Maria Kalaw-Katigbak: Beauty Queen and Senator
MARIA KALAW-KATIGBAK: BEAUTY QUEEN AND SENATOR
by Reymann L. Guevarra
Maria’s mother was the first Queen of the Orient of the Manila Carnival. It was most likely that she too became a beauty pageant competitor. Whether it was in her blood or not did not matter for Maria was her own woman. The queenship of the 1931 Manila Carnival was left contested by her and Alicia de Santos, a mestiza beauty from an affluent family. During that time the deciding factor in a beauty contest lay with the contestant with the highest number of sponsors. At first, Alicia being wealthier, had the upperhand. Maria on the other hand had her father’s mason friends who helped a lot in augmenting her votes. It became a neck-to-neck contest which lasted for 8 weeks. At the end Maria came out triumphant with an insurmountable lead of 1 million votes over her formidable contender. She was then crowned as Miss Philippines of 1931. Not a soul knew then that Maria Kalaw would become the future “original sweetheart” of the Philippine Senate. But the beauty queen turned senator was more than meets the eye for she was also intellectually gifted. Coincidentally her beauty is well-deserved for she was born on the date when beauty and heart are united, this day is known as “Valentine’s Day”.
Maria Kalaw-Katigbak was born on February 14, 1912 in Manila. She is the eldest among the four children of Teodoro M. Kalaw, writer, statesman, former secretary of the Interior, and director of the National Library, and Pura Villanueva, a Spanish mestiza of the prominent Lopez – Villanueva family of Jaro, Iloilo, also a writer, pioneer for women’s suffrage and property rights for women, and first president and organizer of the League of Women Voters.
She studied at the Jefferson Elementary School and spent a year at St. Scholastica’s College for her religion class, travelling via a tranvia everyday. She graduated as high-school valedictorian from Philippine Women’s University (PWU) in 1928. For her college education she enrolled at the University of the Philippines (UP) where she earned two degrees, namely: Bachelor of Philosophy in 1932, and Master of Arts in Social Work. As a student she participated to various curricular activities in UP. She joined the staff of the Philippine Collegian, became secretary of the UP Student Council, vice president of the UP Women’s Club, secretary of the UP Debating Club, and member of the UP Writers Club. The persistence and perseverance she demonstrated eventually paid off when she obtained the Most Distinguished Senior Award on her graduation. Then, with a Barbour scholarship, she studied abroad which earned her a master’s degree in literature from the University of Michigan in 1933. At the latter University she presided over the Philippine-Michigan Club and served as secretary of the Cosmopolitan Club for Foreign Students. Her sister Pura accompanied her when she studied in the United States. Later she attended the University of Santo Tomas, where she received her bachelor’s degree in literature as well as her doctorate in philosophy, magna cum laude.
She was one of the few women writers to be admitted to the male dominated UP Writers’ Club. She wrote essays which appeared in the Literary Apprentice. Her “Far Away” was included in Filipino Essays in English: 1910-1954, 1954; “An Appeal to Husbands” and “May We Have Our Say?” appeared in Philippine Review (August 1943 and February 1944). Her short stories, like “Pilar,” 1932, were published in popular magazines. She also wrote a column entitled “Checkpoint,” which appeared in the old Manila Times.
Her first book was on her father Teodoro, entitled, Few There Were (Like My Father), 1974. In 1983 her autobiographical book about her mother Pura entitled, Legacy, was published. She also translated from Spanish to English her father’s autobiography, Aide-de-Camp to Freedom, 1965, in which she wrote a chapter about Quezon. Later she became editor of Dawn, an early women’s magazine.
The national elections of 1961 made her the lone woman of that time to become a member of the Philippine Senate (1961 up to 1963). She authored Senate Bill 652, ordering to restore the old school calendar, arguing that the hot, summer months were, in fact, conducive to sleepiness and, therefore, a setback to learning. She also authored the Consumer Protection Act, a.k.a. R.A. No. 3765, which enabled consumers to buy goods on instalments and made similar forms of transaction by credit. Other senate measures she authored were those regulating financing companies; creating the National Commission on Culture, and establishing the Philippine Executive Academy as an affiliate of the University of the Philippines. She also worked to further amend Republic Act 621, “An Act Creating the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization National Commission,” through Senate Bill No. 30.
Apart from pursuing a career in politics she was also active in civic work and the arts, holding such positions as president of the Girl Scouts of the Philippines, the Municipal Symphony Orchestra, and the Philippine Women’s Writers Association, which she had organized in 1938. She became a member of the national board of the Catholic Women’s League, the UP Board of Regents (1962-1964), the Board of National Education, Bo
ard of State Colleges, Philippine Normal College, Philippine College of Commerce, Philippine college of Arts and Trade, Samar Institute of Technology and Mindanao Institute of Technology. She also organized and was the first executive director of the Catholic Charities of Manila. She headed the UST Graduate School of Social Work while at the same time working as one of its associate professors. She was a professor of English both in UP and PWU. She was also a writer and columnist of the Manila Times and the Weekly Nation, and was chairman of the Writers Union of the Philippines. In 1981 she was appointed by President Marcos as chairman of the Movies and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB), whose precursor, the Philippine Board of Censorship for Motion Pictures, created around 1929, was headed first by her father.
Her diverse concerns took her to a number of international fora, chiefly as Philippine delegate, notably the Afro-Asian Conference of Girl Scouts in Athens; the Second Congress of the Lay Apostolate in Rome; and the 21st UNESCO General Conference in Paris where she presided as chairman.
She was married to Dr. Jose R. Katigbak, an obstetrician and gynaecologist, by whom she had four children.
References:
Books
Ancheta, Herminia M. and Beltran-Gonzales, Michaela. (1984). Filipino Women in Nation Building. Q.C. : Phoenix Pub.
Gwekoh, Sol H. (1939). Distinguished 100. Manila: The Author & APO Book Company.
Tiongson, Nicanor G. (1994). CCP Encyclopedia of the Arts. Vol. 9. Manila: Sentrong Pangkultura ng Pilipinas.
NHI Clippings (Obituaries).
Internet
http://senate.gov.ph/senators/former_senators/maria_katigbak.htm (Accessed on February 6, 2012).
http://nhi.gov.ph/downloads/fihgov0074.pdf (February on 6, 2012).
A Black American Hero in the Philippines
A BLACK AMERICAN HERO IN THE PHILIPPINES
by Peter Jaynul V. Uckung
A hero is an anomaly rising from a society suffering from unbearable social problems that cannot be remedied by the government. When the public begins to remember the legacy of a hero in a regular basis, it becomes a moral sentinel from which all aspect of governance is measured upon. For is not human happiness the ultimate purpose of heroism and the study of history? Peace, racial equality, economic security, and freedom of culture and expression are the values on which humanity base justifiable happiness, without which civilization becomes cancerous and self destructive.
In the Philippines, heroes there are many. Jose Rizal exemplified those who fought oppression and were killed for their convictions.
Rizal was a fighting writer who unleashed broadside after broadside of scathing articles, essays, and novels dead-aimed to penetrate the armor of indifference that beclouded the minds of colonial officials, to no avail.
But Rizal’s novels were very effective in releasing the anger within a suppressed and abused people, not only of his country, but of others as well.
Rizal was also evidently aware of the colonial injustices being enforced on the other people. In his novel, El Filibusterismo, his main character and anti-hero Simoun, after verbally downsizing the imperious friars, is derisively called “American mulatto”, and “British Indian”. Rizal even intimated a sense of consciousness to the discriminating practices being legally enforced upon the North American Indians.
The term “mulatto” means the first generation of a pure negro and a white, having the yellowish brown color.
Rizal was no stranger to race issue in the United States. He had visited the country first in 1888, arriving in San Francisco, passing through Sacramento, Reno, Denver, Salt Lake City, Colorado, Missouri, Chicago, Boston, Niagara Falls, and finally New York.
With the places he has visited in the United States, it was impossible for him to miss the institutionalized degradation that was bestowed upon American negros.
The Black American people during Rizal’s time suffered a more dehumanizing form of social denigration – slavery. Afro-American families were often broken up, the members sold to different white families. A slave’s frequent destiny was to never see his family again once he was sold. Mothers, fathers, sons and daughters, even children were sold as if they were pieces of furnitures to do labor without being paid.
This generally was the accepted social treatment of black Americans when a regiment of black American soldiers, the Twenty-Fourth Infantry, was sent to the Philippines in 1899.
Black soldiers had shown their mettle in the short Cuban War of 1898 when they rescued colonel Theodore Roosevelt and his rough riders during the Battle for Santiago.In the Philippines, the Afro-American soldier (called Buffalo soldier) now had to contend with the fact the he was now helping impose on another non-white people the same kind of racial oppression which have been abusing him and the likes of him at home.
The black soldier undoubtedly felt the united determination of the Filipinos to win their freedom by waging war. Something that black Americans have never done.
Black American soldiers and Filipinos usually developed friendly relations partly due to the derision and contempt they both experienced from white soldiers and civilians alike.
The Filipinos recognizing the sentiments of black American soldiers to racial issues, offered unequivocal brotherly relation and offered military commission to would-be defectors.
Only a few black American soldiers defected and joined the Filipinos due to the threat of capture (death or long imprisonment for defection). Also the prospect of forgoing all cultural and social ties was a great deterrent to those who entertained the thought of defecting.
Corporal David Fagen was the most celebrated black American soldier who defected to the Filipinos. It was still unclear why he defected, but stud
ies reported that “Fagen’s position in the company was extremely uncomfortable” and that “personal difficulties” might have driven him to his decision. His military records cancelled incompetency as the reason for defection.
He was described as dark brown, five feet six inches, with a carved scar in his chin. He was in the middle twenties.
On November 17, 1899, Fagen, assisted by a Filipino officer, jumped into a horse and went galloping into the jungles of Arayat. He was promoted from lieutenant to captain on September 6, 1900 by Gen. Jose Alejandrino, the Filipino commander in Nueva Ecija. He was referred to by his men as General Fagen.
Newspapers in the United States featured him on front page and brought his exploits to a fascinated audience. Not a few black Americans praised Fagen’s decision to side with the Filipinos. He was described as “cunning and highly skilled guerrilla who harassed and evaded large conventional American units and their Filipino auxiliaries”.
Often clashing with his former comrades, he once captured a steam launch on the river in Pampanga. He was so elusive that even the then best known guerrilla chaser, Frederick Funston, the man who captured Emilio Aguinaldo, never did capture him.
So daring was Fagen that he was reported to have visited Manila and always escaped dragnets with ease.
His reputation as a torturer of captured white American soldiers was repudiated by a former prisoner. If he could not be labelled as a butcher, the Americans did call him with other deregatory names. They described him as having a small head, a good for nothing whelp, a bad man, a rowdy soldier, unintelligent ingrate.
Black American defectors who were captured were indeed executed and there were Edmund Du Bose and Lewis Russell of the Ninth Cavalry for example. They were considered criminals engaged in inciting servile resistance. Also a black officer, Major John Calloway who wrote a friendly letter to a Filipino patriot, Thomas Consunji, was dishonourably discharged from the army.
Gen. Alejandrino, however, surrendered in May 1901. He was reported to have asked pardon for Fagen as one of his surrender terms. It was refused by the Americans. Fagen would not be considered a prisoner of war. He was to be court-marshalled and executed.
With most of the Filipino generals surrendering, Fagen left the camp with his Filipino wife. They went hiding in the mountains of Nueva Ecija.
The Americans hunted him with a vengeance. He was declared a bandit. Six hundred dollars was authorized as a reward for Fagen “dead or alive”.
On December 5, 1901, a Filipino hunter, Anastacio Bartolome brought a decomposing head of a Negro, together with some weapons, clothing, binoculars, documents and a west point ring of one of Fagen’s former captive.
Bartolome’s story was that he and his companion hacked Fagen to death in Dangalan Cove. His wife reportedly jumped into the sea and drowned.
The evidences were considered strong. The Americans reported a positive identification, but there were no record of reward going to Bartolome.
However, many expressed doubts about whose head Bartolome had delivered. It was too small. There were talks of Fagen orchestratig the whole thing so he could finally be free of his dogged pursuers. A report about the continued pursuit of Fagen was unearthed months after his supposed killing.
Jose Rizal might not have dabbled more seriously with the issue on social discrimination inflicted on black Americans, but his fleeting mention of Simoun being mistaken for an “American mulatto” hints of the kind of degrading racial treatment that was being given to non-white people in America. It was the proverbial tip of the iceberg.
When a retelling of a social crime disturbs and angers people and moves them to denounce and condemn this particular social occurrence it is often sufficient enough to assuage the hunger for justice that will be generated by the critically reflecting people.
Remembering David Fagen and his revolutionary exploits in the Philippines reveals a lot more than the revolution itself.
As a country suffused with the memories of heroes who fought aga
inst the inhumanities of colonialism, the Filipinos will readily discern the social problems that the likes of Fagen symbolized.
For Fagen, by fighting the US, not only fought for the freedom of his adopted homeland, he fought against a most cruel enemy of mankind. He fought against slavery and racism which were then still being practiced in the US.
Although, outlawed and condemned in the US after a devastating civil war that almost tore that country in half, slavery survived and had been carried out discreetly through legal and extra legal terror.
The American Civil War ushered in a euphoric interlude of freedom for most Black Americans. But slavery, though outlawed, survived in other forms. After their emancipation and the reconstruction era, Black Americans now had to suffer segregation.
Slavery was evil and unsurpassable in its social malignancy. Family members were separated at will by owners. The slightest resistance was met with inhuman tortures designed to break the toughest of fighting spirit.
With the outlawing of slavery; some states devised legal efforts to keep Black Americans intimidated, submissive and “in their place”. Laws were created with mechanisms designed to disenfranchise blacks, and with no political and legal rights black Americans had no real hope for economic advancement.
Segregation was legalized. It was a system of norms that dictated every aspect of human behavior between two different races. It was an etiquette system whose purpose was always to imply that blacks were inferior to white men, and that Black Americans were content to be inferior.
This was the oppressive and unbearable world that David Fagen finally confronted when he joined the Filipinos in their war for independence.
In honoring the memory of the Philippine Revolution we must remember that there were men who fought not only against colonialism, but also against the tyranny of slavery and racism.
For that David Fagen is a monument of a hero.
Tandang Sora: Profile of A Courageous Mother
TANDANG SORA: PROFILE OF A COURAGEOUS MOTHER
by Bryan Anthony C. Paraiso
Few Filipinos are aware that a Filipino heroine is celebrating her bicentennial birthday today—Melchora Aquino, popularly known as Tandang Sora. We, who were taught Philippine history by rote, have come to know her through the stately appellation “Mother of the Katipunan,” but barely appreciated the role she played in the Revolution.
Heroines always get the short end of the stick, with their exploits often relegated to the footnotes of history. Male chauvinism seems to permeate our historical accounts of heroic acts and conventional roles the sexes play—with men as gallants winning wars on the battlefield or gaining political clout, while women dealt with the daily realities of hearth and home.
True enough, place a woman on the spotlight and gossip on her supposed physical or sexual aberrations would surely prosper. Unless a multi-layered and objective understanding of female contributions in Philippine history is seriously undertaken, we can neither fully appreciate their sacrifices nor change misconstrued perceptions.
Much of what we know about Tandang Sora’s early life is shrouded, not by mystery but by the ordinariness of her life. Traditional accounts state that she was born on January 06, 1812 and describe her as a comely peasant woman from Barrio Banlat, Kalookan, who often essayed the role of Reyna Elena during the annual Santacruzan. She married Fulgencio Ramos, a cabeza de barangay, and bore him six children. However, she was widowed young and despite hardship, steeled herself to become a loving single parent to her children and a shrewd manager of the farm and businesses inherited from her spouse.
Although Tandang Sora could have embraced a comfortable life, her character was nurtured and strengthened by the seasonal rhythms of the farmer’s life: tilling the land, sowing and reaping its crops. It bolstered her empathy towards her indigent neighbors, who assisted her during the harvest, and this sense of community, encouraged her to wholeheartedly share her abundance.
How did Andres Bonifacio come to know Tandang Sora? How was she able to embrace his principles, if he did not frequent her home as a guest? It is probable that her sons were members of the Katipunan, and that Bonifacio might have engaged in heated discussions under her roof, which convinced her of the legitimacy of the Revolution’s aspirations for freedom and nationhood.
Although well past her eighties when the 1896 Revolution flared, Tandang Sora, risked both life and livelihood to clandestinely support the needs of the Katipunan. Through her generous spirit, Tandang Sora provided food, shelter, medicines and motherly comfort for weary and injured Katipuneros. As a recognized community leader, she mobilized her countrymen for the Revolution, and her selfless efforts heartened Filipinos to continue on the struggle.
In Katipunero Santiago V. Alvarez’s narrative of the Philippine Revolution, it was in Tandang Sora’s own home where the famed “cry” and tearing of the cedulas took place:
“At ten o’clock that Sunday morning, 23 August 1896, we arrived at Sampalukan, Bahay Toro. Our number had grown to more than 500 and the house, yard, and granary of Cabesang Melchora was getting crowded with us Katipuneros. The generosity of Cabesang Melchora was no less than that of Apolonio Samson. Like him, she opened her granary and had plenty of rice pounded and animals slaughtered to feed us…
The following day, Monday, August 24, more Katipuneros came and increased the number to more than a thousand, the Supremo called a meeting at 10 o’clock that morning inside Cabesang Melchora’s barn…After the adjournment of the meeting at twelve noon, there were tumultuous shouts of ‘Long Live the Sons of the People!’ ”
(Linggo, ika-23 ng Agosto, 1896; ika-sampu ng umaga, ang bahay at kamalig ng alilisan ni kabisang Melchora, sa pook ng Sampalukan, Bahay-Toro, ay unti-unting napupuno sa pagdaratingan ng Katipunang humahanap sa Supremong Bonifacio at ng mga kasama-sama, lahat ay hihigit at di kukulangin sa limandang katao. Ang kagandahang-loob ni kabisang Melchora ay hindi ipinahuli sa mga inihandog ni tininting Polonyo. Nagbukas din ng kamalig ng kanyang maraming palay, nagpabigas at nagpapatay ng mga hayop na ipinakain…
Lunes, ika-24 ng Agosto, 1896: Ang Katipunan ay humigit sa isang libong bilang, dahil sa walang tigil at sunud-sunod na datingan. Ang Supremo ay nag-anyayang gumawa ng Pulong sa loob ng kamalig ng alilisan; ang pulong ay sinimulan nang ika-10 oras ng umaga at pinamunuan ng Supremo Bonifacio…Ika-12 ng tanghali nang itindig ang pulong, at pinagtibay na lalo nang di magkamayaw sa sigawang:‘Mabuhay ang mga Anak ng Bayan.’)
Her very tenderness towards these Katipuneros, who were peasants as well, showed the mettle and strength of her defiance against the colonial power. What crime should be imputed to a grandmother who loved her countrymen? Tandang Sora stood her ground at Pasong Putik, Novaliches and was arrested by the Spanish authorities on August 29, 1896. Confined at the notorious Bilibid Prison, she was mercilessly questioned but steadfastly refused to betray the Supremo and other Katipuneros.
Exiled to Guam for six years, Tandang Sora grieved at this enforced disconnection from her homeland, yet endured despite the separation from family and countrymen. At the ripe age of 91, she was released by the Americans, Spain’s colonial successors in February 1903. She faithfully returned to her home in Barrio Banlat, a tearful homecoming among family and neighbors.
Although age had crippled Tandang Sora’s body, her patriotic fervor remained undimmed. Refusing honors and despite the privations of penury, she was satisfied to have loved her country and people too well. Tandang Sora peacefully passed away on February 19, 1919 at 107 years old. Her former comrades extolled her charity and sacrifice, laying her to rest at the Cementerio del Norte at the Mausoleo de los Veteranos de la Revolucion.
What lessons can we learn from Tandang Sora’s life? Simply, that valor is neither dictated by age nor by gender, but sired by determination for selfless service when the opportunity arises. Finally, love of country may be best realized through the day-to-day practice of virtues: kasipagan (industry), kagalingan (excellence), katapatan (integrity), kalinga at pagmamalasakit sa kapwa (care and sympathy for others), and pag-ibig sa Diyos (love of God).
Bonifacio’s Undead Legacy
BONIFACIO’S UNDEAD LEGACY
by Peter Jaynul V. Uckung
Andres Bonifacio was not the father of the Philippine Revolution.
Social injustice was.
He was not poor. He was not uneducated. He was a working class hero, who initiated a period of immense struggle from below, an effort often treated as a footnote in Philippine history.
But a footnote in history, rescued from obscurity, and subjected to moral scrutiny could help students become critical agents who can speak, write, and assert their own histories, voices and realities. A footnote in history, in the hands of an erudite teacher can help students acquire knowledge to act in their collective self-interest and change the world without taking power.
Andres Bonifacio is often treated as a footnote in history, relegated to a chapter of cannot be and should not be. Saluted for being. Regaled for trying.
Remembered on his birthday. Forgotten the next day.
Blame it on a system that really doesn’t need him.
After Bonifacio, it was clear that advanced capitalist powers and oppressed nations are not equal in international diplomacy (or anything international).
That in a legal contest over the interpretation of, say the legality of freedom by revolution over colonialism, the nation with the greatest power is more likely to win its interpretation over those with less power.
After Bonifacio, the Filipinos experienced how the United States used political humanitarianism as ideological justification for submerging the Philippines into American control, overthrowing a progressive government and installing reactionary rulers.
Bonifacio’s intrusion into the system so modified for sowing social inequality was so threateningly effective in throwing it into high reverse gear. A frantic solution was concocted by those whose power and privileges were endangered by Bonifacio’s revolution. The solution invented was reconciliation, an approach to social crimes involving exposure but not retribution. A formula so effective that it is still being used today.
In actually musing how Bonifacio became Bonifacio one will see him opposing a social order in which it was possible for a priest or landlord who does absolutely nothing that is useful, to amass a fortune of hundreds of thousands of pesos, while thousands upon thousands of Filipino men and women who work all the days of their lives secure barely enough for a wretched existence.
From Bonifacio, we learn that a revolution is the weapon of the oppressed. And what is a revolution? It is resistance to wrong. The brutalization of poverty is the springboard of a militant mind. It was a call that could not be denied by anyone possessing the code of righteousness.
When the revolution impacted on the minds of the Spanish colonial masters, they reacted like a wounded tiger, slashing and tearing suspected Katipuneros apart and writing reports screaming of native treachery and cultural ingratitude, totally writing off the evils of colonialism that brought forth such vengeful forces.
These colonial government reports survived to this day and, being used as sources of history, dilute the memory of the raison d’ etre of the revolution.
Bonifacio the revolutionary proved that we cannot take government reports and statistics as accurate representation of how people were living then. Just as how unbelievable the government is when reporting economic prosperity based on increased GNP alone.
After Bonifacio, we discovered that passivity is not natural. That poverty is not divinely ordained. That there is a tremendous degree of violence in a society imposing servility and silence on the people. That in order for injustice to reign, the people must be cowed by whatever means, be it by religion, education or legalization. That the people must believe on their own cultural inferiority.
After Bonifacio, all these myths were exposed. Exposed too were the enormous profits made by those who thrived by imposing fear and racism.
Because we know Bonifacio, we can readily recognize the deception and disinformation that colonizers used to cover their malignant economic system.
Bonifacio was a true nationalist. And we laud him for that. Nationalism is taught in school and is expected to be shown by everyone, more so by our politicians. Actually nationalism is the ultimate foe of globalization, an economic system our government has forced us to embrace.
Globalization, or free market, takes decision making out of government’s hand which the public has at least some potential control, and hands it over to a faceless creature called the international market over which the public has absolutely no control.
Globalization gives the advantage of capital mobility to business corporations by relocation of operations to more favorable places, where taxes, wages and environmental standards are lowest. This to ensure maximum profit.
A nationalistic law would have wrought murder to any globalizing business effort to the Philippines.
For globalization, Bonifacio’s memory is anathema.
Nationalistic restrictions impede the flow of profits. That is clear.
Then why is Bonifacio, the militant nationalist, a hero? Because with him we can remember the moments in the past which show the possibility of a solution to a social dilemma. That change is possible. In knowing Bonifacio, history is power.
Heroes are social anomalies. They emerge when a government cannot solve an unbearable social problem.
Dead, but still deadly, Andres Bonifacio, is a real hero. Remember him; he holds the key to national salvation.
Cemeteries of Memories, Where Journey to Eternity Begins
CEMETERIES OF MEMORIES
WHERE JOURNEY TO ETERNITY BEGINS
by Quennie Ann J. Palafox
Cemeteries are the least visited places in contrast to parks and shopping malls. Not until November 1, when All Saints is annually held, that cemeteries get absolutely crowded with families visiting their departed loved ones. Contrary to common knowledge that cemeteries are mere final resting places for those who passed away, cemeteries are also historic sites and silent witnesses of history, and can be sources of historical information about important events that happened in a specific community.
The terms sementeryo or campo santo stirs fright among the public because of the popular belief that the sementeryo is inhabited by ghosts. The word sementeryo came from the Spanish “cementerio” which is also known as kampo santo from Spanish “campo” (field), and “santo”, (saints). Other names for sementeryo are pantyon, a Tagalog word for the Spanish “panteon” a (funeral monument), and libingan (resting place) from the Tagalog “libing” or (bury).
The practice of burying the dead goes back to the pre-Hispanic Philippines where honoring the dead was observed by the families of the departed member because of the belief in afterlife. Thus, burial practices varied from one place to another depending on the culture of a specific group.
When the Philippines was colonized by the Spanish, the Filipino practice of burying the dead with ceremonial rites carried on. It was customary to inter the dead Catholic members within church sacred grounds while religious and civil personages were buried within the church. This practice continued until the 19th century.
The dramatic increases in the population of towns prompted civil officials to construct grave sites away from the centers of towns. This was to ensure proper sanitation of the disposal of the corpse. On the grave site is a lapida or a stone slab with the name and birth of the deceased inscribed on it.
Giving proper burial was so important that the refusal of the parish priest to bury the body of the brother of Francisco Dagohoy sparked his resentment which led him to stage the longest revolt in Bohol. For the campo santo was considered consecrated ground, and those who committed grave sins were not allowed to be buried on church grounds, and those who were refused burial were stigmatized as sinners unworthy of Christian burial, bringing shame upon the family of the departed member.
One distinguishing structure inside the campo santo was the capilla (mortuary chapel) usually located at its center. A special site was also designated for children who died at a very young age, called angelito (little angel).
Three of the historic cemeteries in the Philippines can be found in Metro Manila namely: old Cementerio General de Dilao or Cementerio General de Paco, now Paco Park, Cementerio General de La Loma or the Catholic Cemetery of La Loma, and the then Cementerio del Norte or Manila North Cemetery. In the 19th century Manila, cemeteries were constructed primarily for the purpose of disposing massive numbers of corpses following epidemics. Likewise, the government of Manila wanted to promote sanitation to guarantee that the health of the population was properly safeguarded.
The allocation of public lands for cemeteries continued into the American period. The North and South Cemeteries were built for the inhabitants of Manila and its environs. Other municipal cemeteries were also established; many, however, were built after the American regime. In 1906, the Americans passed the Cemetery Law regulating the establishment and maintenance of burial and the disposal of the dead in the province.
Paco cemetery (now Paco Park) was built in the suburb of San Fernando de Dilao. The construction of the cemetery began in 1814, but the cholera epidemic that wreaked havoc on the city prompted the use of the cemetery in 1820. The Cementerio General de Dilao became the resting place for Spaniards, indios, and mestizos who came from the different parishes adjacent Manila, which included Intramuros, Binondo, Quaipo, San Miguel, Sta. Cruz, Sampaloc, Tondo, Ermita and Malate. Paco Park, its niches empty and no longer used for burials, is now a hushed, well cultivated park. It has also become a venue for concerts and group exercises. It’s conversion into a beautiful national park was completed in 1966 and it is now under the supervision of the National Parks Development Committee.
The remains of our national hero, Dr. Jose Rizal were interred in the cemetery immediately after his execution in Bagumbayan (now Luneta). He was buried in the ground between the inner and outer walls and his former burial site marked with his initials in reverse R.P.J (Rizal Protacio Jose). The bodies of the Gomburza, the three martyred priests, were also buried in the historic Paco Cemetery.
One of the oldest cemeteries in the City of Quezon is the La Loma Cemetery established in 1882. It was constructed in the hilly terrain of La Loma and inaugurated on September 21, 1882. La Loma Cemetery served as the grave site of the Christians in Manila.
The Manila North Cemetery, on the other hand, was built during the early phase of American period. In 1910, the Cementerio del Norte was considered one of the best and most attractive institutions of its kind in the Orient. The Manila North Cemetery serves as the final resting place for key figures in the Philippine history, including former presidents, revolutionary heroes and other men and women of notable achievement. Among the famous personalities interred in this cemetery are: Macario Sakay, revolutionist; Quintin Paredes, former senate president; Arsenio Lacson, former mayor of Manila; Gregoria de Jesus, widow of Andres Bonifacio; Francis Burton Harrison, Americal Governor-General; Atang dela Rama, singer and actress; Epifanio delos Santos, historian; Pancho Villa, boxer; Claro M. Recto, foremost nationalist; presidents of the Philippines such as Sergio Osmeña, Ramon Magsaysay, Manuel Roxas; and the legendary actor Fernando Poe, Jr.
One may also marvel at the picturesque architectural wonders of the mausoleums of some wealthy families in the cemetery. Walking around the 50-hectare cemetery, you may notice the group plots of the Boy Scouts; Firemen; Jewish cemetery; Masonic burial grounds; Mausoleo del los Veteranos de la Revolucion; Armed Forces of the Philippines Cemetery and the Thomasites’ plot.
The Mausoleo del los Veteranos de la Revolucion functions as the repository of the remains of the veterans of the Philippine Revolution in 1896 and Philippine-American War in 1899-1900. It was inaugurated on May 30, 1920 and the structure was designed by Arch. Arcadio Arellano. However, some remains of the heroes such as those of Melchora Aquino and Marcelo H. del Pilar were exhumed and transferred to their respective birth sites and given heroes’ honors.
During the Japanese occupation, the Manila North Cemetery saw the brutal killings of innocent civilians. Members of Armed Forces of Japan under the command of Gen. Tomoyuki Yamashita were accused of executing non-combatant civilians at the North Cemetery during the months of October to November 1944. In December 1944 at North Cemetery, more than 2, 000 unarmed noncombatant and civilians were brutally mistreated and killed.
Cemeteries do not only occupy an important role in our past but also serve as monuments to our country’s history. The historic journey of our people, nonetheless, does not end in the cemetery.
Reference:
De Viana, Lorelei. Public Sanitation and Cemeteries in 19th Century Manila. Unitas, Vol. 77, No. 1, March 2004
CCP Encyclopedia
Historical Markers (1992-2006). Manila: National Historical Institute, 2008
Zaide, Gregorio. Documentary Sources of Philippine History Vo. 12. Manila: National Book Store, 1990.
Report of the Philippine Commission to the Secretary of War, 1910.
Sergio Osmena: Remembering the Grand old man of Cebu
SERGIO OSMEÑA: REMEMBERING THE GRAND OLD MAN OF CEBU
(1878-1961)
Juana Suico Osmeña was only fourteen years old when she gave birth to Sergio Osmeña on September 9, 1878. Sergio used Osmeña as family name since Juana was not officially married to anyone. It is no secret in history that he grew up without knowing his father, but it didn’t hinder him from joining the roster of the iconic Filipino leaders.
The outbreak of the Revolution in Manila forced Sergio to return to Cebu to continue his studies. He worked as a part-time court recorder for the Cebu Audiencia and a personal aide to the Spanish military governor of Cebu. At the same time, he was a contributor of articles to El Boletin de Cebu, the only provincial newspaper at that time; and to the Spanish Manila- based periodical, El Comercio. Sergio’s excellence as a journalist earned him the prestigious Medalla del Merito Civil.
Sergio went back to Manila in 1897 to resume his studies. However, new anti-Spanish uprisings forced him to flee to Borbon in Cebu since he was identified with the Spaniards. Returning to Manila after two years, he covered the retreat of Emilio Aguinaldo for a Cebu newspaper. Sergio gave his support to the besieged republic, providing Aguinaldo updates with the developments in Cebu. He became an associate of Juan Climaco, an influential Cebuano illustrado and a republican.
Before travelling to the north, Sergio met Estefania Chiong Veloso, daughter of Nicasio Chiong Veloso, a business tycoon in Cebu. He generously gave Sergio a capital of 30,000 pesos to establish the first daily periodical in the province; and on April 16, 1900, the first issue of El Nuevo Dia was published. Working with Rafael Palma and Jayme de Veyra, Osmeña put out El Nuevo Dia, not for the purpose of making a profit but to spread the concept of preserving liberty among the Filipinos.
Sergio married Estefania on April 10, 1901. In 1903, he took the examination for aspiring lawyers, and placed second in the overall ranking with an average grade of 95.66, and got 100 percent in Penal Code and Civil Procedure.
Resurfacing in Cebu in May 1903, Sergio was recognized as a nationalist after winning a case in favor of a former Filipino revolutionist who was charged with sedition. In December of the same year, with the support of Governor Juan Climaco, Sergio made his initial entry into politics after winning as municipal councillor. He was re-elected in the 1904 elections. Governor Climaco appointed him as acting provincial governor some time in 1904. Backed with his experience, he was victorious in the gubernatorial race of the 1905 elections. Sergio Osmeña won a seat in the Philippine Assembly in 1907, and was easily proclaimed as its first Speaker at twenty nine. At that time, the Speakership was the highest position that a Filipino could aspire for, being second only to the American governor-general.
In 1916, the passage of Jones Law allowed the Filipinos to have a broader participation in the running of the government. It created a bicameral legislative system, composed of a lower house called the House of Representatives and an upper house known as the Senate. Sergio remained as House Speaker, while Quezon was elected as Senate President.
Two years after Estefania died in 1918, Sergio married Esperanza Limjap who came from a wealthy clan.
A Senator from 1922-35, he joined fellow Senator Manuel Roxas in the United States to lobby for Philippines independence at the American Congress. The OSROX Mission played a vital role in the approval of the Hare-Hawes-Cutting Act which was eventually replaced by the Tydings-McDuffie Act. Quezon and Osmeña ran as president and vice-president respectively in the 1935 elections for the Commonwealth government, beating their opponents with a huge margin.
Manuel Quezon and Sergio flew to the United States when World War II broke out. The Commonwealth government was suddenly in exile, with Quezon remaining as President and Osmeña as Vice-President.
On August 1, 1944, Manuel Quezon’s death in Saranac Lake, New York put Sergio Osmeña at the helm of a presidency in exile. He was with General Douglas MacArthur and his soldiers, when he returned to the Philippines, landing at the Red Beach, Palo, Leyte on October 20, 1944. The Commonwealth government, headed by Osmeña was re-established temporarily in Tacloban, Leyte on October 23, 1944.
The Second World War ended in 1945. Sergio inherited a devastated country. Nevertheless, he showed that old age was not an obstacle to serve the country. He devoted his short term as president to the restoration of peace and order, providing health services for the Filipinos, handling issues of collaboration, re-establishment of foreign relations and reconstruction of cities destroyed by war.
In the 1946 national elections, Sergio Osmeña lost to Manuel A. Roxas, but his character as a nationalist and statesman never vanished from the memory of the Filipinos. Until now, his descendants are very visible and active in Philippine politics, a manifestation that the Filipino people have trusted the Osmeñas through the decades.
Truly, it is worthy to pay tribute to a man who fought for the liberty we enjoy today.
REFERENCES:
Agoncillo, Teodoro. Garotech Publishing. History of the Filipino People. 1970
Pacis, Vicente. President Sergio Osmeña. A Fully Documented Biography: Volume I and II. 1971
President Sergio Osmeña: Peerless Filipino Statesman. President Sergio Osmeña Memorial Foundation, Inc. 1968.
Santos, Gloria M. Philippine Presidents: 100 Years. New Day Publishers. 1999
The Song of O-Sei-San
THE SONG OF O-SEI-SAN
By: Quennie Ann J. Palafox
A popular song among ex-couples, who had let go of one another for the reason that breaking apart is the right thing to do, is “Somewhere Down the Road”. It’s lyrics tells the story of a love that was lost, but one that still clings to the hope that someday and somewhere lovers who fell apart will find themselves in each others arms again. It was written by Cynthia Weil and Tom Snow recorded in 1981 by Barry Manilow.
If O-sei-san were still alive in the 1980’s, she could have dedicated this song to Jose Rizal, as she had to let go of Rizal in order for him to fulfill his dream for his country. Rizal could have lived longer and established his own family had he opted staying in Japan with O-sei-san. However, Rizal made a great sacrifice when he chose to return to the Philippines and devote his precious life for his fellow countrymen.
It was only in recent years that interests have arisen to unravel the mystery of Rizal’s Japanese love- ‘Osei-san’. His relationship with O-sei-san and his residence in Japan for over a little month has been one of the highlights of Philippine-Japan relations. Leonor Rivera may be Jose Rizal’s greatest love as she was his girlfriend for quite long years. However, their relationship did not last as Rivera was forced to marry an English Engineer named Charles Kipping. On the other hand, a Japanese maiden named Seiko Usui (Osei-san) had loved Rizal like no other woman.
Novelist historian Ki Kimura helped the Philippine embassy in Japan to identify the Japanese girl that Rizal had love in his short stay in the Land of the Rising Sun. Mr. Kimura’s quest for the identity of Osei-san started during the war when he was dispatched to the Philippines by the Army Air Force to write for a Japanese newspaper. His frequent visit in the the National Library to look into Rizal’s diary and other documents was a success as he found the photo of Osei-san which was said to have been preserved by Trinidad, Rizal’s younger sister. O-Sei-San must be very special to Rizal that he had kept a photo of her.
Rizal left Hong Kong for Japan aboard the S.S Oceanic to accept the invitation of Don Juan Perez Caballero, secretary of the Spanish Legation, to live with him in February 1888. He was offered a position in the Spanish Legation with a handsome salary of P100 a month. Jose Rizal penned a letter to his family in Calamba in which he described Yokohama as a town inferior to Manila in respect to outside appearances. He stayed at Grande Hotel in Yokohama. The next day, he went to Tokyo and stayed at Tokyo Hotel, located inside the Hibiya Gate, from March 2 to 7, 1888. He left Tokyo Hotel and resided with Perez Caballero in the Spanish Legation in Azabu, Tokyo Japan.
In his first days in Tokyo, Rizal found difficulty in communication with the Japanese because only few could understand English. Hence, he spent a month and a half in learning the language, Japanese art, judo, theater (kabuki), and music. He also learned the Japanese way of life, their customs and progress. Rizal admired the industry, courtesy, cleanliness of the Japanese. He found out their homes clean, that beggars were rare, but he could not stand the sight of human beings pulling cars (kuruma). He was surprised to discover that many members of a Japanese brass band were not Japanese but Filipinos. While in Tokyo, Rizal marveled at the architecture of the shrines and temples. He frequented the National Museum to appreciate Japanese fine arts. He also visited Meguro, Nikko, Miyanoshita, Hakone and other cities.
Rizal was entertained by Kabuki plays in Tokyo and Osaka. He appreciated the play Sendaihagi in which Masaoka, court-nurse of a daimyo, played by Kikuguro saves her young lord’s life at the sacrifice of his son. In Osaka, he watched the Chushingura and was inspired by the chivalrous spirit of Amagawaya Gihei who placed allegiance on top of his life and even his son’s.
One spring afternoon, Rizal set his eyes on a beautiful Japanese woman who passed by at the Spanish Legation. His eyes were captured by her charm and lovely face. Rizal went on asking information about the name of this woman whose beauty captivated him. Finally, he learned from the gardener that her name was Seiko Usui and she took a walk every afternoon near the legation.
Rizal did all means just to introduce himself to Seiko. Seiko was born in 1865, three years before the Meiji Restoration, in Edo (now Tokyo) to a samurai, who became a trader in Yokohama after the Restoration. The Japanese lady was impressed with Rizal’s wit and charm and eventually their admiration for each other developed into a romantic bond. Rizal was 27 and O-Sei-San was 23 when they met. Osei-san conversed in English and French with Rizal, thus, it removed the language barrier. From thereon, the two meet everyday and they visited all interesting places in the city. She helped Rizal understand the Japanese language and also related to him the culture of the Japanese. O-sei-san was truly an epitome of a high-cultured Japanese woman.
This short-lived residence in Japan proved to be one of the happiest days in Rizal’s life for he was not only fascinated with the sceneries in Japan but he also fell in love with O-Sei-San. Their love came to an end when Rizal had to leave. His heart was filled with grief as he bid sayonara to O-Sei-San. Rizal left Japan for San Francisco on board the English ship Belgic in April 1888. A day before he left Japan, Rizal wrote in his diary his regret for leaving, and his longing for the love of O-sei-san.
“. . . O-Sei-san, sayonara, goodbye! I have spent a lovely golden month; I do not know if I will have another one like it in all my life. Love, money, friendship, esteem, privileges… no woman like you has ever loved me..no woman has made such sacrifices as you have…you shall never know what I still think of you, and that your image lives on in my memory..when shall I return to spend another divine afternoo
n like that in the temple of Meguro?..when will the sweet hours I spent with you come back?…everything is at an end! Sayonara, goodbye!
Rizal might not have left a promise that he will return to Japan to be with O-Sei-San which was probably the reason that Seiko got married to another man. She became the wife of Englishman, Alfred Charlton, who was an English teacher in the Peer’s High School, then the Yamaguchi High School in Imaguchi, and later taught chemistry in the prestigious Gakushuin High School. He was decorated with the Japanese Order of Merit, 5th class, as indicated on his tombstone. Charlton and Seiko had a daughter named Yuriko who married the son of a senator named Yoshiharu Takiguchi. They had a son (no name) who was a Japanese diplomat assigned in Geneva. Charlton died in 1925 while Seiko survived World War II. Seiko died on May 1, 1947 in Hagi City in Yamaguchi Prefecture in Western Japan where she relocated during the war from Tokyo to avoid the bombing. She died at age 80.
On December 30, 1960, officials of the Philippine Embassy in Tokyo placed a bouquet of flowers on a grave at Zoshigaya Cemetery in Tokyo. The inscription of the tomb reads: “Alfred Charlton and his wife Sei-Ko”
References:
Guerrero, Leon Ma. The First Filipino. Manila: National Historical Institute, 2006
Zaide, Gregorio F. and Sonia M. Zaide. Jose Rizal Buhay, Mga Ginawa, at Mga Sinulat ng Isang Henyo, Manunulat, Siyentipiko, at Pambansang Bayani. Quezon City: All-Nations Publishing Co, Inc., 1997
Tezuka, Tatsumaro. Footmarks of Rizal in Japan. Reprinted in The Cable Tow. July, 1961
Ocampo, Ambeth “Osei-san”. Philippine Daily Inquirer. June 23, 2009
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/features/archive/news/2011/06/20110620p2g00m0fe086000c.html
The War and the General
THE WAR AND THE GENERAL
by Peter Jaynul V. Uckung
Miguel Malvar is a symbol of war – war against the Spaniards and war against the Americans. Though he opted to surrender to the Americans on April 16, 1902, he is remembered by history as one of the fightingest Filipino generals during the resistance against American invasion.
Remembering Miguel Malvar beckons us to recount one of the most forgotten and misunderstood eras in Philippine history – the Filipino-American War. Perhaps, because the American colonizers had the chance to induce a national amnesia on this event through massive re-education, by reformatting the curriculum in school, designing it to make the war as benevolent as possible, the Filipino fighters as misdirected heroes or bandits, and American occupation of the Philippines as necessary prerequisite for the Filipinos to be civilized.
In remembering Miguel Malvar, we also must remember the war that stole our independence. Because that was what Malvar stood for, in defence of our independence.
When President Emilio Aguinaldo was captured by the Americans on March 23, 1901, Malvar become the new commander-in-chief of the Filipino forces. He kept on fighting despite Aguinaldo’s oath of allegiance to the U.S., Aguinaldo’s capitulation meant nothing to most of the Filipinos in the field.
This the American recognized and to overcome the tenacity of Filipino resistance, they launched one of the cruelest military campaigns ever to be effected in the opening years of the 20th century.
The Philippine constabulary was formed by the U.S. on July 18, 1901. It was created to use native force against native resistance, Filipinos against Filipinos, oftentimes brother against brother. Former comrades found themselves on opposite sides with the same urge to kill and destroy any and all opponents. Civilians were often the victims as both sides questioned their loyalties.
The echoes of ferocious battles between Filipino resistance fighter and American- trained Filipino constabularies are muted by time and vague descriptions in history text books, which were often clothed in euphemisms.
Tortures, too, were practiced to pry information from suspected supporters of the resistance. Massacres of civilians, be they women, children, or old people were not uncommon. These occurences were blotted out in history books as the American government restructured our educational system. Worse were the justifications of the war waged by the Americans on the Filipinos. Historical apologists and those who hugely benefited from the American occupation began to spread the word that the Filipinos deserved the war of aggression, like it was for the good of the country.
Then there were the American action against whole villages which supported the resistance. They called it “reconcentration”. People were kept within a militarized zone to keep them from aiding Filipino fighters. Disease and starvation, dislocation and death for many Filipinos were the result of this American containment policy. Again, there was neither strong protest from history text book, nor marker to remind us of the inhumanity of the re-concentration policy.
The Americans also passed laws to discourage the people to pursue their struggle for independence in whatever form of advocacy. This included the Sedition Law which was passed on November 4, 1901 imposing death penalty, long prison term or sky high fine for those who would dare write, speak or fight for independence. Even works of art with hints of independence advocacy were suspect. Authors were routinely charged with sedition and most were imprisoned. On November 12, 1902 the Brigandage Act was passed, legally labelling those Filipinos still fighting for freedom as bandits and robbers. History text books still consider most of them as such.
Today, most Filipino historians decry the injustices perpetuated by the Americans to Filipinos during the Filipino-American war. Like a shining pearl revealed by the ebb tide of history, the centenary of Miguel Malvar’s death should give us a wealth of information on the war that eclipsed the first Philippine republic.
And most importantly, we should consider the lessons of war and apply it to the present reality, not only in our country but the world now in the chaos of war.
Torture, reconcentration of population, using brothers to kill brothers, the creation of constricting laws against terrorism. These are again being employed in the Middle East and Africa.
It is our historic duty to hate those who aggressively pursue war as a matter of imperialistic policy and condemn those who support it. We historically know so well the evils that they bring. That is what remembering Malvar is all about.
Teodora Alonso’s Trail of Tears
TEODORA ALONSO’S TRAIL OF TEARS
by Peter Jaynul V. Uckung
Being the one of the richest tenant couples of the Calamba Hacienda, one would think that the Mercado-Rizal family was way too high to be affected by colonial mistreatment. The family was the first to own a big adobe house in the town centre, the first house to have a piano, the first to have stables and carriages, the first to have a library.
Francisco Mercado-Rizal, the patriarch, was very successful farmer tending several important crops. Teodora Alonso-Realonda, his wife, also tended several businesses including a flour mill, a drugstore, and a store. On market day (tiangge) she would put up a sidewalk store. She also was a travelling saleswoman.
Teodora had the means to sent her daughters to the best schools then, which were always religious.
The couple were known for real honest-to-goodness hardwork, popular and respected from far and near. Their house was always open for guests who were treated sumptuously.
The couple played host to numberless guests and officials of the land, but still their goodwill fell short in shielding them from colonial ire.
A series of unfortunate events would snowball into a tragedy from which the Mercado-Rizal would never recover.
A ranking member of the guardia civil, who were used to being supplied by the Mercado-Rizal with horse fodder was offended when his request for the grass was turned down by Francisco Mercado.
Aside from this, Francisco’s building of a sugar mill on a disputed land was being questioned by the friar manager of the Casa Hacienda.
Add to this the predicament of the couple’s son, Paciano, whose close association with the executed priest Father Jose Burgos, put him in the list of those who were being closely watch by the government.
And then Teodora would irretrievably tip the scales of destiny.
Teodora’s half-brother, Jose Alberto wanted to divorce his wife, whom he alleged to be having an affair with another man. Teodora persuaded him to put up with her and preserve their marriage. Since then Jose Alberto went often to Calamba to seek advice from Teodora. This was learned by his wife who then suspected Jose Alberto and Teodora plotting something evil to her. Later Jose’s wife and an officer of the Guardia Civil (presumably the same one who was refused hgorse fodder) then accused Jose Alberto and Teodora of trying to poison Jose Alberto’s wife. Teodora was named as an accomplice. Jose Alberto, the main suspect.
Quick like a bolt of lightning, Teodora was hauled to jail, by the mayor, Antonio Vivencio del Rosario, a known yes man of the friars. A judge who did not like the way he was treated at the Mercado-Rizal house, ordered that Teodora be imprisoned in Santa Cruz, a good 50km away capital of Laguna. She was made to walk the distance, though usual travel was by boat. She was forbidden to use any vehicle, although her family was willing to pay for it and include her escorts for the ride. She was to suffer humiliation and hardship as prescribed by those her family had offended.
On the first night of the journey to Santa Cruz, Teodora and his escorts came to village where there was a festival. Teodora was recognized and invited by one of the prominent families. The judge, upon learning that Teodora was honoured in the village, was so enraged. He went to the house she visited. There was a guard there and the judge knocked and broke his cane on the poor man’s head then beat up the owner of the house.
This obvious case of prejudice was reported by Teodora’s lawyers. The Supreme Court decided to set her free. The cruel judge respected the decision but then charged Teodora with contempt of court. To this, the Supreme Court was persuaded but since Teodora’s wait in prison was longer than the sentence, ordered her release.
Then the lawyer of Jose Alberto charged Teodora with theft. There was rumor that Teodora borrowed money from his brother. The lawyer obviously was interested in recovering the money for himself. This case was heard but dismissed by the court.
Teodora was coerced to make a plea of guilty of which she was promised a pardon, immediate freedom and reunion with her family.
It as all for naught.
Freedom Teodora finally regained after two and a half years.
Her freedom was ordered by no less than the Governor General, who was charmed one fiesta day in Laguna by a daring littl
e girl. So charmed was he that he asked the little girl what she would like him to give her.
“My mother”, was the reply. The little girl was Soledad, Teodora’s youngest daughter. A quick inquiry, a quick decision, a new trial ended in Teodora’s acquittal.
Teodora’s eldest son, Paciano, would remember how their father tried to dissuade Teodora from even meddling in the affairs of her brother’s marriage. But Teodora was beyond dissuasion. She never could have guessed the consequence.
The injustice she suffered fired up the beacons of destiny to his youngest son, Jose Rizal, whose silent vow of nationalism, unbreakable and inexorable in its forward march to the final conclusion of death and heroism.
The ugly reality of colonialism dawned on Jose Rizal and imprinted on him that real men should fight for truth and justice. Anything less is unreal and cowardly. Better to face death with truth and justice on his side than to live with a moneyed existence and a cursed afterlife.
Spanish: A Language of the Filipino Nationalist Discourse
SPANISH: A LANGUAGE OF THE FILIPINO NATIONALIST DISCOURSE
by Nicole Anne A. Zapanta
“To convey in a language that is not one’s own
the spirit that is one’s own” –Raja Rao
Rizal, the bastion of Filipino national consciousness, wrote the literature that strengthened the Filipino’s quest for self-identity. Before the Noli, there was his poem A la Juventud Filipina (To the Filipino Youth, 1879) in which the term “Filipino” developed a new and uncommon meaning. It meant the Philippine-born Spanish insulares, mestizos, and of course the native indios – an all-inclusive grouping into one people, the Filipino. Rizal, though shaped to some degree by European culture, did not write primarily for the European but for his fellow Filipinos. Rizal reveals in his poem that Philippines, not Spain, is the true motherland.
Dia, dia felice,
Filipinas gentil, para tu suelo!
Al Potente bendice
Que con amante anhelo
La ventura te envía y el consuelo.
Day, oh happy day,
Philippines genteel, for your soil!
Bless the Almighty,
Who with loving desire
Sends you fortune and consolation.
(English translation by Alfred Veloso)
The first Filipino novel is Pedro Paterno’s Ninay (1885) – a costumbrista novel in Spanish which showcased the Filipino customs during the Spanish colonial period. More than narrating the hackneyed love story of Ninay and Carlos, Paterno aimed to disprove the Spaniards’ notion that the natives of Las Islas Filipinas had no culture. The novel was to reveal to the foreigners the Filipino’s unique customs and traditions hence the many footnotes stating the meanings of the many native words weaved in the story.
The use of the language in the Filipino nationalist discourse has always been the paradox and confusion to many Filipinos. It should be understood that the Spanish of the Filhispanic writers was not and is no longer the Spanish of Spain but of Filipino for the use and construct of a language reveals a nation’s culture since it presents a unique identity and definition of its people. Bill Aschroft in the book The Empire Writes Back explains that “language becomes a tool with which a world can be textually constructed” (Aschroft 44).
The sad reality in Filipino society is that Spanish is “maligned as the colonizer’s language. The discourse would then be principally expressed in English, it being another colonizer’s language conveniently forgotten” (De la Peña 14). We were and are able to embrace English, but as for Spanish, most of us pay no heed to it primarily because it has never been a language of the majority. Little do we know that our history, most especially our pre-colonial past, can be discovered in that language. Doctrina Cristiana published in 1593 proves that long before the coming of the Spaniards in 1521, Filipinos had their own language and system of writings , others like Rizal’s annotation of Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (1890) and the Exposicion de Filipinas: Collecion de Articulos Publicados en El Globo Diario Ilustrado Politico, Cientifico y Literario (1887), accounts that reveal to the West the Philippine Island’s uniquely diverse culture – from language to food to weaponry to customs etc. many more are still waiting to be discovered about our lost past and we are missing out on something because of our inability to read and comprehend Spanish. The National Archives of the Philippines alone keeps 30 million documents in Spanish – most of them untranslated. Rizal’s “Mi Ultimo Adios”, Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, were all orginally written in Spanish. The Philippine national anthem’s lyrics are the verses of Jose Palma’s Spanish poem Filipina
s (1899). The first constitution of the Philippines was written in Spanish – Constitucion Politica (La Constitucion de Malolos). The battles against the invaders and the oppressors during the colonial Philippines were not only marked by the revolts but were also manifested in the writings of the Filipinos in Spanish – the writings of the propagandists like Marcelo H. Del Pilar, e.g. his La Soberania Monacal en Filipinas which exposed the friar’s control over the archipelago. As for the American occupation, the most famous literary protest was the generally unstudied Filipino poetry in Spanish. Prolific writers like, Fernando Ma. Guerrero, Claro M. Recto and Cecilio Apostol fought for the preservation of the Filhispanic culture, exalted what is Filipino, and most of all condemned the American influence for this new colonial power would rob them of their desired liberty. Nora T. Jolipa in her paper Lost Paradise: American Colonialism and the Filipino Writer in Spanish explains,
As regards the cultural aspect of American rule, these writers’s reaction is no less strong, in “Tue res la Gloria” (1906), Guerrero refers to the Americanization of the youth as the “prostitution” of the soul of the race (“ese exostismo/que prostituye el alma de la raza”)…Recto points out “we have strewn our native soil with American manure” (“hemos preparado con guano de norteamericano el suleo de nuestra patria”), thus making it impossible for the spirit to grow and flower (Jolipa 26-27).
This anti-American literature of the Filhispanic writers was rooted in the narrative that “[it] campaigned for the use of Spanish as the official language of the Philippines, not because it wanted to perpetuate a sad past…but because it did not approve of the implantation of American sovereignty in the islands” (Jesus Z. Valenzuela cited in De la Peña 12).
Whether we accept it or not, Spanish is a crucial part of the Filipino identity. Arsenio Luz explains “it is in this language that we commune with Rizal and our greatest heroes; because in this language the glorious pages of our history are written; because in this language we expressed in the past and we express in the present our longings and our ideals; because in its vibrant syllables we utter our indignation and our protest against any menace to the self-assertion of the Filipino soul” (Luz cited in De la Peña 13). Spanish is not the enemy, it’s the absence of a common language thus “ESPAÑOL BAHAGI NG ATING KULTURA” is not just a tagline but a fact.
Bibliography
Ashcroft, Bill et al. The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post-Colonial Literatures. London and New York: Routledge, 1989.
De la Peña, Wystan. The Spanish-English Language “War”. Linguae et Litterae, IV-V: 6-28. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Diliman, 2000.
Jolipa, Nora T. Lost Paradise: American Colonialism and the Filipino Writer in Spanish. Nationalist Literature A Centennial Forum. Elmer A. Ordoñez, ed. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 1996.
Veloso, Alfredo S. Anguish, Fulness, Nirvana: A Collection of famous poems in Spanish written by Filipino writers and corresponding translations in English. Quezon City: Asvel Publishing Co., 1960.
Reinventing the Filipino Hero
REINVENTING THE FILIPINO HERO
by Quennie Ann J. Palafox
People grow up with their favorite childhood heroes motivating them in their everyday lives. Children often dream of becoming Clark Kent, whose alter ego, Superman, uses superhuman abilities in saving mankind from evil forces. Hence, we are always confronted with the question of heroism as we are always in search for a role model, someone who will set an example for the whole citizenries to follow. Looking back to what Rousseau said, “men are born free, but everywhere they are in chains”, freedom is an inherent right but there are many people in other parts of the world who are deprived of this right. This may not be their own will and that it could have been imposed upon them. Thus, anyone who seeks for the attainment of an ideal society by breaking away from the shackles of oppression for the interest of the general public is worthy to be called hero.
The ideal image of a hero in the Philippines was epitomized by no less than our foremost national hero, Jose Rizal, when he died for the cause of our country’s freedom. Above all, he struggled to pursue his goals amidst the face of oppositions. However, Rizal was not the first Philippine hero as there were Lapu-Lapu, the Gomburza, Diego Silang and others who are equally considered heroes. We have noble men during the Philippine-American war such as Gen. Antonio Luna, Macario Sakay, Juan Cailles, Gregorio del Pilar and World War II guerillas who fought against the Japanese forces during the Japanese occupation of the Philippines. Heroes are not only those who raised arms to defeat the foreign occupational forces as there are individuals who use peaceful means to fight for liberty, men like Marcelo H. del Pilar and Apolinario Mabini and others who served as the moving spirit behind the revolution. We must not forget men like labor leaders and socialists such as Isabelo delos Reyes, Pedro Abad Santos and Jose Nava who stood out and stirred the peasants to clamor for improvement in their working conditions. In a strict sense, these men are to be regarded as heroes for their selfless advocacy in uplifting the welfares of the poor workers.
Webster’s New Encyclopedic Dictionary 1993 Revised Edition gives the following definitions of the word hero: a) a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent and endowed with great strength or ability b) an illustrious warrior c) a person admired for achievements and qualities d) one that shows great courage e) the chief male figure in a literary work or in an event or period. This definition takes the shape of a literary figure, a character which is larger than life such as epic heroes like Beowulf, Lam-Ang, Hercules and many others.
In reality, heroes are not born, they are chosen by the society among men deserving esteem and emulation. There must be public acclamation and pronouncement of their contributions to the society. Otherwise, they will be similar to others who unselfishly helped for the betterment of others and yet they are unrecognized.
As years passed by, the concept of hero was revolutionized due to the different challenges of our times. More and more Filipinos are being regarded as heroes despite not having sacrificed their lives for the country. Today, we have OFW’s working as nurses, seaman, doctors, care-givers, teachers, lawyers, and domestic-helpers whom we branded now as modern heroes or “bagong bayani”, for taking active part in nation building through their remittances which save our country from economic breakdown.
There are several times that “hero” is often misused and abused. Hero is becoming a misnomer for its incorrect usage. Not everyone has what it takes to be a true hero, but there are persons who are not really heroes at all being labeled as heroes such as the opportunist politicians, who pretend to be pro-poor in front of the cameras to solicit support in the election.
Last August 25, 2011, the National Historical Commission of the Philippines awarded Janela Lelis, a young lass from Bicol, who saved the Philippine flag at the height of storm Juaning that ravaged Bicol province last month. A photo of Janela carrying the flag was posted on social networking sites and this caught the attention of the public and media.
De La Salle University
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY
1911-2011
By: Ferdinan S. Gregorio
Protestantism surfaced in the Philippines upon the arrival of the Americans, liberalizing the concepts of religion and education. This led to the rise of non-sectarian private elementary and secondary schools which did not include Catechism among their subjects. The diminishing influence of Catholic education was a result of the Faribault Plan, Section 16 of the Educational Act which states that: “No teacher or other person shall teach or criticize the doctrines of any church, religious sect or denomination, or shall attempt to influence the pupils for or against any church or religious sect in any public school established under this act. If any teacher shall intentionally violate this section, he or she shall, after due hearing, be dismissed from public service…”
Manila Archbishop James Harty, being the highest Catholic leader in the Archdiocese of Manila took the responsibility to revive Catechism in education. He made a request to the Vatican to persuade the Christian Brothers, a Roman Catholic congregation founded by Saint-Baptiste de La Salle, to help him establish a Catholic school of high standing, in which the medium of instruction would be English. The Christian Brothers responded positively and played an important role in organizing the faculty, curriculum and student activities to launch a school. The school aimed to attract scions of wealthy or ilustrado families, who were likely to become the country’s future leaders. Archbishop Harty’s proposal went through many obstacles particularly the lack of funding, but his dream became a reality when De La Salle College was opened at the former Perez Samanillo Compound in Calle Nozaleda, Paco, Manila, on June 11, 1911.
The newly-founded school focused on the basics of education known as the three R’s, which stood for Reading, ‘Riting, and ‘Rithmetic. De La Salle College was determined to challenge the increasing number of non-sectarian schools by including Catholic Education in its curricula for the primary graders. DLSC revived a traditional activity in a typical Catholic school during the Spanish era by conducting a Communion Mass on December 17, 1911.
The Stocks and Exchange Commission of the Government approved the incorporation papers of the school on February 12, 1912. In time, the public became increasingly aware of the quality of education at De la Salle, despite its difficulties such as lack of space and insufficient teaching personnel.
To address the need of additional teachers, Brothers Alexis, Basilian and Anthony were assigned to teach at De La Salle College in 1914. Brothers Donatian Felix, V. Andrew, Albinus Peter, Falvius Leo, Alphonsus Henry, Felix and David King were sent to the school to teach various subjects from 1917-1929.
A Catholic Spanish newspaper, La Libertad, acknowledged De La Salle College in one of its editorials, stating:
“In spite of its two years of existence, it has taken very gigantic steps in the field of letters so that today, its name can be heard by everyone in the archipelago repeated by many to the wonder of the ignorant and the atheist. There is hardly any province in our beloved country that does not send one of its sons to the seat of the said school, drinking from its fountain the laudable instructions of its learned teachers”.
Further, the editorial gave additional commendations through these words:
“Religious imprint on this great center is a distinctive seal that characterizes it among the other colleges and schools which gives instructions in the language of Milton. They are right to say that De La Salle College is the primary solution to the transcendental problems that the exigencies of our present government impose on our Catholic country. It can be said that the triumph of De La Salle College is complete. Rare, very rare, are the colleges that have been founded which can really wave the flag of victory as De La Salle College”.
Bro. Acisclus Michael played a vital role in transferring De La Salle to its new place upon his entry as school director in 1915. The school was given full accreditation in awarding high school diplomas in the same year. He organized the De La Salle Debating Club in 1916 to enhance the communication skills of his students using English as medium.
With the consent of his Superiors, Bro. Michael was given authority to purchase a piece of property which would accommodate the school’s growing population. He found an area at the southern portion of Taft Avenue which was larger than the one at Nozaleda. Despite his limited funds, a competition of architectural designs was held. Tomas Mapua, who later founded the Mapua Institute of Technology, won the contest. With the additional assistance secured by Bro. Michael from Singapore, The dream of De La Salle to have a bigger campus became reality. De La Salle formally transferred to Taft Avenue on October 3, 1921.
The school’s first literary magazine, The Green and White, first appeared on August 24, 1924. This magazine was transformed as the school’s yearbook in 1937 and renamed La Sallite.
Before the emergence of the First World War, De La Salle had established its reputation as the best school for commerce in the entire archipelago. In 1925, the school began to offer six additional subjects in its courses such as Shorthand, Business English, Business Law, Spelling, Oral Expression and Commercial Correspondence. The Commission of Private Education under the colonial government also authorized De La Salle to grant Bachelor and Master of Science in Education Degrees. A decade after the war, the school began to retool its specialization toward technical education including the different engineering courses: civil, mechanical, electrical and chemical engineering.
De La Salle College played an active role during the XXXIII International Eucharistic Congress, a Catholic assembly that took place in Manila from February 3 to 7, 1937. The school gymnasium was made as the “starting point” of the final procession. Student cadets performed as ushers and honor guards for the Blessed Sacrament and served as flag bearers of the different countries during the procession.
During the Japanese occupation, La Salle Campus served as a shelter for the homeless families.
De La Salle University began to accept women enrolees that commenced the school’s co-educational system in 1973. It was given a university status in February 1975, and was declared an autonomous university by the Commission on Higher Education in 2010.
The founding of De La Salle University was indeed a milestone event that shielded Catholic Education in the Philippines from the growing popularity of non-sectarian schools during the American colonial years. Quoting a passage from “The Journal of History- A Century of Education in the Philippines”,
“The DLSU-Manila experience indicates that while the American educational system was geared towards pacification, the main rationale underlying the establishment of De La Salle College in 1911 was the preservation of the Catholic faith. The college was primarily designed to cater to the needs of the afflue
nt sector of society, the reason being that the public school system could very well serve the needs of the masses. The Christian Brothers successfully managed to cope with the challenge posed by the American educational policies and other difficulties that became manifest as they embarked upon their work.”
References:
Quirino, Carlos. La Salle, 1911-1986. Manila Filipino Foundation, Inc. 1986
Philippine National Historical Society. The Journal of History. Vol. XLVIII. Numbers 1&2. A Century of Education in the Philippines. 2002
The Ten-Year Development Plan of De La Salle University 1983-1993. Research Dissemination and Utilization Office of the De La Salle University Research Center. 1984
Links:
http://delasalle.ph/index.php?page=about§ion=dlsu
http://philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=582119&publicationSubCategoryId=108