RESISTANCE AGAINST

SPANISH RULE

Uprising Against Spain

Causes

A. Personal Grievances

B. Opposition to Spanish

Impositions

C. Religious Uprisings

D. Agrarian Complaints

Muslim Resistance to Spanish Rule

Six Phases of Spanish Moro War

A. Personal Grievances

Lakan Dula and Rajah

Sulayman (1574)Martin Panga

and Agustin de Legaspi (1587-1588)

17th CenturyTamblot

(1621-1622)

BankawDagohoy

(1744-1828)

B. Opposition to Spanish Impositions

Magalat (1956)

Sumoroy (1649-1650)

Pangasinan-Ilokos Uprising (1660-1661) Palaris

Revolt (1762-1764)

Diego Silang Revolt (1762-1763)

C. Religious Uprisings

Igorot Revolt (1601) Hernando Pule

(1840-1841)

Apolinario de la Cruz

Cofradia de San Jose

D. Agrarian Complaints

18th Century

Matienza

1888

Valeriano Weyler

Perdro Calderon Enriquez

MUSLIM RESITANCE AGAINST SPANISH RULE

6 Phases of Spanish Moro Wars

Dr. Cesar Adib Majul

FIRST PHASE-began with the arrival of Legaspi

in 1571-ended with the invasion of Brunei

SECOND PHASEthe need to make vassals of the chiefs of

Sulu and Maguindanao-Spaniards explored Sulu archipelago and

even threatened to attack Sulu-they conducted military missions to

Maguindanao and then the Cotabato area

Intentions-to make the Muslims pay tribute-induce them not to allow foreign missionaries-gather information about Muslims-to know the relationship between the

Maguindanao and the Ternatans and other people in Indonesia

• military garrison was established in Tampakan (1596) but it was short-lived so the Spaniards abandoned it and repositioned themselves at La Caldera in Zamboanga Peninsula

THIRD PHASE-Muslims changes their military strategy

from defensive to offensive1599 – Datu Salikula and Datu Sirungan

(chiefs of Maguindanao and Buayan) respectively launched a joint force attacking a major Spanish base in Central Visayas

1602 – another offensive was carried out by the Muslims and the forces were commanded by Datu Buisan (successor of Datu Salikula & Datu Sirungan)

October 29, 1603 – Rajah Buisan together with his allies from Sangila & Ternate invaded Dulag, Leyte

September 8, 1605 – peace treaty was signed (did not hold long because of the Spanish invasion of Ternate in April 1608)

March 1609 – signing of another peace treaty (put the war to rest for at least 25 years)

1627 – war resumed but now with the Sulu sultanate-triggered by a maltreatment suffered by Sulu envoy, Datu

Ache

Rajah Bungsu (sultan of Sulu) – led 2000 warriors and attacked the Spanish base and ship yard in Camarines Sur and Central Visayas

1628 – Spaniards retaliated against the Sulu attack1629 – Sulu sultanate sent another expedition led by

Datu Ache- They attacked the Spanish settlements in

Camarines, Samar, Leyte and BoholMarch 17, 1630 – Spaniards invaded Sulu (again)- Commander Lorenzo de Olaso was wounded1631 – Sulu warriors launched another invasion

aimed at Leyte (seat of Spanish power in Visayas)

Sultan Qudarat – Buayan & Sangil leaders were brought under his control

- Married the daughter of Rajah Bungsu (sultan of Sulu in 1632)

-the Sultanates of Mindanao and Sulu mustered a coordinated military attack and joint invasion of Central Visayas

1634 – they mobilized 1500 warriors who landes at Dapitan, Leyte and Bohol

FOURTH PHASE-Spaniards changed their approach by

establishing a forward force at the enemy’s territory

April 6, 1635 – military base was established in Zamboanga (lasted for 29 years)

March 13, 1637 – Spaniards captured Lamitan (the seat of Maguindanao sultanate)

January 1, 1638 – Jolo (sultanate capital of Sulu) fell after the three-month battle

1639 – Sultan Qudarat re-established his forces and held his court at Pulangi

***Sulu sultanate was able to secure the support of the Butch in Batavia, Indonesia

March 25, 1644 – Rajah Bungsu dispatched his son, Pangiran Salikala

-the sultanate ordered a final offensive against the Spaniards with the Dutch navy which bombarded the Spanish garrison at Jolo

***Spaniards signed a peace treaty and evacuated all their forces from Zamboanga to Manila

FIFTH PHASE1718 – Spaniards occupied Zamboanga- Fort Pillar was builtSultan Badar-uddin – asked the support of

Maguindanao sultanate and the Dutch at Batavia

December 1720 – Sulu and Maguindanao sultanate made a new offensive in Zamboanga

December 11, 1726 – peace treaty was signed between the Sulu sultanate and Spanish colonial government in Manila

1717 & 1733 – Sultan Badar-uddin sent an ambassador to China

1734 – Sultan Badar-uddin attempted to capture Zamboanga

1735 – Spaniards invaded Jolo and drove out the sultanate court

February 1, 1737 – another peace treaty was signed

SIXTH PHASEDream of Mindanao conquest

1851 – beginning of the Spanish invasion in Sulu

April 30, 1851 – peace treaty was signed between Sultan Pulalun and the Spanish forces

Roman Martinez Vigil – a Spanish priest who wrote the theory of a just war

February 21, 1876 – troops were sent to Sulu led by Governor-General Jose Malcampo

Sulu Sultan Jamalul Azam – proclaimed the jihad and ordered the use of the concept of parrang sabil as last recourse

July 22, 1878 – another treaty was negotiated

Datu Amai Pakpak – led one of the best wars in defense of Marawi in 1891 and 1895

Consequences of Fragmented Resistance

Belated Development of Philippine Nationalism

Nationalism- devotion to or advocacy of

national unity and independence

Filipino Nationalism

Contributory Factors

A. Opening of the Philippines to the International Trade

B. Rise of the Middle Class

C. Impact of European Liberalism D. Racial Prejudice

E. Secularization Controversy

F. Liberal Regime of Carlos Maria de la Torre (1869–1871)

G. Cavite Mutiny and the Execution of Gomez, Burgos and Zamora

Lakan Dula & Sulayman (1574)-Disenchanted with ill-kept promises of the Spaniards that

they and their descendants would be exempted from taxation, they attacked the newly established Spanish citadel in Maynila.

Martin Panga & Agustin de Legaspi (1587-1588)-they led a conspiracy to overthrow Spanish sovereignty in the

Philippines-former Rulers of Tondo, Polo, Pandacan, Navotas, Candaba,

Cuyo & Calamianes joined the attempt to regain the freedom and lordship that their fathers have enjoyed before them

-the conspiracy was unsuccessful because of Antonio Surabao a native spy who informed the Spaniards of the plot

BACK

Tamblot (1621-1622)-Tamblot rallied hundreds of Boholanos to join his

cause (to bring back the native religion of Bohol)Bankaw, Chief of Limasawa (1622)-led a revolt in Leyte to restore the old religionDagohoy (1744-1828)-led the natives of Bohol to revolt because of the

Jesuit’s refusal to give a Christian burial to his brother

BACK

Magalat (1596)-he fomented a revolt in Cagayan because of the arbitrary and illegal collection of tributeSumoroy (1649-1650)-he led an uprising against Governor Diego Fajardo’s order requiring the conscription of polistas from the Visayas and the shipyards of CaviteFrancisco Maniago (1660)-led the natives of the province in a revolt against the government practice of forcing them to cut timber and hauling them to Cavite for the construction of galleons-the natives also revolted because of the arrears in pay due them for the rice forcibly collected from them through the bandala system & the labor services that remained unpaid

BACK

Pampango-Pangasinan-Ilokos uprising (1660-1661)-Andres Malong headed the uprising-when Malong died, the leader of the Ilokanos, Pedro Almazan led the rebelsPalaris Revolt (1762-1764)-Juan de la Cruz Palaris led the uprising in Pangasinan-natives are demanding for the abolition of the tribute and the removal of Joaquin Gamboa (alcalde mayor of the province)Diego Silang Revolt (1762-1763)-Silang started the revolt in Vigan, Ilocos Sur because of the anomalous collection of tribute and the excesses of the alcaldes mayores in the exercise of the indulto de comercio-Diego Silang offered his services to the British so he was appointed as the alcalde mayor and sargento mayor of the Ilocos-Miguel Vicos & Pedro Becbec conspired to assassinate Silang-the revolt did not end when Silang died because his wife Gabriela and his uncle Nicolas Cariño continued the resistance BACK

1601 – Ilongots revolted against the insistent Spanish attempts to convert them to Christianity*racial prejudice of Spanish friars alienated countless Filipinos from Christianity1840 – Dominicans refused to admit Apolinario de la Cruz who wanted to pursue a priestly vocation under the religious order because of the fact that he was a native-De la Cruz also known as Hernando Pule established a religious brotherhood called the Cofradia de San Jose in Tayabas-the brotherhood gained thousands of adherents in Tayabas, Laguna & Batangas1841 – De la Cruz and his followers took up arms and murdered the provincial governor

BACK

-lands were accumulated in the hands of the money lenders because of mounting debts that could not be paid by small cultivators-peasant debtors who remained on the lands were burdened by the harsh land taxes so money lenders were able to evade it-absence of a proper land title system aggravated the problem of the ignorant FilipinosMatienza – under his leadership, natives of Lian & Nasugbu in Batangas raised the standard of revolt in protest against the unconditional appropriation of their land by the JesuitsFriars – increased the acreage of their estates by arbitrary alienation of land occupied by hundreds of farmers in Bulacan- increased land rentals and prohibited the natives from enjoying the feudal privileges of gathering forest products and fishing in the rivers and streams without paying taxes Pedro Calderon – he was sent to investigate the agrarian conditions in the province- lands without legal titles were converted into crown lands or relengas1888 – tenants of Kalamba estate took their grievances to court but lost their case to the Dominicans- Governor Valeriano Weyler took the side of the Dominicans and ordered the neighboring towns of Kalamba not to give any hospitality to the Kalambeños

BACK

A. Opening of the Philippines to International trade-it stimulated the commercial cultivation of certain export crops for the world market

Filipino middle class –> Spanish and Chinese half-breeds or mestizos shared in the prosperity either as owners of lands which produced an export crop or as import-export merchants and middlemen

B. Rise of the Middle Class- Filipino middle class sent their children to educational institutions.- Spaniards labeled the Filipino middle class “bestias cargadas de oro” or “beasts loaded with gold”- The middle class became increasingly critical of the superciliousness of the friar-curate, the importunities and excesses of the bureaucrats, both high and low, but they particularly resented the government’s deliberate policy of awarding colonial appointments only to full-blooded Spaniards, more particularly to those born in Spain.- Nationalist feeling grew rapidly among the educated Filipinos and the repressive policy of the Spanish authorities served only to popularize the sentiment.

BACK

C. Impact of European liberalism

- Liberal bureaucrats and refugees along with the European and American liberals influenced Filipinos from the ranks of the middle class with their thought and orientation.-The appeal of the Enlightenment philosophers, notably John Locke (Two Treatises of Government) and Jean Jacques Rouseau (Le Contrat Social / The Social Contract), proved particularly strong to the educated Filipinos.*The situation in France in 1789 closely paralleled the conditions prevailing in the Philippines in 1896.♦upper classes held a monopoly of political and administrative powers and refused to acknowledge the existence of a growing bourgeoisie♦the church owned vast tracts of land, controlled education and commerce, and exercised excessive power throughout EuropeIlustrados – formed the vanguard of the Propaganda movement- exposed the great spiritual crisis that engulfed the Filipinos and attempted to convince the Spanish authorities of the imperative need for far-reaching reforms to avert the outbreak of revolution

BACK

D. Racial Prejudice- Spaniards regarded the Filipinos as belonging to the “inferior races”Indios – a name that carried the most unflattering and disparaging connotations to the native segment of Philippine society- The term Filipino, which referred to Spaniards born in the Philippines, was applied to the native only very much later.- Spaniards waged a campaign of open vilification against the Filipinos because of the increasing number of ilustrados in 19th century.Filipinos – described as “a machine that walks, eats, sleeps and exists”; “an incomplete whole, a confusion of sentiments, instincts, desires, energies, passions, colors that crowd each other without forming a single particular one”;”impossible to expose to curiosity and philosophical studies”- The constant insinuation at the racial and cultural inferiority of the Filipinos constrained Jose Rizal to prepare a new edition of Antonio de Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas which, with his copious annotations and criticisms, debunked the allegations of the Spaniards that the Filipinos were savages and had no culture before the advent of the conquerors.Filipinos – began to regard Western culture as a unifying factor- they realized that they were a race apart from the Spanish colonizers

BACK

E. Secularization ControversyCouncil of Trent (1545-1563) – the secular priests would be appointed to administer the new parishesPope Pius V – issued in 1567, upon the request of King Philip II, the Exponi Nobis, an apostolic brief that allowed regulars to serve as parish priests without diocesan authorization and exempted them from the bishop’s authority and jurisdiction- The appointment of regular priests to Philippine parishes brought them into conflict with the archbishop and bishops.Bishops – maintained that they were responsible for the proper administration of parishes- they should be given the power and authority over the friar curate or cura parrocoCura parroco – invoked the papal brief as exempting them from diocesan visitation and argued that they were subject only to the rules and regulations and the superiors of their respective religious communitiesArchbishop Basiliio Santa Justa – accepted the resignation of the regular priests and appointed secular priests to the vacated parishes- his campaign was sanctioned by the royal decree promulgated on November 9, 1774 ordering the secularization of the parishes (or the turnover of parishes administered by friar curates to the seculars)

BACK

-The unpreparedness of the native secular clergy and the organized opposition of the friars to secularization prompted the passage of another royal decree in 1776 which virtually suspended the secularization of parishes.tye decree restored the parishes to the friar curates but required visitation which could be made either by the bishop or by the superior of the religious order to which the friar curates belonged. The decree, moreover, enjoined the church authorities to prepare for eventual secularization by training a competent native clergy in the Philippines.*Policy of despoliation or desecularization-A decree enacted in 1826 deprived many secular priests of parishes which they had held for nearly fifty years. Another decree in 1849 gave seven curacies in Cavite, which were administered by the secular clergy, to the friars.-The return of the Jesuits in 1859 was also made to justify the policy of despoliation.The Curacy of Antipolo – “pearl of the Philippine curacies”(When the parish priest of Antipolo died in 1862, Father Pedro Pelaez, as ecclesiastical governor of the archdiocese of Manila, appointed Francisco Campmass, a Filipino secular priest, to succeed him. The Recollects protested the appointment on the ground that they had a right to the parish, which was in the archbishopric of Manila, by virtue of the decree in 1861. In the dispute, the Filipino secular clergy lost and the Recollects gained the curacy.)The Parish of San Rafael, Bulakan – became vacant in 1869-the government cancelled the competitive examination for which seventeen Filipino priests had qualified because the Recollects claimed that this curacy should be given to them BACK

F. Liberal Regime of Carlos Maria de la Torre (1869-1871)Carlos Maria de la Torre – most liberal and most loved governor-general of the Philippines-he dismissed his bodyguards and walked about the city in mufti, mingling with the natives and mestizos-he entertained the Filipinos in receptions in his official residence-encouraged freedom of speech and abolished censorship of the press, abolished flogging and substituted imprisonment as punishment for desertion among native soldiers and proved his benevolence by subduing an agrarian uprisisng and pardoning the rebelsRafael de Izquierdo (1871-1873)-he announced upon his arrival that he would rule “with a crucifix in one hand and a sword in the other”-ruled with an iron hand and adopted terroristic measures -reversed the liberal policies of de la Torre-he repealed the exemption from the tribute and forced labor that the Filipinos had been enjoying (disgruntled Filipino workers at the Cavite arsenal mutinied in protest against this unreasonable decree)

BACK

G. Cavite Mutiny and the Execution of GomBurZaJanuary 20, 1872 – a group of native artillery men, marines, soldiers and workers in the arsenal of Cavite led by a Sergeant La Madrid seized the nearby Fort of San Felipe (Izquierdo’s unwarranted abolition of their privileges caused the mutiny.)♦The friars saw the Cavite mutiny as a conspiracy existed to overthrow Spanish sovereignty and establish a Filipino independent republic. In their view, the real perpetrators of the conspiracy were the Filipino priests who were actively supported by Filipino ilustrados and businessmen.♦On January 21, Izquierdo ordered the arrest of Fathers Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez, Jacinto Zamora and other prominent native clerics, lawyers and merchants like Joaquin Pardo de Tavers, Antonio Regidor, Jose and Pio BAsa, Pedro Dandan, Galicano Apacible, Mariano Sevilla and Vicente del Rosario. At the instigation of the friars, the GomBurZa were accused as leaders of the conspiracy, tried in a mock trial which did not give them any chance to defend themselves and publicly garroted on February 17, 1872.

BACK

♦Archbishop Meliton Martinez did not believe that the three priests were guilty. He refused to unfrock them as requested by Governor Izquierdo. Instead, as one last salute to the martyred clerics. He ordered the tolling of bells when the three were executed.♦Jose Rizal dedicated his second novel, El Filibusterismo, to the memory of the three clerics. ♦Edmiund Planchut (French writer) summed up the impact of the execution of the three priests on the future development of nationalism among the Filipino people:

These means that the convictions of Creoles, mestizos and natives were a very greet mistake. Up to then, different Philippine races had lived in distrust of one another; but in their common fate they learned the solidarity of their interests. Future generations will be able to say that the old differences must completely disappear so that they can be one in accord and someday ably fight the common enemy ---- that is, the colonial masters.

BACK