Week 07 – Introduction

Philippine History: Spaces for Conflict and

Controversies
 According to Geoffrey Barraclough, History is “the attempt to discover, on the basis of
fragmentary evidence, the significant things about the past.” Also notes, The history we
read, though based on facts, is strictly speaking, not factual at all, but a series of accepted
judgement.” Such judgement of historians on how the past should be seen as to make the
foundation of historical interpretation.
 History is a construct. Just because these were taught to us as “facts” when we were younger
does not mean that it is set in stone. As a construct, it is open for interpretation. Therefore, it is
important to subject to evaluation not only the primary source but also the historical
interpretation of such source to ensure that the current interpretation is reliable to support our
acceptance of events of the past.
 Multiperspectivity . It is a way of looking at historical events, personalities, developments,
cultures, and societies from different perspectives. There is a multitude of ways by which we
can view the world, and each could be equally valid, and equally partial as well. With
multiperspectivity as an approach in history, we must understand that historical interpretations
contains discrepancies, contradictions, ambiguities and are often the focus of dissent. Exploring
different perspectives in history requires incorporation of source materials that reflect
different views of an event in history. Why? Because singular historical narratives do not
provide space to inquire and investigate.
 Historical writing is, by definition, biased, partial, and contains preconception.
 Historians may:
1. Decide on what source to use, what interpretation to make more apparent, depending on
what his end is.
2. May misinterpret eveidence attending to those that suggest that a certain event
happened, and the ignore the rest that goes against the evidence.
3. Omit significant facts about their subject which makes the interpretation unbalanced.
4. May impose a certain ideology to their subject, which may not be appropriate to the
period the subject was from.
5. May provide a single cause for an event without considering other possible causal
explanations of said events.
 Incorporation of Different Sources:
1. 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.
2. Different kinds of sources also provide different historical truths.
3. Different historical agents create different historical truths, which renders more validity to
the historical validity.
4. It provides for the audience a more complex, more complete and richer and understanding
of the past.
 If historical writing are, biased, partial and contains preconception, does it mean
that we cannot believe history books? Why or why not?
 What makes interpretation imbalanced? If historians will omit significant facts about their
subject, it makes the interpretation imbalanced.
 Exploring different perspectives in history requires incorporation of source materials that
reflect different views of an event in history.
 Advantages of Incorporating Different Sources. To provide for the audience a more complex,
more complete and richer and understanding of the past, different sources should be
incorporated. Different historical agents create different historical truths, which renders more
validity to the historical validity. Different kinds of sources also provide different historical truths.
 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.

Week 08 - First Cry of Revolution

 There is more than two just reading history. There is also the task of studying historical events.
Much of our history is written because there are accounts of eye witnesses or participants of
specific events. This is where the problem comes in: in which account should we believe? As the
saying and historical study goes, "there is one past but many histories". Thus controversies on
and conflicting views of events in the Philippine history exist dissipation however does not detract
from any form or study of historical sources by analyzing how perspectives are made historical
events.
 The Philippine Revolution of 1896 began with what later became known as the “First Cry”
 El Grito de Rebellion = 'Cry of Rebellion';
 First Cry =the initial move of the Filipinos to begin the revolution for independence
 Problematic Areas of the First Cry/ Conflicts and Controversies =
A) Terminology and Current state knowledge of the First Cry;
B) Date of the First Cry; and
C) Venue of the First Cry:

A) Terminology and Current state knowledge of the First Cry

The debate has long been clouded by a lack of consensus on exactly what is meant by the “Cry”. The
term has been applied to four related but distinct events:
 the “pasya”– the decision to revolt; that part of the Revolution when the Katipunan decided to
launch a revolution against Spain.
 the “pagtitipon” –the meeting of Katipuneros; The Katipunan Supremo proceeded to a
designated meeting place outside the city to decide on their next move.
 the “pagpupunit” –the tearing of cedulas; As proof of their determination to break away from
Spain, they tore up their cedulas. The cedula, or residence certificate, was a piece of paper
signifying that the bearer was under the authority of the Spanish crown. There was a reason
why people hated the cedula. According to the Official Gazette, Spanish Gov. Gen. Primo
de Rivera had issued a decree requiring Filipinos to report to Spanish authorities on or
before July 10, 1896. The decree also forbade the people from leaving their towns or villages
without first securing passes or establishing their identity by means of a cedula. The cedula was
the means by which the Spanish colonial government sought to control and restrict the
people's movements. When the Katipuneros tore up their cedulas, they were symbolically
breaking their ties to the Spanish monarchy.
 the “unang labanan” –the first encounter with Spanish forces; start of the war.
These three events, to state the obvious, did not all happen at the same time and place. When
and where the “Cry” should be commemorated thus depends on how it is defined. Many of the
older sources on the “Cry” do not say precisely which event they mean, and often we can only
guess. This problem is so embedded in the literature that it is impossible to eradicate totally, but
wherever practicable these notes will avoid the fluid, contested “Cry” word, and will seek instead to
specify which distinct event is being discussed – the pasya, the pagpupunit or the unang labanan.

B) Date of the First Cry

August 23, 1896 - August 26, 1896
It is almost certain that the decision to revolt was taken on Monday, August 24, 1896, after a lengthy
meeting (or series of meetings) that had begun on Sunday, August 23. But others specifically
remembered the decision had not been taken until the early hours of August 24.

C) Venues of the First Cry

Caloocan City- Bagobantay, Balintawak, Bahay Toro,Pugadlawin, Kangkong
  The barrios, hamlets and farmsteads where the revolution began were all within the municipality
of Caloocan in the province of Manila.
 No detailed maps of the municipality are known to have survived from the Spanish era, and
perhaps none ever existed.
 The barrio boundaries of the time are said to have been sketchy, and are now forgotten.
 The terrain, moreover, was unremarkable, a mix of farmland and rough grassland, talahib and
cogon, with few natural landmarks.
 Many of the sources on the “Cry” are consequently vague and inconsistent in how they identify
and locate the settlements, roads and other features of the area.

Monument: Heroes of 1896, Balintawak

 In 1911, a monument to the Heroes of 1896 was erected in Balintawak. From then on until 1962,
the Cry of Balintawak was celebrated every 26th of August. It was believed that the first “Cry”
occurred there on August 26. But nowadays, because of the conflicts and controversies in the
terminologies, venue and dates of the “Cry”, it is not anymore commemorated such event every
last week of August but still the whole nation celebrates National Heroes Day on August 31st.

Monument: Ang Sigaw ng Pugadlawin, Pugadlawin

The date and place of the cry stated above were later contradicted by different Katipunan
personalities who claimed that they were there at that time. The NHCP did some extensive research of
primary sources and decided that the First Cry of Revolution of 1896 happened on Aug. 23, 1896 at
Pugadlawin, now part of Quezon City.

WHY PURSUE THIS MATTER? Settling the problem, he said, would redound to the “credit, honor and glory
of historical scholarship in our country.” Nicolas Zafra voiced such a view back in 1960. The detail of the
“Cry” might seem insignificant in relation to the broader sweep of events, he acknowledged, and indeed it
might seem “pointless and unprofitable” to pursue the matter, but the historical profession had a duty to
ensure the facts of public history were as accurate as humanly possible.
*Please study on the reading provided particularly the description of the authors of the accounts.
 Primary Sources:
 Pio Valenzuela’s account
 G. Masangkay’s account
 S. Alvarez’s account
Week 09 - Rizal’s Retraction
 Jose Rizal is identifies as a hero of the revolution for his writings that center on ending
colonialism and liberating Filipino minds to contribute to creating Filipino nation. The great
volume of Rizal’s lifework was committing to this end, particularly the more influential ones, 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 Rizal a few hours before his execution. This document, referred to as “The Retraction”,
declares Rizal’s beliefs in the Catholic faith, and retracts everything he wrote against the Church.

 Historical context- the retraction A leader of the reformist movement in Spain, Dr. Jose Rizal
was arrested, triad, and sentence to death by a Spanish court-martial after being implicated as a
leader of he Philippine Revolution. The night before his death by firing squad at the Luneta on
Dec 30, 1896, accounts exist that Rizal allegedly retracted his Masonic ideals and his writings and
reconverted to Catholicism following several hours of persuasion by Jesuit priests. There was
considerable doubt to this allegation by Rizal’s family and friends until in 1935, the supposed
retraction document with Rizal’s signature was found. Until today, the issue whether Rizal
retracted or not, and whether the document was forged or real is a subject or continuous debate
between historians and Rizal scholars alike.

 The Retraction:

 [ C.M. on 18 May 1935

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, ansd
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 repaire 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

 Main Issue: Whether or not Jose Rizal retracted in favor of the Catholic Church.

1) NO. RIZAL DID NOT RETRACT – A number of historians question the authenticity of the retraction
document citing several inconsistencies from Rizal’s writing and even ideals. The following are some
of the observed variances from the “original” document and that of Fr. Balaguer:
 Instead of the words "mi cualidad" (with "u") which appear in the original andthe newspaper texts,
the Jesuits’ copies have "mi calidad" (without "u"). Cualidad comes close to retaining that meaning
and is used to refer to the inherent characteristics of something. In fact, it can almost always be
translated as "characteristic" as well as "quality. Calidad, on the other hand, suggests excellence or
superiority:
  The Jesuits’ copies of the retraction omit the word "Catolica" after the first "Iglesias" which
are found in the original and the newspaper texts.
 The Jesuits’ copies of the retraction add before the third "Iglesias" the word "misma" which is
not found in the original and the newspaper texts of the retraction.
 With regards to paragraphing which immediately strikes the eye of the critical reader, Fr.
Balaguer’s text does not begin the second paragraph until the fifth sentences while the
original and the newspaper copies start the second paragraph immediately with the second
sentences.
 Whereas the texts of the retraction in the original and in the manila newspapers have only four commas,
the text of Fr. Balaguer’s copy has eleven commas.
 The most important of all, Fr. Balaguer’s copy did not have the names of the witnesses from the texts of
the newspapers in Manila.

 2) YES. RIZAL RETRACTED –

1. Rizal was Catholic when he died as a consequence of his retraction. In fact he was buried
in a Catholic cemetery. The said document was alleged to be signed two years before his
execution. This was done along with his profession of faith as a requirement to marry
Josephine Bracken. Today, a number of known historians would believe in the retraction
after the presentation of Cuerpo de Vigilancia de Manila, also known as the Katipunan
and Rizal documents, which consist of important primary sources of the Philippine
revolutions purchased by the government from Spain in the mid-1990s.
2. This debate will continue until enough evidence will put the issue to rest. If in case concrete
findings can be made regarding this controversy, it will be considered very valuable in
understanding Rizal’s nationalism and patriotism. More than that, an analysis of the
retraction controversy can be used as a benchmark in measuring how present-day society
value martyrdom, courage, and bravery.

Week 10- What Happened in the Cavite Mutiny?

 Background of the Issue
 1872 is a historic year of two events: the Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of the GOMBURZA:
Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamor.
 Cavite Mutiny. A major factor in the awakening of nationalism among the Filipino. The mutiny in Cavite
was demonstrated by the uprising of military personnel in Fort San Felipe (the Spanish Arsenal in
Cavite, Philippines) on January 20, 1872. Around 200 soldiers and laborers rose up in the belief that it
would elevate to a national uprising. The mutiny was unsuccessful, and government soldiers executed
many of the participants.
 Mutiny- a rebellion against authority. Comes from an old verb, “mutine” which means “revolt”.
 Cavity Mutiny-
 uprising of military personnel of Fort San Felipe (the Spanish arsenal in Cavite, Philippines) on
January 20, 1872.
 Around 200 soldiers and laborers rose up in the belief that it would elevate to a national uprising.
The mutiny was unsuccessful, and government soldiers executed many of the participants.
 Martyrdom of the GOMBURZA. The GOMBURZA was the collective name of the three martyr priests
who were tagged as the masterminds of the Cavite Mutiny.

 They were Filipino parish priests (with foreign decent) charged with treason and sedition. The Spanish
clergy connected the priests to the mutiny as part of a conspiracy to stifle the movement of secular
priests who desired to ave their own parishes instead of being assistants to the regular friars.


“Authors of the Documents”

Spanish Version Filipino Version
orthAu

Jose Montero y Vidal Pardo de Tavera

Spanish Historian & Government Official Filipino Scholar, Scientist, Historical Researcher
residing in Manila during the Cavite Mutiny Census of the Philippine Islands, 1903
s

His book Historia General de Filipinas was

produced in Madrid in 1895

Rafael Izquierdo
The Governor General during the Cavite
 Mutiny
His report was sent to the Central
Government in Madrid, Spain
 What caused the mutiny  The state between Filipinos and Spanish
 Who were involved government
 What happened before, during and  Clarification of the cause of the mutiny
Content

after the mutiny and the people involved

 What happened before, during and
after the mutiny
Purpose

To report the incident headed by the native To prove the innocence of the native clergy,
clergy and to strengthen the friars’ power in intellectuals, and other Filipinos and clarify what
such affairs. really happened in and caused the mutiny.

Closer to the Time of the Event Farther to the Time of the Event
Written when Philippines was under the Written 5 years after the Spanish rule ended.
Context of the

Spanish rule. The Central Government in Spain The country was already modernized and
Writing

decided to deprive the friars the power to westernized.

intervene in Philippine government affairs as
well as in the direction and management of
schools.

Spanish Version Filipino Version

• The Filipinos executed a mutiny led by the  Native filipino soldiers and laborers were
native clergy to overthrow the Spanish
Document

displeased by Izquierdo’s official act of

summary

government abolishing their privileges which caused

. • This was fueled by dirty propagandas the mutiny in San Felipe Fort, Cavite
carried on by uncontrolled press, democratic,
liberal and republican books and pamphlets
reaching the Philippines.
 Jose Montero y Vidal  Pardo de Tavera
 On 1871, Governor Rafael Izquierdo  The new governor Rafael Izquierdo’s
took charge of the government after La first act was to prohibit the founding
Torre. There was an information of a school of arts and trades.
received that a mutiny against the  He also abolished the privileges
What Happened Before the

Spaniards would occur and it will result (payment of tribute tax and to work
to the assassination of all, including the certain days each year on public
friars. improvements) of the soldiers and
 It has been going on since La Torre was the laborers.
Mutiny

in charged. The leaders Tavera, Zamora,  The dissatisfaction and

and the curate of Bacoor would meet discontentment spread around the
at times. workmen.

 Rafael Izquierdo
 Rafael Izquierdo received anonymous
letters continuously but did not mind it
because he was confident that he
would be able to stop any uprising.

 Spanish Version- Jose Montero y  Filipino Version- Pardo de Tavera

Cause Of The Cavite

Vidal  Native filipino soldiers and laborers were

Aside from the abolition of the privileges, displeased by Izquierdo’s official act of
Mutiny

other causes were: abolishing their privileges of not having

 Spanish Revolution which to pay annual tribute and from rendering
overthrew the secular throne. the forced labor.
 Dirty propagandas carried on by
uncontrolled press, democratic,
liberal and republican books and
 pamphlets reaching the Philippines
 Official Report- Rafael Izquierdo
 The goal to overthrow the Spanish
government to install a new “hari”
which could be Jose Burgos or
Jacinto Zamora, who are parish
priests in Manila.
 Further encouraged by the native
clergy by claiming thatGod is with
them, and those who do not revolt
will be killed. These “Indios” were
also promised of wealth and
power as a reward.
 Newspapers distributed from
Madrid (El Eco Filipino)

VIDAL: Pardo de Tavera

 GOMBURZA  Filipino soldiers
 Antonio Maria Regidor  Filipino laborers
 Pardo de Tavera
 Pedro Carillo
 Gervasio Sanchez
People Involved in the

 Mauricio de Leon
 Enrique Paraiso
Mutiny

 Jose & Pio Basa

 Other filipino laborers, priests, native
soldiers

IZQUERDO
 Native Clergy
 Mestizos
 Native Lawyers
 Residents from Manila and Cavite and
some from other provinces
 GomBurZa fathers were executed by strangulation.
 Others were also executed and life imprisoned.
 There was dissatisfaction among the workers of the arsenal as well as the members of the
native army after their privileges were drawn back byGen. Izquierdo
 Gen. Izquierdo introduced rigid and strict policies that made the Filipinos move and turn
away from Spanish government out of disgust
 The CentralGovernment failed to conduct an investigation on what truly transpired but
relied on reports of Izquierdo and the friars and the opinion of the public
After the

 The happy days of the friars were already numbered in 1872 when the
Mutiny

CentralGovernment in Spain decided to deprive them of the power to intervene in

government affairs as well as in the direction and management of schools prompting
them to commit frantic moves to extend their stay and power
 The Filipino clergy members actively participated in the secularization movement in order
to allow Filipino priests to take hold of the parishes in the country making them prey to
the rage of the friars
 Filipinos during the time were active participants, and responded to what they deemed as
injustices
 The execution ofGOMBURZA was a blunder on the part of the Spanish government, for
the action severed the ill-feelings of the Filipinos and the event inspired Filipino patriots
to call for reforms and eventually independence.

Quoted Evidences for Determining the Author ’ s Purpose

SpanishVersion (Izquierdo’s Official Report)
Author’s Purpose:To report the incident headed by the native clergy and to strengthen the friars’ power in such
affairs. Evidence: “The insurrection was motivated and prepared by the native clergy, by the mestizos, and
native lawyers...” “…and instead continued a vigilant watch wherever possible within the limited means at my
command. I had everything ready, taking into account the limited peninsular force which composes the army.

FilipinoVersion
Author’s Purpose:To prove the innocence of the native clergy, intellectuals, and other Filipinos and clarify
what really happened in and caused the mutiny. Evidence: “The persecutions which began underGovernor
Izquierdo were based on false assumptions that the Filipino were desirous of independence, and although this
was an unfounded accusation, there were many martyrs to the cause, whom were found many of the most
intelligent and well-to-do people”

What was happening at the time of the history:

When theOfficial Report was written…
• Philippines was under the Spanish rule.
• The CentralGovernment in Spain decided to deprive the friars the power to intervene in
Philippine government affairs as well as in the direction and management of schools.

When the FilipinoVersion was written…

• 5 years after the Spanish rule ended.
• The country was already modernized and westernized.

Cavite Mutiny Accounts:

 Spanish Version - Jose Montero y Vida
 Filipino Version – Pardo de Taver
 Official Report- Rafael Izquierdo

 What Happened during the mutiny:

 Jose Montero y Vidal:
The signal for the mutiny was the firing of rockets but the native soldiers in Cavite
mistook the fireworks display as the signal which caused the mutiny to fail.
They assassinated the commander of the fort and wounded his wife.
Two Spaniards were dispatched to inform authorities in Manila but was killed along
the way.The news had been relayed toGovernor Izquierdo by Domingo Mijares.
Regiments led by Felipe Ginove was sent the next day, they demanded renditions
and waited to avoid bloodshed but failed.
They killed the majority of the rebels and the others became prisoners.

 Rafael Izquierdo:
They planned to set fire in Tondo (as a diversion) to start the revolution, they would
seize fort Santiago and fire cannons as the signal for their success.
The rebels in Cavite were helped by 500 natives (in Bacoor) led by Camerino.The
rebels in Cavite made the signals by lighting lanterns but the natives failed to gather
arms and ammunition because of the Spanish navy positioned at the fort.
The uprising should have started in Manila but the rebels in Cavite went ahead of
time.
The military governor in Cavite and the commanders of Regiment 7 obliged the
rebels to take refuge in the fort of San Felipe.
 Pardo de Taverna:
There was an uprising among the soldiers in San Felipe fort, Cavite.
They assassinated the commanding officer and other Spanish officers in charge of the
fort.
40 marines attached to the arsenal and 22 artillery men under La Madrid took part in
the uprising.
General Izquierdo sent a commanding general to reinforce the native troops.
They executed La Madrid and the rebels. Others were captured and taken to Manila.
Since then, no further disturbance of peace occurred.

-National Historical Commission of the Philippines

they give insight into the ways in which historical figures understood or internalized what they
experienced, their place or significance in history