Chapter 3:

“ONE PAST BUT MANY

HISTORIES”:
Controversies and Conflicting
views in Philippine History
 LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of the chapter, you must be able to:

 State the different versions of four of the controversial

issues in Philippine history;
 Analyze the conflicting views presented on some historical
events that shaped the history of the Philippines; and,
 Make a critical evaluation of the issues in Philippine history
Chapter 3: “ONE PAST BUT MANY HISTORIES”:
Controversies and Conflicting views in Philippine
History

 Site of the First Mass

 Cry of Balintawak or Pugad Lawin
 Retraction of Rizal
Site of the First
Mass
 On April 1, 1521 (originally March 31) the first mass in the Philippines
was happened in “Mazaua.”

 R.A. No. 2733

declared Barangay
Magallanes in Limasawa,
Southern Leyte as the
site of the first mass
 Masao, Butuan, Agusan
del Norte.
 Dr. Sonia M. Zaide presented evidences that the site of the first mass
was not in Limasawa but in
 The site of the first mass was first mentioned by Maximillian
Transylvanus on his “De Moluccis…” in 1523 because he interviewed
the survivors of Magellan expedition.
 The survivors mentioned that they landed in “Messana” where the first
mas was officiated.
Limasawa as site of the first mass:
 Carlo Amoretti (1800) of Ambrosiana Library said that Mazaua where
Magellan landed before and the Limasawa mentioned by Fr. Francisco
Combes are the same.
 Limasawa was supported by Fr. Pablo Pastells, Dr. Trinidad H. Pardo de
Tavera, Jaime de Veyra and James Robertson.
 Fr. Francisco Colin wrote a book about the spread of Christianity in the
Philippines but could not exactly determine the site, but he based in
“Limasawa” claim because of the writings of Antonio Herrera who
based his writings to Andres San Martin that the site was in “Mazaua”
 Limasawa became part of Magellan’s expedition because of the
writings of Fr. Colin (Dimasaua) and Fr. Francisco Combes (Limasawa
on his “Historia de Mindnao… in 1667)
 William Henry Scott, Vicente de
Jesus and NHI- the eyewitness
account for the issue was the
accounts of Gines de Mafra
(mariner who reached Mazaua
twice; 1521 and 1543)

*From Homonhon, Magellan

and his men travelled westward,
southwest to the tip of Seilani
(Panaon) to avoid Northeast
monsoon

Homonhon

Limasawa
and Panaon
Masao as site of the first mass
 Gian Battista Ramusio (1536) wrote a chronicle about the voyage of
Magellan where he insisted Butuan as the site of the first mass
 Sonia Zaide pointed-out the ff.:
1. As the place called “Mazaua,” Limasawa has four
syllables and begins with another letter, while Masao
has conclusive syllable.
2. The expedition traveled 20-25 leagues from
Homonhon. If they had been to Limasawa, the distance
only 14.6 leagues.
3. The distance to Cebu from Mazaua based on Pigafetta
was 35 leagues (140 miles). The distance from
Limasawa to Cebu is only 80 miles.
4. Rajah of Mazaua came to their ship in a “Balanghai,”
now, Butuan is a site for atleast nine excavated
Balanghai relics. Limasawa has no significant relic of
Balanghai.
5. Mazaua has abundance of gold, now Agusan Valley had
abundance of gold while Limasawa doesn’t have.
 Mafra mentioned that Magellan’s group reached Mindanao. Mazaua is
45 n.m. south of Surigao, a perfect harbor during Northeast monsoon.
 As drawn by Pigafetta, Mazaua has two hilly areas; Pinamangculan and
Dalindingan where many rice, coconut and fruits.
Saint James The Great Church,
Bolinao, Pangasinan the first site?
 A marker claims that it 1324,
Fray Odorico Pordenone from
Friuli, Italy officiated the first
Catholic mass in the country
Where’s the site of the first mass in the Philippines;
Limasawa, Southern Leyte?
Masao Shore, Butuan, Agusan del Norte?
Bolinao, Pangasinan?
Cry of Balintawak
or Pugad Lawin?
 Before, Caloocan was only a municipality of Manila province
 Caloocan composed of several barrios, namely Balintawak, Baesa,
Bagobantay, Bahay Toro, Banlat, Culiat, Kangkong, Loma, Marulas,
Talipapa, and Tangke.
“Cry” (Unang Sigaw)
 Unang Laban- Soledad Borromeo-Buehler
 Pasya- Teodoro Agoncillo & Isagani Medina
 Pagpupunit- Agoncillo & Medina
“Cry of Balintawak”

 Borromeo-Buehler pointed out, that this “Cry”

commemorated the “Unang Laban,” the Katipunan
encounter with a detachment of the Guardia Civil on
August 26, 1896.
“Cry of Pugad Lawin”
 The name “Pugad Lawin” did not appear on any map of Caloocan at
that time.
 In 1917, Pio Valenzuela insisted that the Pagpupunit and Pasya were
happened on the house of Melchora Aquino in Pasong Tamo, Barrio
Banlat, Caloocan (“Pacpac Lawin”)
 But on 1920’s Valenzuela restated that the two events happened at
Juan Ramos’ house in Barrio Bahay Toro, Caloocan (“Pugad Lawin”)
 Isagani Medina believed that Pagpupunit preceded the Pasya.
 But it was not believed by many and insisted that Pagpupunit
happened soon after the Pasya had been taken, and in the same
vicinity.
 Allegedly, the Pagpupunit was happened on August 23, while Pasya was
happened on August 24 because of the following documents (Medina):

- Biak na Bato Constitution (1897)

- Carlos Ronquillo’s chronicles (1896)
- La Liga Filipina Monument, Tondo (1903)
- Santiago Alvarez’ memoirs (1927)
Where did the allegedly Pagpupunit (August 23) and Pasya (August
24) really happen?
 Leading revolutionists went first to Poblacion, Caloocan after leaving
Manila, and then headed eastwards via Kangkong towards Pasong
Tamo and eventually Balara.
 Some sources say they left Kangkong as early as August 23, whereas
others say they were still in Kangkong as late as August 26.
 Three places where the Pagpupunit and Pasya was happened:
1. Apolonio Samson’s house in Barrio Kangkong, Caloocan
2. Melchora Aquino’s house in Pasong Tamo, Barrio
Banlat, Caloocan
3. Juan Ramos’s house in Barrio Bahay Toro, Caloocan
“Walang tigil ang ambon na humina at lumakas habang tinatahak ng
Katipunan ang malalawak at mapuputik na bukiran at parang.
Basaan ang mga damit, namimitig ang katawan sa malamig na simoy ng
hangin. Pagal at walang imik sa paglalakad.”
-Santiago Alvarez, 1896
*Based on Santiago Alvarez’ accounts*
 August 22, 1896, Bonifacio and 300 Katipuneros reached Apolonio
Samson’s house in Kangkong, Caloocan with 12 revolvers, itak, suligi
and balaraw.
 August 23, 1896, Bonifacio and his men went to Melchora Aquino’s
house in Bahay Toro and the lady fed 500 Katipuneros.
 August 24, 1896- the number of Katipuneros in Aquino’s house reached
1,000, then Bonifacio led a general meeting
 The meeting pointed-out the establishment of “Pamahalaang
Mapaghimagsik” (an evidence that Bonifacio can considered to be as
the president of the Philippines) and the Pasya (decision) for the start
of revolution, scheduled to be on August 29-30, 1896.
 SOURCE LOCATION DATE

Pio Valenzuela (1911) Kangkong, Caloocan August 23, 1896

Pio Valenzuela (1917) Pasong Tamo, Caloocan August 23, 1896

Labi ng Katipunan Marker Kangkong, Caloocan August 23, 1896

(1917)
Tomas Remigio (1917) Kangkong, Caloocan

Pio Valenzuela (1920s) Pugad Lawin (Bahay August 23, 1896

Toro), Caloocan
Julio Nakpil (1925) Kangkong, Caloocan August 26, 1896

Sinforoso San Pedro Kangkong, Caloocan

(1925)
Ramon Bernardo (1927) Pasong Tamo, Barrio August 24, 1896
Banlat, Calooca
Guillermo Masangkay Kangkong, Caloocan August 26, 1896
(1929-1957)
 SOURCE LOCATION DATE

Cipriano Pacheco (1933) Kangkong and Pugad

Lawin (not specific),
Caloocan
Briccio Pantas (1933) Kangkong, Caloocan

Francisco Carreon (1935) Kangkong, Caloocan

Vicente Samson (1961) Kangkong, Caloocan August 26, 1896

 From the survey, Jim Richardson surmised that the KKK Veterans’
statements that the two events happened in Kangkong, Caloocan was
legitimate.
 Yet, Teodoro Agoncillo
and Isagani Medina
considered the memoirs
of Valenzuela because
of his being an
“eye witness.”
 Teodoro Agoncillo wrote the
book, “Revolt of the Masses”
in 1956 that was based fully
on Valenzuela’s memoirs
 Agoncillo insisted that the
Pagpupunit and Pasya was
happened on August 23,
1896 in Pugad Lawin
particularly in Bahay Toro,
Caloocan (Juan Ramos house)
 In 1983, “Pugad Lawin Historical Committee” was established who
investigated the “Cry” but did not find any fresh document that the
“Cry” happened in other places.
 Its investigation relayed to the National Historical Institute, then, a
historical marker was placed on Bahay Toro, Quezon City (alleged
Pugad Lawin) on August 23, 1984.
 In order to simplify the issue, Dr. Ambeth Ocampo suggested that it is
much better to be called as “Sigaw sa Caloocan” (Cry of Caloocan).
 In some ways, to play safe, Prof. Xiao Chua suggested it to be called as
“Unang Sigaw ng Himagsikan” (First Cry of Revolution).
Where did the KKK’s Pagpupunit and Pasya really happened;
Kangkong, Caloocan?
Pasong Tamo, Barrio Banlat, Caloocan?
Bahay Toro, Caloocan (Pugad Lawin)?
Retraction of Rizal
December 28, 1896
 Archbishop of Manila Fr. Bernardino Nozaleda
requested the Jesuit Professors of Rizal in
Ateneo Municipal to give him some spiritual
consolation. Part of this was to convince him to
“retract” his Freemasonry linkages.
*Based on the statements of Fr. Vicente Balaguer in
Murcia, Spain on August 8, 1917*

December 29, 1896

 Fr. Balaguer went to Rizal on 11:00 AM
together with Fray Jose Villaclara tried to
convince him to write a retraction paper.
 But still believing in the Holy Scriptures, Rizal
supposedly refused to retract his anti-Catholic
views by exclaiming:
“Look, Fathers, if I should assent to all you say and
sign all you want me to, just to please you, neither
believing nor feeling, I would be a hypocrite and
would then be offending God!”

 But historians believed that Rizal had a deal

with the friars that he will make a retraction
paper in return, they will allow him to marry
with Josephine Bracken and to produce a
marriage certificate.
2:00 PM
 Allegedly, friars agreed with this deal. After their conversation, Fr.
Balaguer reported to the Archbishop that the only hope to save the life
of Rizal was to retract.
 Rizal had talks with Fr. Estanislao March and Fr. Jose Villaclara then, Fr.
Balaguer returned to his cell at 3:30 PM to discuss (again) the
retraction. History did not know about the result of their second
discussion.
5:30 PM
 Don Silvino Lopez Tuñ on, the Dean of the Manila Cathedral,
accompanied by Frs. Balaguer, March and Villaclara to talk with Rizal
and exchange some views with him. Historians did not find any papers
about their but one thing is for sure, this was about the retraction
paper of Rizal.
 Before he took his last supper, he had confessed to Fray Faura.
Afterwards, an amiable talk happened to Rizal and Manila’s Royal
Audiencia Fiscal Don Gaspar Cestañ o at 9:30 PM.
10:00 PM
 Rizal and some Catholic friars worked on his retraction papers.
 Fr. Balaguer allegedly brought a retraction draft to Rizal made by
Archbishop Nozaleda but Rizal did not like it because it was too long.
 Fray Pio Pi, the Superior of Jesuit Mission in the Philippines, made a
shorter retraction paper that was liked by Rizal and signed it.
“I retract with all my heart anything in my words,
writings, publications and conduct that has been
contrary to my character as a child of church. I declare
this spontaneously, in order to repair any scandal which
my acts may have caused and so that God and man may
pardon me.”

 The retraction paper was also signed by two

witnesses; Juan Del Presno, chief of the Civil
Guards who watched Rizal in Fort Santiago and
Eloy Maure, adjutant of plaza in Intramuros.
 As stated by Father Balaguer, he was the one who married Rizal and
Bracken before his execution (6:00 AM of December 30, 1896).
 Gregorio Zaide, said that Rizal’s assumed retraction and his supposed
church marriage with Josephine Bracken have been considered as a
highly dubious by many Rizal scholars until the present time.
 Nevertheless, the alleged retraction paper “signed” by Rizal did not do
anything. Spanish military court became firm on its decision to
sentence him to death by means of firing squad as duly allowed by
Governor General Camilo G. Polavieja.
Evidence of Rizal’s retraction: The
Statement of Federico Moreno
 The retraction paper was found in 1935
 The issue on Rizal’s retraction was proven because of a document that
could be an “independent eye witness account,” the spy records of
Federico Moreno from the members of Cuerpo de Vigilancia Manila.
 This Cuerpo were the Spanish spies stationed in prison cell of Rizal
during his stay in Intramuros.
Some of its members mentioned to Moreno three things:
 Rizal wrote a paper that he called “La Retractacion”
 Fr. Villaclara, Fr. March, Del Presno and Maure were on Rizal’s prison
cell during that time (match with the persons who signed the
“retraction paper” aside from Rizal)
 Rizal was married to Bracken before his execution.
Did Rizal really retract before he was executed?
Other controversies in
Philippine History:
 Princess Urduja, a hoax?
 Andres Bonifacio, the first Philippine President?
 Emilio Aguinaldo sold Philippine revolution in Biak-Na-
Bato?
 Golden arinola of Elpidio Quirino
 Marcos’ Martial Law was a “Golden Age”