Resistance against Spanish Rule PDF

Preview

Summary

Handout...

Description

Module No. 5: Resistance against Spanish Rule 1. Overview The history of the Philippines is characterized by the dialectic of domination and resistance-domination by powers from without and resistance by forces from within (Ocay, 2010). The first recorded bloody resistance of the native Filipinos against their colonizers transpired in the Battle of Mactan, wherein Ferdinand Magellan’s death prompted the subjugation of the native Filipinos starting Miguel Lopez de Legazpi’s expedition in 1565. The Spaniards took a while in their process of subjugation because they had to reorganize and transform the socio-economic and political system in pre-Hispanic Philippine society. The implementation of the encomienda system led to polo y servicio and everything of value in the country was taken away from its rightful owner. In the long run, the more the Spaniards harshly exploited the resources and all from the native Filipinos, the more it triggered their consciousness to worsen their plight and develop intense hatred toward their colonial masters. As a result, the impoverished masses revolted, and their resentment spread throughout the country. By the end of the Spanish regime, the total number of revolts with uneven scope and duration were at least two hundred. Through research exercises, this topic shall enable you to gain knowledge on the different revolutionary events in the Philippines during the Spanish era and better understand the situations of Filipinos who suffered, the reasons for their revolts and as well as their success-failure stories. 2. Desired Learning Outcomes At the end of the lessons, you should be able to: A. Justify the causes of Filipino revolutions during the Spanish colonialism era by researching their situations and what aggravated them to resort into bloody protest. B. Describe which aspects of Muslim identity were the reasons for their incitement towards the Spaniards. C. Recognize historical events that detailed the actions of numerous groups and individuals who shed light to Filipino resistance. 3. Content/Discussion The real reason behind the Philippine revolution was the political maturation and the national awakening of the Philippine people. This, combined with the stirrings of liberalism, caused the inevitable conflict. The more dramatic hypothesis that the Spanish government was tyrannical and oppressive which the Filipino people, no longer were capable of suffering in silence and obedience, rose against it, leaving many problems unexplained. The crude analogy of a colony to a grown-up son who finally decided to throw away the chains of maternal control is the more correct one (Pilapil,1965). The indigenous communities within the country were consolidated by Spain such that the barangays or towns referred to as pueblos-parishes were under church and civil

administration. This socio-economic system led to its inhabitants to lose ownership of their small fields and agricultural estates. In addition to that, the Datus, or the pre-colonial royalties, were delegated by the Spaniards to amass rent or tributes, which were usually in the form of perishable goods, for the king of Spain. The system was designed to gather surpluses for landowners, to extract labour and to alter the indigenous inhabitants into servile subjects through Catholicism instead of homogenizing them into the dominant Spanish culture (Corpuz, 1997). The inhabitants cultivated the lands that originally belonged to them, yet they were forced to pay unjust taxes, engage in forced labor and hand over their harvest to greedy Spanish authorities. Other factors include unstable colonial administration, corrupt officials, and absence of legal representations in Spanish court, absence of Human Rights, racial discrimination and social injustices of guardia civiles to native Filipinos. The miserable conditions of the Filipinos led to their hostile attitude toward their colonial masters and eventually challenged them. According to Occay (2010), most of the early revolts were directly caused by the excess charging of tributes, forced labor and other forms of abuses by the Spanish colonialists. The Diego Silang Revolt in 1762-1763 in Ilocos is another concrete example. It was reported that on 14 December 1762, an association of about 2,000 natives headed by Diego Silang surfaced at daybreak before the alcalde’s dwelling place and demanded freedom from Spanish cruelty such as tributes and personal services. Fernando Palanco (2002) speculates that Diego Silang appealed to the support of the masses because of this cause. The letter of Fray Francisco A. Maldonado, one of the Spanish friars who had validated the incident, to Simon de Anda, the in-office governor general, supports Palanco’s claim. It states: “By force he (Silang) has caused all these towns to rise up…assuring them that they would not pay the tribute nor perform services and other similar things, by which he attracts the mob” (Occay, 2010). Some of the most notorious bloody protest during the early phase of Spanish colonization were: ● the Dagami Revolt in Cebu in 1567 ● the Manila Revolt (also referred to as Lakandula and Sulayman Revolts) in 1574 ● the Pampanga Revolt in 1585 ● Magat Salamat Revolt in 1587-88 in Manila ● Magalat Revolt in Cagayan in 1596 ● Tamblot Revolt in Bohol in 1621-1622 ● Bankaw Revolt in Leyte in 1621-22 ● Maniago Revolt in Pampanga in 1660 ● Sumuroy Revolt in Samar in 1649-50 Spanish colonialism and Muslim: Although the Spaniards successfully transformed the bulk of the indigenous communities in almost all of Luzon, Visayas and northeastern Mindanao regions to Catholicism, they still failed to colonize the broad Mindanao region. The Spaniards discovered that converting the Muslims of the Philippine south would be a bit more arduous task since Islamic beliefs were so deep-seated into the consciousness of the southern population, in opposition to the other native groups who likely were animists or polytheists. The Moros did not only present a challenge in Spanish colonists' attempts to religious conversion, but they were also compelled to surrender their affluence and be enslaved by the foreign invaders. The Muslim Filipinos, with

their trade networks and strong tribal affiliations, presented a far more effective coordinated front against the colonists compared to other indigenous groups across the country. They were able to formulate their defiance with which the Spaniards abhorred their fierce, ceaseless, fighting spirit. Throughout their 333 years of disruption in Philippine society, the Spanish were unable to enslave the Moros and fit them into their colonial mold (Hernandez, 2017). The Muslim Filipinos of Mindanao and also the Sulu archipelago were decisive in their struggle against Spanish invasion, which the Spaniards conned as guerras piráticas, or “pirate wars”---a misnomer when reflecting on the actual, defensive nature of the conflict: the natives were fighting hard to not lose on to their ancestral properties, and ultimately, their preserved culture and traditions. However, the converted Filipinos who allied themselves with the Spanish colonizers fought and worked together in aiding the formation of the distinct division between the Christianized Filipino and Muslim Filipino, is still prevalent in today’s era. The Spaniards exploited this partition to create an early form of “communal antagonism” propaganda, such as the moro-moro plays. The Moro-Moro plays are theatrical performances involving plots showcasing Catholic missionaries’ efforts to civilize and save the souls of the villainous moro. The Spanish “divide-and-rule” method of approach culminated in the characterization of the Filipino Moro as the apart from “real Filipinos”, who were the Christianized Filipinos, creating and bolstering the sentiments of mistrust and bitterness between the both of them. The Spaniards employed other approaches in this strategy and among them is the large-scale relocation of Christian Filipino populations from their highly colonized areas to the fullyconcentrated and sparsely populated areas in the majority Muslim south; promoting “colonization by proxy.” The confiscation of traditionally Moro and indigenous lands aggravated tensions between the non-Christian and Christian Filipino populations because, the allotment of these lands by the colonial authorities seemed to legitimize, in a broader legal sense, the marginalization of the Moros and indigenous peoples who lived in those territories (Hernandez, 2017)....