CHAPTER 2

In the preceding chapter, we have discussed the importance of familiarizing oneself about the different
kinds of historical sources. The historian's primary tool of understanding and interpreting the past is the
historical sources. Historical sources ascertain historical facts. Such facts are then analyzed and
interpreted by the historian to weave historical narrative. Specifically, historians who study certain
historical subjects and events need to make use of various primary sources in order to weave the
narrative. Primary sources, as discussed in the preceding chapter, consist of documents, memoir,
accounts, and other materials that were produced at the period of the event or subject being studied.

Using primary sources in historical research entails two kinds of criticism. The first one is the external
criticism, and the second one is the Internal criticism. External criticism examines the authenticity of the
document or the evidence being used. This is important in ensuring that the primary source is not
fabricated. On the other hand, internal criticism examines the truthfulness of the content of the
evidence. However, this criticism requires not just the act establishing truthfulness and/or accuracy but
also the examination of the primary sources in terms of the context of its production. For example, a
historian would have to situate the document in the period of its production, or in the background of its
authors. In other words, it should be recognized that facts are neither existing in a vacuum nor produced
from a blank slate. These are products of the time and of the people.

In this chapter, we are going to look at a number of primary sources from different historical periods and
evaluate these documents' content in terms of historical value, and examine the context of their
production. The primary sources that we are going to examine are Antonio Pigafetta's First Voyage
Around the World, Emilio Jacinto's "Kartilya ng Katipunan," the 1898 Declaration of Philippine
Independence, Political Cartoon's Alfred McCoy's Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of the
American Era (1900-1941), and Corazon Aquino's speech before the U.S. Congress. These primary
sources range from chronicles, official documents, speeches, and cartoons to visual arts. Needless to
say, different types of sources necessitate different kinds of analysis and contain different levels of
importance. We are going to explore that in this chapter.

A Brief Summary of the First Voyage Around the World by Magellan by Antonio Pigafetta

This book was taken from the chronicles of contemporary voyagers and navigators of the sixteenth
century. One of them was Italian nobleman Antonio Pigafetta, who accompanied Ferdinand Magellan in
his fateful circumnavigation of the world. Pigafetta's work instantly became a classic that prominent
literary men in the West like William Shakespeare, Michel de Montaigne, and Giambattista Vico referred
to the book in their interpretation of the New World. Pigafetta's travelogue is one of the most important
primary sources in the study of the precolonial Philippines. His account was also a major referent to the
events leading to Magellan's arrival in the Philippines, his encounter with local leaders, his death in the
hands of Lapulapu's forces in the Battle of Mactan, and in the departure of what was left of Magellan's
fleet from the islands.
Examining the document reveals several insights not just in the character of the Philippines during the
precolonial period, but also on how the fresh eyes of the Europeans regard a deeply unfamiliar terrain,
environment, people, and culture. Locating Pigafetta's account in the context of its writing warrants a
familiarity on the dominant frame of mind in the age of exploration, which pervaded Europe in the
fifteenth and sixteenth century. Students of history need to realize that primary sources used in the
subsequent written histories depart from certain perspectives. Thus, Pigafetta's account was also
written from the perspective of Pigafetta himself and was a product of the context of its production. The
First Voyage Around the World by Magellan was published after Pigafetta returned to Italy.

For this chapter, we will focus on the chronicles of Antonio Pigafetta as he wrote his firsthand
observation and general impression of the Far East including their experiences in the Visayas. In
Pigafetta's account, their fleet reached what he called the Ladrones Islands or the "Islands of the
Thieves." He recounted:

"These people have no arms, but use sticks, which have a fish bone at the end. They are poor, but
ingenious, and great thieves, and for the sake of that we called these three islands the Ladrones
Islands."

The Ladrones Islands is presently known as the Marianas Islands. These islands are located south-
southeast of Japan, west-southwest of Hawaii, north of New Guinea, and east of Philippines. Ten days
after they reached Ladrones Islands, Pigafetta reported that they reached what Pigafetta called the isle
of Zamal, now Samar but Magellan decided to land in another uninhabited island for greater security
where they could rest for a few days. Pigafetta recounted that after two days, March 18, nine men came
to them and showed joy and eagerness in seeing them. Magellan realized that the men were reasonable
and welcomed them with food, drinks, and gifts. In turn, the natives gave them fish, palm wine (uraca),
figs, and two cochos. The natives also gave them rice (umai), cocos, and other food supplies. Pigafetta
detailed in amazement and fascination the palm tree which bore fruits called cocho, and wine. He also
described what seemed like a coconut. His description reads:

"This palm produces a fruit named cocho, which is as large as the head, or thereabouts: its first husk is
green, and two fingers in thickness, in it they find certain threads, with which they make the cords for
fastening their boats. Under this husk there is another very hard, and thicker than that of a walnut.
They burn this second rind, and make with it a powder which is useful to them. Under this rind there
is a white marrow of a finger's thickness, which they eat fresh with meat and fish, as we do bread, and
it has the taste of an almond, and if anyone dried it he might make bread of it (p. 72)."

Pigafetta characterized the people as "very familiar and friendly" and willingly showed them different
islands and the names of these islands, The fleet went to Humunu Island (Homonhon) and there they
found what Pigafetta referred to as the "Watering Place of Good Signs." It is in this place where Pigafetta
wrote that they found the first signs of gold in the island. They named the island with the nearby islands
as the archipelago of St. Lazarus. They left the island, then on March 25th, Pigafetta recounted that they
saw two ballanghai (balangay), a long boat full of people in Mazzava/Mazaua. The leader, who Pigafetta
referred to as the king of the ballanghai (balangay), sent his men to the ship of Magellan. The Europeans
entertained these men and gave them gifts. When the king of the balangay offered to give Magellan a
bar of gold and a chest of ginger, Magellan declined. Magellan sent the interpreter to the king and asked
for money for the needs of his ships and expressed that he came into the islands as a friend and not as
an enemy. The king responded by giving Magellan the needed provisions of food in chinaware. Magellan
exchanged gifts of robes in Turkish fashion, red cap, and gave the people knives and mirrors. The two
then expressed their desire to become brothers. Magellan also boasted of his men in armor who could
not be struck with swords and daggers. The king was fascinated and remarked that men in such armor
could be worth one hundred of his men. Magellan further showed the king his other weapons, helmets,
and artilleries. Magellan also shared with the king his charts and maps and shared how they found the
islands.

After a few days, Magellan was introduced to the king's brother who was also a king of another island.
They went to this island and Pigafetta reported that they saw mines of gold. The gold was abundant that
parts of the ship and of the house of the second king were made of gold. Pigafetta described this king as
the most handsome of all the men that he saw in this place. He was also adorned with silk and gold
accessories like a golden dagger, which he carried with him in a wooden polished sheath. This king was
named Raia Calambu, king of Zuluan and Calagan (Butuan and Caragua), and the first king was Raia
Siagu. On March 31st, which happened to be Easter Sunday, Magellan ordered the chaplain to preside a
Mass by the shore. The king heard of this plan and sent two dead pigs and attended the Mass with the
other king. Pigafetta reported that both kings participated in the mass. He wrote:

"...when the offertory of the mass came, the two kings, went to kiss the cross like us, but they offered
nothing, and at the elevation of the body of our Lord they were kneeling like us, and adored our Lord
with joined hands."

After the Mass, Magellan ordered that the cross be brought with nails and crown in place. Magellan
explained that the cross, the nail, and the crown were the signs of his emperor and that he was ordered
to plant it in the places that he would reach. Magellan further explained that the cross would be
beneficial for their people because once other Spaniards saw this cross, then they would know that they
had been in this land and would not cause them troubles, and any person who might be held captives by
them would be released. The king concurred and allowed for the cross to be planted. This Mass would
go down in history as the first Mass in the Philippines, and the cross would be the famed Magellan's
Cross still preserved at present day.

After seven days, Magellan and his men decided to move and look for islands where they could acquire
more supplies and provisions. They learned of the islands of Ceylon (Leyte), Bohol, and Zzubu (Cebu) and
intended to go there. Raia Calambu offered to pilot them in going to Cebu, the largest and the richest of
the islands. By April 7th of the same year, Magellan and his men reached the port of Cebu. The king of
Cebu, through Magellan's interpreter, demanded that they pay tribute as it was customary, but
Magellan refused. Magellan said that he was a captain of a king himself and thus would not pay tribute
to other kings. Magellan's interpreter explained to the king of Cebu that Magellan's king was the
emperor of a great empire and that it would do them better to make friends with them than to forge
enmity. The king of Cebu consulted his council. By the next day, Magellan's men and the king of Cebu,
together with other principal men of Cebu, met in an open space. There, the king offered a bit of his
blood and demanded that Magellan do the same. Pigafetta recounts:

"Then the king said that he was content, and as a greater sign of affection he sent him a little of his
blood from his right arm, and wished he should do the like. Our people answered that he would do it.
Besides that, he said that all the captains who came to his country had been accustomed to make a
present to him, and he to them, and therefore they should ask their captain if he would observe the
custom. Our people answered that he would; but as the king wished to keep up the custom, let him
begin and make a present, and then the captain would do his duty."

The following day. Magellan spoke before the people of Cebu about peace and God. Pigafetta reported
that the people took pleasure in Magellan's speech. Magellan then asked the people who would succeed
the king after his reign and the people responded that the eldest child of the king, who happened to be
a daughter, would be the next in line. Pigafetta also related how the people talked about, how at old
age, parents were no longer taken into account and had to follow the orders of their children as the new
leaders of the land. Magellan responded to this by saying that his faith entailed children to render honor
and obedience to their parents. Magellan preached about their faith further and people were reportedly
convinced. Pigafetta wrote that their men were overjoyed seeing that the people wished to become
Christians through their free will and not because they were forced or intimidated.

On the 14th of April, the people gathered with the king and other principal men of the islands. Magellan
spoke to the king and encouraged him to be a good Christian by burning all of the idols and worship the
cross instead. The king of Cebu was then baptized as a Christian. Pigafetta wrote:

"To that the king and all his people answered that thy would obey the commands of the captain and
do all that he told them. The captain took the king by the hand, and they walked about on the
scaffolding, and when he was baptized he said that he would name him Don Charles (Carlos), as the
emperor his sovereign was named; and he named the prince Don Fernand (Fernando), after the
brother of the emperor, and the King of Mazavva, Jehan: to the Moor he gave the name of
Christopher, and to the others each a name of his fancy."

After eight days, Pigafetta counted that all of the island's inhabitant were already baptized. He admitted
that they burned a village down for obeying neither the king nor Magellan. The Mass was conducted by
the shore every day. When the queen came to the Mass one day, Magellan gave her an image of the
Infant Jesus made by Pigafetta himself. The king of Cebu swore that he would always be faithful to
Magellan. When Magellan reiterated that all of the newly baptized Christians need to burn their idols,
but the natives gave excuses telling Magellan that they needed the idols to heal a sick man who was a
relative to the king. Magellan insisted that they should instead put their faith in Jesus Christ. They went
to the sick man and baptized him. After the baptismal, Pigafetta recorded that the man was able to
speak again. He called this a miracle. peace ellan's after who elated taken aders ailed ched fetta d to
rced her ged OSS te: On the 26th of April, Zula, a principal man from the island of Matan (Mactan) went
to see Magellan and asked him for a boat full of men so that he would be able to fight the chief named
Silapulapu (Lapulapu). Such chief, according to Zula, refused to obey the king and was also preventing
him from doing so. Magellan offered three boats instead and expressed his desire to go to Mactan
himself to fight the said chief. Magellan's forces arrived in Mactan in daylight. They numbered 49 in total
and the islanders of Mactan were estimated to number 1,500. The battle began. Pigafetta recounted:

"When we reached land we found the islanders fifteen hundred in number, drawn up in three
squadrons; they came down upon us with terrible shouts, two squadrons attacking us on the flanks,
and the third in front. The captain then divided his men in two bands. Our musketeers and crossbow-
men fired for half an hour from a distance, but did nothing, since the bullets and arrows, though they
passed through their shields made of thin wood, and perhaps wounded their arms, yet did not stop
them. The captain shouted not to fire, but he was not listened to. The islanders seeing that the shots
of our guns did them little or no harm would not retire, but shouted more loudly, and springing from
one side to the other to avoid our shots, they at the same time drew nearer to us, throwing arrows,
javelins, spears hardened in fire, stones, and even mud, so that we could hardly defend ourselves.
Some of them cast lances pointed with iron at the captain-general."

Magellan died in that battle. The natives, perceiving that the bodies of the enemies were protected with
armors, aimed for their legs instead. Magellan was pierced with a poisoned arrow in his right leg. A few
of their men charged at the natives and tried to intimidate them by burning an entire village but this
only enraged the natives further. Magellan was specifically targeted because the natives knew that he
was the captain general. Magellan was hit with a lance in the face. Magellan retaliated and pierced the
same native with his lance in the breast and tried to draw his sword but could not lift it because of his
wounded arm. Seeing that the captain has already deteriorated, more natives came to attack him. One
native with a great sword delivered a blow in Magellan's left leg, brought him face down and the natives
ceaselessly attacked Magellan with lances, swords, and even with their bare hands. Pigafetta recounted
the last moments of Magellan:

"Whilst the Indians were thus overpowering him, several times he turned round towards us to see if
we were all in safety, as though his obstinate fight had no other object than to give an opportunity for
the retreat of his men."

Pigafetta also said that the king of Cebu who was baptized could have sent help but Magellan instructed
him not to join the battle and stay in the balangay so that he would see how they fought. The king
offered the people of Mactan gifts of any value and amount in exchange of Magellan's body but the
chief refused. They wanted to keep Magellan's body as a memento of their victory.

Magellan's men elected Duarte Barbosa as the new captain. Pigafetta also told how Magellan's slave and
interpreter named Henry betrayed them and told the king of Cebu that they intended to leave as quickly
as possible. Pigafetta alleged that the slave told the king that if he followed the slave's advice, then the
king could acquire the ships and the goods of Magellan's fleet. The two conspired and betrayed what
was left of Magellan's men. The king invited these men to a gathering where he said he would present
the jewels that he would send for the King of Spain. Pigafetta was not able to join the twenty-four men
who attended because he was nursing his battle wounds. It was only a short time when they heard cries
and lamentations. The natives had slain all of the men except the interpreter and Juan Serrano who was
already wounded. Serrano was presented and shouted at the men in the ship asking them to pay
ransom so he would be spared. However, they refused and would not allow anyone to go to the shore.
The fleet departed and abandoned Serrano. They left Cebu and continued their journey around the
world.

Analysis of Pigafetta's Chronicle

The chronicle of Pigafetta was one of the most cited documents by historians who wished to study the
precolonial Philippines. As one of the earliest written accounts, Pigafetta was seen as a credible source
for a period, which was prior unchronicled and undocumented. Moreover, being the earliest detailed
documentation, it was believed that Pigafetta's writings account for the "purest" precolonial society.
Indeed, Pigafetta's work is of great importance in the study and writing of Philippine history.
Nevertheless, there needs to have a more nuanced reading of the source within a contextual backdrop.
A student of history should recognize certain biases accompanying the author and his identity, loyalties,
and the circumstances that he was in; and how it affected the text that he produced. In the case of
Pigafetta, the reader needs to understand that he was a chronicler commissioned by the King of Spain to
accompany and document a voyage intended to expand the Spanish empire. He was also of noble
descent who came from a rich family in Italy. These attributes influenced his narrative, his selection of
details to be included in the text, his characterization of the people and of the species that he
encountered, and his interpretation and retelling of the events. Being a scholar of cartography and
geography, Pigafetta was able to give details on geography and climate of the places that their voyage
had reached.

In reading Pigafetta's description of the people, one has to keep in mind that he was coming from a
sixteenth century European perspective. Hence, the reader might notice how Pigafetta, whether
implicitly or explicitly, regarded the indigenous belief systems and way of life as inferior to that of
Christianity and of the Europeans. He would always remark on the nakedness of the natives or how he
was fascinated by their exotic culture. Pigafetta also noticeably emphasized the natives' amazement and
illiteracy to the European artillery, merchandise, and other goods, in the same way that Pigafetta
repeatedly mentioned the abundance of spices like ginger, and of precious metals like gold. His
observations and assessments of the indigenous cultures employed the European standards. Hence,
when they saw the indigenous attires of the natives, Pigafetta saw them as being naked because from
the European standpoint, they were wearing fewer clothes indeed. Pigafetta's perspective was too
narrow to realize that such attire was only appropriate to the tropical climate of the islands. The same
was true for materials that the natives used for their houses like palm and bamboo. These materials
would let more air come through the house and compensate for the hot climate in the islands.

It should be understood that such observations were rooted from the context of Pigafetta and of his era.
Europe, for example, was dominated by the Holy Roman Empire, whose loyalty and purpose was the
domination of the Catholic Church all over the world. Hence, other belief systems different from that of
Christianity were perceived to be blasphemous and barbaric, even demonic. Aside from this, the
sixteenth century European economy was mercantilist. Such system measures the wealth of kingdoms
based on their accumulation of bullions or precious metals like gold and silver. It was not surprising
therefore that Pigafetta would always mention the abundance of gold in the islands as shown in his
description of leaders wearing gold rings and golden daggers, and of the rich gold mines. An empire like
that of the Spain would indeed search for new lands where they could acquire more gold and wealth to
be on top of all the European nations. The obsession with spices might be odd for Filipinos because of its
ordinariness in the Philippines, but understanding the context would reveal that spices were scarce in
Europe and hence were seen as prestige goods. In that era, Spain and Portugal arveted the control of
Spice Islande because it would have led to a certain coveted the conlth influence, and power. These
contexts should be used and understood in order to have a more qualified reading of Pigafetta's
account.

The KKK and the "Kartilya ng Katipunan

The Kataastaasan, Kagalanggalangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan (KKK) or Katipunan is arguably
the most important organization formed in the Philippine history. While anti-colonial movements,
efforts, and organizations had already been established centuries prior to the foundation of the
Katipunan, it was only this organization that envisioned (1) a united Filipino nation that would revolt
against the Spaniards for (2) the total independence of the country from Spain. Previous armed revolts
had already occurred before the foundation of the Katipunan, but none of them envisioned a unified
Filipino nation revolting against the colonizers. For example, Diego Silang was known as an Ilocano who
took up his arms and led one of the longest running revolts in the country. Silang, however, was mainly
concerned about his locality and referred to himself as El Rey de Ilocos (The King of Ilocos). The
imagination of the nation was largely absent in the aspirations of the local revolts before Katipunan. On
the other hand, the propaganda movements led by the ilustrados like Marcelo H. del Pilar, Graciano
López Jaena, and Jose Rizal did not envision a total separation of the Philippines from Spain, but only
demanded equal rights, representation, and protection from the abuses of the friars.

In the conduct of their struggle, Katipunan created a complex structure and a defined value system that
would guide the organization as a collective aspiring for a single goal. One of the most important
Katipunan documents was the Kartilya ng Katipunan. The original title of the document was "Manga [sic]
Aral Nang [sic] Katipunan ng mga A.N.B." or "Lessons of the Organization of the Sons of Country." The
document was written by Emilio Jacinto in the 1896. Jacinto was only 18 years old when he joined the
movement. He was a law student at the Universidad de Santo Tomas. Despite his youth, Bonifacio
recognized the value and intellect of Jacinto that upon seeing that Jacinto's Kartilya was much better
than the Decalogue he wrote, he willingly favored that the Kartilya be distributed to their fellow
Katipuneros. Jacinto became the secretary of the organization and took charge of the short-lived
printing press of the Katipunan. On 15 April 1897, Bonifacio appointed Jacinto as a commander of the
Katipunan in Northern Luson. Jacinto was 22 years old. He died of Malaria at a young age of 24 in the
town of Magdalena, Laguna.
The Kartilya can be treated as the Katipunan's code of conduct. It contains fourteen rules that instruct
the way a Katipunero should behave, and which specific values should he uphold. Generally, the rules
stated in the Kartilya can be classified into two. The first group contains the rules that will make the
member an upright individual and the second group contains the rules that will guide the way he treats
his fellow men.

Below is the translated version of the rules in Kartilya:

I. The life that is not consecrated to a lofty and reasonable purpose is a tree without a shade, if not a
poisonous weed.

II. To do good for personal gain and not for its own sake is not virtue.

III. It is rational to be charitable and love one's fellow creature, and to adjust one's conduct, acts and
words to what is in itself reasonable.

IV. Whether our skin be black or white, we are all born equal: superiority in knowledge, wealth and
beauty are to be understood, but not superiority by nature.

V. The honorable man prefers honor to personal gain; the scoundrel, gain to honor.

VI. To the honorable man, his word is sacred.

VII. Do not waste thy time: wealth can be recovered but not time lost.

VIII. Defend the oppressed and fight the oppressor before the law or in the field.

IX. The prudent man is sparing in words and faithful in keeping secrets.

X. On the thorny path of life, man is the guide of woman and the children, and if the guide leads to the
precipice, those whom he guides will also go there.

XI. Thou must not look upon woman as a mere plaything, but as a faithful companion who will share
with thee the penalties of life: her (physical) weakness will increase thy interest in her and she will
remind thee of the mother who bore thee and reared thee.

XII. What thou dost not desire done unto thy wife, children, brothers and sisters, that do not unto the
wife, children, brothers and sisters of thy neighbor.

XIII. Man is not worth more because he is a king, because his nose is aquiline, and his color white, not
because he is a priest, a servant of God, nor because of the high prerogative that he enjoys upon earth,
but he is worth most who is a man of proven and real value, who does good, keeps his words, is worthy
and honest; he who does not oppress nor consent to being oppressed, he who loves and cherishes his
fatherland, though he be born in the wilderness and know no tongue but his own.

XIV. When these rules of conduct shall be known to all, the longed-for sun of Liberty shall rise brilliant
over this most unhappy portion of the globe and its rays shall diffuse everlasting joy among the
confederated brethren of the same rays, the lives of those who have gone before, the fatigues and the
well-paid sufferings will remain. If he who desires to enter has informed himself of all this and believes
he will be able to perform what will be his duties, he may fill out the application for admission.

As the primary governing document, which determines the rules of conduct in the Katipunan, properly
understanding the Kartilya will thus help in understanding the values, ideals, aspirations, and even the
ideology of the organization.

Analysis of the "Kartilya ng Katipunan"

Similar to what we have done to the accounts of Pigafetta, this primary source also needs to be analyzed
in terms of content and context. As a document written for a fraternity whose main purpose is to
overthrow a colonial regime, we can explain the content and provisions of the Kartilya as a reaction and
response to certain value systems that they found despicable in the present state of things that they
struggled against with. For example, the fourth and the thirteenth rules in the Kartilya are an invocation
of the inherent equality between and among men regardless of race, occupation, or status. In the
context of the Spanish colonial era where the indios were treated as the inferior of the white Europeans,
the Katipunan saw to it that the alternative order that they wished to promulgate through their
revolution necessarily destroyed this kind of unjust hierarchy.

Moreover, one can analyze the values upheld in the document as consistent with the burgeoning
rational and liberal ideals in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. Equality, tolerance, freedom, and
liberty were values that first emerged in the eighteenth century French Revolution, which spread
throughout Europe and reached the educated class of the colonies. Jacinto, an ilustrado himself,
certainly got an understanding of these values. Aside from the liberal values that can be dissected in the
document, we can also decipher certain Victorian and chivalrous values in the text. For example, various
provisions in the Kartilya repeatedly emphasized the importance of honor in words and in action. The
teaching of the Katipunan on how women should be treated with honor and respect, while positive in
many respects and certainly a significant stride from the practice of raping and physically abusing
women, can still be telling of the Katipunan's secondary regard for women in relation to men. For
example, in the tenth rule, the document specifically stated that men should be the guide of women and
children, and that he should set a good example, otherwise the women and the children would be
guided in the path of evil. Nevertheless, the same document stated that women should be treated as
companions by men and not as playthings that can be exploited for their pleasure.

In the contemporary eyes, the Katipunan can be criticized because of these provisions. However, one
must not forget the context where the organization was born. Not even in Europe or in the whole of the
West at that juncture recognized the problem of gender inequality. Indeed, it can be argued that
Katipunan's recognition of women as important partners in the struggle, as reflected not just in Kartilya
but also in the organizational structure of the fraternity where a women's unit was established, is an
endeavor advanced for its time. Aside from Rizal's known Letter to the Women of Malolos, no same
effort by the supposed cosmopolitan Propaganda Movement was achieved until the movement's
eventual disintegration in the latter part of the 1890s.

Aside from this, the Kartilya was instructive not just of the Katipunan's conduct toward other people, but
also for the members' development as individuals in their own rights. Generally speaking, the rules in
the Kartilya can be classified as either directed to how one should treat his neighbor or to how one
should develop and conduct one's self. Both are essential to the success and fulfillment of the
Katipunan's ideals. For example, the Kartilya's teachings on honoring one's word and not wasting time
are teachings directed toward self-development, while the rules on treating the neighbor's wife
children, and brothers the way that you want yours to be treated is an instruction on how Katipuneros
should treat and regard their neighbors.

All in all, proper reading of the Kartilya will reveal a more thorough understanding of the Katipunan and
the significant role that it played in the revolution and in the unfolding of the Philippine history, as we
know it

Reading the "Proclamation of the Philippine Independence

Every year, the country commemorates the anniversary of the Philippine Independence proclaimed on
12 June 1898, in the province of Cavite. Indeed such event is a significant turning point in the history of
the country because it signaled the end of the 333 years of Spanish colonization. There have been
numerous studies done on the events leading to the independence of the country but very few students
had the chance to read the actual document of the declaration. This is in spite of the historical
importance of the document and the details that the document reveals on the rationale and
circumstances of that historical day in Cavite. Interestingly, reading the details of the said document in
hindsight is telling of the kind of government that was created under Aguinaldo, and the forthcoming
hand of the United States of America in the next few years of the newly created republic. The
declaration was a short 2,000-word document, which summarized the reason behind the revolution
against Spain, the war for independence, and the future of the new republic under Emilio Aguinaldo.

The proclamation commenced with a characterization of the conditions in the Philippines during the
Spanish colonial period. The document specifically mentioned abuses and inequalities in the colony. The
declaration says:

"...taking into consideration, that their inhabitants being already weary of bearing the ominous yoke
of Spanish domination, on account of the arbitrary arrests and harsh treatment practiced by the Civil
Guard to the extent of causing death with the connivance and even with the express orders of their
commanders, who sometimes went to the extreme of ordering the shooting of prisoners under the
pretext that they were attempting to escape, in violation of the provisions of the Regulations of their
Corps, which abuses were unpunished and on account of the unjust deportations, especially those
decreed by General Blanco, of eminent personages and of high social position, at the instigation of the
Archbishop and friars interested in keeping them out of the way for their own selfish and avaricious
 purpose, deportations which are quickly brought about by a method of procedure more execrable
than that of the Inquisition and which every civilized nation rejects on account of a decision being
rendered without a hearing of the persons accused."

The above passage demonstrates the justifications behind the revolution against Spain. Specifically cited
are the abuse by the Civil Guards and the unlawful shooting of prisoners whom they alleged as
attempting to escape. The passage also condemns the unequal protection of the law between the
Filipino people and the "eminent personages." Moreover, the line mentions the avarice and greed of the
clergy like the friars and the Archbishop himself. Lastly, the passage also condemns what they saw as the
unjust deportation and rendering of other decision without proper hearing, expected of any civilized
nation.

From here, the proclamation proceeded with a brief historical overview of the Spanish occupation since
Magellan's arrival in Visayas until the Philippine Revolution, with specific details about the latter,
especially after the Pact of Biak-na-Bato had collapsed. The document narrates the spread of the
movement "like an electric spark" through different towns and provinces like Bataan, Pampanga,
Batangas, Bulacan, Laguna, and Morong, and the quick decline of Spanish forces in the same provinces.
The revolt also reached Visayas; thus, the independence of the country was ensured. The document also
mentions Rizal's execution, calling it unjust. The execution, as written in the document, was done to
"please the greedy body of friars in their insatiable desire to seek revenge upon and exterminate all
those who are opposed to their Machiavellian purposes, which tramples upon the penal code prescribed
for these islands." The document also narrates the Cavite Mutiny of January 1872 that caused the
infamous execution of the martyred native priests Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, and Jacinto Zamora,
"whose innocent blood was shed through the intrigues of those so-called religious orders" that incited
the three secular priests in the said mutiny.

The proclamation of independence also invokes that the established republic would be led under the
dictatorship of Emilio Aguinaldo. The first mention was at the very beginning of the proclamation. It
stated:

"In the town of Cavite Viejo, in this province of Cavite, on the twelfth day of June eighteen hundred
and ninety-eight, before me, Don Ambrosio Rianzares Bautista, Auditor of War and Special
Commissioner appointed to proclaim and solemnize this act by the Dictatorial Government of these
Philippine Islands, for the purposes and by virtue of the circular addressed by the Eminent Dictator of
the same Don Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy."

The same was repeated toward the last part of the proclamation. It states

"We acknowledge, approve and confirm together with the orders that have been issued therefrom,
the Dictatorship established by Don Emilio Aguinaldo, whom we honor as the Supreme Chief of this
Nation, which this day commences to have a life of its own, in the belief that he is the instrument
selected by God, in spite of his humble origin, to effect the redemption of this unfortunate people, as
foretold by Doctor Jose Rizal in the magnificent verses which he composed when he was preparing to
 be shot, liberating them from the yoke of Spanish domination in punishment of the impunity with
which their Government allowed the commission of abuses by its subordinates."

Another detail in the proclamation that is worth looking at is its explanation on the Philippine flag that
was first waved on the same day. The document explained:

"And finally, it was unanimously resolved that this Nation, independent from this day, must use the
same flag used heretofore, whose design and colors and described in the accompanying drawing, with
design representing in natural colors the three arms referred to. The white triangle represents the
distinctive emblem of the famous Katipunan Society, which by means of its compact of blood urged
on the masses of the people to insurrection; the three stars represent the three principal Islands of
this Archipelago, Luzon, Mindanao and Panay, in which this insurrectionary movement broke out; the
sun represents the gigantic strides that have been made by the sons of this land on the road of
progress and civilization, its eight rays symbolizing the eight provinces of Manila, Cavite, Bulacan,
Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Laguna and Batangas, which were declared in a state of war almost
as soon as the first insurrectionary movement was initiated; and the colors blue, red and white,
commemorate those of the flag of the United States of North America, in manifestation of our
profound gratitude towards that Great Nation for the disinterested protection she is extending to us
and will continue to extend to us."

This often overlooked detail reveals much about the historically accurate meaning behind the most
widely known national symbol in the Philippines. It is not known by many for example, that the white
triangle was derived from the symbol of the Katipunan. The red and blue colors of the flag are often
associated with courage and peace, respectively. Our basic education omits the fact that those colors
were taken from the flag of the United States. While it can always be argued that symbolic meaning can
always change and be reinterpreted, the original symbolic meaning of something presents us several
historical truths that can explain the subsequent events, which unfolded after the declaration of
independence on the 12th day of June 1898.

Analysis of the "Proclamation of the Philippine Independence"

As mentioned earlier, a re-examination of the document on the declaration of independence can reveal
some often overlooked historical truths about this important event in Philippine history. Aside from this,
the document reflects the general revolutionary sentiment of that period. For example, the abuses
specifically mentioned in the proclamation like friar abuse, racial discrimination, and inequality before
the law reflect the most compelling sentiments represented by the revolutionary leadership. However,
no mention was made about the more serious problem that affected the masses more profoundly (i.e.,
the land and agrarian crisis felt by the numerous Filipino peasants in the nineteenth century). This is
ironic especially when renowned Philippine Revolution historian, Teodoro Agoncillo, stated that the
Philippine Revolution was an agrarian revolution. The common revolutionary soldiers fought in the
revolution for the hope of owning the lands that they were tilling once the friar estates in different
provinces like Batangas and Laguna dissolve, if and when the revolution succeeded. Such aspects and
realities of the revolutionary struggle were either unfamiliar to the middle class revolutionary leaders
like Emilio Aguinaldo, Ambrosio Rianzares-Bautista, and Felipe Buencamino, or were intentionally left
out because they were landholders themselves.

The Treaty of Paris was an agreement signed between Spain and the United States of America regarding
the ownership of the Philippine lalands and other Spanish colonies in South America. The agreement
ended the short-lived Spanish American War. The Treaty was signed on 10 December 1898, six months
after the revolutionary government declared the Philippine Independence. The Philippines was sold to
the United States at $20 million and effectively undermined the sovereignty of the Filipinos after their
revolutionary victory. The Americans occupied the Philippines immediately which resulted in the
Philippine-American War that lasted until the earliest years of the twentieth century.

The proclamation also gives us the impression on how the victorious revolutionary government of
Aguinaldo historicized the struggle for independence. There were mentions of past events that were
seen as important turning points of the movement against Spain. The execution of the GOMBURZA, for
example, and the failed Cavite Mutiny of 1872 was narrated in detail. This shows that they saw this
event as a significant awakening of the Filipinos in the real conditions of the nation under Spain. Jose
Rizal's legacy and martyrdom was also mentioned in the document. However, the Katipunan as the
pioneer of the revolutionary movement was only mentioned once toward the end of the document.
There was no mention of the Katipunan's foundation. Bonifacio and his co-founders were also left out. It
can be argued, thus, that the way of historical narration found in the document also reflects the politics
of the victors. The enmity between Aguinaldo's Magdalo and Bonifacio's Magdiwang in the Katipunan is
no secret in the pages of our history. On the contrary, the war led by Aguinaldo's men with the forces of
the United States were discussed in detail.

The point is, even official records and documents like the proclamation of independence, while truthful
most of the time, still exude the politics and biases of whoever is in power. This manifests in the
selectiveness of information that can be found in these records. It is the task of the historian, thus, to
analyze the content of these documents in relation to the dominant politics and the contexts of people
and institutions surrounding it. This tells us a lesson on taking primary sources like official government
records within the circumstance of this production. Studying one historical subject, thus, entails looking
at multiple primary sources and pieces of historical evidences in order to have a more nuanced and
contextual analysis of our past.

A Glance at Selected Philippine Political Caricature in Alfred McCoy's Philippine Cartoons: Political
Caricature of the American Era (1900-1941)

Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which veered away from the classical art
by exaggerating human features and poking fun at its subjects. Such art genre and technique became a
part of the print media as a form of social and political commentary, which usually targets persons of
power and authority. Cartoons became an effective tool of publicizing opinions through heavy use of
symbolism, which is different from a verbose written editorial and opinion pieces. The unique way that a
caricature represents opinion and captures the audience's imagination is reason enough for historians to
examine these political cartoons, Commentaries in mass media inevitably shape public opinion and such
kind of opinion is worthy of historical examination.

In his book Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of the American Era (1900-1941), Alfred McCoy,
together with Alfredo Roces, compiled political cartoons published in newspaper dailies and periodicals
in the aforementioned time period. For this part, we are going to look at selected cartoons and explain
the context of each one.

The first example shown above was published in The Independent on May 20, 1916. The cartoon shows
a politician from Tondo, named Dr. Santos, passing his crown to his brother-in-law, Dr. Barcelona. A
Filipino guy (as depicted wearing salakot and barong tagalog) was trying to stop Santos, telling the latter
to stop giving Barcelona the crown because it is not his to begin with.

The second cartoon wn by Fernando Amorsolo and owa Hirmed as commentary to the workings of
Manila Police at that period. Here, we a Filipino child who stole a skinny chicken because he had nothing
to eat The police officer was relentlessly pursuing the said child. A man wearing a salakot, labeled Juan
de la Cruz was grabbing the officer, telling him to leave the small-time pickpockets and thieves and to
turn at the great thieves instead. He was pointing to huge warehouses containing bulks of rice, milk, and
grocery products.

The third cartoon was a commentary on the unprecedented cases of colorum automobiles in the city
streets. The Philippine Free Press published this commentary when fatal accidents involving colorum
vehicles and taxis occurred too often already.

This fourth cartoon depicts a cinema. A blown-up police officer was at the screen saying that couples are
not allowed to neck and make love in the theater. Two youngsters looked horrified while an older
couple seemed amused.

The next cartoon was published by The Independent on 27 November 1915. Here, we see the caricature
of Uncle Sam riding a chariot pulled by Filipinos wearing school uniforms. The Filipino boys were carrying
American objects like baseball bats, whiskey, and boxing gloves. McCoy, in his caption to the said
cartoon, says that this cartoon was based on an event in 1907 when William Howard Taft was brought to
the Manila pier riding a chariot pulled by students of Liceo de Manila. Such was condemned by the
nationalists at that time.

The last cartoon was published by Lipang Kalabaw on 24 August 1902 In the picture, we can see Uncle
Sam rationing porridge to the politicians as the Party) while members of the Nacionalista Party look on
and wait for their turn. This cartoon depicts the patronage of the United States being coveted by
politicians from either of the party.

Analysis of the Political Caricatures during the American Period

The transition from the Spanish Colonial period to the American Occupation period demonstrated
different strands of changes and shifts in culture, society, and politics. The Americans drastically
introduced democracy to the nascent nation and the consequences were far from ideal. Aside from this,
it was also during the American period that Filipinos were introduced to different manifestations of
modernity like healthcare, modern transportation, and media. This ushered in a more open and freer
press. The post-independence and the post-Filipino-American period in the Philippines were
experienced differently by Filipinos coming from different classes. The upper principalia class
experienced economic prosperity with the opening up of the Philippine economy to the United States
but the majority of the poor Filipino remained poor, desperate, and victims of state repression.

The selected cartoons illustrate not only the opinion of certain media outfits about the Philippine society
during the American period but also paint a broad image of society and politics under the United States.
In the arena of politics, for example, we see the price that Filipinos paid for the democracy modeled
after the Americans. First, it seemed that the Filipino politicians at that time did not understand well
enough the essence of democracy and the accompanying democratic institutions and processes. This
can be seen in the rising dynastic politics in Tondo as depicted in the cartoon published by The
Independent. Patronage also became influential and powerful, not only between clients and patrons but
also between the newly formed political parties composed of the elite and the United States. This was
depicted in the cartoon where the United States, represented by Uncle Sam, provided dole outs for
members of the Federalista while the Nacionalista politicians looked on and waited for their turn. Thus,
the essence of competing political parties to enforce choices among the voters was cancelled out. The
problem continues up to the present where politicians transfer from one party to another depending on
which party was powerful in specific periods of time..

The transition from a Catholic-centered, Spanish-Filipino society to an imperial American-assimilated

one, and its complications, were also depicted in the cartoons. One example is the unprecedented
increase of motorized vehicles in the city. Automobiles became a popular mode of transportation in the
city and led to the emergence of taxis. However, the laws and policy implementation was mediocre. This
resulted in the increasing colorum and unlicensed vehicles transporting people around the city. The
rules governing the issuance of driver's license was loose and traffic police could not be bothered by
rampant violations of traffic rules. This is a direct consequence of the drastic urbanization of the
Philippine society. Another example is what McCoy called the "sexual revolution" that occurred in the
1930s. Young people, as early as that period, disturbed the conservative Filipino mindset by engaging in
daring sexual activities in public spaces like cinemas. Here, we can see how that period was the meeting
point between the conservative past and the liberated future of the Philippines.

Lastly, the cartoons also illustrated the conditions of poor Filipinos in the Philippines now governed by
the United States. From the looks of it, nothing much has changed. For example, a cartoon depicted how
police authorities oppress petty Filipino criminals while turning a blind eye on hoarders who monopolize
goods in their huge warehouses (presumably Chinese merchants). The other cartoon depicts how
Americans controlled Filipinos through seemingly harmless American objects. By controlling their
consciousness and mentality, Americans got to control and subjugate Filipinos.
Revisiting Corazon Aquino's Speech Before the U.S. Congress

Corazon "Cory" Cojuangco Aquino functioned as the symbol of the restoration of democracy and the
overthrow of the Marcos Dictatorship in 1986. The EDSA People Power, which installed Cory Aquino in
the presidency, put the Philippines in the international spotlight for overthrowing a dictator through
peaceful means. Cory was easily a figure of the said revolution, as the widow of the slain Marcos
oppositionist and former Senator Benigno "Ninoy" Aquino Jr. Cory was hoisted as the antithesis of the
dictator. Her image as a mourning, widowed housewife who had always been in the shadow of her
husband and relatives and had no experience in politics was juxtaposed against Marcos's statesmanship,
eloquence, charisma, and cunning political skills. Nevertheless, Cory was able to capture the imagination
of the people whose rights and freedom had long been compromised throughout the Marcos regime.
This is despite the fact that Cory came from a rich haciendero family in Tarlac and owned vast estates of
sugar plantation and whose relatives occupy local and national government positions.

The People Power Revolution of 1986 was widely recognized around the world for its peaceful
character. When former senator Ninoy Aquino was shot at the tarmac of the Manila International
Airport on 21 August 1983, the Marcos regime greatly suffered a crisis of legitimacy. Protests from
different sectors frequented different areas in the country. Marcos's credibility in the international
community also suffered. Paired with the looming economic crisis, Marcos had to do something to prove
to his allies in the United States that he remained to be the democratically anointed leader of the
country. He called for a Snap Election in February 1986, where Corazon Cojuangco Aquino, the widow of
the slain senator was convinced to run against Marcos. The canvassing was rigged to Marcos's favor but
the people expressed their protests against the corrupt and authoritarian government. Leading military
officials of the regime and Martial Law orchestrators themselves, Juan Ponce Enrile and Fidel V. Ramos,
plotted to take over the presidency, until civilians heeded the call of then Manila Archbishop Jaime
Cardinal Sin and other civilian leaders gathered in EDSA. The overwhelming presence of civilians in EDSA
successfully turned a coup into a civilian demonstration. The thousands of people who gathered
overthrew Ferdinand Marcos from the presidency after 21 years.

On 18 September 1986, seven months since Cory became president, she went to the United States and
spoke before the joint session of the U.S. Congress. Cory was welcomed with long applause as she took
the podium and addressed the United States about her presidency and the challenges faced by the new
republic. She began her speech with the story of her leaving the United States three years prior as a
newly widowed wife of Ninoy Aquino.

She then told of Ninoy's character, conviction, and resolve in opposing the authoritarianism of Marcos.
She talked of the three times that they lost Ninoy including his demise on 23 August 1983. The first time
was when the dictatorship detained Ninoy with other dissenters. Cory related:

"The government sought to break him by indignities and terror. They locked him up in a tiny, nearly
airless cell in a military camp in the north. They stripped him naked and held a threat of a sudden
midnight execution over his head. Ninoy held up manfully under all of it. I barely did as well. For forty-
 three days, the authorities would not tell me what had happened to him. This was the first time my
children and I felt we had lost him."

Cory continued that when Ninoy survived that first detention, he was then charged of subversion,
murder, and other crimes. He was tried by a military court, whose legitimacy Ninoy adamantly
questioned. To solidify his protest, Ninoy decided to do a hunger strike and fasted for 40 days. Cory
treated this event as the second time that their family lost Ninoy. She said:

"When that didn't work, they put him on trial for subversion, murder and a host of other crimes
before a military commission. Ninoy challenged its authority and went on a fast. If he survived it, then
he felt God intended him for another fate. We had lost him again. For nothing would hold him back
from his determination to see his fast through to the end. He stopped only when it dawned on him
that the government would keep his body alive after the fast had destroyed his brain. And so, with
barely any life in his body, he called off the fast on the 40th day."

Ninoy's death was the third and the last time that Cory and their children lost Ninoy. She continued:

"And then, we lost him irrevocably and more painfully than in the past. The news came to us in
Boston. It had to be after the three happiest years of our lives together. But his death was my
country's resurrection and the courage and faith by which alone they could be free again. The dictator
had called him a nobody. Yet, two million people threw aside their passivity and fear and escorted
him to his grave."

Cory attributed the peaceful EDSA Revolution to the martyrdom of Ninoy. She stated that the death of
Ninoy sparked the revolution and the responsibility of "offering the democratic alternative" had "fallen
on (her) shoulders." Cory's address introduced us to her democratic philosophy, which she claimed she
also acquired from Ninoy. She argued:

"I held fast to Ninoy's conviction that it must be by the ways of democracy. I held out for participation
in the 1984 election the dictatorship called, even if I knew it would be rigged. I was warned by the
lawyers of the opposition, that I ran the grave risk of legitimizing the foregone results of elections that
were clearly going to be fraudulent. But I was not fighting for lawyers but for the people in whose
intelligence, I had implicit faith. By the exercise of democracy even in a dictatorship, they would be
prepared for democracy when it came. And then also, it was the only way I knew by which we could
measure our power even in the terms dictated by the dictatorship. The people vindicated me in an
election shamefully marked by government thuggery and fraud. The opposition swept the elections,
garnering a clear majority of the votes even if they ended up (thanks to a corrupt Commission on
Elections) with barely a third of the seats in Parliament. Now, I knew our power."

Cory talked about her miraculous victory through the people's struggle and continued talking about her
earliest initiatives as the president of a restored democracy. She stated that she intended to forge and
draw reconciliation after a bloody and polarizing dictatorship. Cory emphasized the importance of the
EDSA Revolution in terms of being a "limited revolution that respected the life and freedom of every
Filipino." She also boasted of the restoration of a fully constitutional government whose constitution
gave utmost respect to the Bill of Rights. She reported to the U.S. Congress:

"Again as we restore democracy by the ways of democracy, so are we completing the constitutional
structures of our new democracy under a constitution that already gives full respect to the Bill of
Rights. A jealously independent constitutional commission is completing its draft which will be
submitted later this year to a popular referendum. When it is approved, there will be elections for
both national and local positions. So, within about a year from a peaceful but national upheaval that
overturned a dictatorship, we shall have returned to full constitutional government."

Cory then proceeded on her peace agenda with the existing communist insurgency, aggravated by the
dictatorial and authoritarian measure of Ferdinand Marcos. She asserted:

"My predecessor set aside democracy to save it from a communist insurgency that numbered less
than five hundred. Unhampered by respect for human rights he went at it with hammer and tongs. By
the time he fled, that insurgency had grown to more than sixteen thousand. I think there is a lesson
here to be learned about trying to stifle a thing with a means by which it grows."

Cory's peace agenda involves political initiatives and re-integration program to persuade insurgents to
leave the countryside and return to the mainstream society to participate in the restoration of
democracy. She invoked the path of peace because she believed that it was the moral path that a moral
government must take. Nevertheless, Cory took a step back when she said that while peace is the
priority of her presidency, she "will not waiver" when freedom and democracy are threatened. She said
that, similar to Abraham Lincoln, she understands that "force may be necessary before mercy" and while
she did not relish the idea, she "will do whatever it takes to defend the integrity and freedom of (her)
country."

Cory then turned to the controversial topic of the Philippine foreign debt amounting to $26 billion at the
time of her speech. This debt had ballooned during the Marcos regime. Cory expressed her intention to
honor those debts despite mentioning that the people did not benefit from such debts. Thus, she
mentioned her protestations about the way the Philippines was deprived of choices to pay those debts
within the capacity of the Filipino people. She lamented:

"Finally may I turn to that other slavery, our twenty-six billion dollar foreign debt. I have said that we
shall honor it. Yet, the means by which we shall be able to do so are kept from us. Many of the
conditions imposed on the previous government that stole this debt, continue to be imposed on us
who never benefited from it."

She continued that while the country had experienced the calamities brought about by the corrupt
dictatorship of Marcos, no commensurate assistance was yet to be extended to the Philippines. She
even remarked that given the peaceful character of EDSA People Power Revolution, "ours must have
been the cheapest revolution ever." She demonstrated that Filipino people fulfilled the "most difficult
condition of the debt negotiation," which was the "restoration of democracy and responsible
government."
Cory related to the U.S. legislators that wherever she went, she met poor and unemployed Filipinos
willing to offer their lives for democracy. She stated:

"Wherever I went in the campaign, slum area or impoverished village. They came to me with one cry,
democracy. Not food although they clearly needed it but democracy. Not work, although they surely
wanted it but democracy. Not money, for they gave what little they had to my campaign. They didn't
expect me to work a miracle that would instantly put food into their mouths, clothes on their back,
education in their children and give them work that will put dignity in their lives. But I feel the
pressing obligation to respond quickly as the leader of the people so deserving of all these things."

Cory proceeded in enumerating the challenges of the Filipino people as they tried building the new
democracy. These were the persisting communist insurgency and the economic deterioration. Cory
further lamented that these problems worsened by the crippling debt because half of the country's
export earnings amounting to $2 billion would "go to pay just the interest on a debt whose benefit the
Filipino people never received." Cory then asked a rather compelling question to the US. Congress:

"Has there been a greater test of national commitment to the ideals you hold dear than that my
people have gone through? You have spent many lives and much treasure to bring freedom to many
lands that were reluctant to receive it. And here, you have a people who want it by themselves and
need only the help to preserve it."

Cory ended her speech by thanking America for serving as home to her family for what she referred to
as the "three happiest years of our lives together." She enjoined America in building the Philippines as a
new home for democracy and in turning the country as a "shining testament of our two nations'
commitment to freedom."

Analysis of Cory Aquino's Speech

Cory Aquino's speech was an important event in the political and diplomatic history of the country
because it has arguably cemented the legitimacy of the EDSA government in the international arena.
The speech talks of her family background, especially her relationship with her late husband, Ninoy
Aquino. It is well known that it was Ninoy who served as the real leading figure of the opposition at that
time. Indeed, Ninoy's eloquence and charisma could very well compete with that of Marcos. In her
speech, Cory talked at length about Ninoy's toil and suffering at the hands of the dictatorship that he
resisted. Even when she proceeded talking about her new government, she still went back to Ninoy's
legacies and lessons. Moreover, her attribution of the revolution to Ninoy's death demonstrates not only
Cory's personal perception on the revolution, but since she was the president, it also represents what
the dominant discourse was at that point in our history.

The ideology or the principles of the new democratic government can also be seen in the same speech.
Aquino was able to draw the sharp contrast between her government and of her predecessor by
expressing her commitment to a democratic constitution drafted by an independent. commission. She
claimed that such constitution upholds and adheres to the rights and liberty of the Filipino people. Cory
also hoisted herself as the reconciliatory agent after more than two decades of a polarizing authoritarian
politics. For example, Cory saw the blown-up communia insurgency as a product of a repressive and
corrupt government. Her response to this insurgency rooted from her diametric opposition of the
dictator (ie, initiating reintegration of communist rebels to the mainstream Philippine society). Cory
claimed that her main approach to this problem was through peace and not through the sword of war.

Despite Cory's efforts to hoist herself as the exact opposite of Marcos, her speech still revealed certain
parallelisms between her and the Marcos's government. This is seen in terms of continuing the alliance
between the Philippines and the United States despite the known affinity between the said world super
power and Marcos. The Aquino regime, as seen in Cory's acceptance of the invitation to address the U.S.
Congress and to the content of the speech, decided to build and continue with the alliance between the
Philippines and the United States and effectively implemented an essentially similar foreign policy to
that of the dictatorship. For example, Cory recognized that the large sum of foreign debts incurred by
the Marcos regime never benefitted the Filipino people. Nevertheless, Cory expressed her intention to
pay off those debts. Unknown to many Filipinos was the fact that there was a choice of waiving the said
debt because those were the debt of the dictator and not of the country. Cory's decision is an indicator
of her government's intention to carry on a debt-driven economy.

Reading through Aquino's speech, we can already take cues, not just on Cory's individual ideas and
aspirations, but also the guiding principles and framework of the government that she represented.