FILOMENO V. AGUILAR, JR.

Bonifacio: The "Fall" in the plot of Nationalist History.

-Reynaldo Ileto- the STAGES in the standard nationalist plot begun with:

1.) Golden Age, then

2.) Fall (as in Garden of Eden), then

3.) Dark Age

-Moment of recovery begins w/ "Rise of Nationalist Consciousness"--w/c led to "Birth of the Nation).

-Rizal envisioned pre-hispanic past in his annotations of Morga(1889/1961) & "On the Indolence of the
Filipinos"(1890/1996)--conceptualized glorious past.

-Del Pilar’s portrayal of Pacto de Sangre was a step toward conceiving the Fall, but did not qualify as a
“real” Fall. (Ileto)

- In Del Pilar’s narrative plot, only after Pacto de Sangre would Spain renege (retract) on the valid treaty.
(Ileto)

-Bonifacio built on the ilustrados’ Golden Age, provided explanation for the Fall thru "Ang Dapat Mabatid
ng mga Tagalog” (What the Tagalog Should Know) printed in Katipunan’s publication, Kalayaan, which
circulation began in January 1896, causing a surge in the Katipunan. (Ileto)

-Bonifacio’s (1896/1963, pp68) manifesto begins with Golden Age, prosperity, ease, and harmony before
the coming of Spaniards (pre-Spanish past).

-Written in Manifesto (Ang dapat mabatid): Filipinos bartered w/ Japanese.

-Manifesto: coming of Spaniards was purportedly to offer friendship, but were full of deceit

-What they had agreed upon was witnessed and certified by means of an oath, by taking a little blood
from their respective veins, which they mixed and drank as a sign of sincere and wholehearted pledge
not to betray their agreement. This was what was called “Pacto de Sangre” of King Sikatuna and Legaspi,
the representative of the King of Spain.

-Manifesto: Spaniards deceived Sikatuna (like the serpent in Eden).

-Sikatuna believed Legazpi’s promises and agreed to a compact (like eating the forbidden fruit) this act
constituted the Fall.

-Unlike Del Pilar’s plot, in Bonifacio’s narrative, the betrayal (Fall) occurred at the outset—(in the
Garden).

-Manifesto's focus was the deceitfulness of the Spaniards. (not Sikatuna)

-manifesto led directly to the Birth of the Nation.

-Rizal did not discuss Pacto de Sangre directly, but Morga (his annotations) stated “the contracts and
negotiations of the natives were consummately illicit,” Rizal’s (1889/1961, pp304) riposte (reply) was:
“So are the contracts of all the nations and of all peoples, and so it is and was the very spirit of the
contracts that the first Spaniards celebrated with the Filipino chiefs . . .”

-people realized that Pacto de Sangre was illicit (unlawful) because they had been “blinded” and could
not see their condition properly.

-1.) Spanish treachery and 2.) Sikatuna falling for the “sweetness of their tempting words” began the
Dark Age.

-Apolinario Mabini (1931, pp108): Opening remarks “Ordenanzas de la Revolución” (1898), also alluded
(indirectly referred) to Pacto de Sangre “Our ancestors have recognized the ancient Kings of Castile as
protectors and allies” in a “pact sealed with blood” (un pacto sellado con sangre); it led to “perfect
solidarity” but “from the moment we submitted to its dominion” the Spanish government “shamelessly
violated” the agreement (cf. Majul 1960, pp314).

-In Mabini’s view: Blood Compact was “perfect” (a la Del Pilar), but shattered (after a month?) as soon as
Spain subjugated the Filipinos.

-Colonial conquest: illegitimate, justifying revolution.

-(Bonifacio) Blood Compact: null and void from beginning, thus had clear notion of the Fall.

- Bonifacio’s narrative resonate in Zafaralla’s (1986, 53) reading of Luna’s El Pacto de Sangre

-Legazpi is deceitful, deceived Sikatuna.

-Tupas offering “eternal fraternity and alliance,”(Marcos)

-Pacto de Sangre, resulted in banishment from paradise (garden of eden), & caused Dark Age to PH

-Bonifacio held the Spaniards responsible for not abiding their promise.

-manifesto conclusion: 1.) light of truth must prevail; 2.) The Tagalog must realize the sources of their
misfortune and unite, and 3.) realize that reason dictates the justness of separating from Spain.

- Bernadette Abrera- interpreted Katipunan ritual as revival of sandugo (binalikan at muling isinabuhay)
but in a new form (nagbagong anyo). In her view, partaking of blood was bypassed because the primary
relationship (ang pangunahin nang ugnayan) being established was with Inang Bayan (the Motherland)
and everyone shared the same blood and all, therefore, were siblings (Lahat ng nakipag-ugnayan sa
Inang Bayan ay magiging magkakadugo at kung gayon, mga “kapatid”).

- In the pursuit of “kaginhawahan,” Katipunan’s revivalist practice is part of a “cultural revolution”

(rebolusyong cultural) & meant to return to Filipino roots, to restore Golden Age.
-Pacto de Sangre=nativist quest.