MIDTERM COVERAGE

CHAPTER 3: PHILIPPINE HISTORY: SPACES FOR CONFLICT AND

CONTROVERSIES
Learning Objectives:
To interpret historical events using primary sources;
To recognize the multiplicity of interpretation that can be read from a historical
text.
To identify the advantages and disadvantages of employing critical tools in
interpreting historical events through primary sources.
To demonstrate ability to argue for or against a particular issue using primary
sources.

Introduction
Earlier, we have been introduced to history as a discipline, the historical method, and
the content and context analysis of primary sources. Two key concepts that need to be
defined before proceeding to the historical analysis of problems in history are
interpretation and multi-perspectivity.

Making Sense of the past: historical Interpretation

History is the study of the past, but a more contemporary definition is centered on how it
impacts the present through its consequences.
Geoffrey Barraclough - defines history as the “attempt to discover, on the past.”

CODE OF KALANTIAW
The Code of Kalantiaw - is a mythical legal code in the epic history Maragtas.
Before it was revealed as a hoax, it was a source of pride for the people of Aklan. In fact, a
historical marker was instled in the town of Batan, Aklan in 1956, with the following text:
“CODE OF KALANTIAW- Datu Bendehara Kalantiaw, third chief of Panay , born in
Aklan, establish his government in the peninsula of batang, Aklan Sakup, considered the first
Filipino Law giver, he promulgated in about 1433 a penal code now known as Code of Kalantiaw
containing 18 articles.
Don Marcelino Orilla of Zaragosa, Spain obtained the original manuscript from an old
chief of Panay which was later translated into Spanish by Rafael Murviedo Yzamaney”.
It was only in 1968 that it was proved a hoax, when William Henry Scott. then a doctoral
candidate at the University of Santo Tomas, defended his research on pre Hispanic sources in
Philippine history. He attributed the code to historical Fiction written in 1913 by Jose E. Marco
titled Las artiguas Leyendas de la Isla de Negros. Marco attributed the code to a priest named Jose
Maria Pavon. Prominent Filipino historians did not dissent to Scott's findings, but there are still
some who would like to believe that the code is a legitimate document.
Historians utilize facts collected from primary sources of history and then draw their own
reading so that their intended audience may understand the historical event, a process that in
essence, "makes sense of the past." The premise is that not all primary sources are accessible to a
general audience, and without the proper training and background, a non-historian interpreting a
primary source may do more harm than good-a primary may even cause misunderstandings;
sometimes, even resulting in mere problems.
As a student, we must be well equipped to recognize why these may differ from each other, and how
to critically sift these interpretations through historical evaluation. Interpretations of historical
events change over time; thus, it is an important skill for a student of history to track these changes
in an attempt to understand the past.
 "Sa Aking Mga Kabata" is a poem purportedly written by Jose Rizal when he was eight
years old and is probably one of Rizal's most prominent works. There is no evidence to support the
claim that this poem, with the now immortalized lines "Ang hindi magmahal sa kanyang
salita/mahigit sa hayop at malansang isda" was written by Rizal, and worse, the evidence against
Rizal's authorship of the poem seems all unassailable.
There exists no manuscript of the poem handwritten by Rizal. The poem was first published
in 1906, in a book by Hermenegildo Cruz. Cruz said he received the poem from Gabriel Beato
Francisco, who claimed to have received it in 1884 from Rizal's close friend, Saturnino Raselis.
Rizal never mentioned writing this poem anywhere in los writings and more importantly, he never
mentioned of having a close friend by the person of Raselis.
Further criticism of the poem reveals more about the wrongful attribution of the poem to
Rizal. The poem was written in Tagalog and referred to the word "kalayaan." But it was
documented in Rizal's letters that he first encountered the word through a Marcelo H. del Pilar's
translation of Rizal's essay "El Amor Patrio" where it was spelled as "kalayahan'
While Rizal's native tongue was Tagalog, he was educated in Spanish, starting from his
mother, Teodora Alonso. Later on, he would express disappointment in his difficulty in expressing
himself in his native tongue.
The poem's spelling is also suspect-the use of letters "k" and "w" to replace "e" and "u,"
respectively was suggested by Rizal as an adult. If the poem was indeed written during his time, it
should use the original Spanish orthography that was prevalent in his time.

Multiperspectivity
With several possibilities of interpreting the past, another important concept that we must
note is multiperspectivity. This can be defined as a way of look mg at historical events, personalities,
developments, cultures, and societies from different perspectives. This means that there is a
multitude of war which we can view the world, and each could be equally valid, and at the same
time, equally partial as well. Historical writing is, by definition, total, and contains preconceptions.
The historian decides on what r t IN, what interpretation to make more apparent, depending on
what he is Historians may misinterpret evidence, attending to those that suggest that a certain event
happened, and then ignore the rest that a t the evidence Historians may omit significant facts about
the subject, which makes the interpretation unbalanced. Historians may impose important ideology
to their subject, which may not be appropriate to the per the subject was from. Historians may also
provide a single cause for an author considering other possible causal explanations of said event.
These are just many of the ways a historian may fail in his historian int ren crypto and
interpretation. With multiperspectivity, as an approach in history, we must understand that
historical interpretations contain discrepancies, contradictions, ambiguities, and are often the focus
of distant.
Exploring multiple perspectives in history requires incorporating source materials that
reflect different views of an event in history, because singular historical narratives do not provide
for space to inquire and investigate Different sources that counter each other may create space for
more investigation and research, while providing more evidence for those truths that these sources
agree on.

Case Study 1: Where Did the First Catholic Mass Take Place in the Philippines?
The popularity of knowing where the “first” happened in history has been an easy way to
trivialize history, but this case study will not focus on the significance (or lack thereof) of the site of
the First Cathole Mass in the Philippines, but rather, use it as a historiographical exercise in the
utilization of evidence and interpretation in reading historical events.
Butuan has long been believed as the site of the first Mass int this has been the case for
three centuries, culminating in the erection of a monument in 1872 near Agusan River, which
commemorates the expedition's arrival and celebration of Mass on 8 April 1521. The Butuan claim
has been based on a rather elementary reading of primary sources from the event.
 Toward the end of the nineteenth century and the start of the twentieth century inverter
with the increasing scholarship on the history of the Philippines a more nuanced reading of the
available evidence was made which brough light more durations are against the accepted
interpretation of the first Mass in the Philippines, made both by Spanish and Filipino scholars.
It must be noted that there are only two primary sources that historians refer to in
identifying the site of the first Mass. One is the log kept by Francisco Albo, a pilot of one of
Magellan's ship. Trinidad. He was one of the 18 survivors who returned with Sebastian Elcano on
the ship Victoria after they circumnavigated the world. The other, and the more complete, was the
account by Antonio Pigafetta, Primo viaggio intorno al mondo (First Voyage Around the World).
Pigafetta, like Albo, was a member of the Magellan expedition and an eyewitness of the events,
particularly, of the first Mass.

Primary Source: Albo's Log

Source: "Diario 6 derotero del viage de Magallanes desde el cabo se Agustin en el Brazil
hasta el regreso a Espana de la nao Victoria, scrito por Frandsco Albo." Document no, xxii in
Colleción de viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar los Españoles desde fines del siglo V.
Ed. Martin Fernandez de Navarrete (reprinted Buenos Aires 1945, 5 Wols) IV, 191-225. As cited in
Miguel A. Bernad "Butuan or Limasawa? The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A
Reexamination of Evidence" 1981, kinaadman: A Journal of Southern Philippines, Vol. II. 1-35.
1. On the 16th of March (1521) as they sailed in a westerly course from Ladrones, they saw land
towards the northwest: but owing to many shallow places they did not approach it. They found
later that its name was Yunagan.
2. They went instead that same day southwards to another small island named Suluan, and there
they anchored. There they saw some canoes but these fled at the Spaniards' approach. This island
was at 9 and two-thirds degrees North latitude.
3.Departing from those two islands, they sailed westward to an uninhabited island of "Gada" where
they took in a supply of wood and water. The sea around that island was free from shallows. (Albo
does not give the latitude of this island, but from Pigafetta's testimony, this seems to be the
"Acquada" or Homonhon, at 10 degrees North latitude.)
4. From that island they sailed westwards towards a large island names Seilani that was inhabited
and was known to have gold (Seilani or, as Pigafetta calls it, "Ceylon" - was the island of Leyte)
5. Sailing southwards along the coast of that large island of Seilani, they turned southwest to a small
island called "Mazava." That island is also at a latitude of 9 and two-thirds degrees North.
6. The people of that island of Mazava were very good. There the Spaniards planted a cross upon a
mountain-top, and from there they were shown three islands to the west and southwest, where they
were told there was much gold. "They showed us how the gold was gathered, which came in small
pieces like peas and lentils."
7. From Maazava they sailed northwards again towards Selan. They followed the coast of Seilani in
northwesterly direction, ascending up to 10 degrees of latitude where they saw three small islands.
8. From there they sailed westwards some ten leagues, and there they saw three islets, where they
dropped anchor for the night, In the morning they sailed southwest some 12 leagues, down to a
latitude of 10 and one-third degree. There they entered a channel between two islands, one of which
was called "Matan" and the other "Subu.

9. They sailed down that channel and then turned westward and anchored at the town (la vill..) of
Subu where they stayed man days and obtained provisions and entered into a peace-pact with the
local king
10 The town of Subu was on an east west direction with the islands of Suluan and Mazava. But
between Mazava and Subu, there were so many shallows that the boats could not go westward
directly but has to go (as they did) in a round-about way.
It must be noted that in Albo's acount, the location of Mazava fits the location of the island
of Limasawa, at the southern tip of late 95 degree 54 North. Also, Albo does not mention the first
Mass, but only the planting of the cross upon a mountain-top from which could be seen three
islands to the westad southwest, which also fits the southern end of Limasawa.

Primary Source: Pigafetta's Testimony on the Route of Magellan’s Expedition

Source: Emma Blair and James Alexander Robertson, The Philippine Islands Vols. 33 and 34, as
cited in Miguel A Bernad. "Butuan or lima sawa? The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines. A
Reexamination of Evidence" 198.. Kinauma). A urmat of Southern Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35.
1. Saturday. 16 March 1521 - Magellan's expedition sighted a "high land" named "Zamal" which
was some 300 leagues westward of Ladrones (now the Marianas) Islands.
2 Sunday, March 17 - "The following day" after sighting Zamal Island, they landed on "another
island which was uninhabited" and which lay "to the right" of the above mentioned island of
"Zamal." (To the "right" here would mean on their starboard going south or southwest.) There
they set up two tents for the sick members of the crew and had a sow killed for them. The name of
this island was "Humunu" (Homonhon). This island was located at 10 degrees North latitude.
3. On that same day (Sunday, March 17). Magellan named the entire archipelago the "Islands of
Saint Lazarus," the reason being that it was Sunday in the Lenten season when the Gospel assigned
for the Mass and the liturgical Office was the eleventh chapter of St. John, which tells of the raising
of Lazarus from the dead.
4.Monday, March 18- In the afternoon of their second day on that island they saw a boat coming
towards them with nine men in it. An exchange of gifts was effected. Magellan asked for food
supplies. and the men went away, promising to bring rice and other supplies in "four days"
5.There were two springs of water on that island of Homonhon. Also thev saw there some
indications that there was gold in these islands. Consequently Magellan renamed the island and
called it the Watering Place of Good Omen" (Acquada la di bouni segnialli),
6. Friday, March 22 - At noon the natives returned. This time they were in two boats, and they
brought food supplies.
7. Magellan's expedition stayed eight days at Homonhon: from Sunday, March 17, to the Monday of
the following week, March 25.
8. Monday. March 25 - In the afternoon, the expedition weighed anchor and left the island of
Homonhon in the ecclesiastical calendar, this day (March 25) was the feast-day of the Incarnation,
also called the feast of the Annunciation and therefore "Our Lady's Day. On this day as they were
about to weigh arbor, and accident happened to Pigafetta: he fell into the water but was rescued.
He attributed his narrow escape from death as grace obtained through the intercession of the
Blessed Virgin Mary on her feast day.
9.The route taken by the expedition after leaving Homonhon was "toward the west southwest,
between four islands: namely, Cenalo, Hiunanghan, Ibusson and Albarien." Very probably
"Cenalo" is a misspelling in the Italian manuscript for what Pigafetta in his map calls " Ceilon" and
Albo calls "Seilani": namely the island of Leyte. "Hiunanghan" (a misspelling of Hinunangan)
seemed to Pigafetta to be a separate island, but is actually on the mainland of Leyte (i.e., "Ceylon").
On the other hand, Hibuson (Pigafetta's Ibusson) is an island east of Leyte's southern tip.
Thus, its easy to see what Pigafetta meant by sailing toward west southwest" past those
islands. They left Homonhon sailing westward towards Leyte, then followed the Leyte coast
southward, passing between the island of Hibuson on their portside and Hinangun Bay on their
starboard, and then continued southward, then turning westward to "Mazaua."
10. Thursday, March 28 - In the morning of Holy Thursday, March 28, they anchored off an island
where the previous night they had seen a light or a bonfire. That island "lies in a latitude of nine
and two-thirds towards the Arctic Pole (i.e., North) and in a longitude of one hundred and sixty-two
degrees from the line of demarcation It is twenty-five leagues from the Acquada, and is called
Mazaua."
11. They remained seven days on Mazaua Island.
12. Thursday, April 4 - They left Mazaua, bound for Cebu. They were guided thither by the king of
Mazaua who sailed in his own boat Their route took them past five "islands" namely: "Cevlon,
Bohol. Canighan, Baibai, and Gatighan.
13 At Gatighan, they sailed westward to the three islands of th Camotes Group, namely, Poro,
Pasihan and Ponson. Here the Spanish ships stopped to allow the king of Mazaua to catch up with
them, since the Spanish ships were much faster than the native balanghai--a thing that excited the
admiration of the king of Mazaua.
14. From the Camotes Islands they sailed southwards towards "Zubu”.
15 Sundey April 7 At noon they entered the harbor of "Zubu" (Cebu) It had taken them three days
to negotiate the journey from Mazaua northwards to the Camotes Islands and then southwards to
Cebu.
It must be pointed out that both Albo and Pigafetta's testimonies coincide and corroborate
each other. Pigafetta gave more details on what they did during their weeklong stay at Mazaua.

Primary Source: Pigafetta and Seven Days in Mazaua

Source: Emma Blair and James Alexander Robertson, The Philippine Islands, Vols. 33 and 34, as
cited in Miguel A. Bernad, "Butuan or Limasawa? The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A
Reexamination of Evidence" 1981, Kinaadman: A Journal of Southern Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35.
1.Thursday, March 28. In the morning they anchored near an island where they had seen a light
the night before a small boat (boloto) came with eight natives, to whom Magellan threw some
trinklets as presents. The natives paddled away, but two hours later two larger boats (balanghai)
came, in one of which the native king sat under an awning of mats.
2. Friday, March 29- “Next day. Holy Friday,” Magellan sent his slave interpreter ashore in a small
boat to ask the King if he could provide the expedition with the food supplies, and to say that they
had come as friends and not as enemies.
3. Saturday, March 30- Pigafetta and his companion had spent the previous evening feasting and
drinking with the native king and his son. The following morning (Saturday) Pigafetta and his
companion took leave of their hosts and returned to the ships.
4. Sunday March 31- Early in the morning of Sunday, the last of March and Easter Day”, Magellan
sent the priests ashore with some men to prepare for the Mass. In attendance both at the mass and
at the planting of the cross were the King of Mazaua and the King of Butuan.
5.Sunday, March 31- On that same afternoon, while on the summit of the highest hill, Magellan
asked the two king which ports he should go to in order to obtain more abundant supplies of food
than were available in that island.
6. Monday, April 1- Magellan sent men ashore to help with the harvest, but no work was done that
day because the two kings were sleeping off their drinking bout the night before.
7. Tuesday, April 2 and Wednesday, April 3- work on the harvest during the ‘next to days, i.e,.
Tuesday and Wednesday, the 2nd and 3rd of April.
8. Thursday, April 4- They leave Mazaua, bound for Cebu.
 The Age of Exploration is a period of competition among European rulers to conquer and
colonized lands outside their original domains. Initially, the goal was to find alternative routes by
sea to get to Asia, the main source of spices and other commodities. Existing routes to Asia were
mainly by land and cost very expensive. A sea route to Asia means that Europeans could access the
spice trade directly, greatly reducing costs for traders. Spain’s major foray into the exploration was
through Christopher Columbus, who proposed to sail westwards to find a shortcut to Asia. He was
able to reach the Americas, which was then cut-off from the rest of the known world.
Spain colonized parts of North America, Mexico, and South America in the sixteenth
century. They were also able to reach the Philippines and claim it for the Spanish crown. Later on,
other European rulers would compete with the activities of exploring and conquering lands.

Case Study 2: What Happened in the Cavite Mutiny?

The year 1872 is a historic year of two the Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of the three
Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, Jacinto Zamora, later on immortalized as GOMBURZA. These events
are very important milestones in Philippine history and have caused ripples throughout time,
directly influencing the decisive events of the Philippine Revolution toward the end of the century.
While the significance is unquestioned, what made this year controversial are different sides to the
story, a battle of perspectives supported by primary sources. In this case study, we zoom in to the of
the Cavite Mutiny, a major factor in the awakening of nationalism among the Filipinos of that time.

Spanish Accounts of the Cavite Mutiny

The documentation of Spanish historian Jose Montero Vidal centered on how the event was
an attempt in overthrowing the Spanish government in the Philippines. Although regarded as a
historian, his account of the mutiny was criticized as woefully biased and for scholar. Another
account from the official report written by Governor General Rafael Izquierdo implicated the native
clergy, who were then active in the movement toward parishes two each other.

Primary Source: Excerpts from Montero's Account of the Cavite Mutiny

Source: Jose Montero y Vidal, "Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872," in Gregorio Zaide
and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book
Store, 1990), 269-273.
The abolition of privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite of exemption from the
tribute was, according to some, the cause of insurrection. There were, however, other causes.
The Spanish revolution which overthrew secular throne. The propaganda carried on by an
unbridled press against monarchies principles, attentatory (sic) of the most sacred respects towards
the dethroned majesty: the democratic and republican books and pamphlets; the speeches and
preachings of the apostles of these new ideas in Spain; the outbursts of the American publicists and
the criminal policy of the senseless Governor whom the Revolutionary government sent to govern
the Philippines, and who put into practice these ideas were the determining circumstances which
gave rise, among certain Filipinos, to the idea of attaining their independence. It was towards this
goal that they started to work, with the powerful assistance of a certain section of the native clergy,
who out of spite toward friars, made common cause with the enemies of the mother country.
At various times but especially in the beginning of year 1872, the authorities received
anonymous communications with the information that a great uprising would break out against the
Spaniards, the minute the fleet at Cavite left for the South, and that all would be assassinated,
including the friars. But nobody gave importance to these notices. The conspiracy had been going
on since the days of La Torre with utmost secrecy. At times, the principal leaders met either in the
house of Filipino Spaniard, D. Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, or in that of the native priest, Jacinto
Zamora, and these meetings were usually attended by the curate of Bacoor, the soul of the
movement, whose energetic character and immense wealth enabled him to exercise a strong
influence.
Primary Source: Excerpts from the Official Report of Governor Izquierdo on the
Cavite Mutiny of 1872
Source: Kafael Izquierdo, "Official Report on the Cavite Mutiny." in Cregoria Zaide and Sonia
Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990),
281-286.
It seems definite that the insurrection was motivated and prepared by the native clergy, by the
mestizos and native lawyers, and by those known here as abogadillos...
The instigators, to carry out their criminal project, protested against the injustice of the
government in not paying the provinces for their tobacco crop, and against the usury that some
practice in documents that the Finance department gives crop owners who have to sell them at a
loss. They encouraged the rebellion by protesting what they called the injustice of having obliged
the workers in the Cavite arsenal to pay tribute starting January 1 and to render personal service\.
Antonio Ma Regidor. Jose and Pio Hana, and other Filipino lawyers were suspended from the
practice of law, arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment at the Mariana Island, Izquierdo
dissolved the native regiment of artillery and ordered the creation of an artillery force composed
exclosively by Peninsulares.
On 17 February 1872, the GOMBURZA were executed to serve as a threat to Filipinos never to
attempt to fight the Spaniards again

Differing Accounts of the Events of 1872

Two other primary accounts exist that seem to counter the accounts of Izquierdo and
Montero. First, the account of Dr. Trinidad Hermenegildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and
researcher, who wrote a Filipino version of the bloody incident in Cavite.

Primary Source: Excerpts from Pardo de Tavera's Account of the Cavite Mutiny
Source: Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, Filipino Version of the Crei Mutiny," in Gregorio Zaide and
Sonia Zaide. Documentary Source Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila National Book Store,
1990), 274 280.
This uprising among the soldiers in Cavite was used as a powerful level by the Spanish
residents and by the friars.The Central Government in Madrid had announced its intention to
deprive the friars in these Islands of powers of intervention in matters of civil government and of
the direction and management of the university it was due to these facts and promises that the
Filipinos had great hopes of an improvement in the affairs of their country, while the friars on the
other hand, feared that their power in the colony would soon be complete a thing of the past.
…Up to that time there had been no intention of secession from Spain. and the only aspiration of
the people was to secure the material and education advancement of the country...
According to this account, the incident was merely a mutiny by Filipino soldiers and
laborers of the Cavite arsenal to the dissatisfaction arising from the draconian policies of Izquierdo,
such an the abolition of privilege and the prohibition of the founding of the school of arts and
trades for Filipinos, which the General was a smokescreen to creating a political club.
Tavera in of the opinion that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a
way to address other cities by blowing out of proportion the isolated mutiny attempt. During this
time, the Central Government in Madrid was planning to deprive the friars of all the powers of
intervention in matters of civil government and direction and management of educational
institutions The framers needed something to justify their continuing dominance in the country,
and the mutiny provided such opportunity. However, the Central Spanish Government introduced
an educational decree using sectarian schools run by the friars into a school called the Philippine
Institute. The decree aimed to improve the standard of education in the Philippines by requiring
teaching positions in these schools to be filled by competitive examinations, an improvement
welcomed by most Filipinos.
Another account this time by French writer Edmund Plauchut, complemented Tavera's
account and analyzed the motivations of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny.

Primary Source: Excerpts from Plauchut's Account of the Cavite Mutiny

Source: Edmund Plauchut, "The Cavite Mutiny of 1872 and the Martyrdom of Gom-Bur-
Za," in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7
(Manila: National Book Store, 19gon) 251-268.
General la Torre created a junta composed of high officials including some friars and six
Spanish officials... Ai the same time there was created by the government in Madrid a committee to
investigate the same problems submitted to the Manila committee. When the two finished work, it
was found that they came to the same conclusions. Here is the summary of the reforms they
considered necessary to introduce:
1. Changes in tariff rates at customs, and the methods of collection.
2. Removal of surcharges on foreign importations.
3. Reduction of export fees
4. the real estate, enjoy freedom of worship, and operate commercial transports flying the Spanish
flag.
5.Establishment of an advisory council to inform the Minister of Overseas Affairs in Madrid on the
necessary reforms to be implemented
6. Changes in primary and secondary education.
7 Establishment of an Institute of Civil Administration in the Philippines, rendering unnecessary
the sending home of short term civil officials every time there is a change of ministry.
8.Study of system.
9. Abolition of the tobacco monopoly.

.. The arrival in Manila of General Izquierdo... put a sudden end to all dreams of reforms... the
prosecutions instituted by the new Governor General were probably expected as a result of the
bitter disputes between the Filipino clerics and the Such a must really end in a strong desire on the
part of the other to repress cruelly.
In regard to schools, it was previously decreed that there should be in Manila a Society of Arts and
Trades to be opened in March of 1871 repress the growth of liberal teachings, General Izquierdo
suspended the opening of the school... the day previous to the scheduled inauguration...
The Filipinos had a duty to render service on public roads construction and pay taxes every
year. But those who were employed at the maestranza of the artillery, in the engineering shops and
arsenal of Cavite, were exempted from this obligation from time Without of any kind. a decree by
the Governor withdrew from such old employees their them into the ranks of those who worked on
public roads.
The friars used the incident as a part of a larger conspiracy to dominance, which had
started to show cracks because of the discontent Filipinos. They showcased the mutiny as part of a
greater conspiracy the Philippines by Filipinos to overthrow the Spanish Government.
intentionally, and more so, prophetically, the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 resulted in the martyrdom of
GOMBURZA, and paved the way to the revolution culminating in 1898.
The GOMBURZA Is the collective name of the three martyred priest Mariano Gomez, Jose
Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora, who were tagged as the man of the Cavite Mutiny, They were
prominent Filipino priest charged with treason and sedition It is believed that the Spanish clergy
connected the priests to the mutiny an part of a conspiracy to title the movement of secular priests
who desired to have their own parishes instead of being merely assistants to the regular friars The
GOMBURZA were executed by garrote in public, a see purportedly witnessed by a young Jose
Rizal.
Their martyrdom is widely accepted as the dawn of Philippine nationalism in the nineteenth
century, with Rival dedicating his second novel, El Filibusterismo, to their memory:
“The Government, by enshrouding your trial in mystery and pardoning your concounted,
has suggested that some mistake was committed when your fate was decided, and the whole of the
Philippines, in paying homage to you memory and calling you martyrs, totally rejects your guilt.
The Church, by refusing to degrade you, has put in doubt the crime charged against you."

Case Study 3: Did Rizal Retract?

Jose Rizal is identified as a hero of the revolution for his writings that center on ending
colonialism and liberating Filipino minds to contribute to creating the Filipino nation. The great
volume of Rizal life work war committed to this end, particularly the more influential one, Noli Me
Tangere and El Filibusterismo. His essays vilify not the Catholic religion, but the friars, the main
agents of injustice in the Philippine society.
It is understandable, therefore, that any piece of writing from Rizal that recants everything
he wrote against the friars and the Catholic Church in the Philippines could deal heavy damage to
his image as a prominent Filipino revolutionary. Such document purportedly exists, allegedly
signed by Riza few hours before his execution. This document, referred to as "The Retraction,"
declares Rizal's belief in the Catholic faith, and retracts everything he wrote against the Church.

Primary Source: Rizal's Retraction

Source: Translated from the document found by Fr. Manuel Garcia,
C.M on 18 May 1938
I declare myself a catholic and in this Religion in which I was born and educated I wish to live and
die.
I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been
contrary to my character as son of the Catholic Church. I believe and I confess whatever she
teaches and I submit to whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is of the
Church, and as a Society prohibited by the Church. The Diocesan Prelate may, as the Superior
Ecclesiastical Authority, make public this spontaneous manifestation of mine in order to repair the
scandal which my acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon me.
Manila 29 of December of 1896
Jose Rizal

There are four iterations of the texts of this retraction the first was published in La Voz
Española and Diario de Manila on the day of the execution, 30 December 1896. The second text
appeared in Barcelona. Spain, in the magazine La Juventud. A few months after the execution, 14
Fbruary 1897, from an anonymous writer who was later on revealed to be Fr Vicente Balaguer.
However, the original text was only found in the archdiocesan archives on 18 May 1935, after alm st
four decades of disappearance.

The Balaguer Testimony

Doubts on the retraction document abound, especially because only one eyewitness
document of the writing of the document exists that of the Jesuit friar Fr. Vicente Balaguer.
According to his testimony, Rizal woke up several times, confessed four times attended a Mass,
received communion, and prayed the rosary, all of which seemed out of character. But save it’s the
only testimony of allegedly a "primary" account that Rizal ever wrote a retraction document, it has
been used to argue the authenticity of the document.

The Testimony of Cuerpo de Vigilancia

Another eyewitness account surfaced in 2016, through the research of sor Rene R.
Escalante. In his research, documents of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia included a report on the last
hours of Rizal, written by Federico Moreno. The report details the statement of the Cuerpo de
Vigilancia to Moreno.
Rizal's Connection to the Katipunan is undeniable -in fact, the precursor of the Katipunan as
an organization is the La Liga Filipina, an organization Rizal founded, with Andres Bonifacio as one
of its members. But La Liga Filipina was short lived as the Spaniards exiled Rizal to Dapitan
Former members decided to band together to establish the Katipunan a few days after Rizal's exile
on 7 July 1892.
Rizal may not have been officially part of the Katipunan, but the Katipuneros showed great
appreciation of his work toward the same goals Out of the 28 members of the leadership of the
Katipunan (known as the Kataas taasang Sanggunian ng Katipunan) from 1892 to 1896, 13 were
former members of La Liga Filipina Katipuneros even used Rizal's name as a password.
In 1896, the Katipuneros decided to inform Rizal of their plans to launch the revolution,
and sent Pio Valenzuela to visit Rizal in Dapitan Valenzuela's accounts of his meeting with Rizal
have been greatly doubted by many scholars, but according to him, Rizal objected to the plans,
saying that doing so would be tantamount to suicide since it would be difficult to fight the
Spaniards who had the advantage of military resources. He added that the leaders of the Katipunan
must do everything they could to prevent the spilling of Filipino blood Valenzuela informed Rizal
that the revolution could inevitably break out if the Katipunan were to be discovered by the
Spaniards Rizal advised Valenzuela that the Katipunan should first secure the support of wealthy
Filipinos to strengthen their cause, and suggested that Antonio Luna be recruited to direct the
military movement of the revolution.

Case Study 4: Where Did the Cry of Rebellion Happen?

Momentous events swept the Spanish colonies in the late nineteenth century, including the
Philippines. Journalists of the time referred to the phrase "El Grito de Rebelion" or "Cry of
Rebellion to mark the start of these revolutionary events, identifying the places where it happened.
In the Philippines, this happened in August 1896, northeast of Manila, where they declared
rebellion against the Spanish colonial government. These events input kore m the history of eln that
stick their independence t their colonizers.
The controversy regarding this event stems from the identification of the date and place
where the Cry happened. Prominent Filipino historian Teodoro Agoncillo emphasizes the event
when Bonifacio tore the cedula or Lax receipt before the Katipuneros who also did the same. Some
writers identified the first military event with the Spaniards as the moment of the Cry. for which,
Emilio Aguinaldo commissioned an "Himno de Balintawak" to inspire the renewed struggle after
the Pact of the Biak-na-Bato failed. A monument to the Heroes of 1895 was erected in what is now
the intersection of Epifanto de los Santos (EDSA) Avenue and Andres Bonifacio Drive North
Diversion road, and from then on until 1962, the Cry of Balintawak was celebrated every 26th of
August. The site of the monument was chosen for an unknown reason

Different Dates and Places of the Cry

Various accounts of the Cry give different dates and places. A guardia civil, Lt Olegario
Diaz, identified the Cry to have happened in Balintawak on 25 August 1896. Teodoro Kalaw,
Filipino historian, marks the place to be in Kangkong, Balintawak, on the last week of August 1896
Santiago Alvarez, a Katipunero and son of Mariano Alvarez, leader of the Magdiwang faction in
Cavite, put the Cry in Bahay Toro in Quezon City on 24 August 1896. Pio Valenzuela, known
Katipunero and privy to many events concerning the Katipunan stated that the Cry happened in
Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896. Historian Gregorio Zaide identified the Cry to have happened in
Balintawak on 26 August 186, while Teodoro Agoncillo put it a Pugad Lawn on 23 August 1896,
according to statements hi Fio Valenzuela Research by historians Milagros Guerrero, Emmanuel
Encarnacion, and Ramon Villegas claimed that the event took place in Tandang Sora's barn in
Gulod, Barangay Banlat, Quezon City, on 24 August 1896.

Primary Source: Accounts of the Cry

Guillermo Masangkay
Source: Guillermo Masangkay, "Cry of Balintawak" in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 307-
309. Sonia Zaide. Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8 (Manila: National Book
Store, 1900), 301-302
Pio Valenzuela
The first place of refuge of Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Procopio Bonifacio, Teodoro
Plata, Aguedo del Rosario, and myself was Balintawak, the tirst five arriving there on August 19,
and I, on August 20, 1896 The first place where some 600 members of the Katipunan met on August
22, 1806, was the house and yard of Apolonio Samson at Kangkong. Valenzuela’s account should be
read wuth caution: He once told a Spanish Investigator that the “cry” happened on Balintawak on
Wednesday, 26 August 1896. Much later, He wrote in his Memoirs of the revolution that it happened
at pugad lawin on 23 August 1896.
According to Guerrero, Encarnation and Villegas, all these places are in Balintawak, then
the part of Caloocan, now, in Quezon City.