JOHN ALEXIS A.

CABOLIS, BS STATISTICS 1-1 SIR JASPER CHRISTIAN GAMBITO

GEED 10033: READINGS IN THE PHILIPPINE HISTORY

LESSON 3: THE DECLARATION OF PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE

ACTIVITY.

QUESTION RESPONSES

A. SOURCING THE DOCUMENT

1. Is the document Sulpicio Guevara, as the source of the document, is considered a

source a primary secondary source. Secondary sources are “the testimonies of

source? Why? anyone who is not an eyewitness” (Louis Gottschalk, 1950).

Though the latter only translated the document into English from

its original Spanish version, he is neither the original author nor

part of the issuing agency that wrote it nor an eyewitness. The

document passed through the process of translation, therefore, is

already considered processed information.

2. Do you think the Yes, as far as the document is concerned, the author is credible.

author is credible as It was competent that what was written in the documents

far as the document is includes the historical events that happened since the time the

concerned? Why? Spanish landed on the Philippines. The willingness of the source

on telling the truth is also present. The author is also a respected

individual giving him adequate respect for reliability.

3. For whom do you I think the document was intended for the Filipino People,
 think the document particularly their independence. It was also to declare that the

was intended? Why Philippines is already independent of the domination of the

do you think it was Kingdom of Spain. The document was written as a diplomatic

written? document about the declaration of independence and the

establishment of a Dictatorial Government of the Philippines and

was undersigned by a lot of respected individuals. It was a

ratification of independence.

B. COMPREHENSION

4. What are the author’s The argument of the document is the proclamation of the

main arguments? Declaration of Independence by the Dictatorial Government of

the Philippines by Emilio Aguinaldo. The document also argued

the summative narrations of all the happenings—from Magellan

to Lopez de Legazpi to all the friars and priests--did by the

Spanish along with their regime and the start of the revolution

(August 1896) to regain independence by the Filipinos, and the

cry for the Filipino revolutionists who were executed by the

Spanish government. There also included the conflicts between

Spanish and America and the war between them. The latter part

of the document described the elements of nationhood of the

country; thus, the flag, its accentuations, the national anthem,

and territories.

5. Give an example of The entire document itself is a historical fact that I learned. I was

historical fact able to read the declaration of independence of the Filipino

indisputable) that we independence of the country is a huge part of the history after

learn from this more than three centuries of being under the power of Spain and

document. to read the declarations is such a privilege.

6. What do you think I do not think there is something that needs not to be included in

are some pieces of the document. The arguments of the document are of relevance

information that and it shows the reasons why there is a need for independence. I

should have not been think, however, the document needed more information about

included in the the government that they declared. They should have included in

document? Why do the declaration a few of the general plans of action of the

you think so? government, not just the power of the president, that they created

for the ‘Pueblo Filipino’ to better understand the relevance of the

government that they established.

C. INTERPRETATION

7. Does the evidence in Yes, it does. The name of Lapu-Lapu that is Chief Kalipulako of

this document offer Mactan. This is also the first time I knew about Chief Tupas who

any information that was the last Rajah of Cebu in the Pre-Hispanic Indianized polity

you did not know of the Philippines. I also knew about Chief Sikatuna of Bohol,

before? What is this and Chiefs Soliman and Lakandula of Manila.

information?

8. Does the evidence The entire evidence supports what I have learned when I was

support or contradict primary. It completes and specifies my knowledge about the

anything you have Declaration of Independence. I learned that the government

textbook or some government. What I knew was a revolutionary government

other sources? What apropos of the revolutions that they inculcated. Although those

might this be? two forms of government are not so different, at least I knew the

specific form of government that was declared.

9. What information I think the explicitness and accuracy about the happenings—in

should you the Spanish regime and the early friendship with the

countercheck with Americans—that were mentioned. But since the document was

other sources? about the declaration of the independence, it is not something

that really needs emphasis on. What I want to countercheck, if

ever, is the translation of the document. I want to cite some other

translations of the document.

10. Does this source It gave me a better understanding of the revolution, and it opened

broaden or deepen my eyes more about the desire and thirst of the Filipinos to be

your understanding of free from the Spanish colonization. It made me see the relevance

its period? How? of independence for the oppressed. The Filipinos really fought

for independence, and it is shown in the document. And I, as a

contemporary Filipino, is very honored for what they all did.