June 12 as Flag and Anthem Day?
by Ed Aurelio C. Reyes
Kampanya para sa Kamalayan sa Kasaysayan
Government insistence on marking June 12 as independence day and as the
establishment day for the first republic in this continent has run into serious
controversy, nay debate, with historians.
The historians are saying that the June 12 declaration in Kawit, Cavite, was one of
a protectorate (or "independence" that was "under the protection of the
mighty and humane North American nation"). And the government that was formed was
a dictatorial government, which, upon the advice of Apolonario Mabini, was
changed later into a revolutionary government. It was only in September 1898 that
a constituent assembly (called "Malolos Congress") was converned, and it was in
January of the following year that upon the resultant Constitution hammered out by
that assembly the first Philippine Republic (also called "Malolos Republic") was
inaugurated.
KAMALAYSAYAN (Kampanya para sa Kamalayan sa Kasaysayan)
has chosen to take side of historicity or historical accuracy. If we are to awaken in
our contrymen an interest in our history, why feed them myths? June 12 as Independence
Day is a myth. It has always been. Earlier, we had another myth: that of celebrating
Independence on the fourth of July. In 1962, President Diosdado Macapagal moved
Independence Day from one false date to another.
But let me not be quoted as saying June 12, 1898 is not at all a significant date
in the history of our nation, the nation that was born two years before at the outbreak
of the Philippine Revolution in August 1896.
June 12 can somehow be considered our "Flag and Anthem Day." It was on that date when
the gathering before the Aguinaldo balcony in Kawit, Cavite, the same crowd that heard
General Aguinaldo proclaim the Philippines as a protectorate of the "Mighty and
Humane North American nation," first heard the melody of the Marcha Magdalo, which
was given lyrics years afterwards to finally evolve into the Lupang Hinirang that
is our present national anthem. The march was played then by a brass band. The
occasion also witnessed the first public unfurling of the Philippine flag very very
similar to the one we have now.
My mention of the Philippine flag cannot be complete without citing a historical
background to its "reverse evolution." And for readers to understand and appreciate
this point, the following points must first be clear.
1. Andres Bonifacio has been criticized for allegedly being regionalistic, having led
"only the Tagalogs," while Aguinaldo has been projected as a statesman of the entire
nation beause he led in forming and inaugurating the "Republica Filipina." The
correction of these impressions has to cite the official Katipunan meaning in using the
word "Tagalog" and also well-documented researches on the actual nationwide coverage
of the Philippine Revolution before its leadership was grabbed by Aguinaldo.
The footnote to be found on the cover page of Emilio Jacinto's Sa May Nais Makisanib
sa Katipunang Ito (For Those Who Want to Join this Association - Ken), the Katipunan primer known more widely by its nickname,
"Kartilya ng Katipunan," we find the following clarification, as worded and spelled
(italics in the original): "Sa salitang tagalog katutura'y ang lahat ng
tumubo sa Sangkapuluang ito; sa matawuid, bisaya man, iloko man,
kapangpangan man, etc. ay tagalog din."
In November 1992, the University of the Philippines Department of History and the
Asosasyon ng mga Dalubhasa at May-hilig sa Kasaysayan (ADHIKA) jointly convened in
Batac, Ilocos Norte, a national conference on the actual geographical scope of the
Katipuan-led 1896 Revolution. The converence, supported by the National Commission on
Culture and the Arts (NCCA), established in no uncertain terms the presence of the
Katipunan in provinces as far north as the Batanes in Luzon, in the Visayan islands
and as far south as Cotabato in Mindanao. The convenors have published the proceedings
in book form, titled Katipunan: Isang Pambansang Kilusan (Katipunan: Nationwide
Movement - Ken.).
2. With regards to the evolution of our flag, President Ramos would not have any reason
recently suggest changes (like putting a crescent or a ninth ray) if the orginal sun in
bonifacio's flag had been maintained up to the sewing of our present tricolor. Bonifacio's
Katagalugan (named to aptly describe people who lived near rivers and other bodies of
water) covered the entire archipelago, and the sun in his flag had an indefinite
number of rays. Aguinaldo's flags had only eight rays, clarified in the 1898 Kawit
Declaration to represent the first eight provinces that rose up against Spain. And how
did Aguinaldo decide to honor the "first eight", and not the first seven, the first nine
or the first ten in a field of more than 20 provinces? He based his decision on the
martial law proclamation of Governor Ramon Blanco covering eight provinces.
It was bad enought that the designation of the number of rays in our flag had to be
based on a martial law proclamation of a foreign colonial overlord. What was worse was
that the shrinking of the number of rays from indefinite to onoly eight also shrunk in
the people's minds the application of the world "Tagalog" from the katipunan's
archipelago-wide coverage to Aguinaldo's (or Blanco's?) "first eight provinces" that
roughly correspond now to the present-day Tagalog-speaking provinces.
It may be argued that the Moros, and the Cordillera tribes, who were never conquered
by Spain, were not categorically mentioned in the "Kartilya" footnote, and may have been
covered only by the word etcetera in the enumeration. But neither are the
Bicolanos, the Warays, or all the other lumad groups, not even the Boholanos
who had maintained an independent regime for 85 years! Neither are they represented
in Aguinaldo's (Blanco's) eight rays.
Had we kept the orignal Katipunan sun, with an indefinite number of rays, there would
have been not feelings of exclusion on the part of those who cannot be contented with
representation by one of three stars (historically, representing Luzon, Panay
and Mindanao!).
This is not to say we should now redesign the flag. After all, it has had its own place in
the heroic sturggles of our people. We are just taking the opportunity to discuss what
I called earlier in this article the "reverse evolution" of our flag. Or, in other words,
we have to know how this symnbol actually evolved from the broad to the narrow.
###
This article originally appeared in Health Alert Issue 85, July 1995. Produced by the
Health Action Information Network, Quezon City. Reprinted with permission.
Return to Sense of History
Philippine History 101
