RIPH 111 ACTIVITY #2

1. Who is Santiago Alvarez? How come his writing is a primary source?

a. Santiago Alvarez was a revolutionary general and a founder and honorary president
of the first directorate of the Nacionalista Party. He was born on July 25, 1872 in
Imus, Cavite. “Kidlat ng Apoy” (Lightning of Fire) was his alias because of his
inflamed bravery and courage in Cavite. He is the only child of Mariano Alvarez, the
revolutionary general. Due to his presence on the scene and his firsthand experience
of the events, his writing is considered a primary source.

2. Who is Teodoro Agoncillo? How come his writing is a secondary source?

a. He was a prominent Filipino historian of the 20th century. He and his companions
Renato Constantino were among the first historians of the Philippines to become
known for advocating a strongly nationalist perspective on the country's past. He was
a poet as well as an essayist. Because he was a well-known historian in the 20th
century in the Philippines and wrote on the "Tejeros convention," his writing is
considered as secondary source.

3. Create a chart comparing in detail the accounts of the two writers regarding the
“Tejeros Convention”

EXCERPT FROM THE SANTIAGO EXCERPT from TEODORO AGONCILLO,

ALVAREZ ACCOUNT “Katipunan and the
Revolution: Memoirs of a General”, (pp.
82-88). This is referring to the events that
transpired during the Tejeros Convention.
Since this is the primary source, the author
was He was a Magdiwang man and the
Commander-in-Chief of the said faction.
The election, which was conducted by two
factions—Magdiwang and Magdalo—at the
Tejeros convention, was described in detail
by Santiago Alvarez with an objective
viewpoint. The fact that he cited the
delegations of the people engaged, which
only take place on election day, shows how
thorough it is.
The election held by the two factions,
Magdiwang and Magdalo, in the Tejero
Convention is the focus of Santiago Alvarez's
narration.
There is a scene in which Dr. Jose Rizal's
sister, Trining, and his widow, Josephine, beg
General Apoy not to arrest Mr.Montenegro
and instead to let him stay at the estate
house where they were staying.
“The Revolt of the Masses, the story of
Bonifacio and the Katipunan”
He was a historian in 20th century in the
Philippines
Indicating the circumstances leading up to
Tejeros' convention is Teodoro Agoncillo's
goal. Dates, battles, and significant events
were given, but Alvarez had differing
knowledge of them.
Teodoro Agoncillo emphasizes the events
that occur before and after the convention
when presenting the story.
There is no mention of Trining and his widow,
Josephine, begging to General Apoy not to
detain Mr. Montenegro.

4. Form your internal and external criticisms over the two sources.
Internal Criticism addresses the issue of credibility, such as the Author's Character,
dependability, and ability and willingness to tell the truth. However, in my opinion, the excerpt of
Santiago Alvarez, who was there when the story happened, was biased because he did not tell
the truth from the perspectives of Magdiwang and Magdalo. As a primary source, he simply
stated what happened at the time without knowing the truth about the two opposing factions, the
Magdalo and Magdiwang. As for the secondary source, which is from Teodoro Agoncillo,
mentioned the events that occurred before and after the election, including the description,
reason, and locations of the rival sides, as well as the differences between the two. In terms of
external criticism, both are well-written. But Alvarez’s story is a little biased because it is not
detailed, and just narrates the story so simple without explaining it further. Whilst, Teodoro
Agoncillo's book is well written, detailed but I am not sure if I should believe him or consider it as
credible because of where the excerpt comes from. Regardless of the way how they tell the
story, both are good and historical. All of us should be critical and analyze the story before
jumping to conclusion by considering the entire scenario.