The triumph of tagalog and the dominance of the discourse on english language politics in the philippines during the american colonial period 5

The Tagalog essays on the Tagalog language published in the daily Muling Pagsilang from 1903-1908 were the first printed articulations of opposition to the English language policy.. The

CHAPTER FIVE THE HISTORIOGRAPHY OF THE TAGALOG CHALLENGE TO ENGLISH

One of the most inspiring stories in Philippine history is the story of the “seditious plays”

of the first decade of the 20th century Following in the heels of the American military occupation was the imposition of a strictly enforced censorship against any utterance against the American government and any expression of independence As the press was rigidly monitored, brave Tagalog writers who wanted to express their desire for independence turned to the theater

Using the Tagalog zarzuela form, a drama that included singing, the playwrights wrote allegorical stories, intentionally made with a thin plot so as to pass the American censors and so

as to encourage adlibbing Vibrant sets, music, clandestine attempts to show the Philippine flag315, thinly-veiled characters meant to represent the Filipino motherland or the oppressive American government, adlibbed, emotional speeches about the oppression by America of the Filipino, emotionally involved audiences: all these make the rise of “seditious plays” one of the most colorful moments in Philippine history Add to this the way in which riots broke out in many of the performances or the sensational way in which playwrights, actors, stage hands, theater managers and sometimes even the members of the audience would be hauled off to jail in the middle of the performance and you have an example of when the production of the drama becomes even more dramatic than the drama itself

Hindi Aco Patay (I Am Not Dead) by Juan Matapang Cruz caused a riot during its

performance of May 8, 1903 because American soldiers attempted to stop the performance after the flag of the Katipunan was raised Ten actors and the playwright were arrested later.316 Also

315

Though the Flag Law became an official law only in 1907, the display of the Philippine flag was considered an act of disloyalty to the United States The studies of the seditious plays recount how the display of a flag during a performance would spark either an arrest or a riot In one of her lectures during

my university days, theater scholar Doreen Fernandez talked about how the performers would come up with inventive ways to display but the also quickly dismantle the flag It would be used as a woman’s kerchief which could easily be flashed and then withdrawn throughout the performance or it could be “assembled”

by two women standing side by side with the designs of their long skirts containing the two halves of the flag

316

Tomas Capatan Hernandez, The Emergence of Modern Drama in the Philippines (1898-1912),

Philippine Studies Working Paper, (Honolulu: Asian Studies Program, University of Hawaii, 1976), 113

in 1903, Juan Abad, author of Tanikalang Guinto (Golden Chain), was arrested during the

performance of the play.317 The most famous of the seditious plays is Kahapon, Ngayon at Bukas, (Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow) which caused a riot during its initial performance on

May 14, 1903 and caused its author (who also acted in the play), Aurelio Tolentino, to be

sentenced to life in prison The description of the reaction of the audience of Kahapon, Ngayon

at Bukas points to the deeply felt sentiments Filipinos had against the Americans and for

independence:

The audience on the night of May 14 was receptive and responsive They cheered the enumeration of revolutionary martyrs’ names (not in the script, but they could have easily been inserted during one of the many eulogies delivered in the play) They applauded whenever Tolentino and ‘the woman accompanying him’ spoke, and they kept silent or hissed every time the actors playing America and the American government delivered their pieces In the course of the performance, they frequently called for Tolentino, who stepped out of character to take a bow of acknowledgement ‘The

audience displayed its greatest pleasure during that part of the play which showed the Filipino people up in arms against the Government.’318

These three plays and many others like it have achieved an iconic status and are very

well-documented in Philippine history319, Philippine literary history320, and even Philippine novels321 The plays themselves continue to be produced by many of the major Philippine theater

companies.322

Along with the long-haired revolutionary leader, Macario Sakay, these seditious plays have become the great symbols of Filipino tenacity, courage and creativity during the first ten years of the oppressive American occupation

This is a recent phenomenon, however, brought about by efforts of recent “nationalist” historians to shed light on the resistance to America Reynaldo Ileto, in discussing history up until

the time he wrote Pasyon and Revolution says: “Even today, the period from 1902 to 1910 is very

See, for example Bienvenido Lumbera, Revaluation: Essays on Philippine Literature, Cinema

and Popular Culture, (n.p.: Index Press, 1984), 36-43; 125-126

321

One such seditious play is the setting in which the main character of Nick Joaquin’s novel, The

Woman Who Had Two Navels, meets her first husband

322

Kahapon, Ngayon at Bukas was produced by Tanghalang Ateneo in 1999 and Tanikalang

Guinto was produced by Dulaang UP in 2002

little understood and, in some respects, clouded in secrecy.” The historical figure of Macario Sakay, in particular, has recently enjoyed not just a renaissance but a popularity even to the point

of commodification His image is reproduced on t-shirts and the posed photo of Sakay and his generals taken shortly before their surrender has been spoofed on posters

Without a doubt, the “nationalist” historians have done much to highlight Filipino

resistance to American occupation In the 1960s and 1970s and in reaction to decades of

American-sanctioned knowledge production, the humanties and the social sciences focused their attention on recovering knowledge from the margins Historians were now investigating figues like Sakay who had been part of a comprehensive movement of resistance against the Americans and who had been previously demonized Scholars and critics produced new knowledge that reinvested local literature and culture, that had been previously branded as inferior, with a new respect and inderstanding

And yet many, many events of the early years of American occupation are still not known and not easily comprehended One such neglected topic of this period is the topic of this chapter

The Tagalog essays on the Tagalog language published in the daily Muling Pagsilang from

1903-1908 were the first printed articulations of opposition to the English language policy Yet, these essays are hardly mentioned even in historical accounts of language

The First Articulations Against the English Policy

It is a bit of a mystery how Lope K Santos, known as the Ama ng Balarila (Father of

Philippine Grammar) does not mention in his autobiography the work he did for the Kapulungan

ng Wikang Tagalog (Convocation of the Tagalog Language), of which he was clearly the moving

sprit Neither are the Kapulungan’s early (1903 and 1904) essays on Tagalog published in Muling Pagsilang mentioned The reasons for this are varied One possible reason is that the Samahan

ng mga Mananagalog (Organization of Tagalog users), which evolved from the Kapulungan after

1904, was a bigger and more active and thus more easily remembered Also, much of Santos’s

323

Reynaldo Clemeña Ileto, Pasyon and Revolution: Popular Movements in the Philippines,

1840-1910 (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1979) 172

later work on Filipino, the national language (such as the first official grammar book to be used in all schools) were institutionalized on a national level and thus entered the realm of the material that historians are compelled to include in their national histories The writer of the

autobiography might, understandably, focus on this official nationalism of which his is a very distinguished part Finally, Santos himself was a bit of a renaissance man who was a journalist, linguist, novelist and poet, labor leader and politician (he was a senator from 1910-1913 and Governor of Nueva Ecija from 11918-1920) The diversity and intensity of his life, a testimony

to how, during his time, language and culture issues were indistinguishable from material and political issues, was probably itself the reason why the story of these essays written over just a few months gets left out

Santos does recount his days as Muling Pagsilang editor The focus of his narrative, however, is, again understandably, on the reputation of the Muling Pagsilang and its Spanish counterpart, El Renacimiento, as great anti-American newspapers and on the very famous libel

case that eventually brought about the papers’ demise The case, described by writer Loreto Paras-Sulit as “one of the most fiercely contested libel suits of the age,”324 caused an upheaval and polarized nationalists and supporters of America.325 Commissioner Dean Worcester brought the charges (Santos was initially included in the charge) as he (Worcester) felt an editorial piece,

which appeared in El Renacimiento, “Aves de Rapina”326 (Birds of Prey), alluded to him and was

an insult to his honor and dignity Both the criminal and the civil cases were lost by El

Renacimiento/Muling Pagsilang and the newspapers were forced to close down and were sold at

public auction in January of 1910 The libel suit, a symbol of America’s severe oppression and disregard for human rights, is an incident that is now studied by all students of Philippine history and “Aves de Rapina,” made their required reading

324

Loreto Paras-Sulit, “Birds of Prey: A Document of Human Rights,” in The El Renacimiento

Libel Suit, ed Teodoro M Kalaw (Manila: n.p., 1950), 39

325

Pura Villanueva Kalaw, wife of Teodoro M Kalaw, editor of El Renacimiento at the time and

one of two who were eventually tried and found guilty (the other being martin Ocampo, the periodicals founder and owner) described the event as having a “passion reminiscent of the political trial of Dreyfus, during which the French nation demonstrated the capacity for hate and generosity in its great heart” and

through which “the Filipino nation suffered.” Quoted in Teodoro M Kalaw’s autobiography Aide-de-Camp

to Freedom (translated from the Spanish by Maria Kalaw Katigbak), page 79

326

published in El Renacimiento in 1908

Though the libel incident overshadows much other knowledge about El

Renacimento/Muling Pagsilang, it does serve as a good introduction to understanding the

suppression placed by the Americans on the expression of national sentiment during the first decade of the twentieth century In the early days of occupation, when there was as yet no

organized nationalist party, El Renacimiento/Muling Pagsilang and the Cebu-based El Nuevo Dia

“acted as vehicles of nationalist views, tempered by the circumstances of the time, the

Sedition Law and the censorship of the press.”327 The founders, editors and writers of both El Renacimiento/Muling Pagsilang and El Nuevo Dia were active during the revolution of just a few

years before It is therefore not surprising that these newspapers “’embodied the ideals of the Revolution in all their purity.’”328 The authors of these papers were therefore fearless in their attack and criticism of American policy However, maybe as a concession to the censorship laws, the authors sometimes tempered their discussion of issues

In its engaement of the language issue, Muling Pagsilang was both bold and moderate, almost always, however, pro-Tagalog The essays in Muling Pagsilang about language were of

two kinds The first were the published output written by the members of the Kapulungan ng Wikang Tagalog (Convocation of the Tagalog Language) which was convened in June of 1903 and the second were a good number of opinion pieces, many of which were writen under

pseudonyms The essays published under the Kapulungan were lengthy pieces that were

serialized, the pages of which were not published in proper sequence because they were meant for cutting out and folding into little pamphlets The essays of the Kapulungan present a range of opinions and expertise; some express a keener interest in the relation of language to society while others are concerned with the technicalities of linguistics (creation of an alphabet, spelling, etc.) The opinion articles are shorter, less linguistically technical, and express stronger political opinions The signed pieces are written by relatively well-known Tagalog writers They include: Santos himself, playwrights Patricio Mariano and Severino Reyes, grammarians Sefronio G Calderon and Eusebio Daluz, and novelists Faustino Aguilar and Valeriano Hernandez Peña (who

327

Maximo M Kalaw, The Development of Philippine Politics, 1872-1920, (Manila: Oriental

Commercial Co, Inc., 1926), 284

328

Ibid, 283, (quoting Jaime de Veyra)

wrote the first Tagalog novel, Nena at Neneng) The unsigned pieces were probably written by

Lope K Santos, Faustino Aguilar, Valeriano Hernandez Peña, and Patricio Mariano, members of

the Kapulungan who were also part of the editorial staff of Muling Pagsilang

Given that these essays were written by well-known literary figures, that they were published in a relatively accessible forum329, and that they were the first articulations against the English policy, and therefore of great historical importance, it is a mystery that they have figured little in the our linguistic histories There are several possible causes for this grave oversight However, the most obvious one is the general attitude of disregard for articulations made in local languages, especially if the study is done in English This attitude is evident for example even in

the assessment sometimes made of Muling Pagsilang For example, in The History of Journalism

in the Philippine Islands, much is made of the historical importance of El Renacimiento but no mention is made of Muling Pagsilang This book has a short section that discusses “the

vernacular press” and describes it as “not usually reckoned with in questions of greatest national magnitude” even while it acknowledges that “the circulation of most of them is greater than that

of newspapers in either English or Spanish.”330 As this section on the vernacular press is part of a

description of the newspapers that were current during the time the study was made, Muling Pagsilang (which had closed down with El Renacimiento more than twenty-five years after this

study was published) is never once mentioned

Though this particular study of Philippine journalism was done in 1933, it carries with it

an attitude about writing in local languages that persists to today This same kind of linguistic discrimination—where articulations in English are given more importance than those in the vernacular—exists in literature as well Philippine literature in English stands high above

329

The newspaper in which these essays were published, Muling Pagsilang, and its Spanish counterpart, El Renacimiento, are widely acknowledged as the most vocal and most

consistent critic of the American colonial government The two newspapers were twice involved in legal

sedition charges brought by the American government The first one involved 1906 reports in Muling

Pagsilang about abusive practices of the constabulary in Batangas and Cavite The second, more famous

case was brought by Dean Worcester against El Renacimiento for its “Aves de Rapina” (Birds of Prey) editorial El Renacimiento and Muling Pagsilang were forced to close down in 1912 because of the loss of

this case The “Aves de Rapina” is like Emile Zola’s “J’accuse!” in that they are both journalistic opinion pieces that played important roles in history The text of “Aves de Rapina” is often reproduced in history textbooks and essay anthologies

330

Jesus Z Valenzuela History of Journalism in the Philippine Islands, (Manila: Jesus Z

Valenzuela, 1933), 160-161

literatures in the vernaculars in terms of the number of literary awards and in greater publication venues as well as in its position in the educational system.331 Thus, it is probably with some sort

of blinders that linguistic historians tend to construct their histories; focusing more on the

campaigns carried out in English

Ommisions and Misnomers

The first important linguistic history of the Philippines, Ernest J Frei’s The Historical Development of the Philippine National Language takes the general view that the Filipinos

happily and widely accepted English Frei’s discussion of the Filipino reaction to the language policy focuses on the likes of Camilo Osias and Isidro Panlasigui who zealously defended

English The interest in the vernacular languages are discussed from the perspective of American linguists such as Frank Blake and David Doherty and thus Lope K Santos and his “Academy of Philippine Lingustics,”332 of 1903 is mentioned only as a result of the discussion of Doherty’s fusionist view of language

This attitude is repeated in Andrew Gonzalez’s Language and Nationalism, which

devotes a mere paragraph to the subject of Santos and the Kapulungan The full text of that paragraph reads:

Doherty persuaded Lope K Santos, already an established novelist, poet, and journalist at the time, during this same year to call editors and writers to a conference to make an attempt to ‘fuse these dialects into a uniform or common one.’ Thus, in 1904, Santos founded the Kapulungan ng Wika (Conference on Language), although, subsequently, Santos dropped the fusionist proposal in favor of Tagalog and became president of the Samahan ng Mananagalog (Association of Tagalog Users) in 1908 and in 1911 became the president of the Academia de Tagalistas (Academy of Tagalog Scholars) and subsequently vice-president of the Kapulungang Balagtas (Association of Balagtas Followers), a decidedly pro-Tagalog association.333

331

The CCP Encyclopedia of Art defines Philippine literature in English as constituting “in the overall literary landscape, a larger stream than that written in Spanish, a much smaller stream than that written in the vernacular languages like Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilongo, Ilocano, Waray, Pampango, Pangasinan, Bicol, but certainly the most visible one because of its exposure in the educational system and its

accessibility through publications.”

Andrew B Gonzalez, Language and Nationalism: The Philippine Experience Thus Far,

(Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1980), 36-37

The name of the organization founded in 1903 (and not 1904 as Gonzalez claims) is not the

“Kapulungan ng Wika” but the “Kapulungan ng Wikang Tagalog.” This exclusion of the word

“Tagalog” makes a world of a difference when reconstructing the origin of linguistic nationalism Whereas the misnomer makes it appear that the organization was interested in languages in general, its actual name shows it was committed to Tagalog at the very outset In the context of the colonial situation where the Americans instituted an overwhelming and unrelenting English campaign and American colonial officials were predicting the disappearance of local languages, the existence of such an organization in 1903, was vitally important as it points to an active stance

of upholding and promoting Tagalog The misnomer also wrongly hints at the fusionist views of Santos and of the Kapulungan

Gonzales also gets the date for the establishment of the Samahan ng mga Mananagalog wrong Gonzales claims it was founded in 1908, however, Faustino Aguilar, in 1904, mentions preparations for the establishment of the Samahan not in the context of abandoning fusionist views but as a way of widening the scope of what the Kapulungan had accomplished In 1906,

Muling Pagsilang published a list of active members of the Samahan The list had fifty-three

names All this is important because, as the suceeding chapter will argue, nationalist

articulations, linguistic or otherwise, made before 1907 (the establishment of the Philippine Assembly; the lifting of the ban on political parties that call for independence) were disitict from those made after when bans on expressions of nationalist sentiments and aspirations for

independence were lifted

Gonzalez does not mention this body of essays (about thirty in all) published by Muling Pagsilang Their exclusion leads him to attribute the first proposal to make Tagalog the basis of

the national language to Eusebio Daluz in 1915.334 The idea of Tagalog as the national language was of course an idea that had much currency during the Philippine revolution Even Gonzalez

334

Gonzalez, Language and Nationalism, 42 The attribution reads: “The proposal to make

Tagalog the basis of the national language dates back to as early as 1915 and is found in the literature, for

the first time, in Daluz’s Filipino-English Vocabulary.” The first openly signed (versus signed with a

pseudonym) document explicitly calling for a Pilipino language based on Tagalog that I found was P.L

Stangl’s “Ang Wikang Pilipino, Isang Wikang Isasalig sa Tagalog,” Muling Pagsilang, April 3, 1907, 1

The idea of a “Wikang Pilipino” is mentioned even earlier in pseudonymed essays

notes this in his chapter on the Spanish period The exclusion, however of the Muling Pagsilang

essays creates a gap of almost twenty years It is a period that, as the subsequent section will show, was actually rife with articulations about Tagalog and its central position in the Philippine nation

The Origins of the Idea of Tagalog as the National Language

The search for exactly who first proposed Tagalog as the basis of the national language during the American period is actually a complex and knotty enterprise In terms of the context

of their movement, if not in terms of the actual first identifiable statement to that effect, the honor should rightfully go to the Kapulungan, if not to Lope K Santos himself While writing for the Kapulungan, Santos was very careful never to suggest that Tagalog alone should be the basis of the national language When he did mention the idea of a national language, it was always in the context language fusion This is seen in the following quote which is one of the first, if not the first proposal during the American period for a national language It is taken from his 1903 essay

entitled “Isang Wikang Filipino” published in El Renacimiento (it was only in 1904 that the Tagalog version of El Renacimiento was given its own name, Muling Pagsilang):

sapagkat yayamang iisa na rin lamang ang tawag sa atin, FILIPINO; iisa ang ating bayan, FILIPINAS, at malinaw na iisa rin ang pinakaina ng tanang wikang iyan, ang MALAYO, ayon sa mga pantas na Manunri (?), ay dapat na ring maging isa na lamang ang pairaling Wika, ang pinaglakpan baga ng lahat, WIKANG FILIPINO [Lopez’s capitalization]335

…because we are given just one name FILIPINO; we have one nation FILIPINAS, and it is clear that the origin of all our languages is one, MALAY, according to the learned ones, there should just be one language that should be promoted, the joining together of all, the FILIPINO LANGUAGE

Santos’s call for language fusion should, however, be seen in the context of the whole project of the Kapulungan, or, in this case, even within the context of his essay Language fusion is not the subject matter of this essay; it is the Tagalog language Apart from two brief references to fusion (this one quoted and one more at the close of the essay), the whole essay, all thirty pages of it, is about Tagalog and the need to modernize it

335

Lope K Santos, “Isang Wikang Filipino,” El Renacimiento, (serialized) September 7-16, 1903

This particular quote appeared in the September 7 issue

Many of the subsequent essays published by the Kapulungan between 1903 and 1904 diplomatically avoid making definitive statements about the national language but certainly suggest it by the very topics they took on The essays clearly indicate the Kapulungan was interested in strengthening Tagalog for its possible future role as national language For example, Francisco Makabulos’s essay for the Kapulungan was entitled, “Ang Wikang Tagalog sa mga Lupang Kapampangan,” 336 (“The Tagalog Language in the Land of the Kapampangans.”) In this essay, he reaffirms the objectives of the Kapulungan of purifying the Tagalog language in order to meet the objective of the unity and strengthening of the mother nation It also describes how Tagalog is already accepted and widely used in the Kapampangan region as a medium of

communication with people from other regions Eusebio Daluz’s essay is about the best way to teach Tagalog to other Filipinos.337 In this essay, Daluz recalls Jose Rizal and his call for us to study the Tagalog language This is important, Daluz tells us, because through the knowledge of our own language, we will achieve knowledge, freedom, and unity

If the authors who wrote under the Kapulungan were hesitant about suggesting that

Tagalog should be the basis of the national language, the authors who wrote for Muling Pagsilang

(but not under the name of the Kapulungan) were not These authors, however, all wrote under symbolic pseudonyms.338 This suggests that, given the context of the time, the authors and maybe

the editors of Muling Pagsilang felt that merely writing about strengthening and modernizing

Tagalog was a relatively harmless activity but suggesting that it should be the basis of a national language was not

Among several of these essays, Tagalog, in no uncertain terms, is offered as the national language One essay calls for Filipinos to:

“grandchild of someone from the region of Pampanga” and indicates that even non-Tagalogs are open to

the idea of Tagalog as the national language My favorite pseudonym, Mapaninta (from the root word sinta

which means “beloved”) suggests the author’s deep love and commitment to Tagalog

[huwag limutan] ang ating tunay na casaysayan at alamat; siyasatin ang mga

diccionariong Filipino; pag-aralan ang Wikang Tagalog at iba pang mga wikang

catutubo; pag-isahin ang marami at linangin ang wicang magiging pangcalahatan,

na walang iba cundi ang Tagalog, lenguwaheng ina ng tanang mga diyalekto natin.339

[remember] our history and our legends, study the Filipino dictionaries, study the Tagalog language and other local languages, unify the many, and cultivate the language that will be for all, none other than Tagalog, the mother language of all our dialects

The author of another essay which discusses the logic of the American officials for using

throughout the Philippines, schoolbooks written in English The author of the essay claims this logic is rotten and poor because learning is best done through one’s own language and because schoolbooks can be easily and quickly translated into Tagalog The author claims that: “walang karunungan at palatuntunang maayos na hindi maisasalin at maisusulat sa wika ni Balagtas, mula

sa a, b c, hangang sa mga malalim at sigasigalot na babasain ng Pilosopya.”340 (there is no knowledge and ideas of good principles that cannot be translated and written in the language of Balagtas341, from the a, b, c’s, to the deep readings of Philosophy.) A few other essays discuss the need to use the local language, and not a foreign language as the medium of instruction Though the authors do not make a single explicit statement that Tagalog should be the national language, they suggest it when they explicitly identify Tagalog as the most prevalent of all local languages One argues, “sa maraming wika natin ay isa ang pinaka ina ng lahat, sanhi sa pagkamalaganap, ito’y ang Tagalog, na sinasalita ng karamihang taga Luson at gayon din, ng puu-puu at daan-daang mga bisaya at magindanaw.”342 (Of many of our languages, one is the mother of all, through its being wide-spread; this is Tagalog which is spoken by most from Luzon and by thousands from the Visayas and Mindanao) Another describes Tagalog as “ang masanghayang Wika ni Florante, na siyang pangulong wikang malaganap ng Kapilipinuhan.”343 (the beautiful

339

Apo ni Kapampangan (pseudonym), “Ang Bayang Pilipino at ang Kanyang Sariling Wika,”

Muling Pagsilang, May 19, 1905, 1

language of Florante which is the leading language, most wide-spread among the Filipino people)

The vision of one author in particular for Tagalog as national language is a vision that stems from its role in the past, particularly its role in the recent revolution The author mentions

an ancient legend that designates Tagalog as the mother language of the Filipinos and that it was and is currently being used as the common language when people from different regions meet Most importantly, the author identifies the recent revolution as one of the causes for Tagalog’s current status as the language most widely used: “mula ng Paghihimagsic ng Kapilipinuhan (1896) ay nagging pangcaraniwan na ang Wikang Tagalog, hindi sa paraang pagpilit, cundi sa talagang pinagcacagawian ng marami.”345 (from the time of the Philippine Revolution (1896), the Tagalog language became commonplace, not through force, but through its use by many.) This sentiment is reprised later in the essay when the author makes a definitive statement about the eight million Filipinos belonging to different regions but belonging to one nation, a fact

established by a Tagalog legend and strengthened by the Katipunan of 1896 (“ayon sa alamat ng Katagalugann na pinagtibay niyong di dapat limiting K.K.K ng mga Bayaning Anak ng Bayan (1896)”346) The essay calls for a national unity based on language unity:

…pagcacaisang lalong matibay cung natatalian ng isang wicang tunay na ating sarili, na walang iba, cundi ang pinag-isang “Wikang” binubuo ng tanang mga Wikang Pilipino347, o cung hindi mangyari ito ay payabuangin(?) at ilaganap ang Wikang Tagalog na siyang ipinangungusap ng marami at halos malaganap na naman.348

…a unity made stronger if bound by one language which is truly ours and which

is none other than the unified “Language,” made up of all Filipino languages, or,

if this does not happen, then spread the Tagalog language, which is spoken by many and which is anyway already widespread

344

Florante is Balagtas’ pseudonym

345

Apo ni Kapampangan (pseudonym), “Ang Bayang Pilipino at ang Kaniyang Sariling Wika,”

Muling Pagsilang, April 18, 1905, 1 The essay cited in footnote 19 has the same author and the same title

as this one The essay itself and the publication dates are different

348

Ibid

The acknowledgement of the role of the revolution in establishing the idea of a single nation and the idea of Tagalog as the language that binds the nation is important (the reasons of which are listed in the succeeding paragraphs) It signifies a continuity between the goals and aspirations of

the revolution and the objectives of the Muling Pagsilang authors This connection points to

another connection between these early struggles for linguistic-self determination and the

eventual “triumph,” altered and adulterated as it may have been, of the establishment of a national language It also establishes the strong awareness of those who would agitate against colonialism

of the importance of agitating against cultural and linguistic imposition and the importance of the defense and protection of one’s own language and culture

The Erasure of the Tagalog Campaign

Andrew Gonzales’s misassignment of the first proposal to make Tagalog the basis of the national language to a later date has serious implications on how we understand the anti-colonial struggle Though, at first blush, it seems a harmless mistake to suggest the proposal was made ten

or twelve years later than it actually was, it is in fact serious By 1915, the strong, anti-American resistance and the popularly supported guerilla movement of twelve years before had almost completely dissipated The ban on political parties advocating independence had long been lifted and in fact the Nationalistas (who openly campaigned for independence) had won an astounding victory over the Federalistas (who called for statehood) five years before This was just a year before the passing of the Jones law, which guaranteed independence Expressing nationalist fervor was no longer dangerous, in fact it was, by this time, quite banal

What this twelve year misassigned lag accomplishes to do (apart from the obvious erasures) is to cut out from history a bold and almost prophetic vision that is strongly connected

to the past when Tagalog was the unquestionable language of the revolution and of the imminent nation.349 Though the essays in Muling Pagsilang hardly reference the revolution (as censorship

349

The only official statement of explicitly assigning Tagalog as the national language was made

in the Biac-na-Bato constitution, a constitution drawn up in 1897 Article VII reads: “Tagalog shall be the official language of the Republic.” The full transcript of the constitution is found in Maximo M Kalaw,

The Development of Philippine Politics, 1872-1920, (Manila: Oriental Commercial Co., 1926), 418-422