Pinay Ako!

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

Erratum.

Ciudad Fernandina was named in honor of Ferdinand, son of King Phillip II, the sovereign of Spain after whom our country was named, and not after Ferdinand Magellan. Sorry for the slip.

Is Cuidad Ferdandina not also the hometown of a fellow Ilocano, Ferdinand E. Marcos?

--Rocky (Marie)

P.S. How is Tess doing with her SLEC?

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

Erratum.

Ciudad Fernandina was named in honor of Ferdinand, son of King Phillip II, the sovereign of Spain after whom our country was named, and not after Ferdinand Magellan. Sorry for the slip.

Is Cuidad Ferdandina not also the hometown of a fellow Ilocano, Ferdinand E. Marcos?

--Rocky (Marie)

P.S. How is Tess doing with her SLEC?

Sarrat, Ilocos Norte was the hometown of the former President.

--Bullwinkle (Bill)

[Don José 2]

The Arrest and Execution of Andres Bonifacio

On the morning of April 28, 1897, while Bonifacio was in Limbon, a remote village near Indang town where he had been staying since the tumultuous Tejeros Convention, the Supremo was taken by surprise by a group of armed men led by Col. Agapito Bonzon and Aguinaldos brother-in-law Major Jose Ignacio Paua.

Bonifacio's wife, Gregoria de Jesus, affirmed in her letter to Emilio Jacinto, the Katipunan's secretary, that Aguinaldo's troops attacked their camp even as the Supremo had already ordered his men to stop retaliating against their compatriots.

She narrated that her husband was shot, stabbed, and beaten while trying to pacify the attackers. Two men collared her brother-in-law, Ciriaco, before he was gun down and murdered, while Procopio was hog-tied and hit with a revolver.

Seriously wounded on the left arm, Andres Bonifacio was easy prey for Aguinaldo's brother-in-law, Major Ignacio Paua, who then stabbed him on the right side of the neck with a dagger. Blood spurted and made the Supremo dizzy.

When Major Paua made another move to attack and finish the Supremo, Alejandro Santiago rushed forward and pleaded that they take his life instead of the Supremo's.

After the treacherous assault at Limbon, a half-starved and wounded Bonifacio was carried by hammock to Naic, where General Emilio Aguinaldo, who had just been elected President of the Philippine Republic by the Magdalo faction, had set up his headquarters.

The Bonifacio brothers were jailed in a narrow, dark, damp and dirty room under the stairs of a friar estate house and, in the three days they were detained, were fed only twice.

Bonifacio's trial opened in Naik on April 29, a day after his arrest. Aguinaldo's Council of War was directed to try Bonifacio and his associates for the crime of sedition, treason, and of attempting a counterrevolution.

Although there was nothing in the forged testimonies of the false witnesses that could condemn Bonifacio and his brother Procopio to death, Bonifacio's fate was sealed by Emilio Aguinaldo from the start.

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

Effects of the Treaty of Paris: 1899

Summary

Not surprisingly given the American anti-colonial, anti-imperialist tradition, the acquisition of territories and colonies as outlined by the Treaty of Paris caused considerable debate. An organization known as the Anti-Imperialist League arose in the US, standing in opposition to American expansion and imperialism. Some of the nation's most famous people, including the writer Mark Twain and the philosopher William James, were leading figures in the Anti-Imperialist League. This vocal minority had many points that still smack of good reason today. However, in the late 1890s, their view did not win out. Instead, pro-imperialism, backed by an ideology of jingoism, carried the day. The Treaty of Paris, though signed, still had to be passed by two-thirds of the Senate in 1899. The Democrats had enough votes to block passage of the treaty, and for a while it looked as if Senate deadlock was inevitable. Finally, William Jennings Bryan, a leading Democrat and constant opponent of President McKinley, decided to support the treaty. Convincing several of the Democratic senators to change their mind, Bryan barely got the treaty passed in the Senate on February 6, 1899. In supporting the Treaty of Paris, Bryan had a trick up his sleeve. He knew that if the treaty passed, the nation would see the Republicans, the majority party at the time, as responsible. In the election of 1900, Bryan hoped to run against McKinley on an anti-Imperialist platform, and by passing the treaty, he hoped to associate the Republicans with Imperialism. Bryan expected imperialism to quickly become unpopular, giving the Democrats an issue to criticize the Republicans over. Unfortunately for Bryan, not enough voters were upset about imperialism by 1900 to aid his cause: he still lost to McKinley. Bryan also appeared to vote as he did for ideological reasons reminiscent of British patriarchal colonialism: he suggested that the sooner the US annexed the Philippines, Guam, and Puerto Rico, the sooner the US could prepare them for independence. The annexation of the Philippines caused major problems, however. The Filipinos had fought with the Americans against the Spanish, thinking that the Americans were there to liberate the Philippines in the same way they were liberating Cuba. When hoped for freedom failed to materialize and the Americans did not go home, the Filipinos felt betrayed. On Jan 23, 1899, the Filipinos proclaimed an independent republic and elected long-time nationalist Emilio Aguinaldo president. The US sent in reinforcements to put down this "rogue" government. Fighting against the Filipino nationalists they had fought alongside months earlier, the US endured two harsh years of battle. Aguinaldo's guerilla fighters put the US through a much more difficult and bloody conflict than the relatively easy Spanish-American War. Still, the Filipino's never had much chance against the superior force of the Americans. On March 23, 1901, the US finally put down the Filipino revolt by capturing Aguinaldo. After being forced to take an oath of loyalty and receiving a pension from the US government, Aguinaldo retired, and never led further revolutions.

Commentary The founders of the United States, who fought a revolution to end its own status as a colony of Britain, probably never expected that a little more than a century later the United States would take colonies of its own. From this perspective, America's imperialism during and after the Spanish-American War is quite a shock, which some have called the "Great Aberration." It is therefore not surprising that a strong resistance movement, the Anti-Imperialists, would rise up. However, from another perspective, American imperialism in 1898 was not a sudden abandonment of anti-colonial tradition, but a was logical extension of commercial expansion, something the US had been doing throughout its history. The claim that the year 1898 was an aberration in American history are undermined by the facts. Today, the biggest colonialist of recent history, Great Britain, has relinquished its last colony, Hong Kong. Meanwhile, America still possesses the protectorates of Guam and Puerto Rico, and still has naval bases in Cuba and the Philippines. In this sense, the imperialist effects of the Spanish-American War remain alive even in the present. The Anti-Imperialist argument was as follows. Since the Filipinos wanted freedom, annexing their homeland violated the basic American principle that just government derived from the "consent of the governed." Second, and perhaps more practically, the Anti-Imperialists felt that American territory in the Philippines would make it likely that events in Asia would involve the US in more conflicts and more wars. The pro-Imperialist viewpoint succeeded because it appealed to the American public's sense of national honor and pride, as well as the jingoism taking hold in the period. From a business perspective, imperialists felt strongly that there were many opportunities for profit inherent in American possession of the Philippines. And of course, the imperialists proudly promised to "uplift" the "poor" Filipinos and satisfy the "white man's burden". (If only to simultaneously get something out of the bargain.) The conflict with Aguinaldo and his guerrilla fighters in the Philippines seems to offer some foreshadowing of the Vietnam War. In Vietnam, the US became so caught up in a large, geopolitical goal (fighting Communism) it failed to realize that in the pursuit of this larger goal it was harming a smaller country full of proud people who desperately wanted to govern themselves and who were willing to fight a long war to set up a unified, independent Vietnam. In annexing the Philippines, the US did much the same thing: looking towards large geopolitical goals like increasing the US commercial presence in East Asia, the US stopped the nationalist Philippines from pursuing its own independence. Not surprisingly, the Filipinos fought back. In fact, just as the Vietnam War became a subject of intense public dissent against illegal US infringement upon the sovereignty of a foreign nation, so too did the struggle in the Philippines have its Anti-Imperialists, who argued along similar lines.

Source

[Don José 2]

Thanks for this thread Rocky y Bullwinkle. I have learned some pieces of Philippine history here. I know that the land of my ancestors, Mexico, and the Philippines were sisters, reared by their mother Spain, although Mexico left the house earlier. Keep informing us with the history lessons, please!

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

Sorry for the way that one looks. The editor would not let me back in to fix it.

--Bullwinkle

P.S. Thanks for the article pepe N pilar!

[Don José 2]

Sorry for the way that one looks. The editor would not let me back in to fix it.

--Bullwinkle

P.S. Thanks for the article pepe N pilar!

¡De nada, Señor Bullwinkle!

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

Mark Twain, The Greatest American Humorist, Returning Home, New York World [London, 10/6/1900]

You ask me about what is called imperialism. Well, I have formed views about that question. I am at the disadvantage of not knowing whether our people are for or against spreading themselves over the face of the globe. I should be sorry if they are, for I don't think that it is wise or a necessary development. As to China, I quite approve of our Government's action in getting free of that complication. They are withdrawing, I understand, having done what they wanted. That is quite right. We have no more business in China than in any other country that is not ours. There is the case of the Philippines. I have tried hard, and yet I cannot for the life of me comprehend how we got into that mess. Perhaps we could not have avoided it -- perhaps it was inevitable that we should come to be fighting the natives of those islands -- but I cannot understand it, and have never been able to get at the bottom of the origin of our antagonism to the natives. I thought we should act as their protector -- not try to get them under our heel. We were to relieve them from Spanish tyranny to enable them to set up a government of their own, and we were to stand by and see that it got a fair trial. It was not to be a government according to our ideas, but a government that represented the feeling of the majority of the Filipinos, a government according to Filipino ideas. That would have been a worthy mission for the United States. But now -- why, we have got into a mess, a quagmire from which each fresh step renders the difficulty of extrication immensely greater. I'm sure I wish I could see what we were getting out of it, and all it means to us as a nation.

Source

[Señor Bonito 2]

Erratum.

Ciudad Fernandina was named in honor of Ferdinand, son of King Phillip II, the sovereign of Spain after whom our country was named, and not after Ferdinand Magellan. Sorry for the slip.

Is Cuidad Ferdandina not also the hometown of a fellow Ilocano, Ferdinand E. Marcos?

--Rocky (Marie)

P.S. How is Tess doing with her SLEC?

Tess left for Manila over the weekend and she should be on her medical exam now. She hasn't called me yet though as to how everything is going along. Thanks for asking.

President Marcos is from Ilocos Norte. The most prominent Viganos were Pres. Elpidio Quirino and Rep. Floro Crisologo.

Below is the Quirino Bridge just outside Vigan and it spans over the mighty Abra River. This bridge wasn't around when I was a kid and everybody was ferried by barges across the river.

[muñequita linda 0]

Thanks for the info, Marie. We'll definitely visit Fort Santiago. As for Corregidor, I probably doubt it as I get seasick very quickly, but we'll see. It's sayang, the fronton ain't there no more. But what is this news that I gather from the grapevine that the owner of Mall of Asia is building a Jai Alai fronton in Sta. Ana, Cagayan?

They already have Casinos in Sta.Ana cag.Manong .. owned by Enrile and GMA though....

me and fiance will go visit when he gets here...

Dios ti agngina, Mary Jane. I wish we could go there also but Cagayan is out of the way for us; we will be going to the west side of Northern Luzon where I came from originally. We'll probably visit Fort Ilocandia Resort and Casino in Laoag. Do you now if the horses still run at San Lazaro?

The Manila Jockey Club still runs horse races at San Lazaro and they have off-track betting stations all over Metro Manila, Manong. But the San Lazaro Hippodrome was supposed to move to a new location in Cavite late last year. I am not sure if they have moved or not. The other race track in Santa Ana, operated by the Philippine Racing Club, is gearing up to move to a new location, also in Cavite.

Taga Vigan kayo, Manong? Siak ket addaak ditoy Baguio ngem nayyanakak diay San Vicente.

[kaye 0]

this thread is really interesting thanks for the history class keep it up!

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

I. THE PHILIPPINE-AMERICAN WAR

The Filipinos had become suspicious of the true motives of the United States in going to the Philippines. In fact, they were prevented by the Americans from entering Manila after its fall. Their suspicions were confirmed by the Treaty of Paris under which Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States. Neither Spain nor the United States gave Felipe Agoncillo, Aguinaldo’s special envoy, a chance to present the wishes of the Filipinos in the Paris peace talks. Suspicion turned to hostility, and war between the two sides became inevitable. The Filipinos were outraged when they learned that Spain, which no longer controlled the Philippines, had ceded the country to the United States.

Benevolent Assimilation Proclamation. On December 21, 1898, President William Mckinley announced his decision to keep the Philippines as an American colonial possession.

Entitled “Benevolent Assimilation Proclamation,” the McKinley proclamation was announced in the Philippines on January 4, 1899. It stated clearly the intention of the United States to stay permanently in the Philippines. The mission of the United States was described by McKinley as one of “benevolent assimilation.” In the same proclamation, General Elwell Otis was named the commander of American ground forces in the Philippines, which was to “extend by force American sovereignty over this country.”

On January 5, 1899, Aguinaldo issued a counter-proclamation. He warned that his government was prepared to fight any American attempt to forcibly take over the country. This sounded like a declaration of war to the American military although Aguinaldo had no wish to get into a war with the United States. He knew that war would only cause untold suffering to the Filipino people. He was still hopeful that the situation could be saved by peaceful negotiations between him and the American military leaders in the Philippines. Aguinaldo wrote General Elwell S. Otis calling for peaceful negotiations.

On January 9, 1899, Otis appointed three American officers to meet with three Filipino military officials appointed by Aguinaldo. However, they didn’t accomplish anything.

“Halt!” Then Bang! Bang! Bang! The tension between the Americans and the Filipinos was so great that it was easy to precipitate a war. On the night of February 4, 1899, as described in Aguinaldo: A Narrative of Filipino Ambitions, (E. Wildman 1901, Norwood Press, Norwood, MA) an American sentry, Private William W. Grayson, with another soldier, encountered three armed Filipinos on a bridge in San Juan del Monte near Manila.

Recalling the incident, Grayson said:

About eight o’clock, Miller and I were cautiously pacing our district. We came to a fence and were trying to see what the Filipinos were up to. Suddenly, near at hand, on our left, there was a low but unmistakable Filipino outpost signal whistle. It was immediately answered by a similar whistle about twenty-five yards to the right. Then a red lantern flashed a signal from blockhouse number 7. We had never seen such a sign used before. In a moment, something rose up slowly in front of us. It was a Filipino. I yelled “Halt!” and made it pretty loud, for I was accustomed to challenging the officer of the guard in approved military style. I challenged him with another loud “halt!” Then he shouted “halto!” to me. Well, I thought the best thing to do was to shoot him. He dropped. If I didn’t kill him, I guess he died of fright. Two Filipinos sprang out of the gateway about 15 feet from us. I called “halt!” and Miller fired and dropped one. I saw that another was left. Well, I think I got my second Filipino that time....

The Filipino troops fired back at the American lines and before the night was over, fighting had broken out between Filipino and American forces. Most of the Filipino commanders at that time were attending a dance in Malolos, Bulacan Province. When told of the outbreak of hostilities, they rushed back to their units, which were already shooting it out with American troops.

When war finally came, Aguinaldo still tried to stop it by sending an emissary to General Otis to appeal for an end to the fighting. But Otis responded, “fighting, having begun, must go on to the grim end.”

[muñequita linda 0]

DIEGO SILANG

Diego Baltazar Silang was born on December 16, 1730 in Aringay, La Union. His parents were Miguel Silang from Aringay, and Nicolasa Delos Santos, a mestiza, from Vigan, Ilocos Sur.

When he became a young man, Diego worked as a helper for Fr. Cortes y Crisolo, the parish priest of Vigan. He was very witty, and a fast learner. He became fluent in Spanish. He was then entrusted by Fr. Crisolo to be his messenger. He would deliver messages from Vigan to Manila; traveling by boat. On one instance, the boat he was riding were attacked and wrecked by the wild Zambal natives along the coast of Zambales. The passengers were either drowned or killed by the natives; but Diego was lucky to be spared. He became a slave to the natives whom he soon befriended. A Recollect Missionary ransomed him.

After that incident, he went back to his duty-carrying letters to Manila. He married Josefa Gabriela, a young mestiza widow from Santa, Ilocos Sur.

Diego Silang realized that the Spaniards were also weak. He went home to Pangasinan and contemplated over his thoughts with his parents. They agreed to form a revolt. He conspired with Lopes, his relative who led the camp in Pangasinan. He went to Vigan and started an uprising. The people of Vigan were open to his ideas.

Soon after, simultaneous uprisings happened in Pangasinan, Cagayan, Laguna, and Batangas. He was called the leader of the Ilocanos. Meanwhile, the Spaniards were busy fighting against the British forces and tried to stay in power in the provinces. Diego, who was becoming popular, was caught and imprisoned. Father Millan, who once gave shelter to Diego, helped him to be released.

As soon as he got his freedom back, Diego started to work double time. It excited the people thus he attracted many followers who joined him and led an army. He became more cautious and prepared to possible attacks of the Spaniards. He assigned guards who were stationed by the sea and land. He was becoming successful in building an army. Simon de Anda, magistrate of the audencia, ordered for his surrender within 9 days, otherwise he would be treated as a traitor.

Silang never surrendered; instead, he tried to conspire with the British forces. He wrote a letter addressed to the British leader stating his acknowledgement of the British majesty. He, in return, received an appointment by the British government as Sarjento Mayor and Alcalde Mayor. He gained the power to choose minor and subordinate officials.

He was becoming a pain in the neck of the Spaniards. Anda planned for Diego's assassination. He offered reward and Spain's gratitude to whoever can turn down Diego. Miguel Vicos (a mestizo) and Pedro Becbec, both were friends of Diego, accepted the task.

May 28, 1763, the two visited Diego Silang at the Casa Real in Vigan. They shot Diego on his back that led to his death. After he died, his wife, Gabriela Silang, continued his missions.

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

II. IN THE UNITED STATES

The American people, however, received a different version of how the war started. Newspaper reports made it appear that the Filipinos had started the fighting. This was the time when the Treaty of Paris was pending ratification in the U.S. Senate. Previously, because of strong public opinion against the U.S. annexation of the Philippines, ratification of the treaty was uncertain. But the distorted news that reached the United States, specifically that the Filipinos were the ones who started hostilities, changed the minds of several U.S. senators to vote for ratification. On February 6, 1899, the U.S. Senate ratified the Treaty of Paris.

Philippine Insurrection? Ouuuccccch. The Americans viewed the fighting as an insurrection, not a war. Hence, Americans refer to this episode as the Philippine Insurrection, not the Philippine-American War. The Spanish-American conflict that lasted only three months, is referred to as the Spanish-American War. But the Philippine-American conflict officially lasted three years and is known only as the Philippine Insurrection by America. Actually the fighting between American and the remaining armed groups of Filipinos, whom Americans branded as “bandits,” lasted 16 years (1899-1914).

James Loewen, a Washington, D.C.,-based scholar and author of a forthcoming book titled Lies Across the Landscape: What Our Historical Markers and Monuments Get Wrong, said, “What we call the Philippine Insurrection should be called the Philippine War. We had never conquered the Philippines, so you can’t call it a revolt.” Loewen’s comment was mentioned in an article published in the Star Tribune in Minnesota, in its issue of November 15, 1997.

Source

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

Thanks for the post, mariquita linda. Good stuff! Any more?

--Bullwinkle