Name: Llacuna, Karl M.
Course: BS Civil Engineering
Block: BSCE- 2C
Controversy 1: The 1872 Cavite mutiny
Comparison
Jose Montero y Vidal`s Version
According to Vidal, the three GOMBURZA
priests were the primary perpetrators of the
premeditated incident, which was caused by a
mass rebellion against Spanish rule that
included the assassination of all Spaniards,
including friars, as well as the extension of tax
exemptions for Cavite Arsenal workers.
Gov General Rafael Isquirdo`s Version
He apparently thought that local academics,
clergy, and some people were behind the
Cavite Mutiny. The Cavite Mutiny was
described as a "insurrection," a "uprising," and
a "revolution" by Governor-General Izquierdo.
Dr. Trinidad Herminigildo Pardo De Tavera`s Version
His narrative of the mutiny is based on a single
occurrence in which local troops and laborers
rebelled against the strict rules of Rafael de
Izquierdo, the new governor-general, who
terminated their earlier privileges of being
excused from paying an annual fee and being
subject to forced labor.
Edmund lauchut`s Version
Tavera's story gained support from Edmund
Plauchut's statement, which attested that the
soldiers and arsenal workers in the Cavite fort
at the moment of the occurrence were
frustrated. However, the Frenchman
concentrated more on witnessing the three
martyr priests' execution.
Contrast
According to his story, the mutiny in Cavite was a
part of a bigger scheme to overthrow Spanish rule
over the Philippines.
The edict from Governor-General Rafael de
Izquierdo ordering the Engineering and Artillery
Corps members, who had previously been
exempt, to pay personal taxes is seen to be the
main reason for the mutiny.
Tavera argued that Izquierdo and the Spanish
friars exploited the Cavite Mutiny, which was
expanded to include not only the native soldiers
but also Cavite and Manila people as well as,
more importantly, the native clergy, as a powerful
tool to end Spanish control in the Philippines.
The governor Izquierdo claimed that the
immediate cause was his executive order
requiring the Filipino employees of the
engineering and military corps at the Cavite
arsenal to pay personal taxes and perform slave-
like forced labor.
Your position/ Conclusion
The Spanish government, headed by the conservative governor Rafael de Izquierdo, rapidly put down
the uprising, but they dramatized it and used it as an excuse to punish Filipinos who had called for
political change. The Cavite Mutiny of 1872 is described in Spanish by Jose Montero y Vidal. The
idea of this tale was that in order to bring about the events of 1872, the employees at the Cavite
Arsenal and unhappy local troops planned a rebellion against Spanish rule. Both perspectives show
that the Spanish friars and clerics' uprising was ultimately a Filipino attempt to topple the existing
Spanish monarchy.

Controversy 2 The 1896 Cry of Rebellion

Claimants Date Place Basis
LT Oligario Dias August 25, 1896 Balintawak Spanish guardia civil officer Lt.
Olegario Diaz claimed that the Cry
occurred at Balintawak on August 25,
1896.
Teodoro Calaw Last week of Balintawak According to historian Teodoro Kalaw's
August 1925 book The Filipino Revolution, the
Cry took place in Kangkong,
Balintawak, in the final week of August
1896.
Santiago Alvares August 24, 1896 Bahay Toro, The cry allegedly occurred on August
Quezon City 24, 1896, close to Bahay Toro, now in
Quezon City, according to Santiago
Alvarez, a Katipunero and the son of
Mariano Alvarez, the head of the
Magdiwang group in Cavite. Santiago
asserted this in 1927.
Pio Valenzuela August 23, 1896 Pugad Lawin A close friend of Andrés Bonifacio
named Po Valenzuela claimed that the
incident took place on August 23,
1896, in Pugad Lawin in 1948.
Guillermo August 23, 1896 Balintawak A significant gathering took place at
Masangkay Balintawak on August 26, 1896, at the
home of Apolonio Samson, who was
the cabeza of that neighborhood in
Caloocan at the time, according to
Masangkay's account of the "Cry of
Balintawak," which was featured in an
article from The Sunday Tribune
Magazine on August 21, 1932, titled "A
Katipunero Speaks."
 Gregorio de Jesus August 25, 1896 Caloocan She asserted that Bonifacio and his
forces had congregated in the
Balintawak hills prior to the Liberation
War. Gregoria went to Manila and
joined her husband in the fight for
freedom when she knew she would be
imprisoned by the Spanish
government.
Gregorio Zaide August 26, 1896 Balintawak Gregorio Zaide asserted in books
written in 1954 that the "Cry" occurred
on August 26, 1896, in Balintawak.
Teodoro Agoncillo August 23, 1896 Pugad Lawin Po Valenzuela and fellow historian
Teodoro Agoncillo both asserted that it
happened on August 23, 1896, in
Pugad Lawin.
Milagros August 23, 1896 Tandang Ramon Villegas, Emmanuel
Guerero;Emmanuel Sora's barn Encarnacion, and Milagros Guerrero all
Encarnacion and in Gulod, provided testimonies of the incident
Ramon Villegas Barangay that took place in Tandang Sora's barn
Banlat, in Gulod, Barangay Banlat, Quezon
Quezon City City.
Other Claimants

Your Position paper / Assessment

August 26, 1896 saw the occurrence of The Cry of Balintawak. The precise date of "The Cry," the
crucial time when Filipinos formally rejected Spanish colonial rule over the Philippine Islands, has
been hotly contested due to the month and year. The suggested dates ranged from August 23 to
26. The throngs shouted and tore apart their cedulas by yanking them out. Our understanding of
history, especially those significant events in 1896, shouldn't be based on a made-up tale that
was created to give us a Hollywood moment; doing so ignores the nuances of the time as well as
the difficulties those people encountered and the trials and tribulations they underwent.

The Controversy 3: Did Rizal Retract?

Rizal Retracted
Claimant Argument 1 Evidences/proof
Vicente Vicente Balaguer, S.J., a lone Jesuit Austin Coates' biography of Rizal,
Balaguer,S.J priest, made the initial suggestion that Rizal: Filipino Nationalist. The
Rizal should apologize for his assertions made by Balaguer, which
remarks and actions. Additionally, he served as the foundation for the
asserted that Jose Rizal and archbishop's pronouncement of a
Josephine Bracken were wed at retraction, and which were also
about 6.15 in the morning. on
 December 30, just hours before Rizal included in a letter from Balaguer to his
were executed. Jesuit superior, Fr. Pio Pi.
Your position/Observation
The two Jesuits who witnessed Rizal's execution denied Balaguer's assertion that he had
retracted. If he had really changed his mind, Rizal would have had a Catholic funeral. As it proved
out, how could he have died without even a coffin? Balaguer was absent when the execution took
place. Josephine Bracken was also not present during Rizal's final hours.

Rizal Retracted

Claimant Argument 2 Evidences/proof

Teodoro Kalaw Different historians have different The retraction was originally written by,
perspectives on Jose Rizal's according to Rizal, Teodoro Kalaw, an
retractions. Regarding what he had expert on our hero's writings, and other
previously said about the Catholic handwriting experts who judged it after
Church, he experienced a change of thorough investigation.
heart. While some contend that Rizal
just wrote and signed the retraction
paper, others are sure that it is
genuine. In his statement, Rizal
added, "I profoundly apologize for
everything in my words, works,
publications, and behavior that has
been inconsistent with my character
as a son of the Catholic Church.
Your position/Observation
The two Jesuits who were present during Rizal's execution rejected Balaguer's claim of retracting.
Rizal would have received a Catholic funeral if he had actually changed his mind. How could he
have passed away without even a casket, as it turned out? Balaguer was not there for the
execution. Additionally absent during Rizal's final hours was Josephine Bracken.

Rizal did not Retract

Claimant Argument 1 Evidences/proof

Fr. Manuel A. The report claims that Rizal did not Public access to the retraction's
Gracia flee, mostly due to the document was provided.
 that has been obtained as proof.
Furthermore, there has never been a
discovery of an original document. In
a statement that said, "I retract with
all my heart whatsoever in my
words, works, publications, and
actions have been contradictory to
my character as a son of the
Catholic Church," Rizal reportedly
proclaimed his wish to reject his anti-
Catholic beliefs.
Your position/Observation
If Rizal had changed his mind, he would not have been executed. But as we all know, he was
executed, so Rizal did not back down.
occurring on May 13, 1935. Fr.
stumbled upon it. Manuel A. Gracia
worked at the Manila Catholic
hierarchy archive. Contrary to common
perception, only copies or imitations of
the original paper were ever made
available to the general public; hence,
it is unofficial and unreliable as
evidence of Rizal's retractions. It was
merely a copy of it.

Rizal did not Retract

Claimant Argument 2 Evidences/proof

Baron Fernandez He refused to recant his two novels, Except for the claim that one of his
Noli Me Tangere and El conditions for signing the agreement
Filibusterismo, because he wished to was that he marry Josephine Bracken,
educate the Filipino people about the Rizal made no other objections. In the
abuses carried out by the Spaniards. public records or on Dr. There is no
This was one of the reasons Spanish proof to back up the Catholic Church's
people wanted him to retract these assertion that they were married the
two writings. By fostering intellectual day before Rizal was put to death.
growth, these two books assisted the
Filipino people in evolving.
Your position/Observation
Fernandez contends that letter could only be a refutation of his retraction because Rizal was
aware that the friars were deceiving the Filipinos and sought to correct the record as a result.