The AFP coat of arms and insignia

Media

Part of Philippine Armed Forces Journal

Title: The AFP coat of arms and insignia
Language: English
Source: Philippine Armed Forces Journal Volume 9 (No. 2) December 1955
Year: 1955
Rights
Fulltext: ~e AFP Coat of Arms and Insignia By Capt. Ambrosio P, Peha s H~:r~~!e:en:a:h;e::s! ~~~~ ing need of changing tho Philippine Army wliform and .its accompanying accoutrements. In 1946, in an open discussion held on this matter by Colonel Ireneo Buenconsejo, then AC of S, G-1, It was approved in principle to change the uniform especially the rank and branch of service inall"'" nia which were of American origin, Background In 1!147, definite steps were taken in this direction when HAP created a Unifo~ Board, under the chairmanship of Colonel Cia· ro B. Li:z:ardo, whose mission was to work on an appropriate dnigns of the uniform and such other deviees worn with it, so aa to make them distinct from those of the United States Army. lt was reuoned that after all it waa 'rargely for expediency that the Philippine Army had adopted the U.S. Army's devices of ranks and branch and service insignia in " 1!)36. After serious consideration of the matter, the Board pre!rented its concepts of a new set of Wli· form and its accompanying accoutrements, including a new coat of arms and insignia of rank, arms, and ;crv1ccs. When these designs were presented. the then Chief of Staff, Major General Rafael Jalandoni, made the obs:nvation that in any future war lhe Philippine Army would inevitably fight alongside the United States Army. For purpose of quick identification of the milltary personnel of these two al· !led countries, no changes should therefore be made on the P A uniform and insignia. This observation by Gen. Jalandoni had been dispelled by our experience in Korea where the military forces of more than a dozen nations were fighting aide by side, each of which has its distinctive set of uniform and in!dgnia, By 1952, therefore, a new Uniform BoaTd was created under Colonel Carm!¥o Z. Barbero, then AC of S, G-1, which worked out the designs for a new coat or arms and rank insignia. These were :~.pproved by the then Chief of Staff, Major General Calixto puque and President Quirino. Final u~e of the new set would depend, however, on the reaction of the Officers Corps of the AFP after a "service test" of six months. For service testing, the officers in GHQ nnd some select ~troup~ in the fielU were required to use the new set. There were varied reactions as a result of the service test, most J!Hlmint'nt of which wa:; the one sayin.l:" that tht new insignia of rank, particularly fot· the company grade officers, were like those used by the ROTC cadet officers. Consequently, after the six-month period, the Pre~ident disapproved the new design, Gtars for Insignia of Rank Soon after the appointment Vf Lieutenant General Jesus Vargas as Chief of Staff, the idea of adopting a new coat of :rm~ and officers' rank insignia was revived. Toward this end Gen. Vargas instructed Colonel Oscar Rialp, then AC of S, G-1, to work on appropriate devices that could be adopted for use of the Armed Forces. A new Uniform Board was created under G-1, which, after some lengthy deliberations, presented its concept of the coat of arms and officers' rank devices during a General Staft Conference on 28 October 1!)54. The rank de\'iccs that this\Board had m mind were more evolutionary than syml.olic. This Board conceived a "three-pointed slar" for the company grade officers, and "five-pointed stars'' for the general officers. The base metal to be used for their manufactore was silver. Immediately after the presentation by a representative of the Uniform Board, Major Rafael Diaz, numerous objections to the designs were raised. Colonel Dionisio Ojeda, then Superintendent of the PA School Center, and Lieutenant CoTonel Apolinar G. Fajardo, Chief of the Troop Information and Education Division, were most militant in their objections, and they suggested that the General Staff hold in abeyance the approval of the proposed coat of arms and rank de\'ices. Colonel Ojeda requested that he be given the chance to present the designs conceh•ed in the PASC while Col, Fajardo also requested that the designs his Division had worked on be considered. The Uniform '" Board contended that the 3-, 4-, and 5-pointed stars were simple and practical in design, aside from thf'l fact that th<·ircost wa~ very economical. On the other hand, those who opposed the designs were Vehement in their assertions that the ''stars" could be likened to amoebic evolution, especially becaus:? tho! proposition of the Uniform Board called for a 3-pointed star to indicate a 2nd lieutenant; and I THI COAT OF ARMS AnfED FO!'CJSOF THEPHILIFPINIS r&l ~ t.,..,, Ownru c., 'Dmtc ( Appr•vld) three 3-pointed st.\rs for the captain. A 4-pointed star indicated the l'ank of a major, two 4-pointed stars the lieutenant colonel; and three 4-pointed stars the colonel. The general officers, from the brigadier, major, and lieutenant general, would have fo1· rank insignia, one, two, and three 6-pointed 11tars, respect:\ •ly. No doubt the designs w•·n· very simple but, as pointed out hy Col. Fajardo, they violated certain fundamental principles of heraldry, among which were: <a> the design must be e~pressive of the mod salient national symbolilm, eit~r by use of •vmbolic objects or bu allegory; (b) the design must be simple yet it "IIISt accurately portrn.y a t~aliorlal tradition or sentiment; and (c) the design rtl!lst b£ of 11alurnl and logical optn!'ts. Colonel Fajardo's commentaries were made to 1efute :& statement made by Uaj. Diaz during the staff conference on 28 October, to the effect that the meaning or GEmAL OFFICERS symbolism of a heraldric device may be culled to conform with the deaign, which the Uniform Board intended to do to justify the adoption of the 3-, 4-, and &-pointed atars. In a Disposition Form sent to the Chief of Staff by Col. Fajardo, dated 8 November 1954, the latter pointed out that there exists great pouibility of exploiting "as thoroughly as possible the historical background of our country and people as well a~ the national tradi58 tions to serve av basis in designing at least the insignia of rank of the AFP officers." This commentary was useU on 13 Novem· ber 1954 by Col. Fajardo as a basis of a formal request to the Chief of Staff to afford ·him a chance to present to the General Staff the designs created by the TI & ED of an appropriate coat' of arms and officers' rank insignia. The request was granted, and on 23 November 1954, the General Staff, includJg the Comptroller, met to hear the proposition of Col. Fajardo. The conferen<:e did not turn out as originally intended since tl1e conferees alao heard the proposition of Col. Ojeda. Likewise, in this same conference Maj. Diaz once more presented the 3-, 4-, and 5-pointed stars. Nothing definite resulted from this conference, although the majority of the conferees agreed to adopt the design of the rank device of c::ompany grade officers as presented by Col. Fajardo, for field grade officers, the design presented by Col. Ojeda, while the 5-pointed got the eqpferees nod. Commenting on thiB matter, Col. Fajardo in· his letter to the Chief of Staff, dated 5 February, assailed the choice of design as n "tragi-comedy.'' He pointed out to the Chief of Staff that "the design of the Officers' insignia of rank was done at random. Consequently, the choice for the AFP rank insignia did not follow a defiuite Iogie in that the company grade officers' rank de\"ices were. adopted for their supposed 'simplicity'; the general officers' rank insignia were adopted because of their being 'universal' in use; while the field gL·ade officers' in signia were :1dopted for their 'symbolism'." The Tl & ED Design The designsof the coat of arms and officers' insignia of rank, as proposed by Col. Fajardo were admitedly inspired by the Filipino flag. In alluding to this fact, the Colonel in his letter to the Chief .of Staff, dated 5 February, poin•• ted out: " .. I. submit that if the design and symbolism of our national flag have stood the test of time · they must be honorable nnd a good one. Therefore I submit that if our revolutionary leaders, in spite of their limi~d education and narrower perspective, could design the Filipino flag tlutt it the ultimate in symbolism, there U the nwre reason that we, of thUs generation, with our claim to ha:ving amasted greater wtalth of information, a mort -rounded education and b-rooder horizoru~, shuuld -readily acquire in1piration f-rom the field of honor of our flag as the dnign of lhe AFP intignia of rank and such other devices per· tinent to our o-rganization. It behooves us as members o7 the military p-rofession to be loyal to our gloriout past. We should be lhe most mililant group of people to adhere to the noble tentiment of the Filipino people and to PEV"petuate the glorious tradition of our own organization. It is, as a matter of duty, our inherent obligation as 1nernbers of the military profetsion to preserve everything that is noteworthy in our history and tradition - the symbol adopttd by our htroet and fortfatherl ond beqUeathed to us as a -noble Ugacv which is truly ou-r own." Evidently this• letter drove home a point for the Chief of Staff directed that a conference be held on lC February 1955 by the Special and General Staffs, including the commanders of the major services, to take up nnew the designs for a new coat of ' and officers' rank insignia proposed by Col. "Fajardo. During this conference, the de· l'ice8 proposed by tlie PASC and the Uniform Board, expounded by Col. Ojeda and l\laj. Diaz, respectively, were practically ignored. Colonel Fa~ardo, who was given practically the entire conference time to discuss the designs conC<livcd by him, stressed the point thn.t the designs he was presenting for adoption were well within the purview of the criteria set by G-1, in that these proposed devices wero (l) symbolic, (2J nattvc in their motif, (3) uniqut:, (4) distincti..,e, {5) simple, and (6) Jlractical. Colonel Fajardo, furthennore, stressed that in resolving the problem of an appropriate coat of arms and officers' J·ank insignia, General Headquaters should be guided by certain heraldric prin ciples which have be~n universally accepted and are therefore limetested. The principles involved were: (1) The design must be e:t· pres11ive of the most sali~rnt national 1>7fmbolism, either by use of St•ml>olic object or by allegory; (2) 7'/zc design must be simple nnd ytt it must accurately por tray a natiornzl tradition or sentiment; and (3) The design must be of na-tural aptness and logical sequence. To clinch his arguments, Col. Fajardo pointed that inasmuch as the rlesig-ns conceiverl by hilflw•·•• inspired by the field of honor of the national/far'!. theywerethcrcforc th~ most appropr.ate des•gns."After all", Col. Fajardo !!mphasizcd, "these (referring to the flag's field of honor) are lofty symbols COJJceived by our heroes and forefa~hers , bequeathed to us as a noble legacy which is truly our own; FIELD GJ:APE OPFh.:RhS ...... itt .. ;j • ... ,.. llJ.jor Llc.l. Collllol 60 J CO!llPAJJ!I GKAUE OFF1C£KS • <:::.)} - .... .... .... 2n.lLl lot Lt C.ploin ~~~I livmg reli!:s we must fervently <:herish and proudly hand down to our posterity." Colonel Fajardo went further to recommend the approval in toto of all the designs conceived by the Chief, TI & ED, inasmuch as these designs "logi· eally symbolize the hierarchy and chain of command in our military establishment." Decision Reached After the presentation by Col. Fajardo, Lt. Col. Jose M. Mendo· 11a, Asst. G-1, and Maj. Dia:~: also S(IOke in favor of the 3-, 4-, and 5point stars with a view of still influencing the decision on the matter. Colonel Ojeda also spoke tc argue for the designs of the PASC. The arguments of Col. Fajardo, undoubtedly, gave the conferees a new outlook. Where once there was indecision, now there was c1·ystalliud opinion on the matter of a new coat of arms and officers' rank insignia. The Chief of Staff, who arrived in the conference room in the midst of the deliberation, made it clear at the outset that the choice of designs for the new coat flf arms and officers' rank insignia shall be ma< ll' a " democratic process" by getting the majority's wish ,hrnugh open voting. The Uniform Board's designs which were first taken up, got two votes - th1· vntes of Col. Mendoza and Maj. Diaz , while the designs by the PASC had one vote - that of Oj,.da. The TI & ED's designs were voted by a great majority - by the General Staff members and the representatives of the major services. In passing it may be mentioned that the decision to adopt a new set of coat of arms and officers' rank insignia was influenced to a 61 large degree by tl'e forthcoming SEATO conference in May 1955. Th., Chief of Staff desired t he AFP to have ils own lievices for use of its officers during that conference in place of those borrowed frrm the U.S. Army. Modifications By general agreement of the conferees, however, some slight modifications were introduced, against the wishes of Col. Fajardo who fought for the adoption in toto of the original designs. These modifications were the :lssignment of the golden "Philippine Sunburst" to indicate the field grade officers' rank instead of its being used by general officers. The star, which was further modified by superimposit ion of the golden sunburst and the triangle to make it truly distinct, unique, and symbolic, was retained'for general officers. Also, by grneral agreement, the three triangles, three suns, and three stars, to indicate the rank of l"aptain, colonel, and lieutenant general, respectively, were to be presented in a straight line instead of a triangle as was orginally intended to portray the triangular field of honor of the natiOnal flag. The coat of arms was unanimously voted for adoption by the AFP, provided that the motto "UNA ANG BAYAN" was replaced with"PHILIPPINES". manufactured as pe~ agreed modifications, for presentation to secure the approval of the Presi(!Ent. Colonel Fajardo ordered the n"'w devices from Mr. Jose Tupaz, Jr., of the El Oro Engravers. Mr. Tupaz as in the past, readily cooperated by re-setting the original dies at his own expenses. In the second week of Ma1·ch 1955, the new samples were presented to the AFP by Mr. Tupaz, a11d these were forwarded to the President, through the Secretary of National DefensE", on 12 March 1955. In his 1st indorsement on the matter, dated 15 March 1955, the Undersecretary of Defense, HonOl"ab\e Jose M. Crisol, recommended approval of the new AFP coat of arms and officers' rank insignia as proposed by the Chief of Staff. The Undersecretary, however, by way of comment a.nd suggestion, voiced the opinion that it were better and of "more patriotic fervor" to retain on the coat of arms the motto "UNA ANG BAl'AN" as originally conceived, instead of "PHILIPPINES." The Undersecretary, furthermore, suggested setting the three triangles, three suns, and three star!! in a triangulat'· pattern as originally intended as "this will follow the triangular concept of the national flag and the triangular pattern of the in· signia of Army of the Revolu· tion." Shortly before th.e conference broke up, the Chief of Staff directed Col. Fajardo to procure a new set of samples of the coat of arms and officers' rank devices, The President readily approved in toto the recommendation made by the Chief ot Staff, contained in G2 a 2nd ind!rsement, dated 17 March 1955. The President, likewise, approved the proposal that there would be no more "service test" period as recommended by the Chief of Staff. Immediately after this approval a rush order for 400 sets of the new devi<:Cll was made to Mr. Tupaz to fill the needs of all the, officers attending the forthcoming SEATO conference. The change from the old coat of anns and the U.S. Army's rank insignia was effected by GHQ on 1 September 1955. It is important that an ap· praisal of tht: reasons for the aduption of th1· new AF'P coat of arms and rank insi!:"nia be made. Toward this end we have to appreciate fully the terms 11ymbol, symbolism, and emblem. As defined in Webster's International Dictionary, symbol is "an authoritative summ.a1"JI of faith or doctrine", or something "which stands for or suggests something else by reason or relationship, association, convention, or accidental but not intentional resemblance." Symbolism, on the other hand, is defined as the "practice or art of using symbols, as by investing things with a symbolic mea.ning or by ezpressing the invisible, intangible, or spiritual, by means of visible or sensuous representation." Symbolism, likewise, is defined as "the artistic imitation or invention not as an end in itself but aa a method of revealing or tugguting immaterial, ideal otherwise in£angible truth or state." The word emblem, as defined in Webster's International Dictionary, means "a picture accompanied by a motto." It is also meant as "a visible sign of an.ideal, an object, or a figure of an object symbolizing or suggesting another object, or an idea. having nat11ral aptness." Choice of Symbols During the pre-Spanish and Spanish periods, the Philippines was lacking in unity as the term is construed today. As a result, there was not a time during the 1War!y four cenh11ies of Spanish rule when the Filipinos could put up a united front against the ty. ranny and oppression by the Spanish colonizers. By the end of the 19th century, however, there wa~ develope(~ a national consciousue~s 1n the Filipino ptop~, r.,sultin!! from the liberal ideas tnt~ring the country And when fin~tlly the Philippine Re\·olution against Spain attained th>' desired momentum there was need of creating a distinctly native sym· bnl that could best speak of the idealsandaspirationsofthef'i!ipinos. That symbol must be one which by reason of relationship, association, or convention could best portray the Filipino sentiment not only at that time but for all times. The Filipino nationalists had to have an artistic imitation of their ideal for freedom, equality, a.nd fraternity; furthermore, t/,at symbol must convey nat1tral 63 aptness. " Finally in 1896, the first native emblem was unfurled by Bonifacio, which was a red triangle charged with a Tagalog letter "K". Later on, two more K's were added. ~aeh of which stood for, /(ataa.staasan, Kagalanggalatlgan, Katipunan. The other rovolutionary leaders, having no other thought except to give a symbol or meaning to the cause they were fighting for, and with the original Bonifacio flag as as their model, put up distinctive emblems of their own. There was therefore nothing standard; nor was there one that could best portray the sentiment of a united people. Two more years had to go by. The Philippine Revolution against Spain heeame national in magniGeneral DO MajGeneral 64 tude, involving as it J_d practically all of the provinces of the country. But the design of the Filipino emblem or flag that we have today was not conceived in our own country which was then torn by the war and by fratricidal strifes. Our Filipino leaders, among them Emilio Aguinaldo, Pio Valenzuela, and Gregorio del Pilar, hnd gone in voluntary exile to Hongkong and within the peaceful environs of that British Crown Colony were to dig deep into history and accept as intangible truth the most notable features of the Philippines and its people. These salient features were intricately woven into a fabric which finally materialized into an emblem or flag that i< truly representative of the rich historical background, the glorifield Grade Officers Major LlCclcnel Colonel ous traditions, and the noble sentiment of the Filipino people and their country. It is the same flag conceived in 1898, in Hongkong, that we revere today and to which we owe allegiance. The Filipino tri-colored emblem has withstood changes and time for no other reason than the fact that it is the moat eloquent manifestation as well as the ultimate in design that could best symbolize everything that is lofty in Philippine history. Take the color scheme: the blue stands for freedom; the red, for courage, and the white, for purity. The right aide of the flag, which under a heraldric principle is the field of honor, contains the white triangle on which is charged the symbolic 65 Philippine sun on the center and tho three stars inside the angles of the triangle. That a trian1le should represent the field of honor of our flag, was not inten· tional but rather an accidental resemblance to the geographical conformity of the country. And further it is an accidental re-semblance to a geographical conformity of a larger territory of which the Philippines was once upon a time a part. History holds that in the re-mote past the Philippines in IIUC· cession was a part of the great Mahjapahit and Shri·Visaya empires. The Mahjapahit Empire, founded in the 8th century, in· eluded the vast areas from the f«)Uthern half of Formosa in the north, tha Malay Peninsula, Su· I matra, and Ceylon jn the west, tlu;. Moluccas and the western half of Java in the cast. Taken as a whole, this once vast >\sian empire was triangular in shape. It is universally accepted in heraldry that1 in designing any object to represent another, one must make use of the most ex of honor of the Filipbo national flag have been combined: the white triangle, t he eight-rayed sun and the three stars. T hese ure held together by a garland of s:~.mpaguita, the Filipino national flower, which also holds in Jllace .1 blue scroll charged "UNA ANG BAYAN". The motto was bepressivc existing symbolism. With licved most appropriate since il this rule in mind, the designers can inspire patrioti'im and can -:) of the new coat of arms and rank serve well as a baltlecry. This iusignia of the Armed Forces have drawn inspiration from the Filipino flag. These designs, therefor~. speak well of the rich heritage of the F'ilipinos and are in keeping with their present loyalties and nationalism. New Coot of Arms F1rst, th(' thr('(' rnost distinctive symbols containeU in the fielrl design was unanimously approved in principle by the General Staff in its conference on 28 October 1954. Subsequently, however, in another conference of the General Staff, the rnotto "'UNA ANG A A Y A N '' was changed to '"PIIILIPPINES". As finally approved by the General Ileadqnarters and the Pres· Company Grade Officers l\ Captain L-~--------------~,~.,------------lstlieu!enant idcnt, the n~w coat of arms has for its central motif the silver triangle, superimposed with the symbolic eight-rayed Philippine sun charged on its center with .ancient Tagalog letter "K". His-torically, the K was a feature of the early flags used by the Filipino revolutionists of 1896. It stood for Kalayaan (freedom) and Kasarinlan (independence) . The main intention of the designers of the new coat of arms wa~ therefore to associate our country's newly-found freedom with the past aspirations of our revolutionists. The letter K is as well a reminder of the AFP's zealot devotion in the discharge of its duties to s~fc-guard the indepcnd~nce of the country. At the base of the triangle is a blue scroll charged "Philippines". The garland of sampaguita, the ntltional flower, emanates from the scroll and encircles the silver triangle and the sun. The two tips of the garland hold the cluster of three stars which during the revolution of 1896 portrayed the united effort of the three major island groups of the country, namely: Luton, Visayas, and Mindanao. The whole device is done in gold except for the silver triangle and the blue let.ter K and the blue &croll. Insignia of Rank Like the coat of arms, the new devices of rank insignia have been intended to depict Filipino sentL· ment, traditions, and history. Their design have also been in· :pired by thl' field of honor of thto Filipino fla g. A modified silver equilateral triangle whose sides each of 3/4-inch, are drawn with a little arc instead of with a straight line. represents the rank of company grade officers, -.vhile the symbolic golden Philippine sun with its 8 rays, 3/ 4-inch in diameter has been set aside to indicate the rank of field gL·ade officers. Both of these rank devices are charged on the center with the blue tetter "K" in old Tagalog script, signifying Kalaya,. fiJI and Kasarilan. Adopted to represent the general officer's rank is a silver star, one-inch in diameter, on which is superimposed a golden 8-raycd sun (field grade) and further superimposed with a silver triangle (company grade) charged on the center with a blue letter "K". The general's star with its superimposed devices is the most original and distinctive of its kind. It is intended to depict the chain of command and cohesiveness in the military hierarchy. 67 The .new rank devices are presented in a one-two-three concept. The 2nd lieutenant, major, and brigadier general would be represented by one triangle, one sun, and one star, respectively. The 1st ileutenant, lieutenant colonel, and major general would each have two triangles, two suns and two stars set on a hon:tontal row. The captain, colonel and lieutenant general gets three triangles, three suns, and I three stars, also sel on a hori:o:ontal row. A clearance or space 1/8-inch between each of the multi-devices was also provided for. The rank devices as discussed above are intended for use on shoulder boal'lls or shoulder straps and on the collar in the case of 2nd and 1st lieutenants, major and lieutenant colonel, and brigadier general and major general. The multi-devices of rank for use on the collar of the captain, colonel, and lieutenant general were of reduced sizes of 112-inch, with n 2/ 32-inch clearance or space between each device Although these new rank devices were already approved by the President, the Uniform Board made one final move at their modifications by presenting to the Chief of Staff in the latter part of March 1955, a proposition that all•of the collar rank devices, including those for the 2nd lieutenant, major, and brigadier general, should be of the reduced size, that is 1/2-inch. The Uniform Board, likewise, proposed that the multidevices of ranks be set without clearance or apace !rom each other. The fallacy of these propositions were assailed by Col. Fajardo who claimed that the 1/ 2-inch triangle or l / 2-inch sun for the use of the 2nd lieutenant or major, would be too small for ready identification at a distance. Moreover, these single devices of rank would not be any different in appearance, especially from a distance, from college fraternity 68 pins. Colonel Fajardo also pointed out that the multi-devices of rank when set close to each other would look like "sitting ducks." One has only to imagine how the captain's bars of the U.S. Army would look like if they were set side by side without clearance. The proposal at modifying what had already been approved by the President would look "preposterous." A compromise was agreed upon however, to have the reduced collar rank devices include those for use of the 1st lieutenant, lieutenant colonel, and major general. Thia compromise rr.easure waa the one finally approved by the Chief of Staff, along with the original intention to provide a clearance of 1/8-inch between the multi-devices of rank for use on the shoulder board or shoulder strap, and 2132inch between the multi-devices of rank for use on the collar. Conclusion For the record, the desire to change the pre war PA coat of arms, which made use of the Amedcan eagle for its main mGtif, and the U.S. Army's rank devices, resulted directly from our change in political atatus. The first effort taken toward this end was late in 1946, inspired by Col. Buenconsejo, then AC of S, 'G-1. Definite steps in this direction wet·e taken in 194-7 with the creation of a Uniform Board under Col. Lizardo, but the Board's designs were disapproved by the then Chief of Staff, Gen. Jalan· doni. in•ignio of I~• AFf' &y Mr. Jo•• Tupoz, Jr. in o c•r•mony ol Mcdocoiion", on 23 No••mb•r 1955 In 1952, new designs were pro- ficers' rank devices now in use posed by Col. Barbero, then AC were the product of an intense of S, G-1. The new sets were research by the heraldry section tentatively approved and used of the Military History Branch, ~:::::. 8 ;!:-7:;i~~e:·:~;-"~~~a!~:!~ TI & ED. Colonel Fajardo, as to these insignia led to its final Chief of the Division, had chieCly • disapproval by then President inspired these designs, which Quirino. were approved by President MagThe new Coat of Arms and of- saysay on 17 March 1955. A RMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES EM's Chevrons at tC<.H1!VI"I ()r :St·omuno, /~t ('/) E'-; r;., 1F'i1-/ ;-i,lf/turlf) lih the new A1P coot ol ""'" ond ollicerJ tonk '""Iii"'"· ,..,.. ,.., .. ,.,,, lor EM QOI Jlofl triongulo< de.,gn lrom Notoonol Flog fhe1 ore ,..,.,. dutoncli>'e 70 AFP QM INSIGNE The/eolwuollheinsiQneorelhe/o!/o.,jng The Key.- A uni>'eTfol ond on(ienr <ymbof for storage ond <uppl•• • The Kri• (Creeoe). - One of the weapon• of rhe Moloycu u<ed in •~• oofegouarding of oupplieo lor the individual, rhe fomily, the home ond lhe nolion lor mmtory purposes The Wheel. - For lrontporlorion, o mo;or /un<lion of the OM s ,., ,.;, ., Modern military operolions depend largely on tronoporlolion lor "'""" "'o"' of pe.,onne/, e quipmenl ond oupplie<. The eighr •poluu of !he whettl re present lhe eight original provincu of lhe Philippines that re>'ohed osurin.r lheSpol>iord•forindependence The Equilateral Triangle.- Fat equitable dislribution ond ••••ice It ol.o repreunt unitr as defined in rhe Notional Flog. The opu is down to fotm o funnel, through which the QM Service collects ond suppfie• the ormed forcer The coconut.-foundthroughoutthePhifippin.,. Jli• o source of hundreds of QM suppliu such 01 slolionerie•, food, fuel, clothing, joniloriolo ""d mony other. The four leo .. , repreoenl the four mojor ••r~icu ol the AFP. The Rice. - On top of the triangle ir the prime commodity onrJ nud of the soldier It io the ,rople food of the notion On food the ormy The Color Gold- for obundonce 81o<k- reprerentr •oil Agriculture;, the booic indu,try ol the country from which mo•t OM item• come 71