Si Gat Andres Bonifacio at ang Pagbuo ng PagkaBANSA

Halaw mula sa "Kasaysayan ng Kapilipinuhan: Bagong Balangkas," ng katangi-tanging istoryador, antropologo, teoriko at pangunahing tagasulong ng Pantayong Pananaw na si Zeus A. Salazar

Panimula

Ang kasaysayan ng Pilipinas ay mahahati sa tatlong panahon o bahagi -- ang Pamayanan (h-k. 500,000/250,00 BK – 1588 MK), Bayan (1588 -1913) at Bansa (1913 - kasalukuyan).

Ang PAMAYANAN ay binubuo ng limang kabanata at tumatalakay sa paglitaw ng sinaunangpamayanang Pilipino, mula sa pagsulpot ng unang tao (h-k. 500,000/250,000-7,000/5,000 BK) sa kapuluan -- magdaan sa 1) pagdating at pamamalagi sa Pilipinas ng mga Austronesyano (h-k.7,000/5,000 BK h-k. 800 BK...

Nakatuon naman ang limang kabanata ng BAYAN sa pagkabuo ng estadong pangkapuluan sa batayan ng paglawak ng estado o sambayanan ng Maynila na sasaklaw bilang “estadong kolonyal” sa malaking bahagi ng kapuluan (hanggang 1896), habang nananatiling palaban dito ang nalalabing mgaestadong etniko (sambayanan) ng Tausog, Magindanaw at Maranaw, kasama na ang iba pang
“malalayang” grupong etnolingguwistiko (kabayanan) na taal sa Pilipino...

Photo art: JB

Masasabing magsisimula sa panahong ito ang pagkabuo ng kapuluan sa batayan ng pinalawak na dalumat ng “bayan” na pagdating ng panahon ay magkakaroon ng anyong pangkapuluan saadhikaing Inang Bayan ni Bonifacio. Nakaugat pa ang prosesong ito sa panahong Austronesyano;samantalang ang paglaganap ng ideyang Europeo/kanluranin ng “nación” ay lilitaw lamang sa panahonng “Bayang Pilipino: Katutubo at Banyaga” (1807-1861), bagay na magbibigay-daan sa pagkakahati ng lipunan sa dalawang magkatunggaling kalinangan, kamalayan at puwersang sosyo-pulitikal at pangekonomiya-- ang taal na bayan at ang inangkat mula sa Kanluran na nación (1861-1913). Dulot nito, magkakaroon ng magkaibang direksyong ekonomiko-pulitikal at panlipunan ang bagong kabuuangsosyo-pulitikal ng Kapilipinuhan sa pagsapit ng ika-20ng dantaon.

Sa agos ng panahon, masasaksihan ang pamaya’t mayang pagtutuos ng mga ito -- i.e., ng mga komunidad na “lumad” at ng mga estadong Muslim laban sa Kastila [Dayagram IV] --kaalinsabay ang paglawak ng dalumat at reyalidad ng Bayan sa loob mismo ng sistemang kolonyal, tungo sa paglitaw rito ng dalawang modelo o proyekto ng pagbubo ng “Bansa” [Dayagram VI]. Ang una ay ang “Inang Bayan” na nakaugat sa tradisyon ng bayan. Binibigyang halaga nito ang kapatiran, damayan, pantay na karapatan at ganap na kasarinlan. Ito ang siyang layuning pinanghawakan at kinasandigan ni Bonifacio at ng mga Anak ng Bayan sa panahon ng Himagsikan. Ang pangalawang proyekto ay ang nación/nasyon ng mga akulturadong elit na bilang mga “Filipinos” ay nakahulma sa kulturang/sibilisasyong Europeo/Kanluranin [Dayagram V].

XXXX

BAYAN

Ang Ikalawang Yugto ng Kasaysayan ng Kapilipinuhan (1588 – 1913)

Sa ikalawang yugto ng kasaysayan ng Kapilipinuhan -- ang panahon ng Bayan (1588-1913) -- ang Pamayanan, bilang watak-watak na mga kabayanan, ay tutungo sa pagkabuo bilang isang Bayan sa anyo ng estadong pangkapuluan. Sa simula (1588-1663), makakaharap ng Sinaunang Pamayanan ang isang krisis: ang pagtatagpo ng mga estadong bayan o sambayanan sa isang dako at, sa kabilang dako, ng itatatag ng banyaga na estadong kolonyal sa batayan ng dating estadongbayan ng Maynila.

Sa pagsapit ng 1896, puputok ang Himagsikang pangungunahan ng Bayan. Nanumbalik ang tiwala sa sariling kakayahan na gagarantiya ng ganap na kaginhawahan at kalayaan ng lahat; ngunit sa pamamagitan ng kudeta ng Tejeros ng 22 Marso-10 Mayo 1897, aagawin ng paksyong maka-nación ni Aguinaldo ang pamumuno sa Himagsikan na magiging Revolución ng mga elit/elitista. Pansamantalang mapagsasanib ang dalawang tradisyon ng Bayan at nación. Sa pagtatapos ng yugtong ito, magtatagumpay ang simulaing pulitikal ng nación matapos ideklara ng pangkating Aguinaldo ang “independencia” ng “Filipinas.” Naitatag samakatuwid ang estadong nasyonal na malayo’t papalayo nang papalayo sa mithiin ng Inang Bayan nina Bonifacio [Dayagram V, pah. 28].

XXXX


Filipinos at mga Anak ng Bayan (1892 - 1896)

Isang katangian ng mga ilustrado ang kanilang kanluraning edukasyon. Sina Jose, Rizal, Graciano Lopez Jaena, Marcelo H. del Pilar, Juan Luna pati na rin si Emilio Aguinaldo ay iilan sa mga Pilipinong nakapag-aral sa Europa.

Isa sa mga dulot ng kanilang pag-aaral ay ang pagkamulat sa nasyonalismo at liberalismo. Bumuo sina Rizal, Lopez at del Pilar ng grupo na tinawag ng repormista o propagandista. Humingi sila ng mga reporma sa pamamalakad ng mga Kastila sa pamamagitan ng La Solidaridad. Isa sa mga hinihiling nila ay maging probinsya ng Espanya ang Pilipinas. Hindi pinakinggan ang kanilang mga daing. Hiningi nilang sunod ang kasarinlan ng Pilipinas. Ninais ng mga ilustrado na bumuo ng isang nacion na nakabatay sa mga konsepto ng bansa sa Europa. Muli hindi sila pinakinggan. Nakasalubong din ng mga problema ang propaganda. Natigil sa kanilang paglilimbag dahil kakulangan ng pondo. Nadakip din ang kanilang kasapi na si Rizal at pinatapon sa Dapitan. Sa mga pangyayaring ito, humina ang balakin ng nación.

Si Andres Bonifacio naman ang bumuo sa isang himagsikan ng mga mamamayan. Ipinanganak siya sa Tondo noong Nobyembre 1863. Sa tulong ng Katipunan, pinalaganap ni Bonifacio ang konsepto ng bayan. Ibang iba ito sa konsepto ng nación ng mga ilustrado. Ito ay nakabatay sa pagbuo ng/kay Inang Bayan at pagtatag ng Haring Bayan (estadong bayan) para sa buong kapuluan (Republika ng Katagalugan). Sinasabing ang Inang Bayan ang dapat panggalingan ng pagbubuo dahil sa kanyang sinapupunan lamang nagkakaroon ng tunay na kabuuan. Sa ilalim ng iisang Inang Bayan, nagkakaroon ng kapatiran ng mga ito. Ginamit ni Bonifacio ang metapora ng mag-anak bilang simbolo ng pagkakaisa ng mga bayan sa buong kapuluan at noong Hulyo 6, 1892, itinatag niya ang Kagalang-galangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan (KKK).


Ipinaglabang Nación at Inang Bayan (1896 - 1901)

Nagsimula ang rebolusyong Pilipino noong taong 1896. Noong Agosto 24, sinalakay ng mga Katipunero ang Maynila. Naging matagumpay sila sa simula. Ngunit hindi ito nagtagal. Mayroong tatlong pinapalagay na dahilan kung bakit natalo ang himagsikan. Ang unang dahilan ay ang pakadiskubre ni Gobernador Blanco sa planong pagsalakay. Ikalawa, ipinatapon ang 500 sundalo sa Mindanao. Ang huling dahilan ay ang hindi pagdating ng grupo ni Heneral Aguinaldo na dapat ay dumating mula Cavite.





Sa kabila ng kanilang hindi pagtatagumpay, ipinagpatuloy ni Bonifacio ang paglalaban. Hindi pinalampas ng mga Kastila ang mga pangyayari na hindi gumaganti. Maraming Pilipino ang nadakip. Isa na dito si Rizal. Pinatay siya sa Bagumbayan noong ika-30 ng Disyembre noong 1896. Habang lahat na ito ay nangyayari, naiisip ng mga kasapi ng puwersang mula sa Cavite, na hindi ang pamamalakad ni Bonifacio ang nais nilang sundin. Nais nilang lumikha ng estadong nakabatay sa ginamit na estado ng mga Kastila. Sa pagitan ng 22 Marso at 10 Mayo 1897, sa Tejeros, nawala ang estado ni Bonifacio (Haring Bayan/Republika ng Katagalugan). Pagkatapos agawin ang kapangyarihan noong 22 Marso 1897, inutos ni Aguinaldo na hulihin si Bonifacio at ipapatay ito dahil sa nakita niyang magiging balakid si Bonifacio sa kanyang mga plano. Sa Bundok Buntis pinaslang ang Supremo noong Mayo 10, 1897.

Nakipagkasunduan si Aguinaldo sa mga Kastila sa Pakto ng Biak-na-Bato. Kasama sa kasunduang ito ang pagpapatapon kina Aguinaldo sa Hongkong. Sumunod dito ang digmaang Amerikano at Kastila. Sa “pangako” ng konsul na Amerikano na kikilalanin di-umano ang kalayaan ng Pilipinas sa sandaling mapaalis ang mga Kastila, sumama si Aguinaldo sa mga puwersa ni Admiral Dewey sa pagsalakay nito sa Maynila. Inokupa ito ng Amerikano at dahil di tinupad nito ang “pangako,” sumiklab ang Digmaang Pilipino-Amerikano at nadakip si Aguinaldo sa kanyang pinagtaguan noong 1901.

XXXX

__________

Pinagkunan:

Salazar, Zeus A. Kasaysayan ng Kapilipinuhan: Bagong Balangkas. Lungsod ng Quezon. 2004 Disyembre. http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=9&ved=0CFMQFjAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.bagongkasaysayan.multiply.multiplycontent.com%2Fattachment%2F0%2FRvJZtwoKCsQAABfjrrM1%2FZeus%2520Salazar%2520-%2520Balangkas%2520ng%2520Kasaysayan%25202004.pdf%3Fnmid%3D55581663&ei=nBfwTKeUHIGgvgPo1qiHDg&usg=AFQjCNFY-7Ih-iNxGvjWhtjgIoebyl9cyA&sig2=zVIiGiBQyP0ap9pEjukt9Q
 


Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Debunking the Outrageous Glenn May Thesis on Supremo Andres Bonifacio

 by Jesusa Bernardo
(Updated  27 November 2010)


PART of the outrageously mythical thesis of the dubitable historian character, Glenn Anthony May, is that the letters in the possession of scholar and prewar Philippine Library and Museum director Epifanio de los Santos were forgeries made in collusion with the latter. May based this on the supposedly wrong Tagalog language "focus" of the period the letters were written. May's thesis, for those still not in the know, alleges that practically everything known about Gat Andres Bonifacio y de Castro is baseless, with the documents upon which the views about the national hero are based being supposedly forgeries.

May, an American University of Oregon professor, had the gall to think that his working knowledge of Tagalog is good enough to make him understand the intricacies and variants of the dominant Philippine language AND cast aspersion on de los Santos. May's ridiculous allegation is based on how the alleged forger made the mistake of switching active and passive voices, supposedly thinking that pre-1917 correct Tagalog made use of the active voice.

Photo art: JB

According to Malcolm H. Churchill, May summarized his argument for this astonishing allegation by stating that the alleged forger in effect switched active and passive-voice," believing that "the correct voice for pre-1917 Tagalog is the active voice, whereas the Tagalog of the four Bonifacio letters is in the passive voice." Churchill is the author of the handout "Determining the Truth About Forged Documents in Writing the Story of Andres Bonifacio" that is part of the book Determining the Truth: The Story of Andres Bonifacio (Being Critiques of and Commentaries on Inventing a Hero, The Posthumous Re-Creation of Andres Bonifacio), published by the Manila Studies Association, Philippine National Historical Society, National Commission on Culture and the Arts (Philippines), and Committee on Historical Research.

This argument by May is belittled and dismissed by Churchill who believes the letters examined by May were copies of the original. He finds several problems with May's arguments and thesis as a whole. First, Churchill thinks it incredible that de los Santos, who "knew enough to correct the 'focus,'" would have allowed a pre-1917 forger not to do any such forgery right considering that the alleged counterfeiting happened in less than two decades after the death of Bonifacio.

Second, Churchill finds May's conclusion based on the assertion that the Tagalog original should have been in the active voice as disregarding the complexity and subjectivity of the translation process. Translators, after all, deal with the need to balance literal translation with the meaning of the original in their own differing ways.

Churchill also calls May's Tagalog "deficient," while "considerable for a non-native speaker." This deficient Tagalog is responsible for woeful error of judgment, as when May finds the fourth Bonifacio letters to be 'forged' when it is but natural for a Manila Tagalog speaker to mostly use the passive voice. As explained by Churchill:

The significance of Cavite/Batangas Tagalog usage is that it sometimes, but not always, results in a verb being in the active rather than the passive voice. If a Cavite speaker were to use the form "Nakain ako," "I am eating," for the Manila Tagalog usage "Kumakain ako," the tense remains unchanged, and a non-native speaker of Cavite Tagalog might find it "weird." If, on the other hand, a Batangas writer were to state "Nagsulat ako ng liham," "I wrote a letter," instead of the Manila Tagalog "Sinulat ko ang liham," "The letter was written by me," the "focus" has been shifted to "ako" from "liham" and the sentence in English translation has been transformed from passive to active.

Andres Bonifacio was from Tondo. He spoke Manila Tagalog. He used the passive voice. That the fourth Bonifacio letters that Prof. May examined use the passive voice proves nothing other than that Bonifacio was not from Batangas or Cavite!

In addition, Churchill thinks it is simply so illogical for de los Santos' family to have retained the letters all these decades if they were forgeries. If they were indeed crude forgeries as claimed by May, what the logical thing the de los Santoses could have done was discard them as they could not possibly stand the scrutiny of scholarly examination. Churchill makes another strong point here because, indeed, for the de los Santoses to retain those "forgeries" would only be inviting public humiliation.

Another thing that makes May's thesis highly questionable, if not implausible, is that his Bonifacio-related theses made overtime CONFLICT with each other. In 1991, May published a Pilipinas article arguing that documents about Bonifacio were inadequate to portray the Father of the Philippine Revolution, adding that historian Teodoro A. Agoncillo 'invented' Bonifacio. However, as Churchill points out, May, some four years later, would raise a 'forgery thesis' in which he claims that the forgeries done in collusion with de los Santos were made to "to present a more favorable view of Bonifacio than was justified, for the purpose (as May explicitly asserted) of sustaining the image of Bonifacio as a national hero."

Talk about changing theses. And hopping from an 'inventor' historian to a colluding 'forger' scholar allegation. For someone with a deficient Tagalog knowledge but who had the gall to linguistically scrutinize Philippine documents, doesn't Prof. May sound like an inventor-cum-forger and imperialist crackpot rolled in one?


De los Santos' View of Bonifacio

Perhaps another strong argument that proves the unsoundness of the astounding forgery claim of May is de los Santos' seeming partiality AGAINST Bonifacio, or at least with regards the Supremo's death. Hermenegildo Cruz, author of the book honoring Bonifacio and the KKK, "Kartilyang Makabayan," writes that de los Santos seemingly agrees with Jose Clemente Zulueta's opinion that the execution of Bonifacio was supposedly needed to "win the Revolution" [against Spain].

So why would a scholar who believes that the (power grab against and) killing of the Father of the Philippine Revolution  is justified even forge documents hailing the Supremo? The March-April 1897 letters and appointment paper in de los Santos' collection point out, among others, that Bonifacio was the first president of the revolutionary Katipunan government.

As quoted from historian Milagros Guerrero, these letters had the following titles and designations of Bonifacio:

     Pangulo ng Kataastaasang Kapulungan
    (President of the Supreme Council)

    Ang Kataastaasang Pangulo
    (The Supreme President)

    Pangulo nang Haring Bayang Katagalugan
    (President of the Sovereign Nation of Katagalugan)
    Note: "Bayan" means both "people" and "country"

    Ang Pangulo ng Haring Bayan May tayo nang K.K. Katipunan nang mga Anak ng

    Bayan, Unang nag galaw nang Panghihimagsik

    (The President Sovereign Nation Founder of the Katipunan,
    Initiator of the Revolution)

    Kataastaasang Panguluhan,Pamahalaang Panghihimagsik
    (Office of the Supreme President,Government of the Revolution)


May's Demolish-Bonifacio Intent

Photo art: JB

May's forgery thesis simply does not make sense at all. What seems to make sense, however, is that May seems bent on demolishing the towering stature of Bonifacio. As noted by Churchill himself, "Prof. May has a long-standing interest in Andres Bonifacio. However, this interest has to date manifested itself more in efforts to cast doubt upon existing knowledge than to expand our understanding of this revolutionary hero."

At the very least, it seems unprofessional for Glenn Anthony May, or for any historian for that matter, to be preoccupied with baselessly clouding a historical figure. Viewed from the larger context of continued American imperialist interest in the Philippines, is it possible that May is carrying out the American line of belittling Filipino figures they perceive to represent opposition to their interests or standards?

As Filipino-American author E. San Juan laments, "Witness how the figure of Andres Bonifacio has been attacked by American scholars eager to debunk the prestige of the hero...." May's attack on Bonifacio is nothing new. As early as the American colonial period, Bonifacio had been denigrated in the imperialist design to dispirit the Filipinos and completely subjugate their hearts and minds. As William J. Pomeroy writes:

The textbooks introduced in the new schools portrayed him [Bonifacio] as a terrorist and advocate of force and violence destructive of democracy. The Commission under Governor-General William Howard Taft projected instead, counter-figure Jose Rizal, the moderately nationalist writer and doctor who was a reformist and who had denounced the revolution of 1896 as its beginning.

Whatever it is that drives May's preoccupation with demolishing one of the two greatest, if not the greatest, national heroes of the Philippines, what is clear is the preposterous mediocrity, or stupendousness even, of his arguments. Perhaps, it was so ridiculous that as Lily S. Mendoza points out, "Pantayong Pananaw* scholars found no need to respond at all [as it would only] legitimize [May] as part of the national discourse."


Glenn May's Book a Reject

Not surprisingly, May's book, "Inventing a Hero: The Posthumous Re-Creation of Andres Bonifacio," which encapsulates his outrageous thesis, did not actually pass the stringent scholarly scrutiny of the Ateneo de Manila University Press (ADMU Press). The work was submitted to ADMU Press but was rejected by its reviewers that included noted historians Zeus A. Salazar and Milagros C. Guerrero. In a personal communication, Salazar told this author that for his part, he rejected May's book based on its failure to live up to the following criterion that he, along with his fellow co-members of BAKAS (Bahay Saliksikan ng Kasaysayan -- Bagong Kasaysayan), Inc., adheres to:

It is important that the work employed methodology and truthful/factual knowledge about the Philippines and its language(s) and culture(s) in the scholarship efforts of  foreigners and Filipinos alike.

Salazar also disclosed that after the Ateneo de Manila University Press' rejection of his book, May afterwards informed them that he will just look for another area of specialization. Dr. Salazar adds that, for a time, he and his historian colleagues actually already forgot all about Glenn May until they heard about the publication of the Inventing a Hero work by another publisher.

In fact, even with the publication of May's book, Pantayong Pananaw scholars did not bother to respond at all as they'd did not want to legitimize May as part of the national discourse. It was only when the issue broke out in a local tabloid that the Pantayong Pananaw scholars responded, not with the intent of rebutting the University of Oregon professor as they apparently did not deem his arguments worthy enough, but more to communicate with the Filipino people who were forced to look into the issue.


 Conclusion

That the ADMU Press and a noted group of nationalist Filipino scholars considered the book not worthy at all clearly shows the apparent--the lack of scholarly merit, if not outrageousness of  May's thesis. It should be noted that the ADMU Press is an auxilliary unit of the prestigious educational institution, the Ateneo de Manila,  and which "first made its mark producing high quality scholarly books on the Philippines in the humanities and social sciences and literary works in various Philippine languages."

ADMU Press has strove to publish only "significant works, in order to achieve its aim of genuinely contributing to scholarhip, research and education" and May's controversial work is clearly not in this list. Why should it be? Beyond being based on "shifting grounds," as noted by his fellow American professor Malcolm Churchill, May's thesis also involves use of unscholarly mediocre analysis, unapologetically deficient Tagalog, stupendous deception allegation/defamation against respected Filipino scholars, and simply preposterous arguments.

By the way, Glenn Anthony May first came out with an invented-Bonifacio thesis in 1991. He then greatly modified it, coming up with a Bonifacio-made-favorable-as-national-hero thesis five years later, or in 1995. His astonishing book was published the following year, 1996, which was the centennial of the Philippine Revolution led by the Supremo. Doesn't it sound like a most apropos anti-Bonifacio demolition job? Or at least, a mediocre foreign scholar's irresponsible attempt to invent controversies and cash in on the popularity and timeliness of a towering Filipino historical figure?

*Pantayong Pananaw, a particular historical perspective used by certain Philippine historians, is marked by the insistence on writing historiographic or scientific discourse  in the native language and the inclusion of  the use of unconventional sources that are untainted by any foreign biases.

__________


References:

The Ateneo de Manila University Press. http://www.ateneopress.org/about.asp
Churchill, Malcolm H. "Determining the Truth About Forged Documents in Writing the Story of Andres Bonifacio." In http://bonifaciopapers.blogspot.com/2005/09/churchill-malcolm-h.html

Cruz, Hermenegildo. Kartilyang Makabayan. Lupong Tagaganap" ng ARAW NI BONIFACIO, 1933. Project Gutenberg EBook #148822, January 28, 2005.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14822/14822-h/14822-h.htm

Guerrero, Milagros C., Emmanuel N. Encarnacion, & Ramon N. Villegas. Andres Bonifacio and the 1896 Revolution. 16 July 2003. http://www.ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article.php?i=5&subcat=13

Mendoza, S. Lily. Between the Homeland and the Diaspora: The Politics of Theorizing Filipino and Filipino American Identities; A Second Look at the Poststructuralism-Indigenization Debates. Nueva York at London: Routledge, 2002, Binagong Edisyon, Maynila: Palimbagan ng Unibersidad ng Sto. Tomas, 2006, pp. 90-109. In  http://bagongkasaysayan.multiply.com/journal/item/15/S._LILY_MENDOZA_Theoretical_Advances_in_the_Discourse_of_Indigenization_A_Summary_of_Pantayong_Pananaw

Pantayong Pananaw. WikiPilipinas. http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Pantayong_pananaw
San Juan, E.  After Postcolonialism. Latham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2000. In http://philcsc.wordpress.com/2008/09/06/carlos-bulosan-between-imperial-terror-and-worker-peasant-revolution/


Original Photo credit:

Diosdado Capino. http://komiklopedia.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/philippine-literary-series/andresbonifacio1/


Reposts are licensed to the respective authors. Otherwise, posts by Jesusa Bernardo are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Philippines.

Revolutionary hero Emilio Jacinto & his "A La Patria" (To My Fatherland)

 by Jesusa Bernardo


EMILIO Jacinto y Dizon was dubbed the "soul and brains (intelligence)" of the Katipunan by Andres Bonifacio, the "Father of Philippine Revolution," and Supremo of the secret-society-turned-revolutionary-national-government Kagalanggalangang Katipunan nang manga Anak nang Bayan (KKK). Though born in poverty, Jacinto was innately intelligent and had the luck to be educated in good schools through the kindness of his uncle. Jacinto loved learning and grew to be an intelligent, patriotic, morally principled young man who would be recognized by, and would forge a strong bond of friendship with, the Supremo.

He occupied several posts in the Katipunan. Jacinto was only a pre-law student (at the University of Santo Tomas) when he was elected as fiscal or No. 2 official in the Supreme Council of the Katipunan. He also served as the KKK's Secretary and a military leader. His last position was as Commanding General of the Northern District of Manila, accordingly appointed by Bonifacio on April 15, 1897.

Emilio Jacinto Seal as Punong Hukbo
of KKK forces in Manila, Morong,
Bulacan & Nueva Ecija (late 1896 - early 1897)

Jacinto is well known for the Katipunan ethics code, the Kartilya, and his editorship of the revolutionary newspapaper Kalayaan. His best politico-social treatise, however, he wrote some five months after the terrible anguish over the coup murder-by-execution of his brotherly friend, Bonifacio, who fell prey to the greed of the camp of then Capt. Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy. Jacinto elected to fight the colonial Spaniards separate from the forces of Aguinaldo who liquidated the Supremo and his brother on May 10, 1897. Jacinto remained loyal to Bonifacio and true to the cause of the Katipunan, turning down Aguinaldo's invitation for him to serve in the latter's new de facto revolutionary government.

Possibly nestled by the shade of some tree but under fire from the colonial enemy; hurting from the most unjust death of his Supremo friend who distinctly had the guts and wits to propel the Philippines into a nationalist revolution; and hands grimy from combat efforts, Tagalog (Filipino) patriot Jacinto wrote his masterpiece "A La Patria" (To My Fatherland) on October 8, 1897 in Sta. Cruz, Laguna. The poem was almost surely inspired by Jose Rizal's "Ultimo Adios". Written in a neglected second language and, thus, not literarily excellent, Jacinto's poem nevertheless brims with patriotic sincerity and is said to equal Rizal's piece in nobility and loftiness of thought.

What follows are the original Spanish version of Jacinto's "A La Patria" and a modern English translation. A Tagalog version by this blog author is in the works.

 (Original) SPANISH Version

A LA PATRIA

    por Dimas-Ilaw (Emilio Jacinto)

¡Salve, oh patria, que adoro, amor de mis amores,
que Natura de tantos tesoros prodigó;
vergel do son más suaves y gentiles las flores,
donde el alba se asoma con más bellos colores,
donde el poeta contempla delicias que soñó!

¡Salve, oh reina de encantos, Filipinas querida,
resplandeciente Venus, tierra amada y sin par:
región de luz, colores, poesía, fragancias, vida,
región de ricos frutos y de armonías, mecida
por la brisa y los dulces murmullos de la mar!

Preciosísima y blanca perla del mar de Oriente,
edén esplendoroso de refulgente sol:
yo te saludo ansioso, y adoración ardiente
te rinde el alma mía, que es su deseo vehemente
verte sin amarguras, sin el yugo español.

En medio de tus galas, gimes entre cadenas;
la libertad lo es todo y estás sin libertad;
para aliviar, oh patria, tu padecer, tus penas,
gustoso diera toda la sangre de mis venas,
durmiera como duermen tantos la eternidad.

El justo inalienable derecho que te asiste
palabra vana es sólo, sarcasmo, burla cruel;
la justicia es quimera para tu suerte triste;
esclava, y sin embargo ser reina mereciste;
goces das al verdugo que en cambio te dá hiel.

¿Y de qué sirve ¡ay, patria! triste, desventurada,
que sea límpido y puro tu cielo de zafir,
que tu luna se ostente con luz más argentada,
de que sirve, si en tanto lloras esclavizada,
si cuatro siglos hace que llevas de sufrir?

¿De que sirve que cubran tus campos tantas flores,
que en tus selvas se oiga al pájaro trinar,
si el aire que trasporta sus cantos, sus olores,
en alas también lleva quejidos y clamores
que el alma sobrecogen y al hombre hacen pensar?

¿De qué sirve que, perla de virginal pureza,
luzcas en tu blancura la riqueza oriental,
si toda tu hermosura, si toda tu belleza,
en mortíferos hierros de sin igual dureza
engastan los tiranos, gozándose en tu mal?

¿De qué sirve que asombre tu exuberante suelo,
produciendo sabrosos frutos y frutos mil,
si al fin cuanto cobija tu esplendoroso cielo
el hispano declara que es suyo y sin recelo
su _derecho_ proclama con insolencia vil?

Mas el silencio acaba y la senil paciencia,
que la hora ya ha sonada de combatir por ti.
Para aplastar sin miedo, de frente, sin clemencia,
la sierpe que envenena tu mísera existencia,
arrastrando la muerte, nos tienes, patria, aquí.

La madre idolatrada, la esposa que adoramos,
el hijo que es pedazo de nuestro corazón,
por defender tu causa todo lo abandonamos:
esperanzas y amores, la dicha que anhelamos,
todos nuestros ensueños, toda nuestra ilusión.

Surgen de todas partes los héroes por encanto,
en sacro amor ardiendo, radiantes de virtud;
hasta morir no cejan, y espiran. Entre tanto
que fervientes pronuncian, patria, tu nombre santo;
su último aliento exhalan deseándote salud.

Y así, cual las estrellas del cielo numerosas,
por tí se sacrifican mil vidas sin dolor:
y al oir de los combates las cargas horrorosas
rogando porque vuelvan tus huestes victoriosas
oran niños, mujeres y ancianos con fervor.

Con saña que horroriza, indecibles torturas,--
porque tanto te amaron y desearon tu bien,--
cuantos mártires sufren; más en sus almas puras
te bendicen en medio de angustias y amarguras
y, si les dan la muerte, bendicente también.

No importa que sucumban a cientos, a millones,
tus hijos en lucha tremenda y desigual
y su preciosa sangre se vierta y forme mares:
no importa, si defienden a tí y a sus hogares,
si por luchar perecen, su destino fatal.

No importa que suframos destierros y prisiones,
tormentos infernales con salvaje furor;
ante el altar sagrado que en nuestras corazones
juntos te hemos alzado, sin mancha de pasiones,
juramentos te hicieron el alma y el honor.

Si al terminar la lucha con laureles de gloria
nuestra obra y sacrificios corona el triunfo al fin,
las edades futuras harán de tí memoria;
y reina de esplendores, sin manchas ya ni escoria,
te admirarán los pueblos del mundo en el confín.

Ya en tu cielo brillando el claro y nuevo día,
respirando venturas, amor y libertad,
de los que caído hubieren en la noche sombría
no te olvides, que aun bajo la humilde tumba fría
se sentirán felices por tu felicidad.

Pero si la victoria favorece al hispano
y adversa te es la suerte en la actual ocasión,
no importa: seguiremos llamándonos "hermano",
que habrá libertadores mientras haya tirano,
la fé vivirá mientras palpite el corazón.

Y la labor penosa en la calma aparente
que al huracán precede y volverá a bramar,
con la tarea siguiendo más firme, más prudente,
provocará otra lucha aun más tenaz y ardiente
hasta que consigamos tus lágrimas secar.

¡Oh patria idolatrada, cuanto más afligida
y angustiada te vemos te amamos más y más:
no pierdas la esperanza; de la profunda herida
siempre brotará sangre, mientras tengamos vida,
nunca te olvidaremos: ¡jamás, jamás, jamás!

Octubre, 1897

 (ENGLISH Version)

TO MY FATHERLAND

              by Dimas-Ilaw (Emilio Jacinto)

Hail! Oh my native country!  More than aught I adore thee
Whom with so many treasures lavish nature has blessed;
Eden where flowers more fragrant bloom than in other gardens,
Where with more beautiful colors, rising, the dawn paints the heavens,
And where the poet, enraptured, sees what he elsewhere but dreamt.

Hail! Oh thou queen enchanting!  Filipinos beloved,
Venus beauty enshrouded, peerless, beloved land!
Region of light and color, poetry, fragrance, and gaiety,
Regions of fruits delicious and or sweet harmonies,
gently lulled to sleep by the breezes and the surf of the sea.

Pearl the most precious and dazzling of our Eastern Ocean,
Paradise built by the splendors of our brilliant sun:
Eagerly do I greet thee, and adoration ardent.
Offers my soul with the burning, fervent desire to see thee
Free from thy bitter sorrow, free from the Spaniard's yoke!

Ah, in the midst of thy splendors, sadly in chains dost though languish,
That which to thee is most precious-freedom, though has it not!
Ah, to relieve thee, my country, in thy distress, in thy suffering,
Pain would I give my life-blood, gushing forth from my bosom
To the last drop, and oblivion find, eternal rest.

What should be thine by Justice, rights unalienable
Are naught but words vain and hollow, cruel mockery to thee;
Justice is but a deception in thy sad situation,
Bonmaid art thou, though worthy of a Queen's purple instead,
Joy givest thou to thy tyrant, who gives thee gall in return.

What does it help thee, my country, sad bowed by dire misfortune,
That thou hast skies like the turquoise, clear and diaphanous,
That of thy moon the silvery beams are of matchless beauty:
What does it help thee, who, weeping, sighing in bitter bondage,
Hast for four centuries been suffering - what is the good to thee?

And what avail thee flowers covering thy smiling meadows,
What the bird's carols that sweetly in your forests resound?
Ah, the same breeze that their fragrance bears and their songs harmonious,
Bears on its wings cries and sobbing, weeping and bitter complaints,
That fill the soul with anguish and the mind with sad thoughts.

What is the good of thy splendor, pearl of virginal beauty,
What of the wealth oriental of thy alluring charms,
If all thy grace and beauty tyrants have cruelly blighted,
Bound with mortiferous iron, fetters or hardness unequaled,
Drawing enjoyment and pleasures from thy anguish and woe?

What is the good of thy fertile soil and its matchless exuberance,
That it brings forth fruits delicious and manifold, bountiful?
If all thy generous heavens smile down upon and shelter
Is claimed as his by the Spaniards, who stepping boldly forward,
Insolent in his vileness, loudly proclaims his right?

But to end comes all silence and must all servile patience,
Now, that the tocsin resounding call  us to light for thee,
And without fear, without mercy, openly, crush the servile serpent
That with its venom has poisoned  thy embittered existence;
Fatherland, here we are, ready, anxious to die for thee!

All, the idolized mother, and the wife whom we worship,
Even the babe whom his father loves like a piece of his soul,
In the defense of thy cause we abandon them, leaving behind us,
Happiness, love and hope: all we hold dear we give up,
All our fondest dreams, our illusions all.

And lo!  Throughout the country heroes spring up enchantment,
Burning with love of their country, radiant with virtue's light,
Fighting with ardor that only death can defeat and vanquish,
And even in dying they will utter thy sacred name.
Fatherland, wishing thee happiness, still with their dying breath.

Numerous like stars in the heavens, thousands of noble heroes
Lay on thy sacred altars willingly down their lives,
And when ye hear of the combats and the desperate charges
Fervent prayers to heaven send up, ye children ye aged,
And ye woman, that victory may be with our hosts!
Midst the most horrible tortures cruelty can imagine,

Only because they have loved thee and desired thy good,
Countless martyrs have suffered, yet in the midst of their torments
Blessings for thee have risen from their pure souls, and even
Those who were slain met death with  last wish for thee.

What does it matter that hundreds, thousands of sons of thine perish,
In the unequal struggle, in the tremendous strife,
And that their precious lifeblood flows till it seems like an ocean?
Is it not split in defending thee and thy sacred home?
Little it matters if fighting bravely, they die in thy cause!

Little it matters if exile is our fate, and the prison,
Or even torture, with savage fury inflicted on us,
For t the sacred altar that in his heart each patriot
To thee has raised, have us all, one and all have we sworn
Fealty to our cause, and our honor pledged.

And it we forth from the flight come with the laurels of glory,
And our self-sacrificing labor is crowned with success,
Future ages will honor heap upon honor and crown thee
Queen of the realm of the free, pure and unblemished queen,
And all the peoples on earth mute and admiring will stand.

On the horizon slowly rises the dawn, most brilliant,
Of a new day of freedom, love and prosperity,
And of those who have fallen in the dark night of the struggle
Never let perish the memory, and in their graves, cold and humble,
Happy their slumber will be, happiness being thine.

And if the crown of the victor should be the spoil of the Spaniard,
and if the fickle fortune should turn its back on thee,
Yet we shall always be brethren - be what it may the outcome,
Liberty will always have  the champions while there are tyrants alive.
And our faith will not perish - while there is life, there is hope!

Silent forces are working while  a false calm is reigning
Calm precedes the storm - soon will the hurricane rage,
And  with more firmness, more prudence will our work we continue
And start the struggle again, but with more ardor and strength,
Till in the end we shall triumph, till dried your tears shall be.

Fatherland, idolized, precious, as your sorrows are growing
So our love grows again, your affection for thee,
Do not lose hope or courage, for from the wound, the gaping,
Always the blood will flow, while there is life in us,
And we shall never forget thee in eternity's space.

October 1897

(Translation from http://images.balanghay.multiply.multiplycontent.com/attachment/0/SMXvlQoKCEcAAEyb7ZE1 )

 _________


References:

Chua, Michael Charleston. KASPIL 1. http://images.balanghay.multiply.multiplycontent.com/attachment/0/SMXvlQoKCEcAAEyb7ZE1/Xiaos%20Katipunan%20and%20Other%20Primary%20Documents.doc?nmid=114577752

de la Camara, Eduardo Martin. Project Gutenberg's Parnaso Filipino, by Eduardo Martin de la Camara. Release date: July 4, 2005. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/16201/16201-8.txt

Documents of the Katipunan: Andres Bonifacio Notice of appointment, April 15, 1897. http://kasaysayan-kkk.info/docs.ab.150497.htm

EMILIO D. JACINTO (1875-1899): Brains of the Katipunan. http://www.nhi.gov.ph/index.php?id=252&option=com_content&task=view

Emilio Jacinto. http://philippine-revolution.110mb.com/jacinto_detailed.htm#writer

"Emilio D. Jacinto 134th Birth Anniversary." Mb.com.ph 14 Dec. 2009. http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/234067/emilio-d-jacinto-134th-birth-anniversary


Guerrego, Milagros; Encarnacion, Emmanuel; and Villegas, Ramon. Andres Bonifacio and the 1986 Revolution. 16 June 2003. http://www.ncca.gov.ph/about-culture-and-arts/articles-on-c-n-a/article.php?i=5&subcat=13


Introduction to A La Patria. http://members.fortunecity.com/vrhes/alapatria.htm

Today in History. http://www.nhi.gov.ph//index.php?option=com_today_in_history&th_days=8&th_month=10&Itemid=1&thAction=thDetailView&th_id=1419


Photo credits:

Jacinto Punong Hukbo seal. http://kasaysayan-kkk.info/gallery.selyos.htm 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emilio_Jacinto