Activity 4: Criticism

Instruction: With our discussion about internal and external criticism

read the text attached below and answer the following questions
provided.
1. Who was the author of the article? Is he/she a credible author?
Why?
The author of the article is Ambeth R. Ocampo and he is
considered as credible author due to his expertise in Philippine
history and culture. And in this article, he was be able to apply his
expertise by applying his deep knowledge and research skills about
the Code of Kalantiaw. While reading this article, I noticed that he
was just observer to the said event. However, even he was just an
observer to the said event he was be able to tell the truth by giving a
complete information, facts, evidence, specific date, time, and place
in every information that he wrote. Thus, I considered Ambeth R.
Ocampo as a credible author.
2. When was the article written?
The article written when after the impeachment trial of Renato
Corona. And that was on December 12, 2011.
3. Where was it produced?
The article produced by Philippine Daily Inquirer.

4. How can we say that the source is credible?

 A credible source is one that is authored by an expert in the
field, published in a reputable outlet, supported by evidence and
citations, and aligns with information from other reliable sources.
5. Should we consider it as a primary or secondary source? Why?
This article was considered as secondary source because it was
published after the event. And Ambeth R. Ocampo is just an observer to
this article.
6. Why was it written and what does it imply (create a short
summary)?
Ambeth R. Ocampo, as a historian and writer, may have written
the article "Remembering the Order of Kalantiaw" to provide historical
insights, shed light on the Order of Kalantiaw, and contribute to the
understanding of Philippine history. And as Mr. Ocampo said to his
article that the Order or Kalantiaw was a memorable “pabaon” for years
of dedicated services for retiring justices. However, the Order of
Kalantiaw has been deleted from the Honors of Code. And Ocampo
want to know “what will happen to the 206 individuals who were
conferred the award earlier? Will they be given a replacement medal or
citation or another award?”. So, in order to expand the information of
this Code he further discussed how importance the Code of Kalantiaw.
He also give facts with an accurate information about to this code.
Therefore, this article may aim to revisit the Order of Kalantiaw, its
origins, and its significance within the context of Philippine history.
Ocampo might discuss the historical records, myths, and legends
surrounding Kalantiaw, examining their accuracy and implications. His
intention may be to offer a critical examination of the Order, separate
fact from fiction, and present a nuanced understanding of this historical
artifact. By writing about the Order of Kalantiaw, Ocampo could be
seeking to contribute to the broader discourse on Philippine history,
debunk myths or misconceptions, and provide a more accurate
portrayal of the country's past. Ultimately, the article could serve as a
means to preserve and promote an informed understanding of
Philippine cultural heritage and history.
Remember the Order of Kalantiaw?
By: Ambeth R. Ocampo - @inquirerdotnet
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 09:31 PM June 05, 2012

After the conclusion of the impeachment trial of Renato Corona, I remembered the
impressive state honor or decoration created by an executive order of President
Ferdinand Marcos in 1971 known as the Order of Kalantiaw. Conferred on retiring
Supreme Court justices and visiting international jurists, it co nsisted of a blue sash with a
breast star in the shape of an eight-rayed sun, with many smaller rays in between. The
star was fashioned in enamel and gold or gilt bronze, and its main design elements were a
sword on which lay the balance of justice, as wel l as stone tablets with Roman numerals I
to X that stood for the biblical Ten Commandments.

For retiring justices, this was a memorable “pabaon” for years of dedicated service. The
last recipient of the Order of Kalantiaw was Chief Justice Andres Narvasa because in 2003
the order was dropped from the rolls pursuant to Executive Order 236 issued by President
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in 2003 “establishing the Honors Code of the Philippines, to
create an order of precedence of honors conferred and for other p urposes.”

Now that the Order of Kalantiaw has been deleted from the Honors Code, what happens
to the 206 individuals who were conferred the award earlier? Will they be given a
replacement medal or citation or another award? Perhaps they can be given someth ing
else within the existing awards.

Kalantiaw has had a long life in our textbooks and we hope that the Code of Kalantiaw is
not in the new K to 12 Makabayan learning materials. Before Kalantiaw was officially
declared a hoax in 2004, there were other law s to contend with. On Jan. 24, 1973, four
months after he declared martial law and began to rule by decree, Marcos issued
Presidential Decree 105 declaring previously established national shrines as sacred or
hallowed places and ensuring their protection, along with those that would be declared
shrines in the future, from acts of desecration. Thus, it was forbidden to disturb the
peace of these shrines through noise, excavation, or unbecoming acts (whatever that
meant). Furthermore, Marcos defined fines and prison terms for those who would
desecrate these shrines.

At the time, specific mention was made of the following: “the birthplace of Dr. Jose Rizal
in Calamba, Laguna; Talisay, Dapitan City, where the hero was exiled for four years; Fort
Santiago, Manila, where he was imprisoned in 1896 prior to his execution; Talaga,
Tanauan, Batangas, where Apolinario Mabini was born; Pandacan, Manila, where Mabini’s
house, in which he died, is located; and Aguinaldo Mansion in Kawit, Cavite, where Gen.
Emilio Aguinaldo, first President of the Philippines, was born, and where Philippine
independence was solemnly proclaimed on June 12, 1898; Batan, Aklan, where the ‘Code
of Kalantiyaw ’ was promulgated in 1433; etc.”

The last mentioned was a source of pride in 1956 when the Philippine Historical
Committee, at the request of the Municipal Council of Batan, Aklan, installed a bronze
marker in the area with text that read:

“CODE OF KALANTIAW. Datu Bendehara Kalantiaw, third Chief of Panay, born in Aklan,
established his government in the peninsula of Batang, Aklan Sakup. Considered the First
Filipino Lawgiver, he promulgated about 1433 a penal code now known as Code of
Kalantiaw containing 18 articles. Don Marcelino Orilla of Zaragoza, Spain, obtained the
original manuscript from an old chief of Panay which was later translated into Spanish by
Rafael Murviedo Yzamaney.”

At the time, Kalantiaw was a source of national pride, and the Kalantiaw Shrine and
Museum was established in Batan. Numerous streets were named after this legendary—or
should we say mythical—figure; a segunda mano US destroyer was acquired by the
Philippine Navy in 1967 and christened the RPS Datu Kalantiaw, but this ship was wrecked
by a storm in 1981 and decommissioned.

Then, in a doctoral dissertation defended in 1968, William Henry Scott proved that the
Code of Kalantiaw was a forgery made in the early 20th century by Jose E. Marco of
Negros. As a historiographical issue it was solvable, but what complicated matters were
people who could not let Kalantiaw go peacefully into the night. In the website of the
Bengzon Law Office you will find a photo of a wood relief that adorns its headquarters,
and which is described thus:

“ The mural wood sculpture is the centerpiece of the inner sanctum of The Bengzon Law
Firm. It depicts the proclamation of the Code of Kalantiaw, said to be the first codification
of laws in the Philippines before the Hispanic era, and enacted by Datu Bendahara
Kalantiaw in the year 1433 on the island of Panay. Discovered in a 2 -volume work ‘Las
Antiguas Legendas de las Islas de Negros’ by Fr. Jose Maria Pavon. Today the Order of
Kalantiaw is the highest honor to be bestowed upon deserving judges or legal luminaries.”
There are many examples of “invented tradition,” or how myth and legend som etimes
endure against historical truth. One of the memorable exchanges I had with my students
was when a Chinoy remarked that “ka” isn’t a precolonial honorific because in Chinese it
was a verb that meant “to bite/chew,” while “lantiaw ” was the vulgar word for “testicles.”
By creating Kalantiaw, Jose E. Marco had the last laugh at Philippine history’s expense.

Source: https://opinion.inquirer.net/30125/remember-the-order-of-kalantiaw