History 2

Life, Works, & Writings of Jose Rizal

INTERROGATING THE EMPIRE

May 2012

Rizals interrogation sets the record straight by

examining:
a. claims of colonial achievement
b. motive of colonization and conversion
c. countering racist negations of the Filipino
d. presumptions of civilization and benevolence
of the empire
e. affirming the Filipinos identity and history
Rizal began to embrace a more definite anticolonial
or anti-imperialist position, beyond both liberalconservative
Catholicism
of
his
mentor
Blumentritt and the assimilationist reformism of
his colleagues at La Solidaridad.
Rizals correspondence with Blumentritt (1888)
- Blumentritt disagrees with Rizals total
rejection of colonialism, as immoral.
- Rizal rejects Blumentritts reason of state
argument:
* interests of the state are invoked to
justify policies and practices;
* According to Rizal, Spanish colonial rule
has been detrimental
to the welfare of
the Filipinos and ethically unjustified.
14-18 November 1888 Rizals reply to Blumentritt
- Philippines as a separate nation: The
Philippines is not Spain; she only belong to
Spain [by conquest] and she has yet to
enjoy the same rights of sovereignty as
Spain
Rizal was still debating with his mentor (Rizals
next letter to Blumentritt 22 November 1888).
- great deal was given to the Spaniards
blood, land, lives, freedom, and gift of
mankind.
- if Philippines had not been acquired by
Spain, she would have absorb Islam.
*irrelevance: the issue was colonialism,
not Islam or
Catholicism.
Rizals argument against Blumentritt could well
apply to the blatantly imperialist thesis of Fr.
Pablo Pastells (another Rizals former mentor).
During Rizals exile in Dapitan, Pastells engaged
him in an extended debate by correspondence
over the Catholic dogma.
Pastells second letter (8 December 1888)
jesuitically violated an argument not to talk about
political matters.
- (1) the right of Spain to the occupation and
much later, the dominion, of the Philippines
was a divine and natural right
- (2) the benefits for the Philippines from the
occupation and dominion by Spain, resulting
from the system of legislation, government,
administration, and culture, which Spain
adopted and employed, strengthen the fact
and right of her possession
- (3) united with Spain, the Philippines will
run the run the course of true progress and
finish the race with flying colors; but
separated from her, she will rush headlong
into the chaos of anarchy, slavery, and
savagery.

Letters of Rizal passed thru the military

commander of Dapitan, ignored Fr. Pastells
provocative argument in his long reply (8 January
1893).
L.M. Guerreros comment on Rizal work on the
Morga seems strange, if not altogether
uninformed. This is in direct contradiction to
what Rizal had written to Blumentritt re the
reception to his edition of Morga (26 May 1890).
For Dr. Quibuyen, Rizals Morga was not a waste of
time and was not ignored, for a most crucial
historical reason: of all the things of the
Propaganda Movement, it was the one piece that
supplied
the
cornerstone
for
Bonifacios
Katipunan ideology.
Juan Lunas attribution of excessive patriotism
was
provoked
by
Rizals
unrestrained
denunciation of Spanish colonialism and his
debunking
of
the
mission
civilisatrice
(colonization or spread of civilization) claimed by
Catholic Church.
- Death of Magellan or Victory of LapuLapu and the Flight of the Spaniards. Lunas
reference to Rizals excessive patriotism
(echoing (echoing Isabelo de los Reyes)
should be seen.
- Blood Compact betrays his perspective
re Spain and the Philippines.
Contra de los Reyes
Rizal replied to Lunas letter concerning de los
Reyes critique of the Rizal-Morga.
Rizals (somewhat pugnacious) open reply to de los
Reyes (La Solidaridad, 31 October 1890) is
instructive of his agenda.
- de los Reyes had raised an issue that was
central to Rizals historical project, and thus
could not be ignored: the true character
that [pre-colonial] civilization and what is
still preserved of it in the present customs
of the people.
The fundamental disagreement between them, acc
to Rizal: consists in the desire of Mr. le dos
Reyes to make our ancient noble families appear
like families of bandits, the children as enemies
of their parents, basing himself on the testimony
of Fr. Rada, confirmed by Fr. San Antonio, a later,
but very much later, complier
Pigafettas account, notes Rizal that the early
Filipinos lives with justice and had peaceful,
noble, and respectful customs.
Fr. Chirino was so surprised at the respect
children had for their parents that he could not
understand why they never dared to pronounce
their names.
Aduarte asserts that despite easy divorce, once
they came to have one child, that didnt separate
anymore out of love for their offspring.
Contra Barrantes
Vicente Barantes, high govt official, univ. prof.,
member of Spanish academy, and officially
recognized Spanish authority in the Philippines,
received more devastating reply from Rizal
Barrantes rabidly racist articles in some

History 2

INTERROGATING THE EMPIRE

Life, Works, & Writings of Jose Rizal

May 2012

academic journals in Spain but also for his highheadedness and despotism as a govt official (also
written in Rizal-Blumentritt letter, 13 April 1887).
Barrantes El Teatro Tagalo, appeared as fourpart series in the journal La Ilustracion Artistica
in Barcelona: denigrated Filipino theater as crude
and primitive, and spoke of the natives as so
stupid (like monkeys) and they could not even
learn or assimilate from the more refined
Japanese theater; so devoid of theatrical
imagination that they never even thought of
transforming the Passion epic that Spain brought
to the islands into a stage play as Spaniards had
done in peninsula.
Rizal replied (in La Solidaridad, 15 June 1889) by
poiting out Barrantes innumerable errors.
Barrantes blant
comments:
Barrantes
writes:
the
conquerors
left us, they
gave
slight
value to the
land and its
people

- China and
Japan exerted
great
influences on
the
Philippines
before
the
Spaniards
- Filipino lack
spirit of
Assimilation
for not being
able to imbibe
the finer
elements of
Chinese and
Japanese
theater.

errors

of

fact

and

Rizals

Rizal counters:
- Legazpi concluded with the
natives of Cebu a treaty of
defensive and offensive alliance,
the Spanish soldiers fighting
under the command of Indio
Tupas
- Testimony of Morga, Colin,
Chirino, and Gaspar de San
Agustin who say that Filipinos
had many industries before the
arrival of the Spaniards and that
they lost them little by little since
they took possession of the
country.
- Chinese came to Philippines as
traders only and have no political
influence.

- Chinese and Japanese theater

had not been introduced into the
archipelago.
*it appears that the Intelligent
and superior Spanish race took
14 century to learn the Latin
drama of the roman conquerors
than the stupid and lazy Indio
which only took 1 century to
learn Spanish drama.

Studies in a Dying Colonialism

-study of the Philippine underdevelopment, longest
of Rizals essays

-1st published from July 15-September 15, 1890.

Rizal acknowledged that Indulgence exists.
Rizals Definition of Indulgence
-In the sense of little love for work, lack of
activity, etc. but work of activity does not
only mean physical labor but also
intellectual activity.
-it does not only mean in the sense of
physical laziness, but also of moral and
intellectual apathy, the lack of motivation,
initiative, enterprise and even moral
passion.
Reasons for the Filipino Indulgence
1. Impact of Imperial conquest and the
ensuing colonial policies and practices.
- Brought about by the conquest, wars
and continuing colonial rule.
A. The recruitment of laborers to
work in the construction of the
galleons and to man the ships
going to Acapulco.
2. Climate
- Rain wipe out the furrows, the floods
will drown the planting, weeds and
shrubs will grow everywhere, and on
seeing so much futile labor, the
farmer drops his hoe and abandons
his plow.
3. Introduction of Gambling
- This breeds dislike for steady and
difficult work by its promise of easy
money and its appeal to the
emotions.
4. The abuse of human rights by the
agencies of the state
- Endless worry of people knowing that they
are liable to a secret report, an
administrative action and to be accuse of
being a filibuster or a suspect.
5. Lack of government support for any
commercial and agricultural enterprise
that is not in the hands of religious
corporations and government officials.
- The best estate, the best land is in
the hands of the religious
possessions.
6. Sixth, racial discrimination against
natives in all aspects of life.
7. Unenlightened and dehumanizing
educational system.
- The education of the Filipino from
birth until grave is brutalizing,
depressing and antihuman.
- Racist friar instructors that for the
five or ten years that youth spend in
school, they are subjected to the
daily preaching that lowers human
dignity, gradually or brutally killing
their self respect.

Rizals counter indulgence

History 2

Life, Works, & Writings of Jose Rizal

INTERROGATING THE EMPIRE

May 2012

-Old writers like Chirino, Morga and Colin

are pleased to describe the pre-colonial
Filipinos as good aptitudes for anything
they take up, devoted, and irascible, and
firm, very clean and neat in their persons
and clothing, and of good look and bearing.
*Morga
- Filipinos have pleasant manners, aptitude
for music, drama, dancing and singing.
Prolegomena to a National History
Filipinas detro de cien anos

History 2
May 2012

Life, Works, & Writings of Jose Rizal

INTERROGATING THE EMPIRE

History 2

Life, Works, & Writings of Jose Rizal

INTERROGATING THE EMPIRE

May 2012

Rizal began to embrace a more definite

anticolonial or anti-imperialist position, beyond
both liberal-conservative Catholicism of his mentor
Blumentritt and the assimilationist reformism of his
colleagues at La Solidaridad.
Rizals correspondence with Blumentritt (1888)
- Blumentritt disagrees with Rizals total
rejection of colonialism, as immoral.
- Blumentritt kept cautioning Rizal not to
get
involved
in
any
revolutionary
undertakings.
- Rizal rejects Blumentritts reason of state
argument:
* interests of the state are invoked to
justify policies and
practices;
* Spanish colonial rule has been
detrimental to the welfare of
the
Filipinos and ethically unjustified.
14-18 November 1888 Rizals reply to Blumentritt
- Philippines as a separate nation: The
Philippines
is
not
Spain; she only belong to Spain [by
conquest] and she has yet to enjoy the
same rights of sovereignty as Spain
Rizal writes apologetically having completed his
demolition of Blumentritts staats raison: It is a
question of life and death for my native country.
Rizal was still debating with his mentor (Rizals
next letter to Blumentritt 22 November 1888).
- great deal was given to the Spaniards
blood, land, lives, freedom, and gift of
mankind.
- if Philippines had not been acquired by
Spain, she would have absorb Islam.
*irrelevance: the issue was colonialism,
not Islam or Catholicism.
Rizals argument against Blumentritt could well
apply to the blatantly imperialist thesis of Fr.
Pablo Pastells (another Rizals former mentor).
During Rizals exile in Dapitan, Pastells engaged
him in an extended debate by correspondence
over the Catholic dogma.
Pastells second letter (8 December 1888)
jesuitically violated an argument not to talk about
political matters.
- (1) the right of Spain to the occupation and
much later, the dominion, of the Philippines
was a divine and natural right
- (2) the benefits for the Philippines from the
occupation and dominion by Spain, resulting
from the system of legislation, government,
administration, and culture, which Spain
adopted and employed, strengthen the fact
and right of her possession

- (3) united with Spain, the Philippines will

run the run the course of true progress and
finish the race with flying colors; but
separated from her, she will rush headlong
into the chaos of anarchy, slavery, and
savagery.
Letters of Rizal passed thru the military
commander of Dapitan, ignored Fr. Pastells
provocative argument in his long reply (8 January
1893).
Affirmation of nationhood and the negation of
colonialism was fundamental for Rizal, a matter
of life and death.
L.M. Guerreros comment on Rizal work on the
Morga seems strange, if not altogether
uninformed. This is in direct contradiction to
what Rizal had written to Blumentritt re the
reception to his edition of Morga (26 May 1890).
For Dr. Quibuyen, Rizals Morga was not a waste of
time and was not ignored, for a most crucial
historical reason: of all the things of the
Propaganda Movement, it was the one piece that
supplied
the
cornerstone
for
Bonifacios
Katipunan ideology. The Fili was not well
received by the assimilationist M. del Pilar, who
regarded Fili as inferior to Noli, literary and
politically, a view that was in stark contrat to
Rizals opinion (as well as the opinions of Lopez
Jaena, M. Ponce, J. Basa, and A. Luna).
Juan Lunas attribution of excessive patriotism
was
provoked
by
Rizals
unrestrained
denunciation of Spanish colonialism and his
debunking
of
the
mission
civilisatrice
(colonization or spread of civilization) claimed by
Catholic Church.
- Death of Magellan or Victory of LapuLapu and the Flight of the Spaniards. Lunas
reference to Rizals excessive patriotism
(echoing (echoing Isabelo de los Reyes)
should be seen.
- Blood Compact betrays his perspective
re Spain and the Philippines. There is a
striking imbalance on his Rembrandt-style
painting. It doesnt only marginalizes
Sikatuna but it makes him look insecure,
while it projects Legaspi seems relaxed,
Sikatuna envinces tension as he holds on to
his native sword.
Contra de los Reyes
Rizal replied to Lunas letter concerning de los
Reyes critique of the Rizal-Morga.
Rizals (somewhat pugnacious) open reply to de los
Reyes (La Solidaridad, 31 October 1890) is
instructive of his agenda.
- de los Reyes had raised an issue that was
central to Rizals historical project, and thus
could not be ignored: the true character
that [pre-colonial] civilization and what is
still preserved of it in the present customs
of the people.
The fundamental disagreement between them, acc
to Rizal: consists in the desire of Mr. le dos
Reyes to make our ancient noble families appear

History 2

Life, Works, & Writings of Jose Rizal

INTERROGATING THE EMPIRE

May 2012

like families of bandits, the children as enemies

of their parents, basing himself on the testimony
of Fr. Rada, confirmed by Fr. San Antonio, a later,
but very much later, complier
Rizals first salvo is to take de los Reyes to task in
his claim that: Consensus among authors who
had no reason to lie these cases ought to be
taken into account
Pigafettas account, notes Rizal that the early
Filipinos lives with justice and had peaceful,
noble, and respectful customs. Fr. Chirino was
so surprised at the respect children had for their
parents that he could not understand why they
never dared to pronounce their names. Aduarte
asserts that despite easy divorce, once they came
to have one child, that didnt separate anymore
out of love for their offspring.
Rizal asks de los Reyes how he could believe
Radas account when all the evidence points to
the contrary, esp. when contrasted with European
practices.
Rizal minces no words in confronting his
compatriot with what seemed to be a unwitting
complicity with what we would now call,
following Edward Said, orientalism (Western
study of Eastern culture).
Rizal delivered his coup-de-grace: On the question
of the history of the civilization of the ancient
Filipinos, I believe I have read from beginning to
end all contemporary authors except Fr.
Plasencia and one whose work had been lost. I
never assert anything on my own authority, I cite
texts and when I cite them, I have them before
me.

Rizals had it out with Ilocano folklorist, led by de

los Reyes, whose Ilocanisms and insistence on
calling themselves Ilocanos instead of Filipinos
vexed Rizal (as mentioned on Rizal-Blumentritt,
30 April 1888).
Contra Barrantes
Vicente Barantes, high govt official, univ. prof.,
member of Spanish academy, and officially
recognized Spanish authority in the Philippines,
received more devastating reply from Rizal
Barrantes rabidly racist articles in some
academic journals in Spain but also for his highheadedness and despotism as a govt official (also
written in Rizal-Blumentritt letter, 13 April 1887).
Barrantes El Teatro Tagalo, appeared as fourpart series in the journal La Ilustracion Artistica
in Barcelona: denigrated Filipino theater as crude
and primitive, and spoke of the natives as so
stupid (like monkeys) and they could not even
learn or assimilate from the more refined
Japanese theater; so devoid of theatrical
imagination that they never even thought of
transforming the Passion epic that Spain brought
to the islands into a stage play as Spaniards had
done in peninsula.
Rizal replied (in La Solidaridad, 15 June 1889) by
poiting out Barrantes innumerable errors.
Barrantes blant errors of fact and Rizals
comments:
Barrantes writes:
Rizal counters:
1. the conquerors left 1.
us, they gave slight
value to the land and its
people