2 Readings in Philippine History Module

A GLANCE AT SELECTED PHILIPPINE POLITICAL CARICATURE IN ALFRED

MCCOY’S PHILIPPINE CARTOONS: POLITICAL CARICATURE OF THE AMERICA
ERA (1900-1941)

Political cartoons and caricature are a rather recent art form, which veered away from
the classical art by exaggerating human features and poking fun at its subjects. Such
art genre and technique became a part of the print media as a form of social and political
commentary, which usually targets persons of power and authority. Cartoons became an
effective tool of publicizing opinions through heavy use of symbolism, which is different
from a verbose written editorial and opinion pieces. The unique way that a caricature
represents opinion and captures the audience’s imagination is reason enough for
historians to examine these political cartoons. Commentaries in mass media inevitably
shape public opinion and such kind of opinion is worthy of historical examination.

In his book Philippine Cartoons: Political Caricature of the American Era (1900-1941),
Alfred McCoy, together with Alfredo Roces, compiled political cartoons published in
newspaper dailies and periodicals in the aforementioned time period. For this part, we
are going to look at selected cartoons and explain the context of each one.

The first example was published in

The Independent on May 20,1916.
The cartoon shows a politician from
Tondo, named Dr. Santos, passing
his crown to his brother-in-law, Dr.
Barcelona. A Filipino guy (as
depicted wearing salakot and
barong tagalog) was trying to stop
Santos, telling the latter to stop
giving Barcelona the crown because
it is not his to begin with.
3 Readings in Philippine History Module

The second cartoon was also published by The Independent on 16 June 1917.
This was drawn by Fernando
Amorsolo and was aimed as a
commentary to the workings on
Manila Police at that period, Here,we
see a Filipino child who stole a skinny
chicken because he had nothing to
eat. The police officer was
relentlessly pursuing the saidchild. A
man wearing a salakot, labeled Juan
de la Cruz was grabbing the officer,
telling him to leave the small-time
pickpockets and
thieves and to turn at the greatest thieves instead. He was pointing to huge warehouses
containing bulks of rice, milk, and grocery products.

The third cartoon was a commentary on the unprecedented cases of colorum

automobiles in the city streets. The Philippine Free Press published this commentary when
fatal accidents involving colorum vehicles and taxis occurred too often already.
4 Readings in Philippine History Module

This fourth cartoon depicts a cinema. A blown-up police officer was at the scene
saying that couples are not allowed to neck and make love in the theater. Two youngsters
looked horrified while an older couple seemed amused.

The next cartoon was published by The Independent on 27 November 1915.

Here, we see the caricature of Uncle Sam riding a chariot pulled by Filipinos wearing
school uniforms. The
Filipino boys were
carrying American
objects like baseball
bats, whiskey, and
boxing gloves.
McCoy, in his caption
to the said cartoon,
says that this cartoon
was based on an
event in 1907 when
William Howard Taft
was brought to the
Manila pier riding a
chariot pulled by
students of Liceo de Manila. Such was condemned by the nationalists at that time.
5 Readings in Philippine History Module

The last cartoon was published by Lipang Kalabaw on 24 August 1907, In the
picture, we can see Uncle Sam rationing porridge to the politicians and members of the
Progresista Party (sometimes knownas the Federalista Party) while members of the
Nacionalista Party look on and wait for their turn. This cartoon depicts the patronage of
the United States being coveted by politicians from either of the party.

Analysis of the Political Caricatures during the American Period

The transition from the Spanish Colonial period to the American Occupation period
demonstrated different strands of changes and shifts in culture, society, and politics. The
Americans drastically introduced democracy to the nascent nation and the consequences
were far from ideal. Aside from this, it was also during the American period that Filipinos
were introduced to different manifestation of modernity like healthcare, modern
transportation, and media. This ushered in a more open and freer press. The post-
independence and the post-Filipino-American period in the Philippines were experienced
differently by Filipinos coming from different classes. The upper principalia class
experienced economic prosperity with the opening up of the Philippine economy to the
United States but the majority of the poor Filipino remained poor, desperate, and victims
of state repression.

The selected cartoons illustrate not only the opinion or certain media outfits about
the Philippine society during the American period but also paint a broad image of society
and politics under the United States. In the arena of politics, for example, wesee the
price that Filipinos paid for the democracy modeled after the Americans. First, itseemed
that the Filipino politicians at that time did not understand well enough the
6 Readings in Philippine History Module

essence of democracy and the accompanying democratic institutions and processes.

This can be seen in the rising dynastic politics in Tondo as depicted in the cartoon
published by The Independent. Partronage also became influential and powerful, not
only between clients and patrons but also between the newly formed political parties
composed of the elite and the United States. This was depicted in the cartoon where
the United States, represented by Uncle Sam, provided dole outs for members of the
Federalista while the Nacionalista politicians looked on and waited for their turn.
Thus,the essence of competing political parties of enforce choices among the voters
was cancelled out. The problem continues up to the present where politicians transfer
from one party to another depending on which party was powerful in specific periods of
time.

The transition from a Catholic-centered, Spanish-Filipino society to an imperial

American assimilated one, and its complications, were also depicted in the cartoons.
One example is the unprecedented increase of motorized vehicles in the city. Automobiles
became a popular mode of transportation in the city and let to theemergence of
taxis. However, the laws and policy implementation was mediocre. This resulted in the
increasing colorum and unlicensed vehicles transporting people around the city. The rules
governing the issuance of driver’s license was loose and traffic police count not be
bothered by rampant violations of traffic rules. This is a direct consequence of the drastic
urbanization of the Philippine society. Another example is what McCoy called the ―sexual
revolution‖ that occurred in the 1930s. Young people, asearly, as that period, distributed
the conservative Filipino mindset by engaging in daring sexual activities in public spaces
like cinemas.

Lastly, the cartoons also illustrated the conditions of poor Filipinos in the
Philippines now governed by the United States. From the looks of it, nothing much has
changed. For example, a cartoon depicted how police authorities oppress petty Filipino
criminals while turning a blind eye on hoarders who monopolize goods in their huge
warehouses (presumably Chinese merchants). The other cartoon depicts how Americans
controlled Filipinos through seemingly harmless American objects. By controlling their
consciousness and mentality, Americans got to control and subjugate Filipinos.
7 Readings in Philippine History Module

Revisiting Corazon Aquino’s Speech Before the U.S Congress

Corazon ―Cory‖ Cojuangco Aquino functioned as the symbol of the restoration of

democracy and the overthrow of the Macros Dictatorship in 1986. The EDSA People
Power, which installed Cory Aquino in the presidency put the Philippines in the
international spotlight for overthrowing a dictator through peaceful means. Cory was
easily a figure of the said revolution, as the widow of the slain Marcos oppositionist and
former Senator Benigno ―Ninoy‖ Aquino Jr. Cory was hoisted as the antithesis of the
dictator. Her image as a mourning, widowed housewife who had always been in the
shadow of her husband and relatives and had no experience in politics was juxtaposed
against Marcos’s statesmanship, eloquence, charisma, and cunning political skills.
Nevertheless, Cory was able to capture the imagination of the people whose rights and
freedom had long been compromised throughout the Marcos regime. This is despite the
fact that Cory came from a rich haciendero family in Tarlac and owned vast estates of
sugar plantation and whose relatives occupy local and national government positions.

The People Power Revolution of 1986 was widely recognized around the world for its
peaceful character. When former senator Ninoy Aquino was shot at the tarmac ofthe
Manila International Airport on 21 August 1983, the Marcos regime greatly suffered a
crisis of legitimacy. Protests from different sectors frequented different areas in the
country. Marcos’s credibility in the international community also suffered. Paired with the
looming economic crisis, Marcos had to do something to prove to his allies in the United
States that he remained to be the democratically anointed leader of the [Link] called
for a Snap Election in February 1986, where Corazon Cojuangco Aquino, the widow of
the slain senator was convinced to run against Marcos. The canvassing was rigged to
Marcos’s favor but the people expressed their protests against the corrupt and
authoritarian government.

On 18 September 1986, seven month since Cory became president, she went to
the United States and spoke before the joint session of the U.S. Congress. Cory was
welcomed with long applause as she took the podium and addressed the United States
about her presidency and the challenges faced by the new republic. She began her speech
with the story of her leaving the United States three years prior as a newly widowed wife
of Ninoy Aquino.

She then told of Ninoy’s character, conviction, and resolve in opposing the
authoritarianism of Marcos. She talked of the three times that they lost Ninoy including
8 Readings in Philippine History Module

his demise on 23 August 1983. The first time was when the dictatorship detained Ninoy
with other dissenters. Cory related:

―The government sought to break him by indignities and terror. They locked
him up in a tiny, nearly airless cell in a military camp in the north. They
stripped him naked and held a threat of a sudden midnight execution
over his head. Ninoy held up manfully under all of it. I barely did as well.
for forty-three days, the authorities would not tell me what
had happened to him. This was the first time my children and I felt we had lost him.‖

Cory continued that when Ninoy survived that first detention, he was then charged
of subversion, murder, and other crimes. He was tried by a military court, whose
legitimacy Ninoy adamantly questioned. To solidify his protest, Ninoy decided to do a
hunger strike and fasted for 40 days. Cory treated this event as the second time that
their family lost Ninoy. She said:

―When that didn’t work, they put him on trial for subversion, murder
And a host of other crimes before a military commission. Ninoy challenged
its authority and went on a fast. If he survived it, then he felt God
intended him for another fate. We had lost him again. For nothing would
hold him back from his determination to see his fast through to the end.
He stopped only when it dawned on him that the government would keep his body
Alive after the fast had destroyed his brain. And so, with barely any life
In his body, he called off the fast on the 40th day.‖

Ninoy’s death was the third and the last time that Cory and their children lost Ninoy. She
continued:

―And then, we lost him irrevocably and more painfully than in the
past. The news came to us in Boston. It had to be after the three
happiest years of our lives together. But his death was my country’s
resurrection and the courage and faith by which alone they could be free
again. The dictator had called him a nobody. Yet, two million people threw
aside their passivity and fear and escorted him to his grave.‖

Cory attributed the peaceful EDSA Revolution to the martyrdom of Ninoy. She stated that
the death of Ninoy sparked the revolution and the responsibility of ―offering the
democratic alternative‖ had ―fallen one (her) shoulders.‖ Cory’s address introduced us
to her democratic philosophy, which she claimed she also acquired from Ninoy. She
argued:

―I held fast to Ninoy’s conviction that it must be by the ways of democracy.

I held out for participation in the 1984 election the dictatorship called, even If I
knew it would be rigged. I was warned by the lawyers of the opposition, that I
9 Readings in Philippine History Module

ran the grave risk of legitimizing the foregone results of elections that were
clearly going to be fraudulent. But I was not fighting for lawyers but
for the people in whose intelligence, I had implicit faith. By the exercise of
democracy even in a dictatorship, they would be prepared for democracy
when it came. And then also, it was the only way I knew by which we could
measure our power even in the terms dictated by the dictatorship. The
people vindicated me in an election shamefully marked by government
thuggery and fraud. The opposition swept the elections, garnering a clear
majority of the votes even if they ended up with barely a third of the seats
In Parliament. Now, I knew our power.‖

Cory talked about her miraculous victory through the people’s struggle and
continued talking about her earliest initiatives as the president of a restored democracy.
She stated that she intended to forge and draw reconciliation after a bloody and polarizing
dictatorship. Cory emphasized the importance of the EDSA Revolution in terms of being
a ―limited revolution that respected the life and freedom of every Filipino.‖ She also
boasted of the restoration of a fully constitutional government whose constitution gave
utmost respect to the Bill of Rights. She reported to the U.S. Congress:

―Again as we restore democracy by the ways of democracy, so are we

Completing the constitutional structures of our new democracy under
a constitution that already gives full respect to the Bill of Rights. A jealously
independent constitutional commission is completing its draft which will
be submitted later this year to a popular referendum. When it is approved,
there will be elections for both national and local positions. So, within about
a year from a peaceful but national upheaval that overturned a dictatorship,
we shall have returned to full constitutional government.‖

Cory then proceeded on her peace agenda with the existing communist
insurgency, aggravated by the dictatorial and authoritarian measure of Ferdinand
Marcos. She asserted:

―My predecessor set aside democracy to save it from a communist insurgency

That numbered less than five hundred. Unhampered by respect for
Human rights he went at it with hammer and tongs. By the time
He fled, that insurgency had grown to more than sixteen thousand.
I think there is a lesson here to be learned about trying to stifle
A thing with a means by which it grows.‖

Cory’s speech agenda involves political initiatives and re-integration program to persuade
insurgents to leave the countryside and return to the mainstream society to participate
in the restoration of democracy. She invoked the path of peace because she believed that
it was the moral path that a moral government must take. Nevertheless,
10 Readings in Philippine History Module

Cory took a step back when she said that while peace is the priority of her presidency,
she ―will not waiver‖ when freedom and democracy are threatened. She said that, similar
to Abraham Lincoln, she understands that ―force may be necessary before mercy‖ and
while she did not relish the idea, she ―will do whatever it takes to defend the integrity
and freedom of (her) country.‖

Cory then turned to the controversial topic of the Philippine foreign debt amounting to
$26 billion at the time of her speech. This debt had ballooned during the Marcos regime.
Cory expressed her intention to honor those debts despite mentioning that the people
did not benefit from such debts. Thus, she mentioned her protestations about the way
the Philippines was deprived of choices to pay those debts within the capacity of the
Filipino people. She lamented:

―Finally may I turn to that other slavery, our twenty-six billion

Dollar foreign debt. I have said that we shall honor it. Yet, the
Means by which we shall be able to do so are kept from us.
Many of the conditions imposed on the previous government
That stole this debt, continue to be imposed on us who never benefit from it.‖

She continued that while the country had experienced the calamities brought about by
the corrupt dictatorship of Marcos, no commensurate assistance was yet to be extended
to the Philippines. She even remarked that given the peaceful character of EDSA People
Power Revolution, ―ours must have been the cheapest revolution ever.‖ She
demonstrated that Filipino people fulfilled the ―most difficult condition of the debt
negotiation,‖ which was the ―restoration of democracy and responsible government.‖

Cory related to the U.S. legislators that wherever she went, she met poor and
unemployed Filipinos willing to offer their lives for democracy. She stated:

―Wherever I went in the campaign, slum area or impoverished village. They

Came to me with no cry, democracy. Not food although they clearly needed it but
democracy. Not money, for they gave what little they had to my campaign. They
didn’t expect me to work a miracle that would instantly put food into their mouths,
clothes on their back, education in their children and give them work that will
put dignity in their lives. But I feel the pressing obligation to respond quickly
as the leader of the people so deserving of all these things.‖

Cory proceeded in enumerating the challenges of the Filipino people as they tried building
the new democracy. These were the persisting communist insurgency and the economic
deterioration. Cory further lamented that these problems worsened by the crippling debt
because half of the country’s export earnings amounting to $2 billion would ―go to pay
just the interest on a debt whose benefit the Filipino people never received.‖ Cory then
asked a rather compelling questions to the U.S. Congress:
11 Readings in Philippine History Module

―Has there been a greater test of national commitment to the

Ideals you hold dear than that my people have gone through?
You have spent many lives and much treasure to bring freedom
To many lands that were reluctant to receive it. And here, you have
A people who want it by themselves and need only the help to preserve it.‖

Cory ended her speech by thanking America for serving as home to her family for what
she referred to as the ―three happiest years if our lives together.‖ She enjoined America
in building the Philippines as a new home for democracy and in turning the country as a
―shining testament of our two nations’ commitment to freedom.‖

ANALYSIS OF CORY AQUINO’S SPEECH

Cory Aquino’s speech was an important event in the political and diplomatic history
of the country because it has arguably cemented the legitimacy of the EDSA government
in the international arena. The speech talks of her family background, especially her
relationship with her late husband, Ninoy Aquino. It is well known that it was Ninoy who
served as the real leading figure of the opposition at that time. Indeed, Ninoy’s eloquence
and charisma could very well compete with that of Marcos. In her speech, Cory talked at
length about Ninoy’s toil and suffering at the hands of the dictatorship that he resisted.
Even when she proceeded talking about her new government, she still went back to
Ninoy’s legacies and lessons. Moreover, her attribution of the revolution to Ninoy’s death
demonstrates not only Cory’s personal perception on the revolution, but since she was
the president, it also represents what the dominant discourse was at that point in our
history.

The ideology or the principles of the new democratic government can also be seen
in the same speech. Aquino was able to draw the sharp contrast between her government
and of her predecessor by expressing her commitment to a democratic constitution
drafted by an independent commission. She claimed that such constitution upholds and
adheres to the rights and liberty of the Filipino people. Cory also hoisted herself as the
reconciliatory agent after more than two decades of a polarizing authoritarian politics.

Despite Cory’s effort to hoist herself as the exact opposite of Marcos, her speech
still revealed certain parallelisms between her and the Marco’s government. This is seen
in terms of continuing the alliance between Philippines and the United States despite
the known affinity between the said world super power and Marcos. The Aquino regime,
as seen in Cory’s acceptance of the invitation to address the U.S. Congress and to the
content of the speech, decided to build and continue with the alliance between the
Philippines and the United States and effectively implemented an essentially similar
foreign policy to that of the dictatorship.
12 Readings in Philippine History Module

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 it8 consequences. Geoffrey Barraclough defines history AS
"the attempt to discover, on the basis of fragmentary evidence, the significant things
about the past," He also notes "the history we read, though based on facts, is strictly
speaking, not factual at all. but a series of accepted judgments." Such judgments of
historians on how the past should be seen make the foundation of historical
interpretation.

The Code of Kalantiaw is a mythical legal code in the epic history Maragtas.
Before it was revealed ns a hoax, it was a source of pride for the people of Aklan.
In fact, a historical marker was installed 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, established his government in the peninsula of Batang, Aklan
Sakup. Considered the First Filipino Lawgiver, he promulgated in about
1433 a penal code now known as Code of Kalantiaw containing 18 articles.
Don Marcelino Orilla of Zaragoza, 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 a historical fiction
written in 1913 by Jose E. Marco titled Las Antiguas Leyendas de la Isla deNegros.
Marco attributed the code itself 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 go 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 source may even cause misunderstandings; sometimes, even resulting
in more problems.
13 Readings in Philippine History Module

Interpretations of the past, therefore, vary according to who reads the primary
source, when it was read, and how it was read. As students of history, we must be well
equipped to recognize different types of interpretations, why thesemay 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. Thereis no
evidence to support the claim that this poem, with the now immortalizedlines
"Ang hindi magmahal sa kanyang salita/mahigit sa hayop at malansangisda" was
written by Rizal, and worse, the evidence against Rizal's authorship ofthe poem
seems all unassailable.

There exists no manuscript of the poem handwritten by Rizal. The poem wasfirst
published in 1906, in a book by Hermenegildo Cruz. Cruz said he receivedthe
poem from Gabriel Beato Francisco, who claimed to have received it in 1884 from
Rizal's close friend, Saturnino Raselis. Rizal never mentioned writing thispoem
anywhere in his 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 encounteredthe 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, startingfrom
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 "C'
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 orthographythat was
prevalent in his time.
14 Readings in Philippine History Module

Many of the things we accept as "true" about the past might not be the case
anymore; just because these were taught to us as "facts" when were younger does not
mean that it is set in stone—history is after all, a construct - And as construct, it is open
for interpretation. There might be conflicting and competing account-g of the past that
need one's attention, and can impact the way we view our country's history and identity.
It is important, therefore, to subject to evaluation not only the primary source, but also
the historical interpretation of the same to ensure that the current interpretation is
reliable to support our acceptance of events of the past.

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 looking at historical
events, personalities, developments, cultures, and societies from different perspectives.
This means that there is a multitude of ways by 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, biased, partial, and contains preconceptions. The historian decides on
what sources to use, what interpretation to make more apparent, depending on what
his end is. Historians may misinterpret evidence, attending to those that suggest that a
certain event happened. and then ignore the rest that goes against the evidence.
Historians may omit significant facts about their subject, which makes the interpretation
unbalanced. Historians may impose a certain ideology to their subject, which may not
be appropriate to the period the subject was from. Historians may also provide a single
cause for an event without considering other possible causal explanations of said event.
These are just many of the ways a historian may fail in his historical inference,description,
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 dissent.

Exploring multiple perspectives in history requires incorporating source materials

that reflect different views of event in history, because singular historical narratives do
not provide for space to inquire and investigate. Different that counter each other may
create space for more investigation and research, while providing more evidence for those
truths that agree on.

Different kinds of sources also provide different historical truths—an official

document may note different aspects of the past than, say, a memoir of an ordinary
person on the same event. Different historical agents create different historical truths,
and while this may be a burdensome work for the historian, it also renders more validity
to the historical scholarship.

Taking these in close regard in the reading of historical interpretations, it provides

for the audience a more complex, but also a more complete and richer understanding of
the past.
15 Readings in Philippine History Module

Case Study l: Where Did the First Catholic Mass Take Place in the
Philippines?

The popularity of knowing where the "firsts" 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 Catholic 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. In fact, 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, together
with the increasing scholarship on the history of the Philippines, a more nuanced reading
of the available evidence was made, which brought to light more considerations in going
against the more 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 source 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 Eleano 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). Pigafett,a, 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 ó derotero del viage de Mngallnnes desde el cabo se S. Agustín en

el Brazil hasta el regreso a Espana de la nao Victoria, escrito por Frandsco Albo."
Document no. xxii in Colleción de viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar los
Españoles desde fines del siglo XV, Ed. Martin Fernandez de Navarrete (reprinted
Buenos Ai 1945, 5 Vols.) IV. 191—225. As cited in Miguel A. Bernard "Butuan or
limasawa? The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination Of Evidence"
1981, Kinaadman: A Journal Of Southern Philippine, Vol. 111, 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.
16 Readings in Philippine History Module

2. They went instead that same day southwards to another small island namedSuluan,
and there they anchored. There they saw 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 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 w ds tow 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 small island caned "Mazava." That at latitude of 9 and two-thirds degrees
North.

6. The people of that island or were very good. There the Spaniards u upon mountain-
top. and from there they were shown three islands to the west and southwest, where
they there much gold showed us how the gold gathered. which came in small pieces
like peas and lentils."

7. From Mazava they sailed northwards again towards Seilani_ They followed the coast
of Seilani in a 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 villa) of Subu where they stayed many 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 but has to go (as they did) in round-about way.

It must be noted that in Alba's account, the location of Mazava fits the location of the
island of Limasawa, at the southern tip of Leyte, 9°54'N. Also, Albo does not mention the
first Mass, but only the planting of the cross upon a mountain-top from which could
17 Readings in Philippine History Module

be seen three islands to the west and southwest, which also fits the southern end of
Limasawa.

Primary Source: Pigafetta'g 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 limasawa? The Site of the First Mass
in the Philippines; A Reexamination of Evidence" 1981, Kinaadman: A Journal of
Southern Philippines, vol. m.

1. Saturday, 16 March 1521 — Magellan's expedition sighted a "high land' named

"Zamal' which was some 300 leagues westward of landrones (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 island of "Zamal." (To the fright" 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 at 10 degrees North Latitude.

3. On that game day (Sunday. March 17). Magellan named the entire archipelago the
"Islands of Saint Lazarus.‖ the reason being that it was Sunday in the Lenten 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
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 they 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 the natives returned. This time they were in two bouts, and
they brought food supplies.
18 Readings in Philippine History Module

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 anchor, an
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 token 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 Pignfetta in his map "Ceilon" and Albo calls ―Seilani‖: namely the island
of Leyte. ―Hiunanghan‖ (a misspelling or Hinunangan) to Pigafetta to be 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, it is easy to see what Pigufetta meant by sailing "toward the westsouthwest‖
past those islands. They left Homonhon sailing westward towards Leyte, then
followed coast southward, passing between the island of Hibuson on their portside
and Hiunangan 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, theyanchored
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 Vole (i.e., North)
and in a longitude of one hundred und 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; "Ceylon, Bohol, Canighan, Baibai, and Gutighan."

13. At Gatighan. they sailed westward to the three islands of the Camotes Group,
namely, Poro, Pasihan and Ponson. Here the Spanish ships stopped to allow the
19 Readings in Philippine History Module

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. Sunday, April 7 — At ncxjn 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. us 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 u small boat ( boloto) came with eight natives,
to Whom Magellan threw some trinkets as presents. The natives paddled away.
hut two hours later two larger boats (balanghai) came, in oneof which the native
king sat under an awning of mats. At Magellan's invitation some of the natives
went up the Spanish ship, but the native king remained seated in his boat. An
exchange of gifts was affected. In the afternoon thatday, the Spanish ships
weighed anchor and came closer to shore, anchoring near the native king's
village. This Thursday, March 28, was Thursday in Holy Week, i.e., Holy Thursday.

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 food
supplies, and to say that they had come as friends andnot as enemies. In
reply the king himself came in a boat with six or eightmen, and this time
went up Magellan's ship and the two men [Link] exchange of gifts
was made. The native king and his companions returned ashore, bringing with
them two members of Magellan's expeditionas guests for the night. One of the
two was Pigafetta.

3. Saturday, March 30 — Pigafetta and his companion had spent the previous evening
feasting and drinking with the native king and his son. Pigafetta deplored the
fact that, although it was Good Friday, they had to eat meat.
20 Readings in Philippine History Module

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 priest ashore with some men to prepare for the Mass.
Later in the morning Magellan landed with fifty men and Mass was celebrated,
after which a cross was venerated. Magellan and the Spaniards returned to the
ship for the noonday meal, but in the afternoon they returned ashore to plant
the cross on the summit of the highest hill. In attendanceboth at the Mass
and at the planting of the cross were the king of Mazauaand the king of
Butuan.

5. Sunday, March 31 — On that same afternoon, while on the summit of the highest
hill, Magellan asked the two kings which ports he should go to inOrder to
obtain more abundant supplies of food than were available in that island. They
replied that there were three ports to choose from: Ceylon, Zubu and Calagan. Of
the three, Zubu was the port with the most trade. Magellan then said that he
wished to go to Zubu and to depart the following morning. He asked for someone
to guide him thither. The kings replied that the pilots would be available "any
time," But later that evening the king of Mazaua changed his mindand said that he
would himself conduct. Magellan to Zubu but that he would first have to bring the
harvest in. He asked Magellan to send him men to help with the harvest.

6. Monday, April I — 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
two days," i.e., Tuesday and Wednesday the 2nd and 3rd of April.

8. Thursday, April 4 — They leave Mazaua bound for Cebu.

Using the primary sources available, Jesuit priest Miguel A. Bernad in his work
Butuan or Limasawa. The Site of the First Mass in {he Philippines: A
Reexamination of Evidence (1981) lays down the argument that in the Pigafetta
account, a crucial aspect of Butuan was not mentioned—the river. Butuan is a
riverine settlement, situated on the Agusan River. The beach of Masao is in the
delta of said river. It is a curious omission in the account of the river, which
21 Readings in Philippine History Module

makes part of a distinct characteristic of Butuan's geography that seemed to be

too important to be missed.

The Age of Exploration is a period of competition among European rulers to

conquer and colonize 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 und 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 westward
to find a shortcut to Asia, He was able to reach the Americas, whichwas 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.

It must also be pointed out that later on, after Magellan's death. The survivors of his
expedition went to Mindanao, und seemingly went to Butuan. In this instance, Pigafetta
vividly describes a trip in river. But note that this account already happened after
Magellan's death.

Case Study 2: What Happened in the Cavite Mutiny?

The year 1872 is a historic year of two events: The Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of
the three priests: Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and 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 the different sides to the story, a battle of perspectives
supported by primary sources. In this case study, we zoom in to the events 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 y Vidal centered on how the
event WHS 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 rabid for a scholar. Another account from the official report written by then
22 Readings in Philippine History Module

Governor General Rafael Izquierdo implicated the native clergy, who were then, active
in the movement toward secularization of parishes. These two accounts corroborated
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 of Philippine History, Volume
7 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 269-273.

The abolition of privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal of exemption
from the tribute was, according to some, the cause of the insurrection. There were,
however, other causes.

The Spanish Revolution Which overthrew a secular throne; the propaganda carried on
by an unbridled press against monarchical principles, attentatory [sic] of the most sacred
respects towards the dethroned majesty; the democratic and republican books and
pamphlets; the speeches and preaching of the apostles of these new ideas inSpain;
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 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.
23 Readings in Philippine History Module

Primary Source: Excerpts from the Official Report or Governor Izquierdo on

the Cavite Mutiny of 1872

Source: Rafael Iquierdo. "Official Report on the Cavite Mutiny." In Gregorio Zaideand
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
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 that some
practice in documents that the Finance department gives crop owners who have to sell
them at 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 I and
to render personal service, from which they were formerly exempted...

Up to now it has not been clearly determined if they planned to establish a monarchy or
republic, because Indios have no word in their language to describe this different form of
government, whose head in Filipino would be called hari; but it turns out that they would
place at the head of the government u priest... thot the head selected would be
D. Jose Burgos, or D. Jacinto Zamora... Such is the plan of the rebels, those who
guided them, and the means they counted upon for its realization.

It is apparent that the accounts underscore the reason for the "revolution": theabolition
of privileges enjoyed by the workers of the Cavite arsenal such as exemption from
payment of tribute and being employed in polos y seruieios, or force labor. They also
identified other reasons which seemingly made the issue a lot more serious, which
included the presence of the native clergy who, out of spite against the Spanish friars,
"conspired and supported" the rebels. Izquierdo, in an obviously biased report,
highlighted that attempt to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines to install
a new "hari‖ in the persons of Fathers Burgos and Zamora. According to him, native
clergy attracted supporters by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight would
not fail because they had God's support, aside from promises of lofty rewards such as
employment, wealth, and ranks in the army.

In the Spaniard's accounts the event of 1872 was premeditated, and was part of a big
conspiracy among the educated leaders, mestizos, lawyers, and residents of Manila and
Cavite. They allegedly plan to liquidate high- ranking Spanish officers, and then kill the
friars. The signal they identified among these conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the
rockets fired from Intramuros.
24 Readings in Philippine History Module

The accounts detail that on 20 January 1872. the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast
of the Virgin of Loreto, and came with it were some fireworks display. The Caviteños
allegedly mistook this as the signal to commence with the attack. The '200, men
contingent led by Sergeant Lamadrid attacked Spanish officers at sight and seized the
arsenal. Izquierdo, upon learning of the attack, ordered the reinforcement of the Spanish
forces in Cavite to quell the revolt. The ―revolution‖ was easily crushed, when the
Manileños who were expected to aid the Caviteños did not arrive. Leaders of the plot
were killed in the resulting skirmish, while Fathers Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora were tried
by a court-martial and sentenced to be executed. Others who were implicated such as
Joaquin Pardo de Tavern, Antonio Ma. Regidor, Jose and PioBnsa, and other Filipino
lawyers were suspended from the practice of law, arrested. and sentenced to life
imprisonment at the Marianas Island. Izquierdo dissolved the native regiments of artillery
and ordered the creation of an artillery force composed exclusively 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 Tavern, a Filipino
scholar and researcher who wrote a Filipino Version of the bloody incidentin Cavite.

Primary Source: Excerpts from Pardo de Tavera's Account of the Cavite Mutiny

Source: Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, "Filipino Version of the Cavite Mutiny," in Gregorio
Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History. Volume 7
(Manila: National 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 ofthe university... it was due
to these facts and promises that the Filipinos had great hopes of an improvement in the
affair of their country, while the friars. on the other hand, feared that their power in the
colony would 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…
25 Readings in Philippine History Module

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 as the abolition of privileges and the prohibition of the founding of the
school of art* and trades for Filipinos, which the General saw as a smokescreen to
creating a political club.

Tavera is of the opinion that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as
a way to address other issues 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 friars 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 fusing

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 to be filled by competitive examinations. an improvement welcomed by
most Filipinos.

Another account this time by French writer Edmund Plauchut, complemented Tavera's
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 store, 1990), 251-268.

General La Torre... created a junta composed of high officials... including some friars and
six Spanish officials.... At 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 and the methods of collection.

2. Removal of surcharges on foreign importations.
3. Reduction of export fees.
4. Permission for foreigners to reside in the Philippines, buy 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.
26 Readings in Philippine History Module

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 direct-tax system.
9. Abolition of the tobacco monopoly.

The arrival in Manila of General Izquierdo... put a sudden end to all dreams ofreforms...
the prosecutions instituted by the new Governor General were probably expected as a
result of the bitter disputes between the Filipino clerics and the friars. Such a policy 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 1S71… to 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 wore employed at the maestranza of the artillery, in the
engineering shops and arsenal of Cavite, were exempted from this obligation from time
immemorial. Without preliminaries of any kind, decree by the Governor withdrew from
such Old employees their retirement privileges and declassified them into the ranks of
those who worked on public roads.

The friars used the incident as a part of a larger conspiracy to cement their dominance,
which had started to show cracks because of the discontent of the Filipinos. They
showcased the mutiny as part of a greater conspiracy in the Philippines by Filipinos to
overthrow the Spanish Government. Unintentionally, 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 priests Mariano Gomez,
Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora, who were tagged as the masterminds of the
Cavite Mutiny. They were prominent Filipino priests charged with treason and
sedition. It is believed that the Spanish clergy connected the priests to the mutiny as
part of a conspiracy to stifle the movement of secular priests whodesired to
have their own parishes instead of being merely assistants to theregular friars. The
GOMBURZA were executed by garrote in public, a scene witnessed by a young Jose
Rizal.

Their martyrdom is widely accepted as the dawn of Philippine nationalism in the

nineteenth century, with Rizal dedicating his second novel, El Filibusterismo.
27 Readings in Philippine History Module

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's lifework was committed to this end, particularly
the more influential ones, Noli Me Tangere and EI 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," Rizal's belief in the Catholic faith,
and retracts everything he wrote against the Church.

Primary Source: Rizal's Retraction

Translated from the document found by Fr. Manuel Garcia.

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, and as n 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
Espariola 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 February 1897, from an anonymous writer who was later on
28 Readings in Philippine History Module

revealed to be Fr. Vicente Balaguer. However, the "original" text was only found in the
archives on 18 May 1935, after almost four decades of disappearance.

The Balaguer Testimony

Doubts on the retraction document abound, especially because only one eyewitness
account 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 fourtimes,
attended a Mags, received communion, and prayed the rosary, all of which seemed out
of character. But since it is 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 Professor Rene
R. Escalante. In his research, documents of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia included report on
the last hours of Rizal, written by Federico Moreno. The report details the statement of
the Cuerpo de Vigilancia to Moreno.

Primary Source: Eyewitness Account of the Last Hours of Rizal

Source: Michael Charleston Chua, "Retraction ni Jose Rizal: Mga Bagong

Dokumento at Pannnaw." GMA News Online, published 29 December 2016.

Most Illustrious Sir, the agent of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia stationed in Fort Santiago
to report on during the [illegible] day in prison of the accused Jose Rizal, informs
me on this date of the following:

At 7:50 yesterday morning, Jose Rizal entered death row accompanied by his counsel,
Senor Taviel de Andrade, and the Jesuit priest Vilaclara. At the urgings of the former
and moments after entering, he was served a light breakfast, At approximately 9, the
Assistant of the Plaza, Senor Maure asked Rizal if he wanted anything. He replied that at
the moment he only wanted a prayer book, which was brought to him shortly by Father
March.

Señor Andrade left death row at 10 and Rizal spoke for a long while with the Jesuit
fathers, March and Vilaclara, regarding religious matters, it seems. It appears that these
two presented him with a prepared retraction on his life and deeds that he refused to
sign. They argued about the matter until 12:30 when Rizal ate some poached egg and
a little chicken. Afterwards he asked to leave to write and wrotefor a long time by
himself.
29 Readings in Philippine History Module

At 3 in the afternoon, Father March entered the chapel and Rizal handed him what
he had written. Immediately the chief of the firing squad, Senor del Fresno and the
Assistant of the Plaza, Señor Maure, were informed. They entered death row and together
with Rizal signed the document that the accused had written.

At 5 this morning of the 30th, the lover of Rizal arrived at the prison dressed in mourning.
Only the former entered the chapel, followed by a military chaplain whose name I
cannot ascertain. Donning his formal clothes and aided by a soldierof the artillery the
nuptials of Rizal and the woman who had been his lover were performed at the point of
death (in articulo mortis). After embracing him she left, flooded with tears.

This account corroborates the existence of the retraction document. giving it credence.
However, nowhere in the account was Fr. Balaguer mentioned, which makes the friar
a mere secondary source to the writing of the document.

The retraction of Rizal remains to this day, a controversy: many scholars, however, agree
that the document does not tarnish the heroism of Rizal. His relevance remained
solidified to Filipinos and pushed them to continue the revolution, which eventually
resulted in independence in 1898.

Rizal's Connection to the Katipunan is undeniable—in fact, the precursor of

the Katipunan as an organization is the La Liga Filipino, 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 toband 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 Katipunerosshowed
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 LaLiga Filipina. Katipuneros even
used Rizal's name as a password.

In 1896, the Katipuneros decided to inform Rizal of their plans to launch therevolution,
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 be tantamount to suicide since
it would be difficult to fight the Spaniards who hadthe 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.
30 Readings in Philippine History Module

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 are important markers in the history of colonies that struggled for their
independence against 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 tax 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 1896 was erected in what is now the intersection of
Epifanio 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 Alvurez,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 1896,
while Teodoro Agoncillo put it at Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896, according to
statements by Pio Valenzuela. Research by historians Milagros Guerrero, Emmanuel
Encarnacion, and Ramon Villegas claimed that the event place in Tandang Son’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 Zaid and Sonia Zaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8 (Manila; National Book Store,
1990), 307-309.
31 Readings in Philippine History Module

On August 26th, a big meeting was held in Balintawak, at the house of Apolonio Samson,
then cabeza of that barrio of Caloocan. Among those who attended, I remember, were
Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Aguedo del Rosario, Tomas Remigio, Briccio Pantas, Teodoro
Plata, Pio Valenzuela, Enrique Pacheco, and Francisco Carreon. They were all leaders of
the Katipunan and composed the board of directors of the organization. Delegates from
Bulacan, Cabanatuan, Cavite, and Morong were alsopresent.

At about nine o'clock in the morning of August 26, the meeting was opened with Andres
Bonifacio presiding and Emilio Jacinto acting as secretary. The purpose was to discuss
when the uprising was to take place. Teodoro Plata, Briccio Pantas, and Pio Valenzuela
were all opposed to starting the revolution too early... Andres Bonifacio, sensing that he
would lose in the discussion then, left the session hall and talked to the people, who were
waiting outside for the result of the meeting of the leaders. He told the peoplethat
the leaders were arguing against starting the revolution early, and appealed to them in
a fiery speech in which he said: "You remember the fate of our countrymenwho were
shot in Bagumbayan. Should we return now to the towns, the Spaniards will only shoot
us. Our organization has been discovered and we are all marked men. If we don't start
the uprising, the Spaniards will get us anyway. What then, do you say?"

"Revolt!" the people shouted as one.

Bonifacio then asked the people to give a pledge that they were to revolt. He told them
that the sign of slavery of the Filipinos were (sic) the cedula tax charged each citizen.
"If it is true that you are ready to revolt... I want to see you destroy your cedulas. It
will be a sign that all of us have declared our severance from the Spaniards."

Pio Valenzuela

Source: Pio Valenzuela, "Cry of Pugad Lawin," in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8 (Manila: National Book Store,
1990), 301-302.

The first place of refuge of Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Procopio Bonifacio, Teodoro
Plata, Aguedo del Rosario, and myself was Balintawak, the first five arriving there on
August 19, and I. on August 20, 1896. The first place where some 500 members of the
Katipunan met on August 22, 1896, was the house and yard of Apolonio Samson at
Kangkong. Aside from the persons mentioned above, among those who were there were
Briccio Pantas, Alejandro Santiago, Ramon Bernardo, Apolonio Samson, and others. Here,
views were only exchanged, and no resolution was debated or adopted. It was at Pugad
Lawin, the house, store house, and yard of Juan Ramos, son of Melchora Aquino, where
over 1,000 members of the Katipunan met and carried out considerable debate and
discussion on August 23, 1896. The discussion was on whether or not the revolution
against the Spanish government should be started on
32 Readings in Philippine History Module

August 29, 1896... After the tumultuous meeting, many of those present tore
their cedula certificates and shouted ―Long live the Philippines!

Long live the Philippines!" From the eyewitness accounts presented, there is
indeed marked disagreement among historical witnesses as to the place and
time of the occurrence of the Cry. Using primary and secondary sources, four
places have been identified: Balintawak, Kangkong, Pugad Lawin, and Bahay
Toro, while the dates vary: 23, 24, 25, or 26 August 1896.

Valenzuela's account should be read with caution: He once told a Spanish

investigator that the ―Cry" happened in Balintawak on Wednesday, 26 August
1896. Much later, hewrote in his Memoirs of the Revolution that it happened
at Pugad Lawin on 23 August 1896. Such inconsistencies in accounts should
always be seen as a red flag whendealing with primary sources.

According to Guerrero, Encarnacion, and Villegas, all these places are in

Balintawak, then part of Caloocan, now, in Quezon City. As for the dates,
Bonifacio and his troops may have been moving from one place to another
to avoid being located by theSpanish government, which could explain why
there are several accounts of the Cry.