 As defined by law, cultural heritage refers to the totality of cultural property preserved and developed through time and passed on to posterity. Cultural property refers to all products of human creativity by which a people in a nation reveal their identity. These include churches, mosques, and other places of worship, schools, and natural history specimens and sites, whether public or privately owned, movable or immovable, and tangible or intangible. In the series of lectures, esteemed educators from our national university lend pertinent discussions, thus open academic discourses on Philippine cultural heritage relating to their respective fields of discipline and expertise. These can and may be used as resource materials for further learning and study. Public Intellectual Arnold Azurín, or Lakay to many, explains to us the making of Filipino identity and heritage through conversion, inversion, and subversion. He points out, through historical events, how locals accepted colonial culture and customized it becoming their own to eventually be used in opposing this foreign imposition. I was just recalling the times of Diego and Gabriela Silang when they tried to take over the capital of Locos in Vigan. But unfortunately, even Diego realized that his followers were more Catholic than rebellious, so that when his own friend was convinced by the bishop to just kill his friend Diego, it was an easy matter to undertake such assassination. And even the followers of Silang were not very keen in coming to his, let's say, socor. And so when Gabriela tried to make a comeback in order to cease the government reigns in Vigan, she also didn't succeed in her effort. And what we can say is that at that point in time, Vigan was the bastion of colonization and not only a bastion of political control, but also a religious center because it was the capital of the diocese of Nueva Segovia. So what we can say here is that the cultural conversion of the Ilocanos at that point was more persuasive part of their lifestyle. But it becomes a different matter when in 20 rather in 1807 when the Ilocanos started to wage another rebellion which is unfortunately called Basirebol, more popular when actually it should be called the alzamiento of Ambaristo. Alzamiento is just the uprising because that is what the scholars at the time and the friars called it. Besides, there is no semantic in the Spanish language called Basirebol. That is an Americanism and it was even noticed by the art historian, art critic Patrick Flores, that maybe the Basirebol's name is Misnomer and she said that because the way it labeled the struggle, the bloody struggle was that it would seem that the sole purpose of waging is to have more Basire in their glasses and this was not the case. In fact, the Basirebol label is very unfortunate because it didn't give much value to the struggle for freedom. But then it was not only the textbook authors but also veteran historians who were misquoted by the term Basirebol. For instance, even Renato Constantino, a preeminent historian, one time wrote in his column in Bulletin today that this, disparagingly, he said, the Locanos are sometimes waging rebellions only because they want to drink more Basire. Contrary to the legitimacy of the label Basirebol as causing the anger of the people to become an uproar, yes, because they are disgusted with the lack of Basire to drink for their self-indulgence, let me go to the observation of the Augustinian Provincial at that time. He said that the cause of the insurrection of 1807, which we should now call as it was properly called by historian Isabel de los Reyes, that it should be called Al Samiento de Ambaristo, the uprising of Ambaristo, the leader, the causes of which was traced by the Augustinian Provincial this wise. The Ilocano Indios at that time have become as thieving as those of other provinces. They steal cows, horses, and caravans from their fellow Indios, and those engaged in these businesses are ready to do bad things. It is not surprising that many of these are deserters who started the rebellion in the mountains of Pedig, others joined them after the fire broke out, some Spaniards were deserting their ranks, their role as protectors of vegan, and so this lack of Basire cannot be considered as the reason for the rebellion. And it should also be considered that other observers like Jesuit Father Vicente Aleman wrote in 1768 that is long before the breakout of the Al Samiento. He said that Jesuit Father Aleman said a third of the infantry in vegan, an Ilocos, was made up of poor exiles from Mexico. The Maestre de Campo was some official who could not be an Alperes, a lowly official, in the army. Generally, those who went to the Philippines at the time were the ones who were too lazy in America, called Pulizones, and had originally fled from Spain. They were criminals, they were exiled creoles, called Quachinangus in the Philippines. That is from Jesuit Father Aleman. So what we are saying here is that, unlike the Ilocanos and their leaders, or the Anderca Elianes, in the time of Jaguzilance Rebellion, those Ilocanos then, we showed them to be more religious and more believing in the power of the bishop and the priest. At this time, the people in Northern Luzon, even the Spaniards included, were described this way. I can assure you, Rott Father Aleman, that of all the Spaniards I met in Manila, there were only two or three who had gone legitimately. That is almost all were fugitives. For having been appointed by the court. All the rest were Pulizones and deserters and creoles from there that are called Quachinangus. It would be the greatest human comedy in the world if every resident of Manila were to play his own role because then we would see backs scarred with whip losses and other marks. Hardened soldiers and non-priests celebrating mass and hearing confessions who were punished in Mexico by the tribunal of the inquisition. Some found themselves coming weeks, others scratching beards and still others clutching felons or whipping them. All of these and more you will see in the Philippines. So the point is that at the time that the El Samiento de Ambaristo broke out, most of the people then were involved in anarchistic activities and according to some historians there were more people in the valleys, in the hinterlands that were seeking shelter from such extensive criminality. So we could now see that the people at the time were less religious and their desire to fight the monopolies in tobacco, in wine, in all the rest of the products that were consumed by the people in order to raise taxes for the government, the people were just not, they were not anymore the religious plaque that they were in the time of Diego Silang. In fact, Isabelo de los Reyes, a beginner, even wrote here in his book, in 1807 then people were not predisposed to anything good and in the month of July some recruits fled vegan and took refuge in the mountains of Pidig where they were joined by many discontented people. They tried to get the people of Sarat to rebel. When they failed, however, they returned to the mountains, taking with them the drums that were in the Bantayans, watchtowers of the cows. So I would, having emphasized that the name Basirebol is very much a misnomer, as also asserted by the art historian Patrick Flores, then we might as well make use of the real name used by the historians at that time, which was used the Al Samiento de Ambaristo even up to the American period, up to 1931, when Abentura Bello, another beginner historian, tried to make a recollection of the whole event. This Al Samiento was very important the way I looked at it in the sense that it was the first time that finally the rebels in northern Luzon made use of the term Pilipino, not as referring to this traditional meaning of Spanish born in the Islas Pilipinas. That used to be the regular meaning, but remember that I was showing that the Spaniards themselves were so much engaged in mud-slinging by name-calling because at that time the Spain and Mexico were also collapsing as centers of the empire overlooking or controlling the Islas Pilipinas. So what happened was that the term Pilipino became marginalized in the means of the name-calling of Guachinangus Polisones and whatever bad name the Spaniards can call each other so that the rebels in the Al Samiento finally grabbed the term Pilipino and used it on themselves as their nom de guerre, as their binding name for themselves. And so this was shown by the historians at the time when they said that the constant battle cry was the time of the rebels at the time when they were approaching the bastion of Bigan, the colonial bastion. Their battle cry was Avance Pilipino Puerra Españoles. So it was a surprising turn of events at the turn around in semantics because the term Pilipinos were reserved before the rebellion to the Spaniards born in the Philippines. But now this time the rebellion grabbed the product of conversion of the term Pilipino and then made it into their inverted meaning by calling themselves the real Pilipinos. Now, how sure are we that the inversion of the meaning of Pilipino repairing to the Spaniards born in the Philippines to refer instead to the rebels? It's very clear in two books written by historians we have let me... The two books re-evaluating the events and documents of the bulletile epoch suffice to supplant the devious propaganda of the colonial rulers and friars that it was merely a change of semantics but not the change of real, deeper meaning. The books that are relevant for this deeper change of meaning of Pilipino from the Spaniards to the rebels are the books, the events of 1872 National Glories by Manuel Ortigas y Cuerba and another book, Father Jose Burgos A Documentary History by Jan Schumacher. Together they debunk the traditional claim of Agoncillo that according to him there was no national history prior to 1872 because there are no Filipinos then or the Filipinos were not actually the inhabitants fighting for freedom. That is the claim of the idea that before 1872 said Agoncillo there was no national history prior to 1872 because the histories then were written by the friars about their own activities but what I am now trying to assert here the national identity and history was already born in the 1807 revolt and that was the birthing of the new meaning of Filipino to refer only to the Filipinos born to anybody born in the islas Filipinas so what I am saying to be clear what I am saying is that while Filipinos used to the Filipinos as a term used to refer to the name of the king of Spain this time the fighters in the asamiento of Ambaristo they are now referring the term Filipinos only to anyone born in islas Filipinas there is no more referencing to let's say the name of the king of Spain and how did it follow through that the term Filipino finally became our own identity today what happened was that when the term Filipino was first used as the battle cry to identify the rebels themselves as the real Filipinos while the Spanish had been identified by them to be the enemy to be removed from office at that time although there was a lot of bloodshed that led to the defeat of the asamiento of the rebels there that was already the infancy of would be rebel priest Padre Jose Burgos who was also from the north, exactly from Vigan and at that time he must have been absorbing in his consciousness many of the legends as well as the memories of that asamiento de Ambaristo so that when he was starting to debate argue with the friars about the necessity of advancing the rights of the secular priests into having more let's say cathedrals more churches for the secular priests the rebellious Padre Burgos started calling himself Filipino-Indiana so now we have a new semantic for the self-identification self-identification of the Padre Burgos and company by calling himself Filipino-Indiana meaning native born Filipino so that was very empathic and the next shift to deepening the meaning of Filipino to go deep into the consciousness of people at the time was when Jose Rizal remember very much influenced by Padre Burgos wrote a poem La Juventud Pilipino meaning to the young Pilipino to the youth of the Philippines he said you have no other motherland but Pilipinas so we have Padre Burgos influencing Rizal in redefining Pilipino and in fact this cannot be doubted the influence of Padre Burgos to Rizal because it was Rizal himself who said that if not for 1872 meaning the martyrdom of Burgos, Gomez, and Zamora if not for 1872 I might have not written my novels Rizal said I might have become instead a Jesuit so that is an assertion that he borrowed so much from Padre Burgos who was the first to make it documentary fact that the Pilipino is Indiana and that refers to the freedom fighting but of inhabitants and then what is the next shift of the term Pilipino was when the rebels themselves at the end of the 1800s meaning the Katipunan-led rebellion started calling themselves in their act as let's say La Pilipina, La Revolucion Pilipina that was very Apunaryumabini so when these freedom fighters went to Malolos in order to make their constitution they also called their end product the Malolos constitution but La Republica Pilipina so Pilipina has definitely been grabbed and this is the process of inversion that I was referring to the term Pilipina has now been grabbed by the freedom fighters that it has no longer any value to the ruling class especially to the Spaniards but it's not only even in this field of let's say political identity calling La Republica Pilipina they also called the branch of the church Aglipayan into Iglesia Pilipina Independiente so everything has been Pilipina since the time that it was first expressed as a battle cry in the Alcemiento, the Ambaristo way back in 1807 so now we know that there has already been a separation of the semantics of Pilipina from the name of the king of Spain so when in some of my lectures outside around Asia I usually was asked by some foreigners the question how come you are the only country that allows itself to be called by the name of the king and so I take the chance to explain what I am saying now that the term Pilipina has been uprooted from its former meaning as referring to the king of Spain it has been implanted uprooted there and then implanted to mean the Islas Pilipinas that the motherland is called Pilipinas and then it is already liberated by the revolutionary process that our freedom fighters went through starting from the starting from the Alcemiento de Ambaristo this is Arnold Molina Asurin a scholar who is called by the fellow professors of the country and I continue to continue to change our insights into our because I say that and everything thank you very much