A. Ocampo - Rizal's Morga and Views of Philippine History

Rizal's Morga and Views of Philippine History
Authors(s): Ambeth R. Ocampo

Source: Philippine Studies, Vol. 46, No. 2 (Second Quarter 1998), pp. 184-214
Published by: Ateneo de Manila University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/42634257
Accessed: 26-03-2016 07:07 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Ateneo de Manila University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Philippine Studies
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 121.58.232.35 on Sat, 26 Mar 2016 07:07:34 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Rizal's Morga and Views of Philippine History
Ambetb R. Ocampo
■ ■■■I
Antonio de Morga, lieutenant governor of the Philippines in the late

sixteenth century, described the food of the indios as follows:
Their daily fare is composed of: rice crushed in wooden pillars and when
cooked is called morisqueta (this is the staple throughout the land);
cooked fish which they have in abundance; pork, venison, mountain
buffaloes which they call carabaos, beef and fish which they know is
best when it has started to rot and stink (Retana 1909, 174).
Reading this text in the British Museum 280 years later, Rizal was
so incensed that he later responded in print with:
This is another preoccupation of the Spaniards who, like any other

nation, treat food to which they are not accustomed or is unknown to
them with disgust. The English, for example, feel horror to see a Span-
iard eating snails. To the Spaniard roast beef is repugnant and he can-
not understand how Steak Tartar or raw beef can be eaten; the Chinese
who have tahuri and eat shark cannot stand Roquefort cheese etc. etc.
This fish that Morga mentions, that cannot be good until it begins to
rot, is bagoong [salted and fermented fish or shrimp paste used as a
sauce in Filipino cuisine] and those who have eaten it and tasted it
know that it neither is nor should be rotten (Rizal 1890, 264).1
Rizal's sarcastic rebuttal appears, surprisingly, not in his satirical

novels or his polemical tracts, but in a scholarly work - his annotated
réédition of Morga' s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas . Aside from the ra-
cial slurs to which he was reacting, however, Rizal maintained mixed
This article was a paper presented at the International Conference on Jose Rizal
and the Asian Renaissance, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 3 October 1995.
184
RIZAL' S MORGA
feelings for the Morga, depending on its usefulness for his thesis that
Spanish colonization retarded, rather than brought civilization to, the
Philippines and its inhabitants.
Unfortunately Rizal's Morga has been relegated in the canon, un-
der his "minor writings" (Craig 1927), and remains largely unread
due to the pre-eminence of his novels, Noli me tangere and El
Filibusterismo. Unlike the novels, which have been attacked and con-
demned regularly in the past century, the Morga remains largely
ignored. It is lamentable that, despite being a classic of nationalist
historical writing, Rizal's Morga is seldom read today.
That Rizal's annotations are largely disregarded today stems basi-
cally from the recent advances in historical, archeological and ethno-
graphic research. Although many of Rizal's assertions have been
validated by recent research, the fact is that his work is now dated.
Moreover Rizal's annotations are secondary, and today's scholars
concentrate more on the primary source, Morga, than on Rizal's notes.
Few Filipinos today, even the most patriotic, would find the time
and energy to read the small text of Rizal's footnotes, even if penned
by the national hero.
Another factor in the relative obscurity of Rizal's annotations to
Morga was censorship during the Spanish colonial period. Like Noli
me tangere and El Filibusterismo , the Rizal edition of Morga was
banned in the Philippines in the late nineteenth century. Therefore
copies confiscated by Spanish customs in Manila and other ports of
entry were destroyed. Due to the burning of one particularly large
shipment of the Morga, the book attained "rare" and "out of print"
status within a year of its publication. It did not have a second print-
ing, and the few copies in circulation were left hidden and unread
by frightened owners.
There is also the problem of language, which restricted the im-
pact of the Morga to a small, educated, Spanish-reading elite in
Manila. Among this already minute circle, one could count with the
fingers of one hand, the people who would read a historical work
like Morga rather than the more entertaining Rizal novels. Rizal's
Morga was not read by the masses, although people heard a great
deal about this controversial work. Rizal's Morga, thus unread, is
almost forgotten.
This article deals with Rizal's views on Philippine history. It at-
tempts to place Rizal's Morga within the framework of his work, as
well as in the larger context of Philippine historiography. Rizal's
Morga may not have been read widely, but its significance lies in
185
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
the fact that with this edition, Rizal began the task of writing the
first Philippine history from the viewpoint of a Filipino.
Philippine History
One matter has to be clarified at the outset. Rizal is often cred-

ited with "rewriting Philippine history." The notion of "Philippine
history" is ambiguous to begin with. It can mean either the history
of the place or the history of the people of the place. The difference
between these two histories is related to the different concepts of the
Filipino and the Filipino Nation. The former did not exist until Rizal's
time, and the latter did not exist until the establishment of the short-
lived Philippine Republic under Aguinaldo in 1898. If Philippine his-
tory is taken to mean the history of the place, then Rizal was indeed
rewriting history, because there are numerous Spanish chronicles
written from the late sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries. However,
if we mean the history of the Filipinos, then, being the first history
and having nothing to rewrite, Rizal was actually writing Philippine
history. The historiographical importance of this little-read scholarly
work by Rizal is that it was the first historical work on the Philip-
pines by a Filipino. It is the first history written from the point of
view of the colonized not the colonizer.
Rizal seems to have been reflecting on his country's history shortly
after completing Noli me tangere, in late February 1887, and obviously
drawing on the popular Tagalog proverb, "ang hindi marunong
lumingpn sa pinanggalingan hindi makararating sa pinaroroonan " (he who
does not know where he came from, will never reach his destina-
tion). He realized the importance of the past as a tool to understand
the present and eventually confront the future. Although he wished
to embark on some historical research, he restrained himself, admitting
his inadequacy in a letter to the Austrian ethnographer, Ferdinand
Blumentritt, asking him to write a history of the Philippines:
The Philippines would be grateful to you if you will write a complete

history of our country, judged from impartial criteria. I believe that
you are the only one who can do it. I have the courage for this, but I
do not know enough. I have not read as many books about my coun-
try and the Spanish libraries are closed to me; furthermore my time is
needed for other things and everything I say will always be suspected
of having been inspired by a partisan spirit, but you would be read
186
RIZAL'S MORGA
as an impartial judge; you have no selfish interests... you do not have

to amend historical truth neither for the sake of Filipinos nor the Span-
iards, and you could contemplate the past in cold blood like an out-
side observer. ... I think that you are the man best equipped for this
task ( Epistolario 1938, 5:116).2
By this time, Rizal had begun another novel, a sequel to Noli me

tätigere. But towards the end of June 1888, he tore up the completed
chapters, changed the plot entirely, and began anew to produce a
work which would influence his countrymen "to think correctly"
( Epistolario 1931, 2:20-21). Then, in the middle of August 1888, re-
signed that Blumentritt could not be persuaded to write a history of
the Philippines, Rizal set his literary labors aside, and began to work
on his country's history.
Armed with a letter of introduction from the Director of the In-
dia Office Library, Reinhold Rost, he applied for and was granted a
reader's pass to the British Museum, where he began to consult early
printed materials on the Philippines. "I'm busy," he wrote to his
friend, Blumentritt, "I'm assiduously reading all the ancient
[i.e.primary] sources on the history of the Philippines, and I do not
think I want to leave London until I have read all the books and
manuscripts that have references to the Philippines. I want to become
the 'Filipino Blumentritt"' ( Epistolario 1938, 5:311).
Close to 18 August 1888, Rizal was copying out, by hand, the
entire first edition of Morga's Sucesos de las islas Filipinas , annotating
it along the way, confident that Antonio Regidor, a wealthy coun-
tryman, in exile in London following the Cavite Mutiny of 1872,
would publish the work when completed. As an added incentive,
Regidor promised Rizal that as soon as he had recovered his invest-
ment in the book, all profits would be divided equally between au-
thor and publisher. Rizal, however, was a realist who accepted that
scholarly books such as the Morga would not be financially reward-
ing. Thus he stated in a letter to Blumentritt that his aim was sim-
ply to "present a new edition to the public, above all the Filipino
public ... I do this solely for my country, because this work will
bring me neither honor nor money" ( Epistolario 1938).3
His fears proved correct, for he did not earn anything from the
Morga. In fact, Regidor unexpectedly backed out of the venture with-
out the courtesy of an explanation. One of Rizal's friends hinted at
racism, as Regidor was of Spanish extraction. After all his work in the
copying, editing, and annotation of the Sucesos Rizal had a finished
187
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
manuscript but no publisher. Undaunted by the initial frustration,

Rizal decided to publish the Morga himself. By the end of September
1889 he had brought the manuscript to Paris, where printing costs were
lower than in London, and sent a letter to Blumentritt requesting him
to write an introduction to the book (Epistolario 1938, 5:441, 471).
The concrete result of four months of intense historical research
in Bloomsbury was Rizal's second book with a typically long Span-
ish title, Sucesos de las islas Filipinas por el Doctor Antonio de Morga.
Obra publicada en mejico en el año de 1609, nuevamente sacada a luz y
anotada por Jose Rizal, y precedida de un prologo del prof. Fernando
Blumentritt (Events in the Philippine Islands by Dr. Antonio de
Morga. A work published in Mexico in the year 1609, reprinted and
annotated by Jose Rizal and preceded by an introduction by profes-
sor Ferdinand Blumentritt).
A short biography of Morga and an outline of the structure of his
book is necessary at this point. Antonio de Morga was born in 1559 irt
Seville. He graduated from the University of Salamanca in 1574 and in
1578 attained a doctorate in Canon Law. He taught briefly in Osuna,
later returning to Salamanca to study Gvil Law. In 1580 hie joined the
government service, and was appointed in 1593 to Manila as Lieuten-
ant Governor, the second most powerful position in the colony, next
only to the Governor General of the Philippines. In 1598 he resigned
this post to assume the office of oidor or judge in the Audiencia.
Morga's fame (or infamy depending on which account you are
reading) came in 1600, when he was put in charge of the Spanish
fleet against a Dutch invasion under Olivier van Noort. Although the
Dutch sailed away, the Spaniards lost heavily, and according to
Morga, he had jumped ship and swam ashore with nothing but the
enemy standard in his hand. The Dutch account of the battle de-
scribes Morga hiding and crying in his flagship before it sank.
Morga's reputation in the colony sank, like his flagship, and in 1603
he was transferred to Mexico.
A particularly malicious biographical note on Morga is provided
by W.E. Retana in his three-volume Aparato Bibliografico de la Historia
General de Filipinas (Bibliographical Apparatus for a General History
of the Philippines) published in 1906. In his entry on the Sucesos,
Retana cites a domestic scandal to comment on Morga's character.
Briefly, Juliana, Morga's eldest daughter, was discovered in 1602 to
be in love with a man of a lower social standing, a soldier from
Mexico. Morga and his wife first tried to discourage the relationship
by beating up Juliana, shaving her hair, and finally locking her up
188
RIZAL' S MORGA
in the house. Yet Juliana managed to escape from her parent's house
by tying bedsheets together, and lowering herself from her bedroom
window to the street.
When Morga discovered that his daughter had eloped, he brought
in the governor general himself to persuade Juliana from marriage.
They were all unsuccesful. Juliana silenced parental opposition by
threatening to commit social suicide by marrying a negro if she was
not allowed to marry her lover.4 Morga never spoke to his daughter
again, and left her in Manila when he moved to Mexico.
From Mexico, Morga was moved to Quito in 1615 where he was
president of the Audiencia. Again Morga found himself in trouble,
and in 1625 was investigated for corruption and eventually found
guilty. However he escaped humiliation, and the gallows, by dying
in 1636, before the case was wound up.5
Morga began his work, Sucesos de las islas Filipinas , it is claimed,
as a way of saving face after the disaster with the Dutch invaders in
Manila in 1600. Hence, it is Morga's version of the battle of Manila
Bay left to history. The work consists of eight chapters:
1. Of the first discoveries of the Eastern islands.

2. Of the government of Dr. Francisco de Sande
3. Of the government of don Gonzalo Ronquillo de Peñalosa
4. Of the government of Dr. Santiago de Vera.
5. Of the government of Gomes Perez Dasmariñas.
6. Of the government of don Francisco Tello
7. Of the government of don Pedro de Acuña
8. An account of the Philippine Islands.
The first seven chapters mainly concern the political events which
occurred in the colony during the terms of the first eleven gover-
nor-generals in the Philippines, beginning with Miguel Lopez de
Legaspi in 1565 to Pedro de Acuña who died in June 1606. For
present-day Filipinos chapter eight is the most interesting, because
it gives a description of the pre-Hispanic Filipinos, or rather the
indios, at the Spanish contact. This same chapter was indispensable
for Rizal, not only for its ethnographic value but more to help him
reconstruct the pre-Hispanic Philippines which Rizal wanted to
present to his countrymen.
In his preface to the Morga, Rizal states that he did not change a
single word in the text, save those that required respelling in modern
Spanish orthography or corrected punctuation:
189
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
Bom and raised in the ignorance of our past, like most of you, with-
out voice or authority to speak about what we did not see nor study,
I considered it necessary to invoke the testimony of an illustrious Span-
iard who governed the destiny of the Philippines at the beginning of
her new era and witnessed the last moments of our ancient national-
ity. Therefore, it is the shadow of the civilization of our ancestors which
the author now evokes before you. The high office, the nationality, and
merits of Morga, together with the data and testimonies of his con-
temporaries, mostly Spanish, recommend the work to your thoughtful
consideration (Rizal 1890, preface).6
Rizal's Choice of Morga
Why did Rizal choose Morga over other Spanish chronicles? Why
does he recommend Morga to his countrymen? Surely, Antonio
Pigafetta's account of the Magellan expedition was more detailed, and
closer to the point of first contact between the Philippines and Spain.
Rizal's choice of reprinting Morga rather than other contemporary
historical accounts of the Philippines was due to the following rea-
sons: the original book was rare; Morga was a layman not a reli-
gious chronicler; Rizal felt Morga to be more "objective" than the
religious writers whose accounts included many miracle stories;
Morga, compared to religious chroniclers, was more sympathetic to
the indios; and finally, Morga was not only an eyewitness but a major
actor in the events he narrates.
Morga's Sucesos was originally published in Mexico in 1609, and
was therefore rare. In his introduction, Blumentritt notes that the book
is "so rare that the few libraries that have a copy guard it with the
same care as they would an Inca treasure" (Rizal 1890, introduction).
In 1971, when J.S. Cummins of University College London trans-
lated, edited and annotated the latest edition of Morga for the
Hakluyt Society, he listed just twenty-five extant copies of the Morga
in libraries and other research institutions. It is possible that there
are some unrecorded copies in private collections, but it is safe to
assume that there are less than thirty extant copies of the first edi-
tion Morga (Cummins 1971, 37).
Ironically, Morga was disseminated 259 years after its original
publication in a widely read English translation by H.E.J. Stanley,
published in London by the Hakluyt Society in 1868 under the title
The Philippine Islands , Moluccas , Siam , Cambodia , Japan and China at the
190
RIZAL' S MORGA
close of the Sixteenth Century , which is misleading, since the book is

basically on Spain in the Philippines, and describes, mainly, how the
colony was used as a foothold in Asia, from which other Spanish
expeditions were launched.7
The original Spanish text of 1609 had never been reprinted in full
until the annotated Rizal edition came off the press of Gamier
Hermanos in Paris in 1889.® After the Rizal edition, there was a
magnificent edition by Wenceslao Emilio Retana, which saw print in
1909.9 Probably the most accurate edition, as it reproduces even the
misprints of the original, Retana also supplied a great amount of
supplementary material in his extensive introduction and copious
notes. What makes Retana's edition invaluable is the primary source
material, by Morga himself and other contemporaries, drawn from
the Archivo General de Indias in Seville, which amplify and enrich
the main text. Its only drawback is that it is inaccessible to those
who cannot read Spanish.
In the Philippines, Rizal's Morga was reissued in photo-offset re-
production only in 1958, by which time few Filipinos knew or cared
for books in Spanish. An English translation of Rizal's Morga was
commissioned and published by the Jose Rizal National Centennial
Commission in 1961, but has proven unsatisfactory compared with
the most popular English edition of Morga at present - that by J.S.
Cummins published by the Hakluyt Society in 1971.
These bibliographical notes not only stress the rarity of the origi-
nal, but also reveal that Rizal was not satisfied with the Stanley edi-
tion, which he thought contained errors of fact and interpretation
which required correction. In the eighth chapter, for example, is a
titillating description of the sexual habits of the pre-Hispanic indios.
Like Magellan's chronicler, Antonio Pigafetta (1969) Morga noted the
use of penis rings or sagras by the indios. This short, sexually ex-
plicit, passage was not rendered into English by Stanley who was
obviously constrained by his Victorian scruples. On page 304 of
Stanley's Morga the offending paragraph is left in the original Span-
ish. In the Rizal edition, everything is reproduced in full with no
censorship and some annotation (Rizal 1890, 309).
Although he was doing his research in London, it is strange that
Rizal did not contact or correspond with Stanley regarding the
Morga. Rizal felt, like Blumentritt who wrote the introduction, that
the annotations to Morga should be made not by a foreigner but by
an indio.
191
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
Rizal's second consideration for the choice of Morga was that it

was the only civil, as opposed to religious or ecclesiastical, history
of the Philippines written during the colonial period. Chronicles by
Spanish colonial officials (or non-religious) were rare, making Morga,
for over two centuries, the only secular general history of the Phil-
ippines in print (Retana 1906, 3:1169). The main complaint against
religious historians was that they dealt more with church history than
the history of the Philippines and its people.
In an unsigned article entitled "Reflections on historical publica-
tions relating to the Philippines" which appeared in Ilustración Filipina
in I860, the writer asked why:
despite the thousands of documents, hundreds of historians and the

ongoing writing of a general history of Spain, the Philippines has been
ignored for three centuries. There is much to be written, but the histo-
rians of the Philippines of the old school (antiguo sistema), write vol-
umes upon volumes which go down to very trivial details such that
theý fail to get readers interested in the history of the Philippines. A
general history of the Philippines is demanded of the culture of the
century ( Ilustración 1860, 149-51).
A general history of the Philippines was an ambitious undertak-

ing considering the rarity of secular and, more importantly, indio
historians. Until Rizal's edition of Morga, there was no history of the
Philippines written by an indio, or one written from the viewpoint
of the indio.
In 1925, the American historian Austin Craig pointed out that as
the Philippines had been a colony of Spain, the histories of the Phil-
ippines written during the colonial period were nothing but chap-
ters in the larger history of Spain. In short, what was available was
not a history of the Philippines, but a history of Spain in the Philip-
pines. This idea was acted upon by Teodoro A. Agoncillo in the
1960/s, who, like Rizal, espoused the writing of Philippine history
from the Filipino point of view as opposed to that of the foreigner.
The main difference between Agoncillo and Rizal, however, is that
the indios of the nineteenth century had yet to consider themselves
a nation, and could not have considered themselves as Filipinos.
The third consideration for the choice of Morga was Rizal's opin-
ion that this secular account was more objective, more trustworthy,
than those written by the religious missionaries which were liberally
sprinkled with tales of miracles and apparitions:
192
RIZAL' S MORGA
All the histories written by the religious before and after Morga, up
to our days, abound with stories of devils, miracles, apparitions, etc.
These form the bulk of the voluminous histories of the Philippines
(Rizal 1890, 311 n. I).10
Rizal's annotations fall into two categories. First are the straight-
forward historical annotations, where Rizal amplifies or corrects the
original. Second are the annotations which, though historically based,
reflect his strong anticlerical bias. The latter is something not to be
expected in a scholarly work, but these notes give Rizal's edition its
distinct flavor. Rizal branded religious interpretations of events as
"pious lies" (190).
Rizal emphasized that Morga's Sucesos was devoid of the charac-
teristic Deus ex machina interpretation of historical events which was
popular for the friar chroniclers of the sixteenth to the eighteenth
centuries. Their aim was not to record history as is, but to document
the achievements of their religious orders and, more importantly, to
edify their readers. Friar chronicles cannot be described as history in
the modern sense, but as a narrative with a moral lesson. Often these
chronicles were written to encourage religious vocations or material
donations for the missions in Asia.
An example of this clash in historiography can be seen in Rizal's
caustic comments on the friar accounts of the Chinese uprising of
1603. He was particularly harsh on the claims that the Augustinián,
Antonio Flores, who, in the words of Aduarte, a Dominican friar
in one night took off the bottoms of two hundred vessels, burned some
bigger ones and sank others, and with two arquebuses and something
more than 400 bullets, from five in the morning until six in the evening,
killed more than 600 Chinese . . . later, he alone killed more than 3,000
(225 n. 2).
Not to be outdone, the Franciscans attributed the Spanish victory

over the Chinese not to the gallant men who manned the cannons
on the gates of Intramuros or repelled the rebels from the walls of
the city, but to the founder of their order, St. Francis of Assisi, who
was allegedly seen protecting Intramuros and fighting off the Chi-
nese with a flaming sword. Due to this tale, St. Francis was pro-
claimed by the Archbishop of Manila, serafín custodio de Manila
(Seraphic Protector of Manila), whose feastday was now celebrated
annually as a holiday. The government subsidized the ceremony that
accompanied this religious feast.
193
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
To challenge this account, Rizal cited contemporary accounts of

the Chinese uprising written by laymen, which made no mention oř
the miracle of St. Francis. According to Rizal, as two other chroni-
clers, Morga and Argensola, were silent on St. Francis, perhaps the
miracle was added only years after the event (225 n. 2). How elated
Rizal would have been had he found out that the four hundred
sworn statements about the saintly apparition given by Chinese pris-
oners sentenced to death for the uprising, were made after they con-
verted to Catholicism, were baptized and pardoned (Gonzalez-
Liquette).
Furthermore, Rizal utilized Morga to discredit the work of the
Dominican chronicler Diego de Aduarte, whose Historia de la provincia
del Soneto Rosario de la orden de Predicadores en Philippinas (History of
the Province of the Holy Rosary of the Order of Preachers in the>
Philippines) was published in Manila in 1640 and was considered so
authoritative it was often cited or repeated by later historians. In an.
extended footnote, spanning two pages, Rizal contrasted the work
of Aduarte and Morga, admitting that although the Dominican's work
was pleasant, charming, animated, and written in a picturesque style,
it was, marred by gaps, contradictions and distortions, unlike Morga,
who was more "faithful as a chronicler of his time ... if he covers
up many things for political reasons ... he never distorts events"
(Rizal 1890, 122-23).
Aduarte had later been named a bishop, and according to an ador-
ing biographer, the friar was so holy and ascetic, he wore patched
shoes and after his death miraculously grew a beard in his coffin.
Unable to resist commenting, Rizal said acidly "we have other saints
with less beard and better shoes" (122-23).11
Apart from their deliberate distortion of events in their propaga-
tion of a religious interpretation of Philippine history, Rizal took the
friar chroniclers to task for going against their vows of poverty. In
one of his annotations, Rizal estimated the wealth held by the reli-
gious corporations, particularly the Franciscans and Dominicans, who
owned much property and land in the Philippines. Rizal showed that
the Dominicans maintained properties even in neighboring Hongkong
(346 n. 2). He concluded that, "of course since the beginning [of the
colonial period] the .friar missionaries had very few opportunities to
suffer for religion" (347 n. 1).
Rizal's anticlericalism should be seen in the context of his educa-
tion in the politically unstable, liberal Madrid of the late nineteenth
century, where the Republicans blamed most social ills on priests and
194
RIZAL' S MORGA
religious. In addition, there were Rizal's experiences of oppression

in the colonial Philippines. That he was particularly sharp on the
Dominicans can be explained by the agrarian disputes his family
faced in Calamba which was a Dominican hacienda.
However, Rizal had a soft spot for the Jesuits, who, incidentally
are not friars, under whose tutelage he received his early education.
Only after the religious consolidated their position, did they begin to
spread calumnies and to debase the races of the Philippines with a
view to giving themselves more importance, making themselves indis-
pensable, and thus excusing their stupidity and ignorance with the
pretended coarseness of the indio. There is, however, an exception, for
the Jesuits who always educated and enlightened the indios without
declaring themselves as eternal protectors, tutors, defenders, etc. etc.
[of the indios] (329 n. 2).12
The Jesuits, unlike the other religious orders, were spared arrest
and abuse by the Filipino forces during the second-phase of the Phil-
ippine Revolution that began in 1898. This can partially be explained
by the fact that many leaders of the revolution were former students
of the Jesuit-run Ateneo Municipal. The Jesuits did promote a pro-
gressive educational system, with its emphasis on philosophy, the
humanities and the natural sciences. Despite his soft spot for the Jesu-
its, however, Rizal also includes the jibe in his later annotations that
the Society of Jesus was fifty years behind enlightened secular opin-
ion and science in Europe.
Moreover, the Jesuits maintained a good reputation regarding their
vows of poverty and chastity simply because the Order was sup-
pressed by the Pope in the eighteenth century. The Spanish King
ordered the expulsion of the Jesuits and the confiscation of their prop-
erty in all Spanish dominions; therefore the Jesuits had been absent
from the Philippines from 1768 until they were allowed to return in
1859. Upon their return, the other religious orders that had taken over
their property refused to yield both physical and ecclesiastical juris-
diction. Thus the Jesuits were sent to establish missions in the south-
ern, predominantly Muslim, island of Mindanao. A twist of history
made them lose an opportunity to become a wealthy landowning
religious corporation despised by indios.
The fourth consideration in Rizal's choice of the Morga was that
it appeared more sympathetic, at least in parts, to the indios, in con-
trast to the friar accounts, many of which were biased or downright
195
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
racist in tone and interpretation. In a letter to Blumentritt, on Sep-

tember 17, 1888, shortly before embarking on his annotations, Rizal
expressed his preference for Morga:
The Morga is an excellent book; it can be said that Morga is a mod-

ern learned explorer ( moderno sabio explorador). He has nothing of the
superficiality and exaggeration so typical of present-day Spaniards. He
writes very simply, but in reading him there is much between the lines
because he was governor general in the Philippines and after, head
(Alcalde) of the Inquisition (Epistolario 1938, 5:308)."
The fifth and last consideration was that Morga was an eyewit-
ness, and therefore a primary source, on the Philippines and its peo-
ple at the point of first contact with Spain. Rizal spoke highly of
Morga's integrity as a colonial official, which may have been true of
his term of office in Manila, but, according to more recent editions,
by Retana (1909) and Cummins (1971), his scruples seem to have
deteriòrated as he advanced in age and career.
Rizal's often humorless rebuttals of biased Spanish accounts of his
country and his people emphasized, on one level, the need for an
indio interpretation of history, while on another recreating the glo-
ries of the lost pre-Hispanic Philippines. Rizal argued that the pre-
Hispanic Filipinos had their own culture before 1521, and thus were
not saved from barbarism, and did not require "civilization" or a new
religion from Spain. Rizal insists that the flourishing pre-Hispanic
Philippine civilization, obliterated by Spain and the friars, could have
developed on its own into something great. Rizal emphasizes that
the pre-Hispanic civilization had metallurgy, a ship-building indus-
try, trade contacts with China, and even a system of writing and
accompanying literature, all ruined by Spanish colonization. Rizal
comments that the Philippines of his time was no better than the pre-
Hispanic Philippines. If Spain had not come, or had left the Philip-
pines to its own devices, everyone would be better off.
Rizal's Interpretation of History
This interpretation of history makes Rizal both a boon and a bane

to Philippine nationalism. He made historical assertions necessary for
his time and purposes, but Filipinos a century later, educated on the
same viewpoint, refuse to see Rizal's work in the context of recent
196
RIZAL' S MORGA
scholarship. Most of Rizal's historical assertions have been validated

by recent research. However there are flaws in his reconstruction of
pre-Hispanic Philippine civilization, Three examples central to Rizal's
arguments will suffice to prove his influence.
Generations of Filipino schoolchildren from the American colonial
period to the present have been raised to accept that the pre-His-
panic Filipinos had a system of writing and an accompanying writ-
ten literature which was destroyed by the missionaries who saw these
as "works of the devil." Second is the view that the pre-Hispanic
Filipinos had an advanced knowledge of metallurgy, the evidence
being the fine cannons made by an indio named Panday Pira. Third
was the existence of a pre-Hispanic ship-building industry. All these,
it is said, were systematically ruined by the Spanish. Filipino histo-
rians today have to reconsider the assertions made by Rizal a cen-
tury ago in the light of current archaeological and anthropological
research. In Morga's fourth chapter, for example, on the term of
Governor Santiago de Vera, there is a reference to a foundry run by
an indio from Pampanga named Panday Pira:
[de Vera] built the stone fortress of Our Lady of the Way, inside the
city of Manila on the land side, and for its defense, he had set up a
foundry for the making of artillery under the hands of an old indio
called Pandapira, a native of the province of Pampanga. He and his
sons served in this line of work until their deaths many years later
(Rizal 1890, 23). 14
The word "panday" in Java and Borneo means "metalworker" or

"ironsmith." How Panday Pira became a "cannon-maker" can only
be traced to Rizal. Although Morga made only a passing reference
to this indio artillery-maker, Rizal elaborated in his annotation, stress-
ing that
. That is, an indio who already knew how to found cannons even before the
arrival of the Spaniards, hence the epithet 'old/ In this difficult branch
of metallurgy, as in others, the present-day Filipinos or the new indios
are very much behind the old indios (italics mine; 23).15
In the next chapter, the fifth, on the term of Governor General

Gomez Perez Dasmariñas, there is another reference by Morga to the
foundry: "[Perez-Dasmariñas] established a foundry for artillery in
Manila where, owing to the lack of expert or master founders, few
197
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
large pieces were made" (2 7).16 Rizal now takes the opportunity to
point out, in a footnote, that the indigenous foundry run by Panday
Pira disappeared after the Spanish settled in Manila, conquered from
the indios: "This demonstrates that, when the indio Panday Pira died,
there were no Spaniards who know how to do what he did, nor were
his children as skilled as their father" (27 n. 4).17
Today Panday Pira, the cannon-founder, joins the Pantheon of
Heroes and other "great" Filipinos who are immortalized in school
textbooks, despite historical and archeological evidence to the con-
trary. In Retana's edition of Morga, his long footnotes on Panday Pira
contain transcriptions of sixteenth century archival documents from
Seville which refute Rizal's assertions that cannon-making was a
flourishing indigenous industry. The documents from the colonial
government in Manila requesting higher authorities in Mexico to send
cannon makers show that the Filipinos were unable to forge the thick
European-style cannons.
A letter from governor Vera on 26 June 1587, to the Viceroy in
Mexico gives an account of his artillery and requests more.
I cannot find anyone who knows how to found cannons, because those
provided are by indios who cannot make large cannons. I request Your
Excellency to send from New Spain founders and officers to manufac-
ture cannons (Retana 1909, 406).
Retana continues,
This is to say, that the natives did not know how to found large can-
nons. The twenty-six large pieces alluded to by de Vera could very
well come from the Spanish ships or those well-made by Robles, the
Spanish master founder. If Panday Pira and his sons were indeed such
experts at making large cannons there would be no reason for de
Vera's request (406).
Robles, he notes elsewhere, died before 1587. Thus his arrival in

the Philippines could be dated to about 1575-76. Retana takes Fili-
pino historians - above all Rizal - to task for trying to claim too much
¡from so little, by insisting that cannon-making was a flourishing in-
digenous industry. The documents he cites prove otherwise.
Retana has more to say. He cites an ethnographic article by
Blumentritt (whose opinion was held in high esteem by Rizal and
other Filipino writers) which stated that the pre-Hispanic foundry the
Spaniards encountered in Manila was run by a Portugese c?nnon-
198
RIZAL' S MORGA
maker! It is odd that Rizal, who read practically every word

Blumentritt had written on the Philippines, overlooked an important
line in Filipinas en tiempo de la Conquista (Boletín 1886, 217), which
states that the Portuguese taught the Tagalogs the founding of can-
nons. Blumentritt states further that cannons were brought to the
Philippines by Portuguese adventurers and deserters, challenging the
opinion of other scholars who maintained that this "indigenous" in-
dustry could trace its provenance to Borneo.
Retana (1909, 418-19) gives the coup de grace :
in a word, in the art of metallurgy with relation to the founding of

cannons, the Filipinos did not retrogress, on the contrary, they gained,
thanks to the training given by the Spaniards.
Historical evidence provided by Retana is supported by recent

archeological research. Dr. Eusebio Dizon, Chief of the Archaeology
Division of the National Museum of the Philippines, wrote his doc-
toral dissertation on pre-Hispanic Philippine metal implements. His
research showed that the indios were a metal-using people, but did
not possess the metallurgical knowledge attributed to them by Rizal
or the subsequent historians who drew on Rizal's work. He noted,
however, that it is possible that the indios were capable of forging
the small cannons, or lantakas , which are still manufactured by the
Muslims in the Southern island of Mindanao, although they are not
used for warfare but as ornaments for interior decoration. The pre-
Hispanic indios, as far as current archaeological data is concerned,
were not capable of founding the heavy European-style cannons used
in the sixteenth century (Dizon 1991, interview).
It may be argued that Rizal did not have the benefit of late twen-
tieth century research. His work, no doubt, was commendable for
its time, but in his zeal to recreate the greatness of the lost pre-His-
panic Philippine civilization, he sometimes drew on imagination more
than evidence. Rizal's historical annotations have to be seen in this
light. They were part of a propaganda effort. Scholarly annotations
to a sixteenth century chronicle were used as propaganda: history
was utilized as a weapon against Spain.
Another example may be necessary to demonstrate Rizal's exag-
geration. Morga describes Filipino boats large enough to carry "one
hundred rowers on the border (vanda) and thirty soldiers on top
(pelea)/' on which Rizal (1890, 267-68 n. 1) elaborates to mourn the
extinction of the indigenous boat-making industry:
199
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
The Filipinos . . . [were] celebrated and skilled in navigation, but far

from progressing, have become backward. Although boats are still built
in the islands now, we can say that they are almost all oř the Euro-
pean model. The ships that carried one hundred rowers and thirty
fighting soldiers disappeared. The country that at one time, with primi-
tive means, built ships of around 2,000 tons, now has to resort to for-
eign ports like Hongkong ... for unserviceable cruisers.18
On the same page, Rizal laments the environmental costs of Span-

ish boat-building, by describing the pre-Hispanic Philippine landscape
as being "covered in shadows/' as an abundance of trees were cut
down with no thought of conservation, so that some species became
extinct (268).
There is no doubt that the pre-Hispanic indios were a seafaring
people who built swift and light vessels that could traverse the length
of the archipelago or cross into neighboring countries for trade. Re-
cent archeological excavations in the southern city of Butuan in
Mindanao have enlarged our understanding of pre-Hispanic Philip-
pine boats. Some remains are as large as Morga describes, but noth-
ing comes close to the massive 2,000 ton boats of which Rizal boasts.19
Spanish colonization is further blamed for the loss of the pre-His-
panic Philippine syllabary, and thus the extinction of a written lit-
erature. Aside from a few signatures by indios, in their own script,
on early Spanish legal documents of the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, no full document written in the pre-Hispanic Philippine
script has ever been found.
During the First European Philippine Studies Conference in Am-
sterdam in April 1991, Antoon Postma (1992, 183-203) presented a
paper on a copper plate allegedly discovered in Laguna, with an
inscription that has been dated to 900 A.D. He stated, among other
things, that "Philippine official history has been enlarged with the
revelation of this copper 'document/7 and called for a reexamination
of historical data in the light of this find. Postma has been largely
ignored, simply because the provenance of the copper plate has not
been fully established. It was sold by an antique dealer to the Na-
tional Museum, which has not verified the site where it was alleg-
edly found. The inscription on this copper plate is neither in the
pre-Hispanic Philippine script, nor is it in any of the various Philip-
pine languages. The so-called Laguna copper plate was probably im-
ported from elsewhere in Southeast Asia. This is a further
demonstration of the need to prove certain aspects of pre-Hispanic
200
RIZAL'S MORGA
Philippine civilization. It is a vain attempt to validate Rizal' s asser-

tions on the widespread use of pre-Hispanic writing and the written
literature that presumably accompanied it.
Morga observed that writing was widely in use all over the pre-
Hispanic Philippines, that all indios, men as well as women, could
read and write at least properly in their own language (290-92). Rizal
cites similar observations by the Jesuit Pedro Chirino, who claims that
there was universal literacy, that everyone in the late sixteenth cen-
tury Philippines could read and write in their own language. Rizal
uses Chirino and Morga to express his opinion on literacy in the late
nineteenth century Philippines:
Now the same thing cannot be said. The government, in print and in
words, tries to procure the instruction of the Filipinos20 but in deed
and at bottom, it foments ignorance, placing the instruction in the
hands of the friars who are accused by the Peninsular Spaniards, In-
sular Spaniards, and Foreigners [i.e. Europeans] of the brutalization of
the country and prove themselves with their conduct and writings
(290-92 n. 2).21
Using Morga, Chirino and other early chronicles that mention the
pre-Hispanic Philippine syllabary, Rizal goes one step further in as-
suming that there was a great volume of written literature at the time
the Spaniards arrived in the Philippines. However, at present, there
is no extant body, not even a fragment, of this pre-Hispanic written
literature. The Jesuit Chirino mentions that he burned a "book" which
was condemned as the "work of the devil." From this small refer-
ence has sprung the general view that the missionaries destroyed all
pre-Hispanic "books" and manuscripts.
That all trace of pre-Hispanic writing was destroyed is highly
improbable. The missionaries are blamed for a long-lost pre-Hispanic
literature which probably did not exist. As pre-Hispanic documents
continue to elude scholars, recent anthropological research has yielded
a wealth of oral literature, which is believed to go back to pre-His-
panic times. The Philippines has a large body of complex literature,
such as that in Palawan, which has a complete cosmology and my-
thology. But this is an oral literature, and is only now being recorded
and transcribed, to be preserved in printed form.
To be fair to the much maligned early missionaries, knowledge of
the pre-Hispanic syllabary was probably preserved rather than ob-
literated by the friars, who learned and documented the different
201
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
languages and alphabets they encountered in their mission fields.

They undertook numerous linguistic and grammatical studies of Phil-
ippine languages, and compiled the first dictionaries. Instead of blam-
ing the friars for the loss of pre-Hispanic literature, nationalist
historians should thank these men for preserving the syllabary they
are accused of destroying.
The first book printed in the Philippines, in 1593, the Doctrina
cristiana en lengua tagala (Christian Doctrine in the Tagalog language)
is a translation of the Roman Catholic Catechism and prayers into
Spanish and Tagalog, with the latter printed in both the pre-Hispanic
syllabary and the Roman alphabet. Another work which used the pre-
Hispanic syllabary was a later catechism printed in 1621, translated
into Ilocano. Both these and other missionary studies on Philippine
languages and grammars like Arte y reglas de la lengua tagala by Fr.
Blancas de San Jose (1610) and Arte de la lengua iloca by Fr. Fran-
cisco Lopez (1617) suggest that the friars documented and preserved,
rather than destroyed pre-Hispanic writing (Retana 1895; 1906).
One of the few artifacts in the National Museum of the Philip-
pines raised to the level of a "National Treasure" is an earthenware
pot excavated at a site in Calatagan, Batangas in 1962, which has pre-
Hispanic characters clearly incised around the rim. Often taken as
firm evidence of the widespread use of pre-Hispanic writing, nobody
has asked why only one specimen has been found to date, and, more
importantly, why the characters resembling the Tagalog syllabary on
the Calatagan pot do not translate into anything intelligible. The
National Museum has yet to release their expert deciphered text on
the Calatagan pot. Are these incised characters really pre-Hispanic
writing, or are they simple decorative motifs? The Calatagan pot
unfortunately leaves more questions than it answers.
Rizal's Annotations
The importance of Rizal's annotations to Morga was that he tried

to use history and historical revision, not just to express his personal
views on the historiography, but to create a sense of national con-
sciousness or identity. Historical revision is always met with vary-
ing degrees of opposition, and Rizal's first attempt at writing
Philippine history was no exception. That the Spaniards would ob-
ject was inevitable, and Rizal was prepared for this. When the Morga
was officially banned in the Philippines, Rizal was not surprised.
202
RIZAL'S MORGA
However, the first criticism of Rizal's historical work was not by a

Spaniard or by one of Rizal's enemies, but by Blumentritt in the in-
troduction to the book itself. Often overlooked, this introduction con-
tains observations which are hidden under a mountain of praise.
Blumentritt noted, for example, that Rizal's "observations on the
conduct of the European conquerors and civilizers are in general not
new to the historian. The Germans specially discussed this theme"
(Rizal 1890, introduction). Nevertheless, Blumentritt continued with:
These new points of view give your notes an imperishable value, an

undeniable value even for those who dream of an inaccessible superi-
ority of race or nationality. The scholar will salute your erudite anno-
tations with enthusiasm, the colonial politician gratitude and respect.
Through these lines run a flood of serious observations equally inter-
esting and important to historians and ministers of overseas colonies
alike (ibid.).
Then he cites two defects of Rizal's scholarship which have been

condemned, and rightly so, by later historians: an ahistorical use of
hindsight, and a strong anticlerical bias. Blumentritt, in his glowing
introduction, did not forget to state that
My great esteem for your notes does not impede me from confessing
that, more than once, I have observed that you participate in the error
of many modern historians who censure the events of past centuries
according to the concepts that correspond to contemporary ideas. This
should not be so. The historian should not impute to the men of the
sixteenth century the broad horizon of ideas that moves the nineteenth
century. The second point with which I do not agree is against Ca-
tholicism. I believe that you cannot find the origin of numerous events
regrettable for Spain and for the good name of the European race in
religion, but in the hard behavior and abuses of many priests (xii).22
Hindsight and anticlericalism are fatal defects in a purely schol-

arly work but, as mentioned earlier, Rizal used history as a propa-
ganda weapon against the abuses of the colonial Spaniards. Rizal's
Morga should be seen and excused in this context. The problem with
Rizal is his constant ambiguity. Is he trying to be a scholar or a
propagandist? Hence the Morga was deemed too historical, too schol-
arly for propagandists, while historians and scholars found the work
too biased, too much a work of propaganda to be taken seriously.
While Blumentritt's critique was undeniably tempered by his
friendship for Rizal, one must remember that Rizal solicited the
203
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
introduction. What finally saw print was a version approved and

slightly edited by Rizal. Unfortunately, this draft introduction is not
extant, but we can extrapolate from the Rizal-Blumentritt correspond-
ence to see what Rizal found objectionable and what he wanted de-
leted from the introduction.
Writing from Paris on 19 November 1889, Rizal thanked
Blumentritt for writing the introduction to his edition of Morga. He
liked it very much, and praised it for being written "both with head
and heart." Be that as it may, Rizal reacted strongly against
Blumentritt's mention of "Quiopquiap" (pseudonym of Pablo Feced,
brother of ex-governor Jose Feced y Temprado, a prolific journalist
who wrote racist, anti-indio articles). Rizal told Blumentritt that
Quiopquiap may be highly regarded in Spanish circles in Manila, but
he was not worthy of attention. Rizal declared that he did not want
"to soil the pages of my book" with this name. "I do not write for
the Spaniards in Manila, I write for my countrymen and we all de-
test Quiopquiap" (Epistolario 1938, 5:51o).23
Three days later, on 22 November 1889, Rizal returned the draft
of Blumentritfs introduction together with his "corrections." Even if
Blumentritt had earlier authorized Rizal to edit it however he wished,
out of courtesy Rizal sought Blumentritfs final approval. Apart from
the deletion of the name Quiopquiap, Rizal cut out the text relating to
fraternidad (fraternity) between indios and Spaniards. Rizal told
Blumentritt that, despite his good intentions, his notion of fraternal love
between Spaniards and indios was liable to give the wrong impression.
You wish that the Spaniards embrace us as brothers, but we do not

ask for this by always imploring and repeating this because the result
is humiliating for us. If the Spaniards do not want us as brothers, nei-
ther are we eager for their affection. We will not ask for fraternal love
as if it were like alms. I am convinced that you wish too much and
also wish the good of Spain. But we do not solicit the compassion of
Spain. We do not want compassion, but justice. . . . Fraternity like alms
from the proud Spaniard we do not seek. I repeat, you only have the
best intentions, you want to see the whole world embraced by means of
love and reason but I doubt if the Spaniards wish the same (51 6-1 7). 24
Rizal's Scholarship
Despite his intense feelings, Rizal's tone remains very cordial with
Blumentritt. It must be stressed here that Rizal did not take criticism
204
RIZAL' S MORGA
well, especially if it came from racist Spaniards like Quiopquiap or

Vicente Barrantes, whom Rizal answered in the propaganda paper
La Solidaridad. Indeed, he was surprisingly hostile to a fellow patriot
in "A Reply to Mr. Isabelo de los Reyes," which saw print in La
Solidaridad in 1891. In this article we see all the more clearly the real
motives of Rizal's scholarship.
Isabelo de los Reyes (1864-1938) was a journalist, businessman,
labor leader, politician and prominent member of the schismatic
Iglesia Filipina Independiente (Philippine Independent Church) which
"canonized" Rizal. He was interested in aspects of Philippine history
and culture, especially that which concerned his home province
llocos. His fieldwork and compilations of folklore, history and cus-
toms have proven to be of great ethnographic value for present-day
scholars. De los Reyes had been corresponding with European schol-
ars with research interests in the Philippines long before Rizal came
into contact with Blumentritt. De los Reyes published many books,
pamphlets and articles, including: El Folk-lore Filipino (Philippine folk-
lore) in two volumes, which was awarded a silver medal in the Phil-
ippine Exposition in Madrid in 1887. He had left a Historia de Filipinas
unfinished, with only one volume completed. He also published Las
islas Visayas en a epoca de la conquista (The Visayan islands at the time
of the conquest); and numerous compilations of his journalism,
Filipinas artículos varios sobre etnografia , historia y costumbres de los Fili-
pinos (The Philippines: various articles on the ethnography, history
and customs of the Filipinos); and, a two volume Historia de llocos.
Some of de los Reyes's works were even translated by Blumentritt
into German and published outside the Philippines.25
In his Historia de llocos de los Reyes upsets Rizal. De los Reyes
called attention to the discrepancy between some of Rizal's annota-
tions to Morga vis-a-vis his own research. These differences of opin-
ion were explained, according to de los Reyes, by Rizal's excessive
patriotism:
But that very laudable patriotism of his, it seems to me, blinds him at
times, and as an historian ought to be rigorously impartial, the opti-
mism of the said author turns out to be passionate in some points,
taking exceptions of the general rule, and vice-versa. The consensus
among authors who had no reason to lie in these cases ought to be
taken into account. The true character of that [pre-Hispanic] civiliza-
tion and what is still preserved of it in the present customs of the
people (Quoted in Rizal's reply to de los Reyes, La Solidaridad).
205
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
Rizal was so irritated that he responded by attacking de los Reyes

in the 31 October 1890 issue of La Solidaridad , using the sarcasm he
normally reserved for racist Spaniards and friars
1 do not know how discreet it is to raise oneself as a judge of others

. . . [when] neither one or the other was an eyewitness or more or less
an influential actor. But this, which in anyone else could be censured as
vain presumption, ceases to be so in Mr. Isabelo de los Reyes who
knows very well how to interpret the historians of the Philippines.
As de los Reyes was fond of using Philippine terms in his work,

especially words in his mothe'r-tongue, Ilocano, Rizal took him to task
for (mis)translating Morga's " principales " into its Ilocano equivalent,
agturay.
1 have read Morga about seven times and I do not remember that he
had ever mentioned agturay. I do not know if Mr. de los Reyes in his
laudable desire to Ilocanize the Philippines thinks it convenient to make
Morga speak Ilocano. It is true that this author, in describing the cus-
toms of the Tagalogs, said that they were generally current in all the
islands; but this does not mean that Ilocano customs are the ones that
prevail (ibid.).
Rizal continues the barrage by flaunting his familiarity with the

primary sources in Philippine history, finding fault with de los Reyes
for using "unreliable" sources, like those of the sixteenth century friar
Martin de Rada who described the indios as assassins, thieves, high-
waymen, and cowards. Rizal belittled de los Reyes's scholarship by
claiming that de los Reyes had used a mere French translation of a
manuscript, while he himself had used the original.
Rizal claims he had read all the early accounts of the Philippines,
cover to cover, except that of Plasencia, which was unavailable. "I
never state anything on my own authority," Rizal notes. "I cite texts
and when I cite them, I have them before me" (ibid.).
Although de los Reyes did not have the opportunity to spend as
much time as Rizal in the British Museum, he was, nonetheless, thor-
ough in his research. For Historia de llocos : he "read more than a
hundred historical and non-historical works, just to cull two or three
items from each of them." He supplemented archival research by
utilizing "oral traditions for more recent events" (Scott 1985, 246).
Notwithstanding this, Rizal cites Pigafetta, Chirino, Morga, Argensola,
Colin, San Agustin, and Aduarte, rallying all his sources against the
one main source of de los Reyes, pronouncing proudly that
206
RIZAL'S MORGA
As I based my assertion on seven contemporary writers, I do not know

if in this case, I shall be the exception and de los Reyes the general
rule. I know that the authority of de los Reyes is worth seven times
more than mine; but with my seven authors and he with his Fr. Rada,
we can balance ourselves, if he does not take offense... dealing with
historical facts, only the testimony of contemporaries can be authori-
tative, a testimony that ought to be subjected to the processes of criti-
cism (ibid.).
Rizal is being petulant in bragging about his familiarity with the

primary sources: but significantly, this sour exchange offers an im-
portant insight into Rizal's views, especially into his Tagalog-centered
view of history. Beneath this historiographical argument lies not
scholarship or the reliability of sources, but patriotism. History must
be used for a purpose, not only to enlighten but to make his coun-
trymen "think correctly/' to see history not from the viewpoint of
the Spanish chroniclers but from the indio point of view. Rizal con-
cludes his tirade by washing his hands:
Let it be put on record that this question was provoked by Mr. de los
Reyes, that until now I have only spoken of him with admiration and
respect, even if 1 do not agree with his opinions, for I have always
believed that I could not raise myself to be his judge (Reply to de los
Reyes, La Solidaridad).
Earlier in the essay, Rizal unconsciously unveiled his view of com-

mitted scholarship: "had we no positive proof of de los Reyes's pa-
triotism, we would believe that by giving so much credit to Fr. Rada,
he had intended to denigrate his own people" (ibid.). This is an im-
portant point, because it shows that Rizal was an early exponent of
"committed scholarship," to use a current term, which saw nothing
wrong in driving data into a particular framework, or giving the
narrative a particular bias to push home a point. Rizal, blinded by
his patriotism, as de los Reyes aptly put it, forgets the true purpose
of scholarship, distorting truth to suit the needs of propaganda
against the Spaniards and their particular interpretation of Philippine
history.
The ambiguity in Rizal becomes very clear in this little known
essay against de los Reyes. Rizal was not seeking to be a scholar or
historian; he was merely using history as a weapon for the propa-
ganda movement. Juan Luna wrote to Rizal immediately after read-
ing "Una contestación á I. de los Reyes." in La Solidaridad, warning
207
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
him that public disagreements between the propagandists was coun-

ter-productive as it was giving the Spaniards "a great laugh." Luna
said that de los Reyes was also his friend, but he had done wrong
by refuting Rizal's annotations to Morga, "which are exaggerated by
your excessive patriotism." He called for more restraint in contra-
dicting the work of others simply because "they imagine in another
manner" ( Epistolario 1938, 5:122).
Rizal's patriotism made him over-sensitive or even intolerant of
criticism. Parallel to his historical bias in favor of the indio was the
ilustrado concern to project the ideal or "correct" image of the indio.
This clearly demonstrated their leanings and, in a sense, their own
racist conception of history, reversing that of the Spaniards. De los
Reyes's attempt at objectivity, or at least a measure of fairness, in
his research and writing was suspect in the eyes of his more zeal-
ous countrymen. De los Reyes once remarked that
Indios think it is shocking and shameful to write El Folklore Filipino

because, they say, this is to publicize our own simplicity. I am an indio
and an Ilocano - why should I not say it? And when my beloved broth-
ers learned about my modest articles on Ilocano folklore which they
published in La Oceania, they rose up against me, saying I had dis-
graced my own people" (Scott 1985, 252).
By recreating the proud pre-Hispanic civilization corrupted by

Spanish colonization, Rizal's Morga had set the tone for Philippine
historiography, and provided one of the base positions from which
Filipino identity was to be built. Any critical remarks on the indio,
no matter if supported by research, were not to be tolerated because
this was deemed unpatriotic.
Pardo de Tavera, in Biblioteca Filipina, describes de los Reyes's work
as "full of curious observations and can even be faulted for superfi-
ciality at times, [but] it cannot be said that de los Reyes falsified his-
tory or more or less propagated falsehood and absurdities in an attempt
to glorify the ancient [i.e. pre-Hispanic] civilization of the Filipinos."
Contrary to popular belief, therefore, Rizal was not the only Filipino
at that time interested in the pre-Hispanic Philippine past. The im-
portant point in the scholarship of these two men is that de los Reyes
represented objective scholarship and research while Rizal represented
committed scholarship. Both expressed an interpretation of Philippine
history for Filipinos and patriotism was the fulcrum which deter-
mined the degree of objectivity and propaganda in their work.
208
RIZAL'S MORGA
Rizal's view of Philippine historiography is expressed in his an-

notations to Morga's Sucesos , in his essay Filipinas dentro de cien años
(The Philippines Within a Century), and most clearly in an outline
periodization of Philippine history which he prepared for the Inter-
national Association of Philippinologists, hoping that it could con-
vene a conference of European Philippinologists in Paris during the
International Exposition of 1889.
I. Pre Hispanic Philippines.

Geography, Geology, Hydrography, Flora and Fauna, Government,
Civilization, Literature, Earliest information about the Philippines
in Europe, Bibliography, etc.
II. Arrival of the Spaniards to the loss of Philippine autonomy and

her incorporation into the Spanish nation. (1521-1808)
Influence of Spanish civilization on the social life of the Philippines.
Conversion into Catholicism, Encomiendas, Wars and Invasions, Im-
migration, Government, Commerce, Religious troubles, etc.
III. Incorporation of the Philippines into the Spanish nation up to the

Cavite Mutinyd 808-1 872).
Government, Representation in the Spanish Cortes, Loss of her char-
acter as a Spanish province and the declaration of her status as a
colony, Reforms, Criticism, Influence of the Monastic Orders on the
material progress of the Islands, the Philippines compared with
other colonies, etc.
IV. Linguistics
Classification of languages spoken in the Philippines Tagalog,
Visayan, Ilocano, l'espagnol de kusina [literally Kitchen Spanish or
the pidgin Spanish spoken in CaviteJ, studies on modern literature
of the Tagalogs, modern literature of the Philippines, religious
books, etc. ( Epistolario 1938, 383-89).
V. Races and Independent Regions which includes all Muslim sultan-

ates, independent tribes, Negritos, etc. (406).
The fifth part, on Race and Independent regions, was an after-

thought, as seen in the correspondence between Rizal and
Blumentritt. It was not in the original outline, suggesting that Rizal
saw the Muslims of the Southern island of Mindanao, as well as the
non-Christian, non-Hispanized indios of the mountains, differently
from the lowland Christian indios of which he was part. Note too
209
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
that, as in the annotations to Morga, Rizal did not refer to non-Chris-

tian Filipinos collectively as "Filipinos," in the way that he referred
to the Hispanized indios of Luzon and the Visayas.
An Indio Viewpoint
In the outline Rizal's linear conception of history, and how he uses

the arrival of Spain as the turning point is clear. It is the break in
Philippine history that stunted the pre-Hispanic Philippine civiliza-
tion. Colonization, according to Rizal's view of history, led to the
loss of both Philippine autonomy and its distinct character.
Rizal's survey and study of the Philippine past showed that all
the chronicles on his county and people were written by Spaniards,
and thus reflected their biases. Unlike neighboring countries, Java,
Burma, or Vietnam, which had an abundance of ancient, pre-colo-,
nial, written texts, the Philippines had nothing but the Spanish chroni-
cles. Further complicating the matter was the fact that Rizal attempted
to write on the pre-Hispanic Philippines before the arrival of archae-
ology, and was thus left with no choice but to use Spanish written
sources. In the course of his research, he constantly had to decide
which sources to use for his history of the Philippines, but his patri-
otism largely determined his choice.
Reading through these works, Rizal was continually irritated by
the racist viewpoints of Spanish historians, who often highlighted the
"primitive" or "uncivilized" nature of the indios, vis-a-vis the "civilized"
Spaniards, who brought both the Roman Catholic faith- and
Hispaniza tion to the archipelago. Consequently, Rizal gave himself the
difficult task of rebutting the biased chronicles, and in so doing brought
into existence an indio viewpoint on the history of the Philippines.
More important, Rizal's Morga recreated the pre-Hispanic Philip-
pine past, which he wanted to present to his sleeping countrymen
in order to awaken in them a sense of pride in their race.
If the book manages to awaken in you the awareness of our past,

erased from memory, and to rectify what has been falsified and slan-
dered, then I will not have labored in vain, and with this base, how-
ever small it may be, we shall all be able to dedicate ourselves to study
the future (Rizal 1890, preface).24
The publication of Rizal's Morga in late 1889 clearly divided Rizal's

writings into three distinct components. If the Noli me tangere dealt
210
RIZAL'S MORGA
with the present, and El Filibusterismo was to deal with the future, then
Rizal decided to suspend work on El Filibusterismo in order to dwell on
the past. In his preface to the Morga Rizal addressed his countrymen:
In the Noli me tangere I began the sketch of the present state of our
motherland. The effect that my exercise produced in me was the un-
derstanding that, before proceeding to unfold before your eyes other
successive pictures, it is necessary to give you first a knowledge of
the past in order to enable you to judge the present better and to
measure the road we have traveled during the last three centuries
(Rizal 1890, preface).27
In his essay, Filipinas dentro de ríen años (The Philippines within a

century) which was published in installments in the propaganda
paper La Solidaridad from the end of September 1889 to the begin-
ning of February 1890, Rizal expresses the same message summariz-
ing his work on the Morga, as a prelude to his reflections on the
past and his predictions for the future of the Philippines. 'To fore-
tell the destiny of a nation/' Rizal argues, "it is necessary to open
the book that tells of her past."28
It has been a century since Rizal' s Morga appeared, but Filipinos
have still to come to terms with their past. The search for a national
identity goes on, and the view of history Filipinos carry is generally
that bequeathed to them by the propagandists of the late nineteenth
century and most articulately by Rizal in his edition of Morga whose
effects on later Philippine historiography may not always have been
constructive. In its time, Rizal's Morga was already considered too
historical, that is too academic and scholarly to be digested and used
by patriots and propagandists; but historians and scholars believe the
Morga to be too biased for their purposes.
However, the significance of Rizal's view of Philippine history is
that its influence is still felt and, taken in the context of Philippine
historiography remains the key to an understanding of the reconstruc-
tion of the Philippine past as a means to forge a national identity.
Notes
1. Esta es otra de las preocupaciones de los Españoles que, como cualquiera otra
nación, tratándose de las comidas hacen ascos de aquello a que no etan acostumbrados
o que desconocen. El Ingles, por ejemplo, siente grima al ver a un Español comer
caracoles; a este le repugna al roastbeef y no comprende como se puede comer el
beefsteak tartaro (carne cruda); el Chino que tiene tahuri y come tiburón, no puede
sportar el queso Roquefort, etc. etc. Este pescado que menciona Morga no sabe mejor
211
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
cuando esta comenzado a dañar; todo lo contrarío: es bagoong y cuantos lo han comido
y probado aben que ni esta ni deber estar dañado/'
2. Filipinas le habrá de agradecer si Vd. escribiera una historia completa de nuestro
país, juzgado con criterio imparcial. Creo que es Vd. el único que podría hacerlo; yo
tengo el valor para ello pero no sé bastante; no he léido tanto libros sobre mi país, y
las bibliotecas españolas están cerradas para mí; además necesito mi tiempo para otras
cosas y todo lo que diría sería siempre sospechoso de estar inspirado por éspiritu
partidista; pero Vd. le léeran como á un juez imparcial; Vd. no tiene intereses
egóistas...no tendrá Vd. que enmendar la verdad histórica ni para los filipinos ni para
los españoles, y puede Vd. contemplar el pasado con sangre fría como cualquier
observador extraño...Yo creo que es Vd. el hombre más adecuado para ese trabajo."
3. Original in German, Spanish translation as follows: "Estoy ahora muy ocupado
con Morga , pienso copiar toda la obra y regalar una nueva edicional publico, sobre
todo al publico filipino. . . . Hago eso sólo por mi país, porque esta obra no me traerá
ni honor ni dinero."
4. Retana uses the word "negro" which could mean a "colored man," as opposed
to a white Spaniard or European. Perhaps, it could also mean indio but definitely not
"black" or African.
5. This biography is based on the lengthy biographical essay in Retana's Morga,
and the introduction to the Cummins edition of Morga. The family scandal is con-
densed from Retana's Aparato.
6. Nacido y criado en el desconocimiento de nuestro Ayer, como casi todos
vosotros; sin voz ni autoridad para hablar de lo que no vimos ni estudiamos, considere
necesario invocar el testimonio de un ilustre Español que rigió los destinos de Filipinas
en los principios de su nueva era y presencio los últimos momentos de nuestra antigua
nacionalidad. Es, pues, la sombra de la civilización de nuestros antepasados la que
ahora, ante vosotros evocara el autor.. .El cargo, la nacionalidad y las virtudes de
Morga, juntamente con los datos y testimonios de sus contemporáneos, Españoles casi
todos, recomiendan la obra a vuestra atenta consideración."
7. The Philippine Islands, Moluccas, Siam, Cambodia, Japan, and China at the close
of the sixteenth century by Antonio de Morga. Translated from the Spanish with notes
and a preface, and a letter from Luis Vaez de Torres, describing his voyage through
the Torres Straits by the Hon. Henry E.J. Stanley (1868).
8. Despite the completion and initial distribution of copies of Rizal's Mojga in
autumn 1889, the title-page post-dated 1890.
9. Sucesos de las islas Filipinas , por el Dr. Antonio de Morga. Nueva edición
enriquecida con los escritos inéditos del mismo autor ilustrada con numerosas notas
que amplían el texto y prologada extensamente por W.E Retana (1909).
10. Todas las historias escritas por los religiosos antes y despues de Morga, hasta
casi nuestros dias, abundan en cuentos de demonios, milagros, apariciones, etc.,
formando esto el grueso de las voluminosas historias de Filipinas.
11. "Santos tenemos con menos barbas y mejores zapatos."
12. In the official JRNCC English translation by E. Alzona ,the line, "they almost
always did justice to the indios," is nowhere to be found in the original Spanish text,
which reads:
Solo despues que los religiosos vieron su posicion consolidada, empezaron a esarcir
calumnias y a rebajarlas razas de Filipinas con la mira de darse mas importancia,
hacerse siempre necesarios y ecusar asi su torpeza e ignorancia con la pretendida
rudeza del indio. Hay que execptuar, sin embargo, a los Jesuitas, quienes casi
siempre han enseñado e ilustrado, sin pretender por eso declararse como sus
eternos protectores, tutores, defensores, etc. etc.
212
RIZAL' S MORGA
13. Original letter in German, but I have translated from the Spanish translation.
14. "Edfifico de piedra la fortaleza de Nuestra Señora de Guia, dentro de la coud ad
de Manila, a la parte de tierra, y hizo fundir alguna artillería para su guarnición, por
mano de un indio antiguo, llamado Pandapira, natural de la provincia de Pam panga,
que el y sus hijos sirvieron desto muchos años despues, hasta que murieron."
15. "Esto es, un Indio que ya sabría fundir cañones aun antes de la llegada de los
Españoles, por eso d epiteto antiguo. En este difícil ramo de metalurgia, como en otros,
se han atrasado los actuales Filipinos o los Indios nuevos."
16. "Hizo casa de fundición de artillería en Manila, donde (por falta de maestros
fundidores) se acertaron pocas piecas gruessas/'
17. "Esto demuestra que, muerto el indio Pandapira, no habia Españoles que
supieran hacer lo que aquel, ni los hijos serian tan habiles como el padre."
18. "Los Filipinos . . . celebres y diestros en la navegación, lejos de progesar, se
han atrasado, pues si bien ahora se construyen en las islas barcos, podemos decir que
son casi todos de modelo europeo. Deparecieron los navios que contenían cien remeros
por banda y treinta soldados de combate; el pais que un tiempo, con medios primitivos
fabricaba naos cerca de 2,000 toneladas (Hern, de los Rios, pag.24) hoy tiene que acudir
a puertos extraños, como Hong-Kong . . . inservibles cruceros."
19. Some of these boats are presently on display in the National Museum in Ma-
nila, while others may be viewed, in situ , at the National Museum branch in Butuan
City.
20. Rizal himself is sometimes confused in his use of "Filipinos," as in this case
where the context points to indios.
21. "Ahora no se puede decir lo mismo. El gobierno, en impresos y en palabras,
procura la instrucción de los Filipinos, pero en el hecho y en el fondo fomenta la
ignorancia, poniendo la instrucción en manos de los frailes, acusados por los
Peninsulares, Filipinos, y Extranjeros de querer el embrutecimiento del pais, y
probándolo ellos mismos con su conducta y sus escritos."
22. La gran estimación de tus notas no me impide confesar que más de una vez
he observado que partcipas del error de muchos historiadores modernos, que censuran
los hechos de siglos pasados según conceptos que corresponden á las ideas
contemporáneas. Esto no debe ser. El historiador debe no imputar á los hombres del
siglo XVI el ancho horizonte de las ideas que conmueven al siglo XIX. Lo segundo
con que no estoy conforme, son algunos desahogos contra el catolicismo; creo que no
en la religión, sino en el proceder duro y en los abusos de muchos sacerdotes deben
buscarse el origen de muchos sucesos lamentables para la religión, para España y para
el buen nombre de la raza europea.
23. 'Tu Prologo me gusta muchísimo y me conmueve; está escrito con la cabeza y
con el corazón; te agradezco muchísimo por ello. Solamente quisiera llamar tu atención
á algunas cosas. Tú hablas en él de Quiopquiap ... no quisiera manchar mi libro con
tales nombres. Además, le damos demasiada importancia acordándonos siempre de
él. Tienes razón al creer que Quiopquiap tiene importancia entre los españoles de
Manila; pero entre los nativos y los sabios del mundo él es una nulidad. No escribo
para los españoles de Manila; escribo para mis paisanos y todos nosotros detestamos
á Quiopquiap.
24. "Me he permitido también tachar algunas partes referentes a la fraternidad; tú
abrigas las mejores intenciones, tú quieres que los españoles nos abracen como
hermanos; pero nosotros no debemos pedir eso implorándolo y repitiéndolo siempre,
porque resulta algo humillante para nosotros. Si los españoles no nos quieren como
hermanos, tampoco estamos ansiosos de su afecto; no pedimos el amor fraternal como
una limosna. Estoy convencido de que tú nos quieres mucho y que también deseas
213
PHILIPPINE STUDIES
el bien de España; pero nosotros no solicitamos la compostoti de España; no queremos

compasion sino justicia... Fraternidad como una limosna del orgullo español no la
pedimos. Repito que tú solamente tienes las mejores intenciones; tu quieres ver
abrazarse a todo el mundo por medio del amor y la razón; pero dudo que quieran lo
mismo los españoles.
25. See the three biographical essays in W.H. Scott, Cracks in the Parchment Cur-
tain: "Isabelo de los Reyes, Father of Philippine Folklore" (235-44); "Isabelo de los
Reyes: Provinciano and Nationalist" (245-65); and "Reaction to American imperial-
ism: Isabelo de los Reyes" (285-99).
26. Si el libro logra despertar en vosotros la conciencia de nuestro pasado, borrado
de la memoria, y rectificar lo que se ha falseado y caluminado, entonces no habre
trabajado en balde, y con esa base, por pequeña que fuese, podremos todos dedicarnos
a estudiar el porvenir.
27. En el Noli me tangere principie el bosquejo del estado actual de nuestra patria:
el efecto que mi ensayo produjo, hizome comprender, antes de proseguir
desenvolviendo ante vuestros ojos otros cuadrod sucesivos, la necesidad de dar
primero a conocer el pasado, a fin de poder juzgar mejor el presente y medir el camino
recorrido durante tres siglos.
28. Alzona translation must be checked with original.
References
Boletín de la Sociedad Geografica. 1886. vol. 21. Madrid.

Craig, A. 1927. Rizal's life and minor writings. Manila: Philippine Education Co.
Cummins, J. S., ed. 1971. Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas. London: Hakluyt Society.
Dizon, Eusebio. 1991. Interview. Manila, September.
Epistolario Rizalino. 1931. vol. 2. Manila: Bureau of Printing.
Gonzalez-Liquete. n.d. Repertorio historko, n.p.

Ilustración Filipina. 1860. vol. 2 (no. 3): 149-51.
Pigafetta, Antonio. 1969. Magellan's Voyage. Translated and edited by R. A.
Skelton. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Postma, Antoon. 1991. The Laguna copperplate inscription: Text and Com-
mentary. Paper presented at First European Philippine Studies Conference.
Published in Philippine Studies 40 (1 992) :1 83-203.
Retana, W.E. 1895. Antiguos alfabeto de Filipinas (Notas bibliográficos). Madrid.
Madrid. Minuesa de los Rios.
Victoriano Suarez.
Rizal, Jose, ed. 1890. Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas , por el Dr. Antonio de Morga.
París: Librería de Garnier Hermanos.
Scott, William Henry. 1985. Cracks in the parchment curtain. Quezon City: New
Day Publishers.
Stanley, Henry E J. 1868. The Philippine islands, Molucas, Siam, Cambodia, Japan
and China at the close of the sixteenth century. London: Hakluyt Society.
214

A. Ocampo - Rizal's Morga and Views of Philippine History

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A. Ocampo - Rizal's Morga and Views of Philippine History

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A. Ocampo - Rizal's Morga and Views of Philippine History

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rizal's Morga and Views of Philippine History

Authors(s): Ambeth R. Ocampo

Antonio de Morga, lieutenant governor of the Philippines in the late

This is another preoccupation of the Spaniards who, like any other

Rizal's sarcastic rebuttal appears, surprisingly, not in his satirical

One matter has to be clarified at the outset. Rizal is often cred-

The Philippines would be grateful to you if you will write a complete

as an impartial judge; you have no selfish interests... you do not have

By this time, Rizal had begun another novel, a sequel to Noli me

manuscript but no publisher. Undaunted by the initial frustration,

1. Of the first discoveries of the Eastern islands.

Rizal's Choice of Morga

close of the Sixteenth Century , which is misleading, since the book is

Rizal's second consideration for the choice of Morga was that it

despite the thousands of documents, hundreds of historians and the

A general history of the Philippines was an ambitious undertak-

Not to be outdone, the Franciscans attributed the Spanish victory

To challenge this account, Rizal cited contemporary accounts of

religious. In addition, there were Rizal's experiences of oppression

racist in tone and interpretation. In a letter to Blumentritt, on Sep-

The Morga is an excellent book; it can be said that Morga is a mod-

Rizal's Interpretation of History

This interpretation of history makes Rizal both a boon and a bane

scholarship. Most of Rizal's historical assertions have been validated

The word "panday" in Java and Borneo means "metalworker" or

In the next chapter, the fifth, on the term of Governor General

Robles, he notes elsewhere, died before 1587. Thus his arrival in

maker! It is odd that Rizal, who read practically every word

in a word, in the art of metallurgy with relation to the founding of

Historical evidence provided by Retana is supported by recent

The Filipinos . . . [were] celebrated and skilled in navigation, but far

On the same page, Rizal laments the environmental costs of Span-

Philippine civilization. It is a vain attempt to validate Rizal' s asser-

languages and alphabets they encountered in their mission fields.

The importance of Rizal's annotations to Morga was that he tried

However, the first criticism of Rizal's historical work was not by a

These new points of view give your notes an imperishable value, an

Then he cites two defects of Rizal's scholarship which have been

Hindsight and anticlericalism are fatal defects in a purely schol-

introduction. What finally saw print was a version approved and

You wish that the Spaniards embrace us as brothers, but we do not

well, especially if it came from racist Spaniards like Quiopquiap or

Rizal was so irritated that he responded by attacking de los Reyes

1 do not know how discreet it is to raise oneself as a judge of others

As de los Reyes was fond of using Philippine terms in his work,

Rizal continues the barrage by flaunting his familiarity with the

As I based my assertion on seven contemporary writers, I do not know

Rizal is being petulant in bragging about his familiarity with the

Earlier in the essay, Rizal unconsciously unveiled his view of com-

him that public disagreements between the propagandists was coun-

Indios think it is shocking and shameful to write El Folklore Filipino

By recreating the proud pre-Hispanic civilization corrupted by

Rizal's view of Philippine historiography is expressed in his an-

I. Pre Hispanic Philippines.

II. Arrival of the Spaniards to the loss of Philippine autonomy and

III. Incorporation of the Philippines into the Spanish nation up to the

V. Races and Independent Regions which includes all Muslim sultan-

The fifth part, on Race and Independent regions, was an after-

that, as in the annotations to Morga, Rizal did not refer to non-Chris-