This is in relation to the article “Sword and other Bonifacio ties to Pampanga,” which reported on the hypothesis of Francis Musni that Andres Bonifacio was a Kapampangan. (Inquirer, 12/4/11)
Musni says that Panday Pira forged cannons “for the pre-Spanish Kapampangan kingdoms.” How does he know that there were pre-Spanish Kapampangan kingdoms? Has he found archaeological sites and/or archival manuscripts?
The so-called “three-generation test” mentioned by Musni is not conclusive. It goes like this: (1) Narciso begot Benito. Benito begot Luciano. (2) Narciso begot Manuel. Manuel begot Proceso. (3) Narciso begot Felix. Felix begot Aurelia.
Narciso is therefore the grandfather of Luciano, Proceso and Aurelia. But Proceso says that Narciso is his great-greatgrandfather.
But where does Andres Bonifacio come in? How is Proceso related to Andres? Proceso says he cannot specify “because older Kapampangans usually referred to their relatives by only using the term ‘pipumpunan’ (elder).”
That is not a valid excuse, because there are Kapampangan families and clans—like the Mercados and the Valencias of Minalin, for example—whose members can pinpoint their specific mutual relationships, even if they use the general term pipumpunan after the specific apu (grandparent), apu king tud (great-grandparent), apu king talampakan (great-great-grandparent).” They have a record of their family tree in black and white.
Proceso Bonifacio should show us a clear, complete, authentic record of his family tree in black and white to prove his claim. The mere fact that the Center for Kapampangan Studies helped him build a bust of Gat Andres Bonifacio at Sta. Cruz Elementary School does not prove that he is related to the national hero.
Musni says: There were Katipunan cells in Guagua. Therefore Andres Bonifacio was a Kapampangan.
Let me follow his logic: There were Katipunan cells in Bulacan, in Bicolandia, in Cebu. Therefore, Andres Bonifacio was a Bulakeño, a Bicolano, a Cebuano.
He says: There are many people in Masantol surnamed Bonifacio. Therefore Andres Bonifacio was a Kapampangan. Let me follow his logic: There are many people in Minalin surnamed Mercado. Therefore, Jose Protacio Rizal Mercado was a Kapampangan.
A sword was found in Apalit. Therefore it was made in Apalit. Therefore it was made by Panday Pira. Therefore there were pre-Spanish Kapampangan kingdoms and empires.
Musni says that, according to his 21st-century informants, a sword called “Bartolome” (or “Shakespeare,” whatever) was the favorite of the 19th-century Katipuneros, and the soup “sabo Andres Bonifacio” that contained the leaves “bulung Andres Bonifacio” was what those Katipuneros survived on. These informants were not there at that time. I wonder what criteria Musni used to determine whether to believe what they said or not. If Musni was the first one to reveal to the scientific community the existence of those leaves, they could be given the scientific name Bonifacius Musninensis.
—FR. EDILBERTO V. SANTOS,
edromuald@yahoo.com