One Past, yet Various Histories: The Controversies and Differences

1. Choose two (2) learning resources in 03 Readings: The Katipunan's Cry.

- Pio Valenzuela’s Controversial “Cry of Pugad Lawin”
Ang Madamdaming Alaala ni Isabelo de los Reyes

2. For every resource, state its viewpoint/argument and explain whether you agree
to it or not.
- Pio Valenzuela’s Controversial “Cry of Pugad Lawin”
Pio Valenzuela’s viewpoint or argument is that the “Cry of Pugad Lawin”
was the true and original start of the Philippine Revolution, and that it showed
the courage and patriotism of the Katipuneros who defied the Spanish
oppression. He also claims that he was a credible witness of the incident,
having been one of Andres Bonifacio's closest associates as Katipunan chief.
However, his version is disputed by other eyewitnesses and historians, who
argue that the “Cry” happened at Balintawak or other places, and on different
dates. Some also question the authenticity and consistency of his account, as
he gave two different versions of the event at different times. Some suggest
that he changed his story to protect himself or to please the American
authorities. His version claims that the “Cry” took place at Pugad Lawin, a
place near Balintawak, on August 23, 1896. He also says that only one man,
Teodoro Plata, opposed the revolution and that many Katipuneros tore their
cedula certificates and shouted "Long live the Philippines!"

Ang Madamdaming Alaala ni Isabelo de los Reyes

He argues that the revolution was a legitimate and patriotic struggle of the
Filipino people against the oppressive and corrupt Spanish colonial rule. In
addition, he defended the role and activities of Andres Bonifacio, the leader of
the Katipunan, the secret society that initiated the revolution. In particular the
conflict between Bonifacio and Emilio Aguinaldo, who became president of
the First Philippine Republic, he criticized the factionalism and betrayals that
divided the revolution. He also denounced the intervention of the United
States, which he saw as a new imperialist power that exploited and deceived
the Filipinos.
Explanation:
I agree to de los Reyes claim because it’s his memoir and he even witnessed
it first hand hence, he wrote this memoir and it’s one of the primary sources.