Answer the following questions.

1. What are the primary sources you encountered in the documentary? Secondary
sources? Tertiary sources?

Primary Sources : Paintings, Juan Luna Pictures, Case History, Juan Luna
Notebook, La Solidaridad, and Juan Luna record in Salon des Artistes Francais.

Secondary Sources : Newspaper, Gaston Damag, Manuel Ocampo, Prof Eric

Zerrudto, Maria Maganon, Bernald Port, Mara Padro Tavera, and Constancio
Ongpin.

Tertiary Sources : IWitness documentary

2. Why did Constancio Ongpin and Mara Pardo de Tavera had different
interpretation about the same event? Based on the sources they presented who
is more convincing among the two? Why?
>>>They have different interpretation maybe because they have different
sources with different point of view, and maybe because they being biased
because the person is in the information is someone who’s related to them. For
me Mara Padro de Tavera are the most convincing among the two, her
statement are followed by justifiable proofs of the events. Ongpin information are
unbelievable and not match in the evidence.
3. Did Howie Severino presented the documentary objectively? Explain your
answer.

>>>Yes, Howie severi no presented the documentary objectively and not biased.
Because he dig Juan Luna’s life deep, he investigate from different sides of the
story. He tell how Luna kept Filipinos from being called savage and end up being
one. He clarify the information clearly and not being criticism.