MODULE 2

19TH CENTURY PHILIPPINES AS RIZAL’S CONTEXT

LEARNING OUTCOMES
1. Appraise the link between the individual and the society.

2. Analyze the various social, political, economic and cultural changes that occurred in the
19th century.

3. Understand Jose Rizal in the context of his time.

The Philippines in the 19th century as Rizal’s context

ECONOMIC
In his novel, “El Filibusterismo,” Jose Rizal describes a well-attended party hosted by
a rich Chinese businessman in Binondo, in which “several merchants … were complaining
about the state of business. Everything was going badly, business was paralyzed, exchange
rates with Europe were exorbitant. They asked a jeweler, Simoun, the principal character, for
guidance. Simoun hinted at a few ideas…. Every time [they] proposed a solution, Simoun
responded with a brutally sarcastic smile. ‘Bah! Idiocy!’”

Until one exasperated man asked for his opinion.

“My opinion?” Simoun asked. “Study nations that have indeed prospered and do what they
are doing.” It is clear that Rizal was speaking through Simoun. Rizal, like Simoun, had traveled
to Japan, the United States, England, Germany and France, then as now the leading industrial
nations of the world. He had studied them and learned how the United States had copied
England, its mother country, and how Germany, France, Belgium and other European nations
had learned from each other’s experiences the means through which they could industrialize
and become powerful.

The Philippines, however, under both colonial Spain and America followed no policy model
except that imposed by its mother countries, which was to remain feudal and agricultural. After
independence, it was the same, the Philippines adopting policies dictated by US development
agencies and the international financial institutions. Among such policies are globalization,
liberalization, deregulation and dependence on foreign aid and investments. These policies
have not worked for our people even after more than six decades of independence.
 Rizal’s advice on economic development can be compared to that of Deng Xiaopeng,
the architect of China’s miraculous climb from the bottom of the world’s economic ladder to
No. 2. Deng famously said, “It does not matter whether the cat is black or white, so long
as it catches mice.” In short, pragmatism. When policies do not work as expected, change
them. For too long we have followed policies recommended by foreigners. It is time we follow
not the path shown to us by them, but the real path taken by developing countries that have
become rich—like our neighbors Japan, Korea, China, Malaysia, Singapore and Taiwan,
which started from the same level of poverty and backwardness as our country’s
In Rizal’s story, Simoun was further asked by a persistent listener, “And why are they
prospering?,” referring to the rich nations. Simoun replied with a shrug. Obvious ba?

The Galleon Trade

On September 14, 1815, the galleon trade between the Philippines and Mexico ended
a few years before Mexico gained independence from Spain in 1821. The Spanish Crown took
direct control of the country, and was governed directly from Madrid. The opening of the Suez
Canal and the invention of steam ships, which reduced the travel time from Spain to the
Philippines to 40 days, made this more manageable.
Galleon trade became the fundamental income-generating business for Spanish
colonists living in the Philippine Islands with a total of 110 Manila galleons set sail in the 250
years of the Manila-Acapulco galleon trade (1565 to 1815).

(The Galeon Andalucia, a replica of the 17th Century vessels that sailed between Manila
and Acapulco during the galleon trade)

The Manila galleons or Manila-Acapulco galleons sailed the Pacific for nearly three
centuries, bringing to Spain their cargoes of luxury goods, economic benefits and cultural
exchange.
However, galleon trade benefited only a very small coterie of privilege Spaniards – the
Spanish governor, members of the consulado (merchants with consular duties and rights)
usually insulares, and Spanish residents in Manila.
Positive results of the galleon trade were the intercultural exchanges between the
Philippines and the Americans, symbolized by no less than the Mexican-made Virgin of
Antipolo, chosen as the patroness of the sailors, who protected them from the untold perils
across the Pacific.
 The mango de Manila, tamarind and rice, the carabao (known by 1737 in Mexico),
cockfighting, Chinese tea and textiles, fireworks display, tuba (coconut wine) making came to
Mexico through the trans-Pacific trade.
In exchange, the return voyage brought innumerable and valuable flora and fauna into
the Philippines: avocado, guava, papaya, pineapple, horses and cattle.
The moro-moro, moriones festival, and the image of the Black Nazarene of Quiapo,
were also of Mexican origins.
The Manila-Acapulco galleon trade began when Andres de Urdaneta in convoy under
Miguel Lopez de Legaspi, discovered a return route from Cebu City to Mexico in 1565.

How did the galleon trade end?

On September 14, 1815, the galleon trade between the Philippines and Mexico ended
a few years before Mexico gained independence from Spain in 1821. ... The opening of the
Suez Canal and the invention of steam ships, which reduced the travel time from Spain to the
Philippines to 40 days, made this more manageable.

The Opening of the Suez Canal

The Suez Canal is a man-made waterway connecting the Mediterranean Sea to the
Indian Ocean via the Red Sea. It enables a more direct route for shipping between Europe
and Asia, effectively allowing for passage from the North Atlantic to the Indian Ocean without
having to circumnavigate the African continent. The waterway is vital for international trade
and, as a result, has been at the center of conflict since it opened in 1869.
Where Is the Suez Canal?
The Suez Canal stretches 120 miles from Port Said on the Mediterranean Sea in Egypt
southward to the city of Suez (located on the northern shores of the Gulf of Suez). The canal
separates the bulk of Egypt from the Sinai Peninsula. It took 10 years to build, and was
officially opened on November 17, 1869.
Owned and operated by the Suez Canal Authority, the Suez Canal’s use is intended
to be open to ships of all countries, be it for purposes of commerce or war—though that hasn’t
always been the case.
Construction of the Suez Canal
Interest in a marine route connecting the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea dates
back to ancient times. A series of small canals connecting the Nile River (and, thus, by
extension, the Mediterranean) to the Red Sea were in use as early as 2000 B.C.
However, a direct connection between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea was
considered impossible over concerns that they sat at distinct levels of altitude.
Therefore, various overland routes—using horse-drawn vehicles and, later, trains—
were employed most notably by Great Britain, which conducted significant trade with its
colonies in present-day India and Pakistan.
Linant de Bellefonds
The idea of a large canal providing a direct route between the two bodies of water was
first discussed in the 1830s, thanks to the work of French explorer and engineer Linant de
Bellefonds, who specialized in Egypt.
Bellefonds performed a survey of the Isthmus of Suez and confirmed that the
Mediterranean and Red seas were, contrary to popular belief, at the same level of altitude.
This meant a canal without locks could be built, making construction significantly easier.
By the 1850s, seeing an opportunity for Egypt and the Ottoman Empire, which
governed the country at the time, Khedive Said Pasha (who oversaw Egypt and the Sudan for
the Ottomans) had granted French diplomat Ferdinand de Lesseps permission to create a
company to construct a canal. That company eventually became known as the Suez Canal
Company, and it was given a 99-year lease over the waterway and surrounding area.
Lesseps’ first action was to create the Commission Internationale pour le percement
de l’isthme des Suez—or International Commission for the Piercing of the Isthmus of Suez.
The commission was made up of 13 experts from seven countries, including, most notably,
Alois Negrelli, a leading civil engineer.
Negrelli effectively built upon the work of Bellefonds and his original survey of the
region and took a leading role in developing the architectural plans for the Suez Canal. The
commission’s final report was completed in 1856; two years later, the Suez Canal Company
was formally established.
Construction of the Suez Canal
Construction began, at the northernmost Port Said end of the canal, in early 1859. The
excavation work took 10 years, and an estimated 1.5 million people worked on the project.
Unfortunately, over the objections of many British, French and American investors in
the canal, many of these were slave laborers, and it is believed that tens of thousands died
while working on the Suez, from cholera and other causes.
Political turmoil in the region negatively impacted the construction of the canal. Egypt
was ruled by Britain and France at the time, and there were several rebellions against colonial
rule.
This, coupled with the limitations of construction technology at the time, caused the
total costs of building the Suez Canal to balloon to $100 million, more than double the original
estimate.
Suez Canal Opens
Ismail Pasha, Khedive of Egypt and the Sudan, formally opened the Suez Canal on
November 17, 1869.
Officially, the first ship to navigate through the canal was the imperial yacht of French
Empress Eugenie, the L’Aigle, followed by the British ocean liner Delta.
However, the HMS Newport, a British navy ship, was actually the first to enter the
waterway, with its captain having navigated it to the front of the line under the cover of
darkness the night before the ceremonial opening. The captain, George Nares, was officially
reprimanded for the deed, but also secretly lauded by the British government for his efforts in
promoting the country’s interests in the region.
 The S.S. Dido, was the first vessel to pass through the Suez Canal from South to North.
At least initially, only steamships were able to use the canal, as sailing vessels still had
difficulty navigating the narrow channel in the region’s tricky winds.
Although traffic was less than expected during the canal’s first two years of operation,
the waterway had a profound impact on world trade and played a key role in the colonization
of Africa by European powers. Still, the owners of the Suez experienced financial troubles,
and Ismail Pasha and others were forced to sell their stock shares to Great Britain in 1875.
France, however, was still the majority shareholder in the canal.
Suez Canal During Wartime
In 1888, the Convention of Constantinople decreed that the Suez Canal would operate
as a neutral zone, under the protection of the British, who had by then assumed control of the
surrounding region, including Egypt and the Sudan.
The British famously defended the canal from attack by the Ottoman Empire in 1915
during World War I.
The Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1936 reaffirmed Britain’s control over the important
waterway, which became vital during World War II, when the Axis powers of Italy and German
attempted to capture it. Despite the supposedly neutral status of the canal, Axis ships were
prohibited from accessing it for much of the war.
After the end of World War II, in 1951, Egypt withdrew from the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty.
Gamal Abdel Nasser
Following years of negotiation, the British withdrew their troops from the Suez Canal
in 1956, effectively handing control over to the Egyptian government, under the leadership of
President Gamal Abdel Nasser.
Nasser quickly moved to nationalize the canal’s operation, and did so by transferring
ownership to the Suez Canal Authority, a quasi-government agency, in July 1956.
Both Great Britain and the United States were angered by this move, as well as by the
Egyptian government’s efforts to establish relations with Soviet Union at the time. Initially, they
withdrew promised financial support of planned improvements to the Suez, including
construction of the Aswan Dam.
However, they along with other European powers were further enraged by the Nasser
government’s decision to close the Straits of Tiran, a body of water linking Israel with the Red
Sea, to all Israeli ships.
Suez Crisis
In response, in October 1956, troops from Britain, France and Israel threatened to
invade Egypt, leading to the so-called Suez Crisis.
Fearing an escalation in the conflict, Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs
Lester B. Pearson recommended the establishment of a United Nations peacekeeping force,
the first of its kind, to protect the canal and ensure access to all. The U.N. ratified Pearson’s
proposal on November 4, 1956.
 Although the Suez Canal Company continued to operate the waterway, the U.N. force-
maintained access as well as peace in the nearby Sinai Peninsula. This was not the last time
the Suez Canal would play a central role in international conflict, however.
Arab-Israeli War
At the onset of the Six-Day War of 1967, Nasser ordered the U.N. peacekeeping forces
out of the Sinai Peninsula.
Israel immediately sent troops into the region, and ultimately took control of the east
bank of the Suez Canal. Not wanting Israeli ships to have access to the waterway, Nasser
imposed a blockade on all maritime traffic.
Notably, 15 cargo ships that had already entered the canal at the time of blockade’s
implementation remained trapped there for years.
U.S. and British minesweepers eventually cleared the Suez and made it once again
safe for passage. New Egyptian President Anwar Sadat reopened the canal in 1975, and led
a convoy of ships northbound to Port Said.
However, Israeli troops remained in the Sinai Peninsula until 1981, when, as part of
the Egypt–Israel Peace Treaty of 1979, the so-called Multinational Force and Observers was
stationed there to maintain order and protect the canal. They remain in place to this day.
Suez Canal Today
Today, an average of 50 ships navigate the canal daily, carrying more than 300 million
tons of goods per year.
In 2014, the Egyptian government oversaw at $8 billion expansion project that widened
the Suez from 61 meters to 312 meters for a 21-mile distance. The project took one year to
complete and, as a result, the canal can accommodate ships to pass both directions
simultaneously

Philippines in the 19th Century

Social Structure
The Filipinos in the 19th century had suffered from feudalistic and master slave
relationship by the Spaniards. Their social structure is ranked into three groups:
· Highest class – the people that belong in this class include the Spaniards, peninsulares
and the friars. They have the power and authority to rule over the Filipinos. They enjoyed their
positions and do what they want.

→The Spanish officials

→The Peninsulares (Spaniards who were born in Spain). They held the most important
government jobs, and made up the smallest number of the population.

→The Friars are members of any of certain religious orders of men, especially the four
mendicant orders (Augustinians, Carmelites, Dominicans, and Franciscans).

· Middle Class – the people that belongs into this class includes the natives, mestizos
and the criollos.
→ Natives – the pure Filipinos

→The Mestizos are the Filipinos of mixed indigenous Filipino or European or Chinese
ancestry.
 Lowest class – this class includes the Filipinos only.
→The Indios are the poor people having pure blood Filipin which ruled by the Spaniards.

Political System and the Sources of Abuses in the Administrative System

The Spaniards ruled the Filipinos in the 19th century. The Filipinos became the
Spaniard’s slave. The Spaniards claimed their taxes and they worked under the power of the
Spaniards. Sources of Abuses in the Administrative System:
1. There was an appointment of officials with inferior qualifications, without dedication of
duty and moral strength to resist corruption for material advancement. Through the power and
authority the Spaniards possess, they collected and wasted the money of the Filipinos.
2. There were too complicated functions to the unions of the church and the state.
3. Manner of obtaining the position.
Through the power that the Spaniards possess, they had the right to appoint the
different positions. The appointment of positions is obtained by the highest bidder which is the
Governor-general of the country.
4. Term of office
Term of office or term in office is the length of time a person (usually a politician)
serves in a particular office is dependent on the desire of the King of the country.
5. Distance of the colony
The Spanish officials traveled to various places and the needs of the Philippines were
ignored. They did not put too much attention to the needs of the other people. There were
inadequate administrative supervisions, they were unable to face and solve the problems
regarding to the Philippines. There were also overlapping of powers and privileges of officials
which made them competitive
6. Personal interest over the welfare of the State
7. They were corrupt during the 19th century and the Alcaldias/Alcalde is considered as the
most corrupt over the other corrupts. The Alcaldias/Alcalde includes the administrators, judges
and military commandants. They usually have P25/mo liberal allowances and privileges to
take a certain percentage of money from the total amount of taxes. There were also monopoly
trades or business practices known as indulto para comerciar.
Educational System
There are lots of criticisms received in the educational system of the Philippines in the late
19th century. Below are the following:
1. Overemphasis on religious matters
The power of religious orders remained one of the great constants, over the centuries,
of Spanish colonial rule. The friars of the Augustinian, Dominican, and Franciscan orders
conducted many of the executive and control functions of government on the local level. They
were responsible for education and health measures. These missionaries emphasized the
teachings of the Catholic religion starting from the primary level to the tertiary level of
education.
2. Obsolete teaching methods
Their methods are outdated.
3. Limited curriculum
The students in the primary level were taught the Christian Doctrines, the reading of
Spanish books and a little of the natives’ language. Science and Mathematics were not very
much taught to the students even in the universities. Aside from the Christian Doctrines taught,
Latin was also taught to the students instead of Spanish.
4. Poor classroom facilities
5. Absence of teaching materials
6. Primary education was neglected
7. Absence of academic freedom
The absence of academic freedom in Spain’s educational system was extended to the
schools that Spaniards established in the Philippines. Learning in every level was largely by
rote. Students memorized and repeated the contents of book which they did not understand.
In most cases knowledge was measured in the ability of the students to memorize, largely
hampering intellectual progress.
8. Prejudice against Filipinos in the schools of higher learning
In entirety, education during the Spanish regime was privileged only to Spanish
students. The supposed Philippine education was only a means to remain in the Philippines
as colonizers. For this reason, the Filipinos became followers to the Spaniards in their own
country. Even auspicious Filipinos became cronies, to the extent that even their life styles
were patterned from the Spaniards.
9. Friar control over the system
The friars controlled the educational system during the Spanish times. They owned
different schools, ranging from the primary level to the tertiary levels of education. The
missionaries took charge in teaching, controlling and maintaining the rules and regulations
imposed to the students.
Economic Development and the Rise of Filipino Nationalism
The country was opened to foreign trade at the end of the 18th century which resulted
in the rapid rise of foreign firms in Manila. This stimulated agricultural production and export
of sugar, rice hemp and tobacco. The number of families which prospered from foreign
commerce and trade were able to send their sons for an education in Europe. Filipinos who
were educated abroad were able to absorb the intellectual development in Europe.

Factors Contributed to the Development of Filipino Nationalism:

Opening of the Philippines to International Trade and the Rise of the Middle Class
Manila was opened to foreign trade which brought prosperity to the Filipinos and
Chinese mestizo resulting to the existence of middle class.
Influx of European Liberalism

Connects Mediterranean and red sea; shortened distance between Europe and Orient
Results: (a) Philippines became closer to Europe and Spain (b) encouraged European
travelers to come to our country (c) exodus of literal ideas from Europe to the Philippines (d)
more educated and young Filipinos were able to study abroad
Spanish Revolution of 1868 and the Liberal Regime of Carlos Maria Dela Torre(1869-
1871)

Glorious September Revolution of 1868: Queen Isabela II was overthrown resulting to

the rise of liberalism in Spain. Generals Juan Prim and Francisco Serrano appointed dela
Torre as the governor-general in the Philippines (true democrat). Most liberal governor-
general walked the streets in civilian clothes and dismissed his alabaderos (halberdiers) – the
governor’s security guards – and went unescorted.
· Accomplishments:
(1) abolished censorship of the press and allowed unlimited discussions of political problems
and proclaimed freedom of speech
(2) abolished flogging as a punishment
(3) curtailed abuses particularly the tribute and the polo
(4) allowed secular priests to be assigned to vacant parishes or seminaries and created an
office which would prevent abuses by members of the regular religious orders
(5) reformed the Royal Audiencia to bring about speedier administration of justice
(6) decreed educational reforms, ordered the setting up of medical, pharmacy, and vocational
schools
(7) created the Council of the Philippines on December 4, 1870 which was a consultative body
to study Philippine problems and propose solutions to them.
Rafael de Izquierdo (1871-1873), the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 and the Execution of
GomBurZa (February 17, 1872)
Monarchy was restored in Spain (Prince Amadeo of Savoy, son of Victor Emmanuel I)
ascended the throne in 1870.
April 4, 1871: Isquierdo became the governor-general; “with crucifix in one hand and a
sword in the other” restored press censorship (b) prohibited all talk on political matters and
secularization of the parishes (c) disapproved the establishment of arts and trades in Manila
(d) dismissed natives and mestizos in the civil and military service.
→Cavite Mutiny (January 20, 1872)

About 200 Filipino soldiers and workers in Fort San Felipe mutinied, under the
leadership of Sgt La Madrid; caused by Izquierdo’s abolition of the exemption of the Filipino
workers from polo and paying tributes; mutineers were able to kill the fort commander and
some soldiers; mutiny leaders and participants were arrested and shot to death
→GomBurZa (fought for the Filipinization of parishes and champions of liberalism and
humanitarianism)

They were charged of sedition and rebellion due to the false testimony of Francisco
Zaldua (former Bicolano soldier and was bribed by the Spanish prosecutors to implicate them
as the masterminds of the mutiny). Military Court: three priests guilty and sentenced them to
die by garrote.
Originally, Rizal’s plan was to take up priesthood and become a Jesuit father. When
he heard of the martyrdom of GomBurZa, he changed his mind and swore to dedicate his life
to vindicate the victims of Spanish oppression

ASSESSMENT
REFLECTION PAPER
1. Describe the nineteenth -century Philippines based on the economic, social and political
aspect.
2. How will you compare it in the twentieth century?

Send your reflection paper to [email protected] Do not forget to indicate your name
and subject.