Dave Achondo
I HAVE been reading articles about the incoming President’s plans to declare Lapu-lapu as a national hero. But I do not agree with this. I’m not against him (Lapu-lapu) or anything but to be counted as one of this country’s national heroes is to have a “nation” to begin with which did not exist yet during Lapu-lapu’s time.
Unlike with the guy he beat up in the shores of Mactan who had a nation to fight for and to die for, Lapu-lapu did not have anything close to a nation at that time. But due to his arrogance and pride, the Spaniard got beat up by a guy who was probably wearing a King Leonidas outfit in 300.
Don’t get me wrong. I consider Lapu-lapu a “hero” for his bravery and courage in facing a foe like Ferdinand Magellan. However, I can’t put myself to agree that Lapu-lapu should be proclaimed a Philippine national hero because he was not even a “Filipino” to begin with. Again, fact is, he had no country/nation, and so, it doesn’t qualify him. What he probably had was a small kingdom.
Lapu-lapu did not fight under the flag of the Philippines. He fought because he saw that the Spaniards would corrupt their way of life which during that time was considered sacred and worth cutting somebody’s head off for desecration.
He didn’t fight for the Filipinos but for his people, his tribe, culture and territory.
What are the requirements for being a national hero? First, in order to become a national hero, the candidate must be dead.
In my humble opinion, the only exemption to this in today’s generation are the Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) who are until this very day the true heroes--they are the backbone of the Philippines and are responsible for pumping billions of dollars into the country, preventing it from sinking further.
I have read a 2015 article in the Manila Times by Lea Manto-Beltran entitled “The making of a Philippine national hero.” She raised a few thought-provoking questions about history and the version that we were thought about in school. I agree with her points, and it hit me and made me ask about what I really learned in history. She said there are tons of questions out there regarding the making of a national hero and what it takes to become one!
Does a hero’s life story need to be presented to a particular body? Is thorough research needed to be done to authenticate one’s valor for country? Does a Filipino need to be martyred to become a national hero?
These are some questions that somehow have been left unanswered.
According to National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP) chief of research, publication and heralding division Alvin Alcid, Dr. Jose Rizal has never actually been conferred this title. Nevertheless, NHCP clarified that the position Rizal now holds in Philippine history is a tribute and honor befitting a national hero.
But the reality is that there is no law, executive order or proclamation that has been enacted or issued officially proclaiming any Filipino historical figure as a national hero. (If there is, please do tell me, I want to understand more about this country’s wild history. E-mail to dave.goldstar@gmail.com)
Have you noticed that most of the heroes that we know today came from the mid-Spanish era of the Philippine history. They were the people who became aware that they were being screwed by Spain.
At that time, we were called Filipinos although we were not a sovereign country yet. But there developed a sense of nationalism and love for a country that did not exist yet during Lapu-lapu’s time. (Again, Lapu-lapu had no country and nationality, and I don’t even think “nationalism” occurred to him while he was bashing Magellan’s head.)
