Notes 9: Historical Interpretations in Philippine History PDF

Notes 9 Historical Interpretations in Philippine History: Spaces for Conflict and Controversies Where Did the First Catholic Mass Take Place in the Philippines? Case Study l: Where did the first Catholic Mass take place in the Philippines? The popularity of knowing where...

Notes 9 Historical Interpretations in Philippine History: Spaces for Conflict and Controversies Where Did the First Catholic Mass Take Place in the Philippines? Case Study l: Where did the first Catholic Mass take place in the Philippines? The popularity of knowing where the "firsts" happened in history has been an easy way to trivialize history, but this case study will not focus on the significance (or lack thereof) of the site of the First Catholic Mass in the Philippines, but rather, use it as a historiographical exercise in the utilization of evidence and interpretation in reading historical events. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 2 History, pp. 49-62  First Mass Historical Claim marker in Butuan City Butuan has long been believed as the site of the first Mass. In fact, this has been the case for three centuries, culminating in the erection of a monument in 1872 near Agusan River, which commemorates the expedition’s arrival and celebration of Mass on 8 April 1521. The Butuan claim has been based on a rather elementary reading of primary sources from the event. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 3 History, pp. 49-62  Toward the end of the 19th century and the start of the 20th century, together with the increasing scholarship on the history of the Philippines, a more nuanced (subtle difference) reading of the available evidence was made, which brought to light more considerations in going against the more accepted interpretation of the first Mass in the Philippines, made both by Spanish and Filipino scholars. It must be noted that there are only two primary sources that historians refer to in identifying the site of the First Mass. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 4 History, pp. 49-62  One is the log kept by Francisco Albo, a pilot of one of Magellan’s ship, Trinidad. He was one of the 18 survivors who returned with Sebastian Elcano on the ship Victoria after they circumnavigated the world. The other, and the more complete, was the account by Antonio Pigafetta, Primo viaggio intorno al mundo (First Voyage Around the World). Pigafetta, like Albo, was a member of the Magellan expedition and an eyewitness of the events, particularly, of the first Mass. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 5 History, pp. 49-62 Primary Source: Albo’s Log Source: “Diario o derotero del viage de Magallanes desde el cabo se S. Agustin en el Brazil hasta el regreso a Espana de la nao Victoria, escrito por Francisco Albo, “Document no. XXII in Collecion de viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar los Espanoles desde fines del siglo XV, Ed. Martin Fernandez de Navarrete (reprinted Buenos Aires 1945, 5 Vols.) IV, 191-225. As cited in Miguel A. Bernard “Butuan or Limasawa.” The site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence” 1981, Kinaadman: A Journal of Southern Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 6 History, pp. 49-62 1. On the 16th of March (1521) as they sailed in a westerly course from Ladrones, they saw land towards the northwest; but owing to many shallow places they did not approach it. They found later that its name was Yunagan. 2. They went instead that same day southwards to another small island named Suluan, and there they anchored. There they saw some canoes but these fled at the Spaniards’ approach. This island was at 9 and two-thirds degrees North latitude. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 7 History, pp. 49-62 3. Departing from those two islands, they sailed westward to an uninhabited island of "Gada" where they took in supply of wood and water. The sea around that island was free from shallows. (Albo does not give the latitude of this island, but from Pigafetta's testimony, this seems to be the "Acquada" or Homonhon, at 10 degrees North latitude.) 4. From that island they sailed westwards towards a large island names Seilani that was inhabited and was known to have gold. (Seilani — or, as Pigafetta calls it, "Ceylon" — was the island of Leyte.) Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 8 History, pp. 49-62 5. Sailing southwards along the coast of that large island of Seilani, they turned southwest to a small island called "Mazava," That island is also at a latitude of 9 and two-thirds degrees North. 6. The people of that island of Mazava were very good. There the Spaniards planted a cross upon a mountain-top, and from there they were shown three islands to the west and southwest, where they were told there was much gold. They showed us how the gold was gathered, which came in small pieces like peas and lentils." Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 9 History, pp. 49-62 7. From Mazava they sailed northwards again towards Seilani. They followed the coast of Seilani in a northwesterly direction, ascending up to 10 degrees of latitude where they saw three small islands. 8. From there they sailed westwards some ten leagues, and there they saw three islets, where they (hopped anchor for the night. In the morning they sailed southwest some 12 leagues, down to a latitude of 10 and one-third degree. There they entered channel between two islands, one of which was called "Matan" and the other "Subu.“ Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 10 History, pp. 49-62 9. They sailed down that channel and then turned westward and anchored at the town (la villa) of Subu where they stayed many days and obtained provisions and entered into a peace-pact with the local king. 10. The town of Subu was on an east-west direction with the islands of Suluan and Mazava. But between Mazava and Subu, there where so many shallows that the boats could not go westward directly but has to go (as they did) in a round-about way. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 11 History, pp. 49-62  It must be noted that in Albo’s account, the location of Mazava fits the location of the island of Limasawa, at the southern tip of Leyte, 9⁰54’N. Also, Albo does not mention the first Mass, but only the planting of the cross upon a mountain-top from which could be seen three islands to the west and southwest, which also fits the southern end of Limasawa. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 12 History, pp. 49-62 Primary source: Pigafetta’s Testimony on the route of Magellan’s Expedition Source: Emma Blair and James Alexander Robertson, The Philippine Islands, Vols. 33 and 34, as cited in Miguel A. Bernad, “Butuan or Limasawa? The site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence” 1981, Kinaadman: A Journal of southern Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 13 History, pp. 49-62 1. Saturday, 16 March 1521 – Magellan’s expedition sighted a “high land” named “Zamal” which was some 300 leagues westward of Ladrones (now Marianas) Islands. 2. Sunday, March 17 – “The following day” after sighting Zamal Island, they landed on “another island which was uninhabited” and which lay “to the right” of the above-mentioned island of “Zama.” (To the “right” here would mean on their starboard going south or southwest). There they set up two tents for the sick members of the crew and had a sow killed for them. The name of the island was “Humunu” (Homonhon). This island was located at 10 degrees North latitude. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 14 History, pp. 49-62 3. On that same day (Sunday, March 17), Magellan named the entire archipelago the “Islands of Saint Lazarus,” the reason being that it was Sunday in the Lenten season when the Gospel assigned for the Mass and the liturgical Office was the eleventh chapter of St. John, which tells of the raising of Lazarus from the dead. 4. Monday, March 18 – In the afternoon of their second day on that island, they saw a boat coming towards them with nine men in it. An exchange of gifts was effected. Magellan asked for food supplies and the men went away, promising to bring rice and other supplies in “four days.” Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 15 History, pp. 49-62 5. There were two springs of water on that island of Homonhon. As they saw there some indications that there was gold in these islands. Consequently Magellan renamed the island and called it the “Watering Place of Good Omen” (Acquada la di bouni segnialli). 6. Friday, March 22 — At noon the natives returned. This time they were in two boats, and they brought food supplies. 7. Magellan's expedition stayed eight days at Homonhon: from Sunday, March 17, to the Monday of the following week, March 25. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 16 History, pp. 49-62 8. Monday, March 25 — In the afternoon, the expedition weighed anchor and left the island of Homonhon. In the ecclesiastical calendar, this day (March 25) was the feast- day of the Incarnation, also called the Feast of the Annunciation and therefore "Our Lady's Day." On this day, as they were about to weigh anchor, an accident happened to Pigafetta: he fell into the water but was rescued. He attributed his narrow escape from death as grace obtained through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary on her feast-day. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 17 History, pp. 49-62 9. The route taken by the expedition after leaving Homonhon was “toward the west southwest, between four islands: namely, Cenalo, Hiunanghan, Ibusson and Albarien." Very probably "Cenalo" is a misspelling in the Italian manuscript for what Pigafetta in his map calls "Ceilon" and Albo calls "Seilani": namely the island of Leyte. "Hiunanghan" (a misspelling of Hinunangan) seemed to Pigafetta to be a separate island, but is actually on the mainland of Leyte (i.e., "Ceylon"). On the other hand, Hibuson (Pigafetta's Ibusson) is an island east of Leyte's southern tip. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 18 History, pp. 49-62  Thus, it is easy to see what Pigafetta meant by sailing "toward the west southwest" past those islands. They left Homonhon sailing westward towards Leyte, then followed the Leyte coast southward, passing between the island of Hibuson on their portside and Hiunangan Bay on their starboard, and then continued southward, then turning westward to "Mazaua." Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 19 History, pp. 49-62 10. Thursday, March 28 — In the morning of Holy Thursday, they anchored off an island where the previous night they had seen a light or a bonfire. That island "lies in a latitude of nine and two-thirds towards the Arctic Pole (i.e.. North) and in a longitude of one hundred and sixty- two degrees from the line of demarcation. It is twenty-five leagues from the Acquada, and is called Mazaua.“ 11. They remained seven days on Mazaua Island. 12. Thursday, April 4 – They left Mazaua, bound for Cebu. They were guided thither by the king of Mazaua who sailed in his own boat. Their route took them past five “islands” namely: “Ceylon, Bohol, Canighan, Baibai and Gatighan.” Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 20 History, pp. 49-62 13. At Gatingan, they sailed westward to the three islands of the Camotes Group, namely, Poro, Pasihan and Ponson. Here the Spanish ships stopped to allow the king of Mazaua to catch up with them, since the Spanish ships were much faster than the native balanghai – a thing that excited the admiration of the king of Mazaua. 14. From the Camotes Islands they sailed southwards towards “Zubu.” Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 21 History, pp. 49-62 15. Sunday, April 7 – At noon they entered the harbor of “Zubu” (Cebu). It had taken them three days to negotiate the journey from Mazaua northwards to the Camotes Islands and then southwards to Cebu. It must be pointed out that both Albo and Pigafetta’s testimonies coincide and collaborate each other. Pigafetta gave more details on what they did during their weeklong stay at Mazaua. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 22 History, pp. 49-62 Primary source: Pigafetta and Seven Days in Mazaua Source: Emma Blair and James Alexander Robertson, The Philippine Islands, Vols. 33 and 34, as cited in Miguel A. Bernad, “Butuan or Limasawa? The site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence” 1981, Kinaadman: A Journal of southern Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 23 History, pp. 49-62 1. Thursday, March 28 – In the morning they anchored near an island where they had seen a light the night before a small boat (boloto) came with eight natives, to whom Magellan threw some trinkets as presents. The natives paddled away, but two hours later two larger boats (balanghai) came, in one of which the native king sat under an awning of mats. At Magellan’s invitation some of the natives went up the Spanish ship, but the native king remained seated in his boat. An exchanged of gifts was effected. In the afternoon that day, the Spanish ships weighed anchor and came closer to shore, anchoring near the native king’s village. This Thursday, March 28, was Thursday in Holy Week, i.e., Holy Thursday. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 24 History, pp. 49-62 2. Friday, March 29 — "Next day, Holy Friday," Magellan sent his slave interpreter ashore in a small boat to ask the king if he could provide the expedition with food supplies,' and to say that they had come as friends and not as enemies. In reply the king himself came in a boat with six or eight men, and this time went up Magellan's ship and the two men embraced. Another exchange of gifts was made. The native king and his companions returned ashore, bringing with them two members of Magellan's expedition as guests for the night. One of the two was Pigafetta. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 25 History, pp. 49-62 3. Saturday, March 30 — Pigafetta and his companion had spent the previous evening feasting and drinking with the native king and his son. Pigafetta deplored the fact that, although it was Good Friday, they had to eat meat. The following morning (Saturday) Pigafetta and his companion took leave of their hosts and returned to the ships. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 26 History, pp. 49-62 4. Sunday, March 31 — "Early in the morning of Sunday, the last of March and Easter day." Magellan sent the priest ashore with some men to prepare for the Mass. Later in the morning Magellan landed with some fifty men and Mass was celebrated, after which a cross was venerated. Magellan and the Spaniards returned to the ship for the noon-day meal, but in the afternoon they returned ashore to plant the cross on the summit of the highest hill. In attendance both at the Mass and at the planting of the cross were the king of Mazaua and the king of Butuan. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 27 History, pp. 49-62 5. Sunday, March 31 — On that same afternoon, while on the summit of the highest hill, Magellan asked the two kings which ports he should go to in order to obtain more abundant supplies of food than were available in that island. They relied that there were three ports choose from: Ceylon, Zubu, and Calagan. Of the three, Zubu was the port with the most trade. Magellan then said that he wished to go to Zubu and to depart the following morning. He asked for someone to guide him thither. The kings replied that the pilots would be available "any time." But later that evening the king of Mazaua changed his mind and said that he would himself conduct Magellan to Zubu but that he would first have to bring the harvest in. He asked Magellan to send him men to help with the harvest. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 28 History, pp. 49-62 6. Monday. April 1 — Magellan sent men ashore to help with the harvest, but no work was done that day because the two kings were sleeping off their drinking bout the night before. 7. Tuesday, April 2 and Wednesday, April a — Work on the harvest during the "next to days," i.e., Tuesday and Wednesday, the 2nd and 3rd of April. 8. Thursday, April 4 — They leave Mazaua, bound for Cebu. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 29 History, pp. 49-62  Using the primary sources available, Jesuit priest Miguel A. Bernad in his work Butuan or Limasawa: The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence (1981) lays down the argument that in the Pigafetta account, a crucial aspect of Agusan River, Butuan City Butuan was not mentioned—the river. Butuan is a riverine settlement, situated on the Agusan River. The beach of Masao is in the delta of said river. It is a curious omission in the account of the river, which makes part of a distinct characteristic of Butuan's geography that seemed to be too important to be missed. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 30 History, pp. 49-62  The Age of Exploration is a period of competition among European rulers to conquer and colonize lands outside their original domains. Initially, the goal was to find alternative routes by sea to get to Asia, the main source of spices and other commodities. Existing routes to Asia were mainly by land and coast very expensive. A sea route to Asia means that Europeans could access the spice trade directly, greatly reducing costs for traders. Spain’s major foray into the exploration was through Christopher Columbus, who proposed to sail westward to find a shortcut to Asia. He was able to reach the Americas, which was then cut-off from the rest of the world. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 31 History, pp. 49-62  Spain colonized parts of North America, Mexico, and South America in the 16th century. They were also able to reach the Philippines claim it for the Spanish crown. Later on, other European rulers would compete with the activities of exploring and conquering islands. It must also be pointed out that later on, after Magellan's death, the survivors of his expedition went to Mindanao and seemingly went to Butuan. In this instance, Pigafetta vividly describes a trip up a river. But note that this account already happened after Magellan's death. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 32 History, pp. 49-62  Notes 10 Historical Interpretations in Philippine History: Spaces for Conflict and Controversies What Happened in the Cavite Mutiny?  Case Study 2: What happened in the Cavite Mutiny? The year 1872 is a historic year of two events: the Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of the three priests. Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora, later on immortalized as GOMBURZA. These events are very important milestones in Philippine history and have caused ripples throughout time, directly influencing the decisive events of the Philippine Revolution toward the end of the century. While the significance is unquestioned, what made this year controversial is the different sides to the story, a battle of perspectives supported by primary sources. In this case study, we zoom in to the events of the Cavite Mutiny, a major factor in the awakening of nationalism among the Filipinos of that time. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 2 History, pp. 49-62 Spanish Accounts of the Cavite Mutiny The documentation of Spanish historian Jose Montero y Vidal centered on how the event was an attempt in overthrowing the Spanish government in the Philippines. Although regarded as a historian, his account of the mutiny was criticized as woefully biased and rabid for a scholar. Another account from the official report written by then Governor General Rafael Izquierdo implicated the native clergy, who were then active in the movement toward secularization of parishes. These two accounts corroborated each other. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 3 History, pp. 49-62  Primary Source: Excerpts from Montero's Account of the Cavite Mutiny Source: Jose Montero y Vidal, "Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872," in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store. 1990), 269— 273. The abolition of privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal of exemption from the tribute was, according to some, the cause of the insurrection. There were, however, other causes. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 4 History, pp. 49-62  The Spanish revolution which overthrew a secular throne; the propaganda carried on by an unbridled press against monarchical principles, attentatory [sic] of the most sacred respects towards the dethroned majesty; the democratic and republican books and pamphlets; the speeches and preachings of the apostles of these new ideas in Spain; the outbursts of the American publicists and the criminal policy of the senseless Governor whom the Revolutionary government sent to govern the Philippines, Spanish revolution and who put into practice these ideas were the determining circumstances which gave rise, among certain Filipinos, to the idea of attaining their independence. It was towards this goal that they started to work, with the powerful assistance of a certain section of the native clergy, who out of spite toward friars, made common cause with the enemies of the mother country. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 5 History, pp. 49-62  At various times but especially in the beginning of year 1872, the authorities received anonymous communications with the information that a great uprising would break out against the Spaniards, the minute the fleet at Fort San Felipe, Cavite Arsenal Cavite left for the South, and that all would be assassinated, including the friars. But nobody gave importance to these notices. The conspiracy had been going on since the days of La Torre with Gov. Carlos Maria Dela Torre utmost secrecy. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 6 History, pp. 49-62  At times, the principal leaders met either in the house of Filipino Spaniard, D. Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, or in that of the native priest, Joaquin Pardo de Tavera Jacinto Zamora, and these meetings were usually attended by the curate of Bacoor, the soul of the movement, whose energetic character and immense wealth enabled him to exercise a strong influence. Jacinto Zamora Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 7 History, pp. 49-62  Primary Source: Excerpts from the Official Report of Governor Izquierdo on the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 Source: Rafael Izquierdo "Official Report on the Cavite Mutiny," in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide. Documentary Sources of Philippine History. Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store. 1990). 281—286....It seems definite that the insurrection was motivated and prepared by the native clergy, by the mestizos and native lawyers, and by those known here as abogadillos... Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 8 History, pp. 49-62  The instigators, to carry out their criminal project, protested against the injustice of the government in not paying the provinces for their tobacco crop, and against the usury that some practice in documents that the Finance department gives crop owners who have to sell them at a loss. They encouraged the rebellion by protesting what they called the injustice of having obliged the workers in the Cavite arsenal to Workers in the Cavite arsenal pay tribute starting January 1 and to render personal service, from which they were formerly exempted... Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 9 History, pp. 49-62  Up to now it has not been clearly determined if they planned to establish a monarchy or a republic, because the Indios have no word in their language to describe this different form of government, whose head in Tagalog would be called hari: but it turns out that they would place P. Jose Burgos at the head of the government a priest... that the head selected would be D. Jose Burgos, or D. Jacinto Zamora... Such is... the plan of the rebels, those who guided them, and the means they counted upon for its realization. P. Jacinto Zamora Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 10 History, pp. 49-62  It is apparent that the accounts underscore the reason for the "revolution": the abolition of privileges enjoyed by the workers of the Cavite arsenal such as exemption from payment of tribute and being employed in Polos y Servicios, or force labor. They also identified other reasons which seemingly made the issue a lot more serious, which included the presence of the native clergy, who, out of spite against the Spanish friars. "conspired and supported" the rebels. Izquierdo, in an obviously biased report, highlighted that attempt to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines, to install a new "hari" in the persons of Fathers Burgos and Zamora. According to him, native clergy attracted supporters by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight will not fail because they have God's support, aside from promises of lofty rewards such as employment, wealth, and ranks in the army. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 11 History, pp. 49-62  In the Spaniard's accounts, the event of 1872 was premeditated, and is part of a big conspiracy among the educated leaders, mestizos, lawyers, and residents of Manila and Cavite. They allegedly plan to liquidate high-ranking Spanish officers, and then kill the friars. The signal they identify among these Conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the rockets fired from Intramuros. The accounts detail that on 20 January 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast of the Virgin of and came with it were some fireworks display. The Caviteños allegedly mistook this as the signal to commence with the attack. The 200-men contingent led by Sergeant Lamadrid attacked Spanish officers at sight and seized the arsenal. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 12 History, pp. 49-62  Izquierdo, upon learning of the attack, ordered the reinforcement of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the revolt. The "revolution" was easily crushed, when the Manileños who were expected to aid the Caviteños did not arrive. Leaders of the plot were killed in the resulting skirmish, while Fathers Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora were tried by a court- martial and sentenced to be executed. GOMBURZA Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 13 History, pp. 49-62  Others who were implicated such as Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Antonio Ma Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa, and other Filipino lawyers were suspended from the practice of law, arrested, and sentenced to life imprisonment at the Marianas Island. Izquierdo dissolved the native regiments of artillery and ordered the creation of an artillery force composed exclusively by Peninsulares. On 17 February 1872, the GOMBURZA were executed to serve as a threat to Filipinos never to attempt to fight the Spaniards again. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 14 History, pp. 49-62 Differing Accounts of the Events of 1872 Two other primary accounts exist that seem to counter the accounts of Izquierdo and Montero. First, the account of Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher, who wrote a Filipino version of the bloody incident in Cavite. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 15 History, pp. 49-62  Primary Source: Excerpt from Pardo de Tavera's Account of the Cavite Mutiny Source: Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, "Filipino Version of the Cavite Mutiny," in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 274— 280. This uprising among the soldiers in Cavite was used as a powerful level by the Spanish residents and by the friars...the Central Government in Madrid had announced its intention to deprive the friars in these islands of powers of intervention in matters of civil government and of the direction and management of the university... Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 16 History, pp. 49-62  it was due to these facts and promises that the Filipinos had great hopes of an improvement in the affairs of their country, while the friars, on the other hand, feared that their power in the colony would soon be complete a thing of the past.... Up to that time there had been no intention of secession from Spain, and the only aspiration of the people was to secure the material and education advancement of the country... Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 17 History, pp. 49-62  Fort San Felipe, Cavite Arsenal According to this account, the incident was merely a mutiny by Filipino soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal. Soldiers and laborers of the arsenal to the dissatisfaction arising from the draconian policies of Izquierdo, such as the abolition of privileges and the prohibition of the founding of the school of arts and trades for Filipinos, which the General saw as a smokescreen creating a political club. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 18 History, pp. 49-62  Tavera is of the opinion that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used Cavite Mutiny as a way to address other issues by blowing out of proportion the isolated mutiny attempt. During this time, the Central Government Madrid was planning to deprive the friars of all the powers of intervention in matters of civil government and direction and management educational institutions. The friars needed something to justify their continuing dominance in the country, and the mutiny provided such opportunity. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 19 History, pp. 49-62  However, the Central Spanish Government introduced an education decree fusing sectarian schools run by the friars into a school called Philippine Institute. The decree aimed to improve the standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching Old UST inside Intramuros positions in these schools to be by competitive examinations, an improvement welcomed by most Filipinos. Another account this time by French writer Edmund Plauchut complemented Tavera's account and analyzed the motivations of the Cavite Mutiny. Dominican Friars Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 20 History, pp. 49-62 Primary Source: Excerpts from Plauchut's Account of the Cavite Mutiny Source: Edmund Plauchut, The Cavite Mutiny Of 1872 and the Martyrdom of Gom-Bur-Za," in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide. Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book store, 1990), 251-268. Edmund Plauchut General La Torre... created a junta composed of high officials... including some friars and six Spanish officials.... At the same time there was created by the government in Madrid a committee to investigate the same Problems submitted to the Manila committee. Gov. Carlos Maria Dela Torre Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 21 History, pp. 49-62  When the two finished work, it was found that they came to the same conclusions. Here is the summary of the reforms they considered necessary to introduce: 1. Changes in tariff rates at customs, and the methods of collection. 2. Removal of surcharges on foreign importations. 3. Reduction of export fees. 4. Permission for foreigners to reside in the Philippines, buy real estate, enjoy freedom of worship, and operate commercial transports flying the Spanish flag. 5. Establishment of an advisory council to inform the Minister of Overseas Affairs in Madrid on the necessary reforms to be implemented. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 22 History, pp. 49-62 6. Changes in primary and secondary education. 7. Establishment of an Institute of Civil Administration in the Philippines, rendering unnecessary the sending home of short term civil officials every time there is a change of ministry. 8. Study of direct-tax system. 9. Abolition of the tobacco monopoly....The arrival in Manila of General Izquierdo... put a sudden end to all dreams of reforms... the prosecutions instituted by the new Governor General were probably expected as a result of the bitter disputes between the Filipino clerics and the friars. Such a policy must really end in a strong desire on the part of the other (La Torre) to repress cruelly. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 23 History, pp. 49-62  In regard to schools, it was previously decreed that there should be in Manila a Society of Arts and Trades to be opened in March of 1871... to repress the growth of liberal teachings, General Izquierdo suspended the opening of the school... the day previous to the scheduled inauguration... The Filipinos had a duty to render service on public roads construction and pay taxes every year. But those who were employed at the maestranza of the artillery, in the engineering shops and arsenal Cavite, were exempted from this obligation Cavite arsenal in from time immemorial... Fort San Felipe, Cavite City Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 24 History, pp. 49-62  Without preliminaries of any kind, a decree by the Governor withdrew from such old employees their retirement privileges and declassified them into the ranks of those who work on public roads. The friars used the incident as a part of a larger conspiracy to cement their dominance, which has started to show Employees of Cavite Arsenal cracks because of the discontent of the Filipinos. They showcased the mutiny as part of a greater conspiracy, in the Philippines by Filipinos to overthrow the Spanish Government Unintentionally, and more so, prophetically, the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 resulted to the martyrdom of GOMBURZA, and paved the way to the revolution culminating in 1898. GOMBURZA Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 25 History, pp. 49-62  The GOMBURZA is the collective name of the three martyred priests Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora, who were tagged as the masterminds of the Cavite Mutiny. They were prominent Filipino priests charged with treason and sedition. It is believed that the Spanish clergy connected the priests to the mutiny as part of a conspiracy to stifle the movement of secular priests who desired to have their own parishes instead of being merely assistants to the regular friars. The GOMBURZA were executed by garrotte in public, a scene purportedly witnessed by a young Jose Rizal. Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 26 History, pp. 49-62  Their martyrdom is widely accepted as the dawn of Philippine nationalism in the 19th century, with Rizal dedicating his second novel, El Filibusterismo, to their memory: “The Government, by enshrouding your trial in mystery and pardoning your co-accused, has suggested that some mistake was committed when your fate was decided; and the whole of the Philippines, in paying homage to your memory and calling you martyrs, totally rejects your guilt. The Church, by refusing to degrade you, has put in doubt the crime charged against you.” Candelaria et al. Readings in Philippine 27 History, pp. 49-62  Notes 11 Historical Interpretations in Philippine History: Spaces for Conflict and Controversies Did Rizal Retract? Case Study 3: Did Rizal Retract? Jose Rizal is identified as a hero of the revolution for his writings that center on ending colonialism and liberating Filipino minds to contribute to creating the Filipino Jose Rizal nation. The great volume of Rizal's lifework was committed to this end, particularly the more influential ones, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. His essays vilify not the Catholic religion, but the friars, the main agents of injustice in the Philippine Spanish friars society. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 2 History, pp. 62-68  It is understandable therefore, that any piece of writing from Rizal that recants everything he has written against the friars and the Catholic Church in the Philippines could deal heavy damage to his image as a prominent Filipino revolutionary. Such document purportedly exists, allegedly signed by Rizal a few hours before his execution. This document, referred to as “The Retraction," declares Rizal's belief in the Catholic faith, and retracted The Retraction Letter of Rizal everything he has written against the Church. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 3 History, pp. 62-68 Primary Source: Rizal’s Retraction Source: Translated from the document found by Fr. Manuel Garcia C.M. on 18 May 1935 I declare myself a Catholic and in this Religion in which I was born and educated I wish to live and die. I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been contrary to my character as son of the Catholic Church. I believe and I confess whatever she teaches and I submit to whatever she demands. The Retraction Letter of Rizal Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 4 History, pp. 62-68  I abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is of the Church, and as a Society prohibited by the Church. The Diocesan Prelate may, as the Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make public this spontaneous manifestation of Free Mason Logo mine in order to repair the scandal which my acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon me. Manila 29 of December of 1896 Jose Rizal Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine Rizal as Free Mason 5 History, pp. 62-68  There are four iterations of the texts of this retraction: the first was published in La Voz Española and Diario de Manila on the day of the execution, 30 December 1896. The second text appeared in Barcelona, Spain, on the magazine La Juventud, a few months after the execution, 14 February 1897, from an anonymous writer who was later on revealed to be Fr. Vicente Balaguer. However, the "original" text was only found in the archdiocesan archives on 18 May 1935, after almost four decades of disappearance. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 6 History, pp. 62-68 The Balaguer Testimony Doubts on the retraction document abound, especially because only one eyewitness account of the writing of the document exist—that of the Jesuit friar Fr. Vicente Balaguer. According to his testimony, Rizal woke up several times, confessed four times, attended a mass, received communion, and prayed the rosary, all This was the rosary used by of which seem out of character. Jose Rizal while incarcerated at Fort But since it is the only testimony of Santiago. It was kept by his allegedly a "primary" account that sister and later passed on to Rizal ever wrote a retraction a descendant, Fr. Jose A. document, it has been used to argue Cruz, SJ, who donated it to the authenticity of the document. the Ateneo University Archives. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 7 History, pp. 62-68 The Testimony of Cuerpo de Vigilancia Another eyewitness account surfaced in 2016, through the Rene R. Escalante research of Professor Rene R. Escalante. In his research, documents of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia, included a report on the last hours of Rizal, written by Federico Moreno. The report details the statement of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia to Moreno. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 8 History, pp. 62-68 Primary Source: Eyewitness Account of the Last Hours of Rizal Source: Michael Charleston Chua, "Retraction ni Jose Rizal: Mga bagong dokumento at pananaw." GMA News Online, published 29 December 2016. Prison Cell of Rizal in Fort Santiago Most Illustrious Sir, the agent of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia (Patrol Department) stationed in Fort Santiago to report on the events during the [illegible) day in prison of the accused José Rizal, informs me on this date of the following: Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 9 History, pp. 62-68  At 7:50 yesterday morning, Jose Rizal entered death row accompanied by his counsel, Senor Taviel de Andrade, and the Jesuit priest Vilaclara. At the urgings of the former and Lt. Luis Taviel de Andrade moments after entering, he was served a light breakfast. At approximately 9, the Assistant of the Plaza, Señor Maure, asked Rizal if he wanted anything. He replied that at the moment he only wanted a prayer book, which was brought to him shortly by Father March. Rizal with Fr. March and Fr. Vilaclara Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 10 History, pp. 62-68  Señor Andrade left death row at 10 and Rizal spoke for a long while with the Jesuit fathers, March and Vilaclara, regarding religious matters, it seems. It appears that these two presented Rizal with Fr. March him with a prepared retraction on and Fr. Vilaclara his life and deeds that he refused to sign. They argued about the matter until 12:30 when Rizal ate some poached egg and a little chicken. Afterwards he asked to leave to write and wrote for a long time by himself. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 11 History, pp. 62-68  At 3 in the afternoon, Father March entered the chapel and Rizal handed him what he had written. Immediately the chief of the firing squad, Señor del Fresno and the Assistant of the Plaza, Señor Maure, were informed. They entered death row and together with Rizal signed the document that the accused had written. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 12 History, pp. 62-68  At 5 this morning of the 30th, the lover of Rizal arrived at the prison...dressed in mourning. Only the former entered the chapel, followed by a military chaplain whose name I cannot ascertain. Donning his formal clothes and Josephine Bracken aided by a soldier of the artillery, the nuptials of Rizal and the woman who had been his lover were performed at the point of death (in articulo mortis). After embracing him she left, flooded with tears. Nuptials of Rizal and Josephine Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 13 History, pp. 62-68  This account corroborates the existence of the retraction document, giving it credence. However, nowhere in the account was Fr. Balaguer mentioned, which makes the friar a mere secondary source to the writing of the document. The retraction of Rizal remains to this day, a controversy, many scholars, however, agrees that the document does not tarnish the heroism of Rizal. His relevance remained solidified to Filipinos and pushed them to continue the revolution, which eventually resulted to independence in 1898. Philippine Independence in 1898 Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 14 History, pp. 62-68  Rizal’s Connection to the Katipunan is undeniable – in fact, the precursor of the Katipunan as an organization is the La Liga Filipina, an organization Rizal founded, with Andres Bonifacio as one of its members. But La Liga Filipina was short- lived as the Spaniards exiled Rizal to Dapitan. Former members decided to band together to establish the Katipunan a few days after Rizal’s exile on 7 July 1892. House of Rizal in Dapitan Zamboanga del Norte, Mindanao Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 15 History, pp. 62-68  Rizal may not have been officially part of the Katipunan, but the Katipuneros showed great appreciation of his work toward the same goals. Out of the 28 members of the leadership of the Katipunan (known as the kataas-taasang Sanggunian ng Katipunan) from 1892 to 1896, 13 were former members of La Liga Filipina. Katipuneros even used Rizal’s name as a password. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 16 History, pp. 62-68  In 1896, the Katipuneros decided to inform Rizal of their plans to launch the revolution, and sent Pio Valenzuela to visit Rizal in Dapitan. Valenzuela’s accounts of his meeting with Rizal have been Dr. Pio Valenzuela greatly doubted by many scholars, but according to him, Rizal objected to the plans, saying that doing so would be tantamount to suicide since it would be difficult to fight the Spaniards who had the advantage of military resources. Rizal and Valenzuela Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 17 History, pp. 62-68  He added that the leaders of the Katipunan must do everything they could to prevent the spilling of Filipino blood. Valenzuela informed Rizal that the revolution could inevitably break out if the Katipunan were to be discovered by the Spaniards. Rizal advised Valenzuela that the Katipunan should first secure the support of wealthy Filipinos to strengthen their cause, and suggested that Antonio Luna be recruited to direct the military movement of the revolution. Antonio Luna Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 18 History, pp. 62-68  Notes 12 Historical Interpretations in Philippine History: Spaces for Conflict and Controversies Where Did the Cry of Rebellion Happen? Case Study 4: Where did the Cry of Rebellion Happen? Momentous events swept the Spanish colonies in the late 19th century, including the Philippines. Journalists Of the time referred to the phrase "El Grito de Rebelion" or "Cry of Rebellion" to mark the start of these revolutionary events, identifying the places where it happened. In the Philippines, this happened in August 1896, northeast of Manila, Where they declared rebellion against the Spanish colonial government. These events are important markers in the history of colonies that struggled for their independence against their colonizers. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 2 History, pp. 62-68  The controversy regarding this event stems from the identification of the date and place where the Cry happened. Prominent Filipino historian Teodoro Agoncillo emphasizes the event when Bonifacio tore the cedula or tax receipt before the Katipuneros who also did the same. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 3 History, pp. 62-68  Some writers identified the first military event with the Spaniards as the moment of the Cry, for which, Emilio Aguinaldo commissioned a "Himno de Balintawak" to inspire the renewed struggle after the Pact of the Biak na Bato failed. A monument to the Heroes of 1896 was erected in what is now the intersection of Epifanio de los Santos (EDSA) Avenue and Andres Bonifacio Drive-North Diversion road, and from then on until 1962, the Cry of Balintawak was celebrated every 26th of August. The site of the monument was chosen Bonifacio Monument for an unknown reason. in Balintawak Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 4 History, pp. 62-68  Different Dates and Places of the Cry Various accounts of the Cry give different dates and places. A guardia civil, Lt. Olegario Diaz, identify the Cry to have Cry of Balintawak happened in Balintawak on 25 August 1896. Teodoro Kalaw, Filipino historian, marks the place to be in Kangkong, Balintawak, on Teodoro Kalaw the last week of August 1896. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 5 History, pp. 62-68  Santiago Alvarez, a Katipunero and son of Mariano Alvarez, leader of the Magdiwang faction in Cavite, puts the Cry in Bahay Toro in Quezon City on 24 Santiago Alvarez August 1896. Pio Valenzuela, known Katipunero and privy to many events concerning the Katipunan stated that the Cry happened in Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896. Dr. Pio Valenzuela Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 6 History, pp. 62-68  Historian Gregorio Zaide identified the Cry to have happened in Balintawak on 26 August 1896, while Teodoro Agoncillo puts it at Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896, according to statements by Gregorio Zaide Pio Valenzuela, research by historians Milagros Guerrero, Emmanuel Encarnacion, and Ramon Villegas claimed that the event took place in Tandang Sora's barn in Gulod, Barangay Banlat, Quezon City, on 24 August 1896. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 7 History, pp. 62-68 Primary Source: Accounts of the Cry Guillermo Masangkay Source: Guillermo Masangkay, "Cry of Balintawak" in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990). 307—309. Guillermo Masangkay On August 26th, a big meeting was held in Balintawak, at the house of Apolonio Samson, then the cabeza of that barrio of Caloocan. Among those who attended, I remember, were Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Aguedo del Rosario, Tomas Remigio, Briccio pantas, Teodoro Plata, Pio Valenzuela, Enrique Pacheco, and Francisco Carreon. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 8 History, pp. 62-68  They were all leaders of the Katipunan and composed the board of directors of the organization. Delegates from Bulacan, Cabanatuan, Cavite, and Morong were also present. At about nine o'clock in the morning of August 26, the meeting was opened with Andres Bonifacio presiding and Emilio Jacinto acting as secretary. The purpose was to discuss when the uprising was to take place. Teodoro Plata, Briccio Pantas, and Pio Valenzuela were all opposed to starting the revolution too early... Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 9 History, pp. 62-68  Andres Bonifacio, sensing that he would lose in the discussion then, left the session hall and talked to the people, who were waiting outside for the result of the meeting of the leaders. He told the people that the leaders were arguing against starting the revolution early, and appealed to them in a fiery speech in which he said: "You remember the fate of our countrymen who were shot in Bagumbayan. Should we return now to the towns, the Spaniards will only shoot us. Our organization has been discovered and we are all marked men. If we don't start the uprising, the Spaniards will get us anyway. What then, do you say?“ "Revolt!" the people shouted as one. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 10 History, pp. 62-68 Pio Valenzuela Source: Pio Valenzuela, "Cry of Pugad Lawin," in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide. Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8 Dr. Pio Valenzuela (Manila: National Book Store, 1990). 301—302. The first place of refuge of Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Procopio Bonifacio, Teodoro Plata, Aguedo del Rosario, and myself was Balintawak, the first five arriving there on August 19, and I, on August 20, 1896. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 11 History, pp. 62-68  The first place where some 500 members of the Katipunan met on August 22, 1896, was the house and yard of Apolonio Samson at Kangkong. Aside from the persons mentioned above, among those who were there were Briccio Pantas, Alejandro Santiago, Ramon Bernardo, Apolonio Samson, and others. Here, views were only exchanged, and no resolution was debated or adopted. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 12 History, pp. 62-68  It was at Pugad Lawin, the house, store-house, and yard of Juan Ramos, son of Melchora Aquino, where over 1,000 members of the Katipunan met and carried out considerable debate and discussion on August 23, 1896. The discussion was on whether or not the revolution against the Spanish government should be started on August 29, 1896... After the tumultuous meeting, many of those present tore their cedula certificates and shouted "Long live the Philippines! Long live the Philippines!" Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 13 History, pp. 62-68  From the eyewitness accounts presented above, there is indeed, marked disagreement among historical witnesses as to the place and time of the occurrence of the Cry. Using primary and secondary sources, four places have been identified: Balintawak, Kangkong, Pugad Lawin, and Bahay Toro, while the dates vary, 23, 24, 25, or 26 August 1896. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 14 History, pp. 62-68  Valenzuela's account should be read with caution: He once told a Spanish investigator that the “Cry” happened in Balintawak on Wednesday, 26 August 1896. Much later, he wrote in his Dr. Pio Valenzuela Memoirs of the Revolution that it happened at Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896. Such inconsistencies in accounts should always be seen as a red flag when dealing with primary sources. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 15 History, pp. 62-68  According to Guerrero, Encarnacion, and Villegas, all these places are in Balintawak, then part of Caloocan, now, in Quezon City. As for the dates, Bonifacio and his troops may have been moving from one place to another to avoid being located by the Spanish government, which could explain why there are several accounts of the Cry. Candelaria et al. Reading in Philippine 16 History, pp. 62-68  Notes 13 Evolution of the Philippine Constitution  The constitution is defined as a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is governed, thus, the word itself, constitution, means to be a part of a whole, the coming together of distinct entities into one group, with the same principles and ideals. These principles define the nature and extent of government, The Constitution of the Philippines, the supreme law of the Republic of the Philippines, has been in effect since 1987. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 2 History, pp. 72-84  There are only three other constitutions that have effectively governed the country: the 1935 Commonwealth Constitution, the 1973 Constitution, and the 1986 Freedom Constitution. However, there were earlier constitutions attempted by Filipinos in the struggle to break free from the colonial yoke. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 3 History, pp. 72-84 1897: Constitution of Biak-Na-Bato The Constitution of Biak-na-Bato was the provisionary Constitution of the Philippine Republic during the Philippine Revolution, and was promulgated by the Philippine Revolutionary Government on 1 November 1897. The constitution, borrowed from Cuba, was written by Isabelo Artacho and Félix Ferrer in Spanish, and later on, translated into Tagalog. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 4 History, pp. 72-84  The organs of the Government under the Constitution are: (1) the Supreme Council, which is vested with the power of the Republic, headed by the president and four department secretaries: the interior, foreign affairs, treasury, and war; (2) the Consejo Supreino de Gracia Y Justicia (Supreme Council of Grace and Justice), which is given the authority to make decisions and affirm or disprove the sentences rendered by other courts, and to dictate rules for the administration of justice: and (3) the Assamblea de Representuntes (Assembly of Representatives), which was to be convened after the revolution to create a new Constitution and to elect a new Council of Government and Representatives of the people. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 5 History, pp. 72-84  The Constitution of Biak-na-Bato was never fully implemented, since a truce, the Pact of Biak-na-Bato, was signed between the Spanish and the Philippine Revolutionary Army. Primary Source: Preamble of the Biak-na-Bato Constitution The separation of the Philippines from the Spanish monarchy and their formation into an independent state with its own government called the Philippine Republic has been the end sought by the Revolution in the existing war, begun on the 24th of August. 1896; and, therefore, in its name and by the power delegated by the Filipino people, interpreting faithfully their desires and ambitions, we the representatives of the Revolution, in a meeting at Biak-na- Bato. November l, 1897, unanimously adopted the following articles for the constitution of the State. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 6 History, pp. 72-84 1899: Malolos Constitution After the signing of the truce, the Filipino revolutionary leaders accept & a payment from Spain and went to exile in Hong Kong. Upon the defeat of the Spanish to the Americans in the Battle of Manila Bay on 1 May 1898, the United States Navy transported Aguinaldo back to the Philippines. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 7 History, pp. 72-84  The newly re-formed Philippine revolutionary forces reverted to the control of Aguinaldo, and the Philippine Declaration of Independence was issued on 12 June 1898, together with several decrees that formed the First Philippine Republic. The Malolos Congress was elected, which selected a commission to draw up a draft constitution on 17 September 1898, which was composed wealthy and educated men. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 8 History, pp. 72-84  The document they came up with, approved by the Congress on November 1898 and promulgated by Aguinaldo on 21 January 1899, we titled “The Political Constitution of 1899” and was written in Spanish. The constitution has thirty-nine articles divided into 14 titles, with 8 articles of transitory provisions, and a final additional article. The document was patterned after the Spanish Constitution of 1812 (Cadiz Constitution), with influences from the charters of Cadiz Constitution Belgium, Mexico, Brazil, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Guatemala and the French Constitution of 1793. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 9 History, pp. 72-84  According to Felipe Calderon, author of the constitution, these were studied because these countries share similar social, political, ethnological, and governance conditions with Philippines. Prior constitutional projects in the Philippines also influence the Malolos Constitution, namely: the Kartilya and the Sanggunian, Felipe Calderon Hukuman, the charter of laws and morals of the Katipunan written by Emilio Jacinto in 1896: the Biak-na-Bato Constitution of 1897 planned by Isabelo Artacho; Mabini's Constitutional Program of the Philippine Republic of 1898, the provisional constitution of Mariano Ponce in 1898 that followed the Spanish constitutions; and the autonomy projects of Paterno in 1898. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 10 History, pp. 72-84 Primary Source: Preamble of the Political Constitution of 1899 We, the Representatives of the Filipino People, lawfully convened, in order to establish justice, provide for common defence, promote the general welfare and insure the benefits of liberty, imploring the aid of the Sovereign Legislator of the Universe for the attainment of these ends, have voted, decreed, and sanctioned the following political constitution. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 11 History, pp. 72-84  As a direct challenge to colonial authorities of the Spanish Empire, the sovereignty was retroverted to the people, a legal principle underlying the Philippine Revolution. The people delegate governmental functions to civil servants while they retain actual sovereignty. The 27 articles of Title IV detail the natural rights and popular sovereignty of Filipinos, the enumeration of which does not imply the prohibition of any other rights not expressly stated. Title Ill, Article V, also declares that the State recognizes the freedom and equality of all beliefs, as well as the separation of Church and State. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 12 History, pp. 72-84  These are direct reactions to features of the Spanish government in the Philippines, where the friars were dominant agents of the state. The form of government, according to Title II, Article 4 is to be popular, representative, alternative, and responsible, and shall exercise three distinct powers, namely: legislative, executive, and judicial. The legislative power was vested in a unicameral body called the Assembly of Representatives, members of which are elected for terms of four years. Secretaries of the government were given seats in the assembly, which meets annually for a period of at least three months. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 13 History, pp. 72-84  Bills could be introduced either by the president or by a member of the assembly. Some powers not legislative in nature were also given to the body, such as the right to select its own officers, right of censure and interpellation, and the right of impeaching the president, cabinet members, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, and the solicitor-general. A permanent commission of seven, elected by the assembly, and granted specific powers by the constitution, was to sit during the intervals between sessions of the assembly. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 14 History, pp. 72-84  Executive power was vested in the president, and elected by a constituent assembly of the Assembly of Representatives and special representatives. The president will serve a term of four years without re-election. There was no vice president, and in case of a vacancy, a president was to be selected by the constituent assembly. The 1899 Malolos Constitution was never enforced due to the ongoing Philippine-American war. The Philippines was effectively a territory of the United States upon the signing of the Treaty of Paris between Spain and the United States, transferring sovereignty of the Philippines on 10 December 1898. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 15 History, pp. 72-84 1935: The Commonwealth Constitution It is worth mentioning that after the Treaty of Paris, the Philippines was subject to the power of the United States of America, effectively the new colonizers of the country. From 1898 to 1901, the Philippines will be placed under a military government, until a civil government will be put into place. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 16 History, pp. 72-84  Two acts of the United States Congress were passed that may be considered to have qualities of constitutionality. First is the Philippine Organic Act of 1902, the first organic law for the Philippine Islands that provided for the creation of a popularly elected Philippine Assembly, and specified that legislative power would be vested in a bicameral legislature composed of the Philippine Commission as the upper house, and the Philippine Assembly as lower house. Key provisions of the Act included a bill of rights for Filipinos and the appointment of two non-voting Filipino Resident Commissioner of the Philippines as representative to the United States House of Representatives. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 17 History, pp. 72-84  The second Act that functioned as a constitution is the Philippine Autonomy Act of 1916, commonly referred to as "Jones Law," which modified the structure of the Philippine government through the removal of the Philippine Commission, replacing it with a Senate that served as the upper house and its members elected by the Filipino voters, the first truly elected national legislature. It was also in this Act that explicitly declared the purpose of the United States to end their sovereignty over the Philippines and recognize Philippine independence as soon as a stable government can be established. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 18 History, pp. 72-84  In 1932, with the efforts of the Filipino independence mission led by Sergio Osmeña and Manuel Roxas, the United States Congress passed the Hare-Hawes- Cutting Act with the premise of granting Filipinos independence. The bill was opposed by then Senate President Manuel L. Quezon and consequently, rejected by the Philippine Senate. By 1934, another law, the Tydings- McDuffe Act, also known as the Philippine Independence Act, was passed by the United States Congress that provided authority and defined mechanisms for the establishment of a formal constitution by a constitutional convention. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 19 History, pp. 72-84  The members of the convention were elected and held their first meeting on 30 July 1934, with Claro M. Recto unanimously elected as president. The constitution was crafted to meet the approval of the United States government, and to ensure that the US would live up to its promise to grant independence to the Philippines. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 20 History, pp. 72-84 Primary Source: Preamble of the 1935 Commonwealth The Filipino people, imploring the aid of Divine Providence, in order to establish a government that shall embody their ideals, conserve and develop the patrimony of the nation, promote the general welfare, and secure to themselves and their posterity the blessings of independence under a regime of justice, liberty, and democracy, do ordain and promulgate this constitution. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 21 History, pp. 72-84  The constitution created the Commonwealth of the Philippines, an administrative body that governed the Philippines from 1935 to 1946. It is a transitional administration to prepare the country toward its full achievement of independence. It originally provided for a unicameral National Assembly with a president and vice president elected to a six year term without re-election. It was amended in 1940 to have a bicameral Congress composed of a Senate and a House of Representatives, as well as the creation of an independent electoral commission, and limited the term of office of the president and vice president to four years, with one re-election. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 22 History, pp. 72-84  Rights to suffrage was originally afforded to male citizens of the Philippines who are twenty-one years of age or over and are able to read and write; this was later on extended to women within two years after the adoption of the constitution. While the dominant influence in the constitution was American, it also bears traces of the Malolos Constitution, the German, Spanish, Mexican constitutions, constitutions of several South American countries, and the unwritten English Constitution. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 23 History, pp. 72-84  The draft of the constitution was approved by the constitutional US President Franklin D. Roosevelt convention on 8 February 1935 and ratified by then US President Franklin D. Roosevelt on 25 March 1935. Elections were held in September 1935 and Manuel L. Quezon was elected President of the Manuel L. Quezon Commonwealth. The Commonwealth was briefly interrupted by the events of the World War II with the Japanese occupying the Philippines. Philippine Afterward, upon liberation, the Independence Philippines was declared an Day July 4, 1946 Independent Republic on 4 July 1946. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 24 History, pp. 72-84 1973: Constitutional Authoritarian In 1965, Ferdinand E. Marcos was elected president, and in 1967, Philippine Congress passed a resolution calling for a constitutional convention to change the Ferdinand E. Marcos 1935 Constitution. Marcos won the re-election in 1969, in a bid boosted by campaign overspending and use of government funds, Elections of the delegates to the constitutional convention were held on 20 November 1970, and the Carlos P. Garcia convention began formally on 1 June 1971, with former President Carlos P. Garcia being elected as convention president. Unfortunately, he died, and was succeeded by another former president, Diosdado Macapagal. Diosdado Macapagal Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 25 History, pp. 72-84  Before the convention finished its work, martial law was declared. Marcos cited a growing communist insurgency as reason for the martial law, which was provided for in the 1935 Constitution. Some delegates of the ongoing constitutional convention were placed behind bars and others went into hiding or voluntary exile. With Marcos as dictator, the direction of the convention turned, with accounts that the president himself dictated some provisions of the constitution, manipulating the document to be able to hold on to power for as long as he can. On 29 November 1972, the convention approved its proposed constitution. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 26 History, pp. 72-84  The constitution was supposed to introduce a parliamentary-style government, where legislative power was vested in a unicameral National Assembly, with members being elected to a term of six years. The president was to be elected as the symbolic and ceremonial head of state chosen from the members of the National Assembly. The president would serve a six-year term and could be re-elected to an unlimited number of terms, Executive power is relegated to the Prime Minister, who is also the head of government and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces who was also to be elected from the National Assembly. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 27 History, pp. 72-84  President Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 73 setting the date of the plebiscite to ratify or reject the proposed constitution on 30 November 1973. This plebiscite was postponed later on, since Marcos feared that the public might vote to reject the constitution. Instead of a plebiscite, Citizen Assemblies were held, from 10—15 January 1973, where the citizens, coming together and voting by hand, decided on whether to ratify the constitution, suspend the convening of the Interim National Assembly, continue martial law, and place a moratorium on elections for a period of at least several years. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 28 History, pp. 72-84  The President, on 17 January 1973, issued a proclamation announcing that the proposed constitution has been ratified by an overwhelming vote of the members of the highly irregular Citizen Assemblies. The constitution was amended several times. In 1976, Citizen Assemblies, once again, overwhelming decided to allow the continuation of martial law, as well as approved the amendments: an Interim Batasang Pambansa to substitute for the Interim National Assembly, the president to also become the Prime Minister and continue to exercise legislative powers until martial law is lifted and authorized the President to legislate on his own on an emergency basis. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 29 History, pp. 72-84  An overwhelming majority will ratify further amendments succeedingly. In 1980, the retirement age of members of the judiciary was extended to 70 years. In 1981, the parliamentary system was formally modified to a French-style, semi-presidential system where executive power was restored to the president, who was, once again, to be directly elected; an Executive Committee was to be created, composed of the Prime Minister and fourteen others, that served as the president's Cabinet; and some electoral reforms were instituted. In 1984, the Executive Committee was abolished and the position of the vice president was restored. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 30 History, pp. 72-84  After all the amendments introduced, the 1973 Constitution was merely a way for the President to keep executive powers, abolish the Senate, and, by no means, never acted as a parliamentary system, but instead, functioned as an authoritarian presidential system, with all the real power concentrated in the hands of the president, with the backing of the constitution. The situation in the 1980s has been very turbulent. As Marcos amassed power, discontent has also been burgeoning. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 31 History, pp. 72-84  The tide turned swiftly when in August 1983, Benigno Aquino Jr., opposition leader and regarded as the most credible alternative to President Marcos, was assassinated while under military escort immediately after his return from exile in the United States. There was widespread suspicion that the orders to assassinate Aquino came from the top levels of the government and the military. This event caused the coming together of the non-violent opposition to the Marcos authoritarian regime. Marcos was then forced to hold "snap" elections a year early, and said elections were marred by widespread fraud. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 32 History, pp. 72-84  Marcos declared himself winner, despite international condemnation and nationwide protests. A small group of military rebels attempted to stage a coup, but failed; however, this triggered what came to be known as the EDSA People Power Revolution of 1896, as people from all walks of life spilled onto the streets. Under pressure from the United States of America, who used to support Marcos and his martial law, the Marcos family fled into exile. His opponent in the snap elections, Benigno Aquino Jr.'s widow, Corazon Aquino, was installed as president on 25 February 1986. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 33 History, pp. 72-84 1987: Constitution after Martial Law President Corazon Aquino's government had three options regarding the constitution: revert to the 1935 Constitution, retain the 1973 Constitution and be granted the power to make reforms, or start anew and break from the "vestiges of a disgraced dictatorship." They decided to make a new constitution to that, according to the Corazon C. Aquino president herself, should be "truly reflective of the aspirations and ideals of the Filipino people." Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 34 History, pp. 72-84  In March 1986, President Aquino proclaimed a transitional constitution to last for a year while a Constitutional Commission drafted a permanent constitution. This transitional constitution, called the Freedom Constitution, maintained many provisions of the old one, including in rewritten form the presidential right to rule by decree. In 1986, a constitutional convention was created, composed of 48 members appointed by President Aquino from varied backgrounds and representations. The convention drew up a permanent constitution, largely restoring the set-up abolished by Marcos in 1972, but with new ways to keep the president in check, a reaction to the experience of Marcos rule. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 35 History, pp. 72-84  The new constitution was officially adopted on 2 February 1987. The Constitution begins with a preamble, and eighteen self- contained articles. It established the Philippines as a "democratic republican State" where "sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them." It allocates governmental powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the government. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 36 History, pp. 72-84  The Executive branch is headed by the president and his cabinet, whom he appoints. The president is the head of the state and the chief executive, but his power is limited by significant checks from the two other co-equal branches of government, especially during times of emergency. This is put in place to safeguard the country from the experience of martial law despotism during the presidency of Marcos. In eases of national emergency, the president may still declare martial law, but not longer than a period of sixty days. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 37 History, pp. 72-84  Congress, through a majority vote, can revoke this decision, or extend it for a period that they determine. The Supreme Court may also review the declaration of martial law and decide if there were sufficient justifying facts for the act. The president and the vice president are elected at large by a direct vote, serving a single six- year term. The legislative power resides in a Congress divided into two Houses: the Senate and the House of Representatives. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 38 History, pp. 72-84  The 24 senators are elected at large by popular vote, and can serve no more than two consecutive six year terms. The House is composed of district representatives representing a particular geographic area, and make up around 80% of the total number of representatives. There are 234 legislative districts in the Philippines that elect their representatives to serve three- year terms. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 39 History, pp. 72-84  The 1987 Constitution created a party-list system to provide spaces for the participation of underrepresented community sectors or groups. Party-list representatives may fill up not more than 20% of the seats in the House. Aside from the exclusive power of legislation, Congress may also declare war, through a two-thirds vote in both upper and lower houses. But the power of legislation, however, is also subject to an executive check, as the president retains the power to veto or stop a bill from becoming a law. Congress may only override this power with a two-thirds vote in both houses. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 40 History, pp. 72-84  The Philippine Court system is vested with the power of the judiciary, and is composed of a Supreme Court and lower courts as created by law. The Supreme Court is a 15- member court appointed by the president without the need to be confirmed by Congress. The appointment the president makes, however, is limited to a list of nominees provided by a constitutionally specified Judicial and Bar Council. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 41 History, pp. 72-84  The Supreme Court Justices may hear, on appeal, any cases dealing with the constitutionality of any law, treaty, or decree of the government, cases where questions of jurisdiction or judicial error are concerned, or cases where the penalty is sufficiently grave. It may also exercise original jurisdiction over cases involving government or international officials. The Supreme Court also is charged with overseeing the functioning and administration of the lower Courts and their personnel. It may also exercise original jurisdiction over cases involving government or international officials. Candelaria et al. Reading in Phippine 42 History, pp. 72-84  The Constitution also established three independent Constitutional Commissions, namely: the Civil Service Commission, a central agency in charge of government personnel; the Commission on Elections, mandated to enforce and administer all election