READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY REVIEWER

RETRACTION LETTER OF DR. JOSE RIZAL [ retraction was a Latin word means binabawi]

• One of the greatest historical issues of all time.

Before his execution, the church with all its witnesses expressed that Dr. Jose Rizal wrote a
document where he retracted. But no document was shown to his family.

It was only after 39 years that supposed to be “original” was found in 1935. This led to more
suspicion about whether there was really a retraction and more so, is the document was
authentic or not.
Another text was published in La Voz Espana and Diaro Manila on the very day of Rizal’s
execution, December 30, 1896.
The next text appeared in Barcelona, Spain, on February 14, 1897, in the fortnightly magazine in
La Juventud; it came from Fr. Balaguer who was an anonymous writer at that time but later on
revealed himself after fourteen years.

Archivist Fr. Manuel Garcia, C.M discovered the “original” text was discovered on May 18, 1935
in the archdiocesan archives, after it disappeared for thirty-nine years from the afternoon of
the day when Rizal was executed.
It was supposed to have been signed by Dr. Jose Rizal moments before his death. There were
many witnesses, most of them Jesuits.
The document only surfaced for public viewing on May 13, 1935. It was found by Fr. Manuel A.
Garcia at the Catholic hierarchy’s archive in Manila. The original document was never shown to
the public, only the reproductions of it.
However, Fr. Pio Pi, a Spanish Jesuit, reported that as early as 1907, the retraction of Rizal was
copied verbatim and published in Spain, and reprinted in Manila.
 Fr. Garcia, who found the original document, also copied it verbatim.
The Major arguments for the Retraction
1. The Retraction “Document” found in 1935 was considered imperative [authentic]
evidence to the Retraction, itself.
2. There were eyewitnesses closely associated with the events.
In both reproductions, there were conflicting versions of the text. Add to this date of the
signing was very clear in the original Spanish document which Rizal supposedly signed. The date
was “December 29, 1890.”
Later, another supposedly original document surfaced, it bears the date “December 29, 189C”.
The number “0” was evidently altered to make it look like a letter C. Then still later, another
supposedly original version came up. It has the date “December 29, 1896”. This time, the “0”
became a “6”.
According to the scholars who studied the document, there are differences in four copies that
were found. The significant differences between the “original” and the Manila newspapers
texts of the retraction on the one hand and the texts of the copies of Jesuits Fr. Balguer and Fr.
Pio Pi on the other hand are noted this way.
a. First, the words “mi cualidad” [with “u”] which appear in the “original” and the
newspaper texts did not appear the same in the Jesuits’ copies who have “mi calidad”
[without “u”].
b. Second, in the Jesuits’ copies of the retraction there is no word “Catolica” after the first
“Iglesias” which are found in the original and the newspaper texts.
c. Third, the Jesuits’ copies of the retraction add before the third “Iglesias” the word
“misma” that is not found in the original and the newspaper texts of the retraction.
d. Fourth, 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.
e. Sixth, and the last is 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 and it was only after
twenty years in a notarized document that he added these witnesses which resulted to
more questions to its authenticity. This is due to the claims of Fr. Balaguer had
presented an exact copy of the text that time and they were no witnesses who signed
the document of retraction.
Newly released documents and new interpretations that may affirm his retraction.
1. The Cuerpo de Vigilancia [ kwento ng gwardya sibil na nakabantay nung araw na
papatayin si Rizal]
2. What Rizal wrote on the copy of “Imitations of Christ”
3. Mentions about the “cross” in his final writings
Why do some think Jose Rizal really wrote this retraction document?
According to some historians, if he really retracted, there could be probable reasons if Jose
Rizal could have really written the document of Retraction. It is important to be not far from his
personality.
a. First is a matter of love for his family. To save his family and town from persecution of
the Spanish Authorities.
b. Second is that Jose Rizal wanted to marry Josephine Bracken to give her a legal status as
his wife. In 1912, Prof. Austin Craig wrote down what Fr. Antonio Obach had told him.
He said that Rizal already wrote a letter of retraction in order to marry Josephine
Bracken.
 c. The last is to clear his stand on religion. This is the image of the Sacred Heart of Jesus
that he carved at age 14 during his days in Ateneo. It was requested by Fr. Lleonart, his
professor, and was carved by Rizal from batikulin wood by just using a pen knife. Prior to
his march towards execution on December 20, 1896, Rizal kissed this image as it was
presented by Fr. Luiz Viza in his cell. Rizal’s hate for church is not on the church itself but
only with those friars who use the church to oppress people. His faith in the religion was
actually intact up to last minutes of his life.

Arguments against the Retraction:

1. The retraction letter is not authentic.
2. Josephine Bracken remains unmarried.
3. The aftermath of the retraction points in a different direction.

First, the handwriting of the document was studied by Dr. Ricardo R. Pascual of the
University of the Philippines after the document was found in 1935. He said it was a one-man
document. He means that all the writings, including the body of the retraction document, the
signature of Jose Rizal, and the signature of the witnesses were all written by only one person.
Second, several critics have noted differences between the text of the document found
in 1935 and other versions of the retractions including the one issued by Fr. Balaguer.
Third, there are many stories that did not fit well even after the retraction.
a. The document was not made public until 1935. Even when the family members would
like to see it. It was said to be lost.
b. That Rizal was still executed even after the retraction. Although many have insight that
the affairs of the government were different from the affairs of the church.
c. That Rizal’s burial was kept secret outside the inner wall of Paco Cemetery. Such burials
are meant for those who died as traitors. Since he already retracted supposed to be
buried properly and not just dumped into a hole without a name. His burial was not
recorded on that day Dec 30.
d. There is no public record of the marriage contract of Josephine Bracken to Rizal which
was supposed to have been permitted since he already retracted.
e. There are historians who criticized the existence of retraction because it would not have
fitted Rizal’s character. His writings, his actions in the last hours, minutes of his life did
not reflect any possibility of conversion. They point out that the retraction was
formulated in a very difficult and exceptional situation and that even Rizal’s last poem-
My last farewell is expressive in this statement.
f. There is also the story of a confession of a forger. A man named Antonio K. Abad tells on
how on August 13, 1901, at a party at his house in Nueva Ecija a certain Roman Roque
told how he was employed by the friars earlier that same year to make several copies of
the retraction document.
NOTE: RIZAL WILL ALWAYS BE RIZAL. The hero who courted death to prove those who deny
our patriotism that we know how to die for our duty and our beliefs. [J.P RIZAL]

THE “CRIES” WHICH LAUNCHED THE PHILIPPINE REVOLUTION

From 1908 until 1963, the official historical record was that the cry occurred on August
26 in Balintawak. It was known in history as the Cry of Balintawak.
What is the meaning of “Cry”?
• For his 1956 book The Revolt of the Masses Teodoro Agoncillo defined "the Cry" as the
tearing of cedulas.
• Other definition, the “Cry” could also mean the first skirmish of the revolution. In
Spanish historical sources, term "Cry" is translated from the Spanish el grito de rebelion
(cry of rebellion) or el grito for short.

The Cry of Pugadlawin by Pio Valenzuela (August 23, 1896)

• Andres Bonifacio and other Katipuneros arrived in Balintawak on August 19 while
Valenzuela came on August 20, 1896.
• 500 members of the Katipunan met on August 22, 1896, at the house and yard of Apolonio
Samson at Kangkong. Including Briccio Pantas, Alejandro Santiago, Ramon Bernardo,
Apolonio Samson and others.
• They tore their cedulas and shouted, “Long live the Philippines”.
• Valenzuela memoirs (1964, 1978) corrected that the Cry took place on 23 August at the
house of Juan Ramos at Pugad Lawin. The NHI was influenced by Valenzuela’s memoirs
and it was supported by Teodoro Agoncillo.
• President Diosdado Macapagal ordered that the Cry be celebrated on 23 August and that
Pugad Lawin be recognized as its site.

The Cry of Bahay Toro August 24, 1896, by Santiago Alvarez [Kidlat ng Apoy]
• Santiago Virata Álvarez was a revolutionary general and a founder and honorary
president of the first directorate of the Nacionalista Party. One of the Magdiwang
chapters of the katipunan in Cavite.
Sunday, August 23, 1896
• As early as 10 o’ clock in the morning at the barn of Kabesang Melchora (Aquino), at a
place called Sampalukan, barrio of Bahay Toro, Katipuneros met together. About 500 of
these arrived, ready and eager to join the “Supremo” Andres Bonifacio and his men.
Monday, August 24, 1896
• There were about 1,000 Katipuneros… The Supremo decided to hold a meeting inside
the big barn. Under his leadership, the meeting began at 10 o’ clock in the morning.
• It was 12 o’ clock noon when the meeting adjourned amidst loud cries of “Long live the
Sons of the Country!”

The Cry of Kalookan by Gregoria De Jesus August 25, 1896

• Gregoria Álvarez de Jesús, also known as Aling Oriang, “Lakambini ng Katipunan”, was the
founder and vice-president of the women's chapter of the Katipunan of the Philippines.
She was also the custodian of the documents and seal of the Katipunan.
• Gregoria De Jesus was with her parents through her friends. She learned that the Spanish
are coming to arrest her immediately. She fled the town at 11 o’clock at night and she
secretly going through the rice fields to La Loma, with the intention of returning to Manila.
The Cry of Balintawak August 25, 1896, by Captain Olegario Diaz [Commander of the Guardia
Civil Veterana in Manila]
• The Katipunan leader and Bonifacio's friend. August 23 when Bonifacio and his followers
moved to the barrio of Balintanac (Balintawak). More than 5000 attended the meeting in
Balintawak.

The Cry of Balintawak by Guillermo Masangkay (August 26, 1896)

• In the article, "A Katipunero Speaks “, Masangkay recounts the "Cry of Balintawak",
stating that on August 26,1896, a big meeting was held in Balintawak at the house of
Apolonio Samson, then the cabeza of that barrio of Caloocan.
Nine o’ clock in the morning of August 26
• The meeting was opened with Andres Bonifacio presiding and Emilio Jacinto acting as
secretary Agenda was to discuss when the uprising was to take place Teodoro Plata,
Briccio Pantas and Pio Valenzuela opposed to starting the revolution to early Pledge of
Revolt.
• Initially, the leaders of the movement quarreled over strategy and tactics, and many of its
members questioned the wisdom of an ope nrebellion due to the lack of arms and
logistical support.
• However, after Bonifacio’s intense and convincing speech, everyone destroyed their
cedulas to symbolize their defiance towards Spain and, together, raised the cry of
“Revolt".

The Cry of Balintawak by: Vincent Samson (August 26, 1896)

• 12 years old that time. An old man, his mid seventies in 1961. One of the most
respected and most popular figures in Balintawak. Undefeated barrio lieutenant of
Barrio Balingay. One of the few surviving person at the time who actually witness "The
Cry of Balintawak" in 1896 and the first encounter between the katipuneros and the
Spaniards.
• In 1961 he narrated his story which appeared in an issue of 'The Evening News'.
• He said that "The Cry" was on August 26 and not on any other date.
• His father was a leader of the Katipunan.

TEODORO PATINYO – TRAITOR [REASON WHY THE KKK WAS KNOWN TO THE SPANISH]
ANDRES BONIFACIO – LEADER OF THE KKK
EMILIO JACINTO – PRAYLE [CODE OF THE BIBLE] KARTILYA NG KATIPUNAN
GREGORIA DE JESUS - SECOND WIFE OF ANDRES
WHY SEDULA? It was the official receipt of Spanish era in the taxes of the Filipino.

CAVITE MUNITY

MUTINY – An rebellion against authority. Comes from an old verb, ‘Mutine” which means
“Revolt”.
Dr. Trinidad Hermenegildo Pardo De Tavera – a Filipino scholar who wrote a Filipino version of
the bloody incident in Cavite.
 • According to Pardo De Tavera, the incident was merely amutiny by Filipino Soldier and
laborers of the Cavite arsenal to the dissatisfaction arising from the dacronian policies of
General Izquierdo [abolition of privileges and prohibition of the founding of the school
of arts and trades].
• Uprising of military personnel of Fort San Felipe 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.
GOMBURZA – Mariano Gomes, Jose Burgos and Jacinto Zamora

• Collective name of the Three Martyred Priests.

• Tagged as the masterminds of the Cavite Munity.
• They were prominent Filipino priests charged with treason and sedition.

Garrote – Killing someone by strangulation typically with an iron wire or cord.

February 17, 1872 – The GOMBURZA was executed by Garrote in Public to serve as a threat to
Filipinos never attempt to fight the spaniards again.
JOSE MONTERO VIDAL – A prolific Spanish historian who documented the event and
highlighted it as an attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in the
Philippines.
Secularization – magkaroon ng magandang katungkulan ang mga prayleng pilipino.
Sergeant Lamadrid led the 200 men to attacked to the Spanish officers.

ORAL AND LOCAL HISTORY

• Local history is history in the local context. The study of local history provides the
foundation and the substance of true national history. It is more than the study of
towns, provinces and regions of the Philippines and the people who live there. It
provides us with the documentation and analysis of the broad processes which are
 important to the life of the people. Local history enriches our understanding of our
national history.
• Local history along with oral history are basic to autonomy. Autonomy implies an
exercise of freedom with limited control or influence from the national government. It
provides more room for local initiatives to develop and for local potential to progress.
• Local history provides the vital task of putting the meaningful essence of community in
space and time. Here we can see community life in the context for social perspective.
The Philippines has a strong and varied source of local history because it has 16 regions,
78 provinces, 1,537 municipalities, 69 cities, 41,925 barangays and over a hundred
ethnolinguistic groups.
• Oral History is the systematic collection of living people’s testimony about their own
experiences. Oral History is not folklore, gossip, hearsay, or rumor. Oral historians
attempt to verify their findings, analyze them, and place them in an accurate historical
context. Oral historians are also concerned with storage of findings for use by later
scholars.
• Oral history refers both to a method of recording and preserving oral testimony and to
the product of that process. It begins with an audio or video recording of a first-person
account made by an interviewer with an interviewee (also referred to as narrator), both
of whom have the conscious intention of creating a permanent record to contribute to
an understanding of the past. A verbal document, the oral history, results from this
process and is preserved and made available in different forms to other users,
researchers, and the public. A critical approach to the oral testimony and interpretations
are necessary in the use of oral history.
• An interview becomes oral history only when it has been recorded, processed in some
way, and made available. Availability for general research, reinterpretation and
verification define oral history- Donald Ritchie
• - Oral history is characterized by a structured, systematic planning process, thorough
research, careful consideration of copyright, emphasis on the depth and detail of
information collected, and adherence to strict processing technique. –Barbara Sommons
CHARACTERISTICS OF ORAL HISTORY:
1. It’s an interview- It is an exchange between a knowledgeable interviewer and a narrator.
2. It’s recorded, preserved, and made available to others.
3. It’s historical in intent- It looks for insights and perspectives into the past.
4. It’s recognizing the element of subjectivity.
5. It’s an inquiry that is in-depth.

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10066 - "National Cultural Heritage Act of 2009"

a. Protect, preserve, conserve and promote the nation's cultural heritage, its property and
histories, and the ethnicity of local communities;
b. Establish and strengthen cultural institutions; and
c. Protect cultural workers and ensure their professional development and well-being.
Historical Shrines - It refers to historical sites or structures hallowed and revered for their history
or association as declared by the National Historical Institute.

Example of Shrines:
• Rizal Monument – Luneta, Manila
• Bonifacio Monument – Grace Park, Caloocan City
• Lapu-Lapu Shrine – Cebu
• Magellan Shrine – Cebu
• Leyte Landing Monument – Leyte
• Edsa Shrine – Quezon City

Museums - It refers to a permanent institution that research, acquires, conserves,

communicates and exhibits the material evidence of humans and their environment for
purposes of education or leisure.

Examples of Museums:
• National Museum of Fine Arts
• National Museum of Anthropology
• Ayala Museum
• Aguinaldo Shrine and Museum
• UST Museum of Arts and Sciences

Why is visiting shrines and museums important in the study of history?

• Historical shrines and museums are not only to improve our knowledge but also give
lessons and study of life.
• Shrines and museums tend to collect, preserve, interpret, and display objects of artistic,
cultural and scientific significance for the education of the public.
• Historical shrines and museums serve as portal to the past.