Name:Jade A.
Lagunzad
Course & Section:BAPOS AP1-2
Activity 2. Read the following excerpts and be able to accomplish the matrix by
comparing the two accounts using the guide questions.
Download and read:
1. [Link]
2. [Link]
Alvarez, Santiago (1992), Agoncillo, Teodoro (2002).
The Katipunan and the The Revolt of the Masses:
Revolution: Memoirs of a The Story of Bonifacio and
Guide Questions General. Quezon City: the Katipunan. Quezon City:
Ateneo de Manila University University of the Philippines
Press. Press.
How close was the He was a direct eyewitness in He was born in 1912, after
author to the event the Philippine Revolution. He the breakout of the Philippine
being studied? was part of Katipunero and Revolution in 1896. He was
the son Mariano Alvarez. not an eyewitness or a
participant of the event he
described. Instead, his works
relies on primary documents
such as Katipunan writing,
Spanish Records, and
memoirs of revolutionaries. It
makes his account a
secondary sources. Even if
he didn't witness the actual
event, his reliance on
documented evidence
provided him access to
perspectives of those who
directly witnessed the
revolution.
When was the His memoirs were written and The account was first
account made? published years after the published in 1956, around
revolution that was first sixty years after the
published in 1927 in Tagalog, revolution began. The timing
"Ang Katipunan at was meaningful because the
Paghihimagsik. It means he Philippines had already
was reading firsthand achieved independence in
experiences and some 1946. The context influenced
details may have been Agoncillo's writing.
affected by time, memory,
and highlight.
Who was the The recipient of the account Agoncillo wrote it for Filipino
recipient of the was the Filipino public and public such as students,
account? the future generations. He scholars and ordinary
wanted to document and readers who were searching
preserve the Katipuneros for historical identity that is
struggle and highlights the rooted by nationalism.
contribute of his faction.
Is there bias to be Yes, because Santiago Yes, there is bias in
accounted for? Alvarez was part of the Agoncillo's work. He was a
Expound. Magdiwang faction in Cavite. Nationalist historian that
His writings was intended to emphasizes role of masses
show bias against the and he portrayed Andres
Magdalo faction led by Emilio Bonifacio as the true hero of
Aguinaldo. He also portrays Revolution. On the other
the Magdiwang leaders more hand, Emilio Aguinaldo was
positively and sometimes portrayed as someone who
highlights the conflicts with betrayed the ideas of the
the Magdalo groups. revolution.
Does informed Yes, from internal factional Yes, it is probable because it
common sense disputes, informed common played a role in the
make the account sense had suggests he might revolution, as thousands of
probable? exaggerate or downplay Filipinos risked their lives for
events to favor his side. independence. Thus, the
book presents a believable
account, it simplifies aspect
reality of the revolution.
Is the account Yes but with a caution. For His accounts was
corroborated by example, other memoirs and corroborated by various
other accounts? historical documents like sources such as Katipunan
Expound. Emilio Aguinaldo, Artemio documents, memoirs of
Tecarte, etc. , confirms many participants, and Spanish
of the events, dates, battles, reports. His emphasis on
Alvarez described. Though, Bonifacio's role aligns with
the interpretations of motives, many revolutionary writings.
leadership, conflicts, and the Though, other historian's
factional rivalries it often such as Reynaldo Ileto and
different depending on the Milagros Guerrero have
other faction. pointed out limitations of
Agoncillo's perspective,
arguing his narrative
sometimes overlooks
complex and alternative
viewpoints. Hence, while his
account is supported with
evidence, it should be
balance with other
interpretations for
understanding on the
revolution.
