Conflicting Views and

Controversies in Philippine History

Multiperspectivity
Looking at historical events, personalities, developments,
cultures, and societies from different perspectives
This requires incorporating source materials that reflect
different views in history
Historians
Can decided which sources to use
May misinterpret evidence
Attends to those who claims that certain event happened
May ignore those who go against the evidence
May omit significant facts of the subject
May impose ideology to the subject
 Site of the First Mass
Albo
*March 16, 1521- sailed on
Westward direction
*Reached Mazava where they
planted cross on top of the
mountain
*Location of Mazava fits the
location of Limasawa, located at
the southern tip of Leyte
*No mention of the first mass; his
account only mentioned planting
of the cross
Pigafetta
*March 16, 1521- expedition
sighted the island of Zamal; route
was westward of Ladrones Islands
*Found the island of Homonhon
*Expedition stayed for 8 days at
Homonhon (from March 17-March
25)
*Left Homonhon on March 25,
sailed on a west southwest route
*Reached Mazaua and stayed in
the island for 7 days
 Pigafetta: 7 Days in Mazaua
 March 28- exchange of gifts between Magellan and a native
King
 March 29- Magellan sent his slave to ask for food supplies
from the native king; another exchange of gifts happened
between Magellan and the native King; Pigafetta became a
guest of the King for a night
 March 30- Pigafetta and his companion returned to the both
 March 31- in the morning, Magellan ordered a mass to be
held on the shore, after which a cross was venerated; in the
afternoon, a cross was planted at the summit of the highest
hill, attended by both the King of Mazaua and King of Butuan
 April 1- Magellan in Zubu
 April 2 and 3- Magellan and his men work on the harvest (for
food supplies) as what he previously asked for from the
Kings of Zubu and Mazaua
 April 4- left Mazaua, bound for Cebu
 Summary
 Butuan
 Long believed to be the site of the 1st mass
 Monument was erected in 1872 near Agusan River in commemoration
of the expedition’s arrival and celebration of the mass on April 8, 1521
 Francisco Albo
 Pilot/Captain of Magellan’s ship, Trinidad
 One of the 18 survivors of the expedition
 Primary source through the use of his Log
 Antonio Pigafetta
 Magellan’s official chronicler
 Primary source through the use of his chronicle
 Conflicts
 The River, a crucial aspect of Butuan was not mentioned by Pigafetta
 Butuan is a riverine settlement, located in the Agusan River
 The beach in Masao in located in the delta of Agusan River
 Albo only mentioned putting up a cross while Pigafetta mentioned the
conduct of a mass on the shore
 Cavite Mutiny
1872- historic year of 2 events
Cavite Mutiny
GOMBURZA Execution
Review on Jose Montero y Vidal account
Assessment on Governor Rafael Izquierdo’s account
Analysis on Pardo de Tavera’s account
 Jose Montero y Vidal Account
Reasons for the Mutiny
Abolition of privileges of the Cavite laborers
Determining circumstances in attaining
independence
Overthrowing of the secular throne in the Spanish
Revolution
Propaganda against monarchy
Attestation of the dethroned majesty
Democratic and Republican books and pamphlets
Speeches and preachings of the new ideas in Spain
Outbursts of the American publicists
Criminal policy of the Governor
 Governor Rafael Izquierdo Report
 Reasons for the Mutiny
 Abolition of privileges of the Cavite workers
 Exemption from payment of tribute
 Forced labor
 Other reasons laid out:
 Support of the native clergy to the rebels
 Attempt to overthrow the Spanish government to install a new
leader (either in the person of Father Burgos of Father Zamora)
 Spanish account indicates that the event of 1872 was
premeditated and was part of a conspiracy among educated
leaders, mestizos, lawyers and residents of Manila and Cavite
 Planned to liquidate high-ranking Spanish officials
 Killing of the friars
 Signal is firing of the rocket from Intramuros
 Cont.
Mishap
January 20, 1872- feast of the Virgin of Loreto in the
Sampaloc district
Feast came with a fireworks display
Cavitenos thought that the fireworks display was the signal
to commence the attack
Led by Sgt. Lamadrid, they attacked the Spanish officers and
siezed the arsenal
Gov. Izquierdo sent reinforcement which led to the crushing
of the revolt
GOMBURZA Execution
Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora were tried in a court martial
and were sentenced to death
Execution of the martyr priests was concluded on February
17, 1872 to serve as a threat to Filipinos to never attempt to
fight Spain
 Pardo de Tavera Account
 Cavite Mutiny was merely a mutiny of Filipino soldiers and
laborers of the Cavite arsenal due to:
 Dissatisfaction from the draconian policy of Gov. Izquierdo (1) abolition
of privileges and (2) prohibition of the founding of school of arts and
trades for Filipinos
 Gov. Izquierdo saw the establishment of school as threat to creating a
political club
 Tavera ‘s opinion indicates that the Spanish friars and Gov. Izquierdo
used the Cavite Mutiny to address issues through blowing out of
proportion the isolated mutiny
 Factors that affected the event
 Central Government in Madrid planned to deprive the friars of powers
in the civil government, direction and management of educational
institutions
 Central Spanish Government introduced an educational decree fusing
sectarian schools run by friars into a Philippine Institute
 The decree aimed at improving education in the Philippines by requiring
teaching positions
 Summary
General Izquierdo’s arrival ended the dream for reforms
The prosecutions instituted was a result of dispute
between Filipino clerics and friars
The suspension of building a school in Manila (Arts and
Trades) was to repress the growth of liberal teachings
The abolition of tax exemption of the Cavite workers by
Gov. Izquierdo resulted to dissatisfaction
The friars took advantage of the event to cement their
dominance as there have been evidences of
discontentment among Filipinos
The Cavite Mutiny resulted in the martyrdom of
GOMBURZA, and paved way to the revolution
culminating in 1895
 Rizal Retraction
4 iterations (versions) of the Retraction

La Voz Espanola and Diario de Manila – published

December 30, 1896
La Juventud- published in Barcelona, Spain on February
14, 1897
Archdiocesan Archives- “original” text found on May 18,
1935, after 4 decades of disappearance
 Fr. Vicente Balaguer Testimony
Regarded as the lone eyewitness
Based from Fr. Balaguer’s testimony, he said
that:
Rizal woke up several times
Rizal confessed 4 times
He attended a Mass and received communion
He prayed the rosary
He claimed to have received the “exact” copy of
Rizal’s retraction
 Cont.
Fr. Pio Pi’s copy (Fr. Balaguer’s superior), has the
same text as that of Fr. Balaguer, but Fr. Pi was not
able to verify in his testimony whether or not the
retraction was written by Rizal himself
No one claimed to have seen the original
text/retraction, except the publishers of La Voz
Espanola who claimed that they saw and read
Rizal’s hand-written retraction
Fr. Manuel Garcia claimed to have discovered the
“original” document, but added more doubts on the
authenticity of the retraction due to differences in
the texts comparing it the Fr. Balaguer and Fr. Pi’s
copy.
 Significant Differences
“Original” vs. Jesuit Copy
“Original” Fr. Balaguer
and Newspaper Copy and Jesuit Copy
 “mi cualidad”  “mi calidad”
 Have the word “catolica”  The word “Catolica” was
after the first “Iglesias” omitted after the first
 The word “misma” was not “Iglesias”
in the original text
 The word “misma” was
 Second paragraph started added before the third
immediately with the
second sentence “Iglesias”
 Only have 4 commas  Second paragraph began in
 With names of witnesses the fifth sentence
 Have 11 commas
 No names of witnesses
 The Beginnings of Retraction

Rizal wanted to canonically marry Josephine

Bracken
To do this, he was required to sign a
profession of faith and a retraction to be
approved by the bishop of Cebu
Spanish Law established Civil Marriage in the
Philippines, but the local government
suspended people’s right to avail of such
Cry of Balintawak/Pugadlawin

“El Grito de Rebellion”- Cry of Rebellion-

marked the start of revolutionary events
within Spanish colonies
August 1896- rebellion against Spanish
colonial government was declared in the
Philippines, in northeast Manila
A monument was erected in commemoration
of the Heroes of 1896 at EDSA corner A.
Bonifacio Drive
 Conflicting Views
Guillermo Masangkay
 Advisor of Andres Bonifacio
 August 26- meeting was held in
Balintawak at the house of Apolonio
Samson, Cabeza of Balintawak
 Meeting was presided by Andres
Bonifacio to discuss when the
uprising was to take place
 Some leaders including Pio
Valenzuela opposed the start of
revolution
 Bonifacio left the session hall and
talked to the people waiting outside
 Bonifacio challenged the people
waiting by destroying their cedulas
as a sign of severance from the
Spaniards
Pio Valenzuela
 Close Associate of Andres Bonifacio;
regarded as the lone eyewitness
 August 19 and 20- first arrival of
Bonifacio and Pio Valenzuela at
Balintawak, respectively
 August 22- first meeting at the house
of Apolonio Samson at Kangkong;
meeting was only exchange of views
and no resolution was adopted
 August 23- In Pugad Lawin at the
house of Juan Ramos (son of
Melchora Aquino), there was a
discussion whether or not to start the
revolution on August 29,1896, after
which many of those present during
the meeting tore their cedula
 Conflicting Views
Santiago Alvarez
 He was the son of Mariano
Alvarez, leader of
Magdiwang faction of the
Katipunan
 Stated in his 1927 testimony
that the Cry happened on
August 24, 1896 in Bahay
Toro, Quezon City
 Bahay Toro is a place
between Pasong Tamo and
Kang Kong
Gregoria De Jesus
 Wife of Andres Bonifacio
 Assumed the symbolic
name “Lakambini”
 She stated that the seal,
weapons and papers of the
Katipunan were in her
custody
 She is regarded as a mere
secondary source having
NOT witnessed the actual
event, rather only knew that
the rebellion took place
 Summary
 The account of primary sources indicates that there is indeed a
disagreement on the place and date of the occurrence of the Cry.
 Using primary and secondary sources, 4 places have been
identified:
 Balintawak
 Pugad Lawin
 Kang Kong
 Bahay Toro
 There were variation of dates (August 23, 24, 25, 26, 1896)
 Valenzuela’s account should be analyzed carefully due to
differences of his testimony
 He testified during the Spanish interrogation that the Cry happened on
August 26, 1896 in Balintawak
 In his “Memoirs of the Revolution”, he stated that the Cry happened on
August 23, 2896 in Pugad Lawin
 Several accounts of the Cry may be attributed to Bonifacio and his
men moving from one place to another to avoid the Spanish
government haunting them
 Cont.
Due to competing accounts, the exact date and place of
the Cry is still in contention
In 1908 until 1963, the official stance was that the cry
happened in Balintawak on August 26, 1896
1n 1963, using Pio Valenzuela’s account, the
government shifted to August 23 as the date of the Cry
in Pugad Lawin
Pugad Lawin is not on any of the official maps released
by the Government in 1956, 1987 and 1990
The changes in municipal/city boundaries can have an
impact to the identification of the place of the Cry