CHAPTER 1

Meaning and Relevance of History

Human beings in the face of the planet have different actions and interactions with the
occurrences of their physiological needs environmental change. Most of the time, they act
accordance to their humanistic needs like thirst and hunger that possibly lead them to the
development of their cognitive skills to think on how to meet the needs that being
endured by their biological structure. Human beings might invent the spears, bow and
arrow to kill an animal for food to ease their hunger, and molded a mud into a cup alike
in the shape of their palms when they fetch fresh water from the river. These innovative
particular actions are possible product of their creativity on how to kill an animal for food
without risking their lives in an apparent attack or danger, and on how to keep fresh water
in dwelling areas by imitating the shape of their palm into a cup made of mud. The cup,
spears, bow, and arrow served as the extension of human’s arms and body as simple
machine that possess power through their inserted effort and force.

Human beings in the past also respond in the uncontrollable environmental

phenomena like volcanic eruptions, storms, tidal waves, rains, and thunders which gave
them the feeling of fears and danger that might lead them to think how to protect
themselves from all of those. They learned to hide in caves that provided them the
feeling of security from volatile weather that also served as dwelling place that protected
them from the scorching heat of the sun and dousing rain drops. And eventually, living on
the cave possibly gave them the idea to build houses which the shape is mostly like a
cave.

Through the course of time across the oceans and continents on Earth, the
aforementioned humanistic and natural phenomena might lead human beings to invent
the first machine, to write the first symbol, domesticate animals, to plant and crop seeds,
to stay in one place and stop wandering and eventually founded the first community that
rose into civilization. They evolved and continuously invent in accordance to their needs.
Human beings through thousands of years never stop innovating their tools to make their
lives comfortable. They reached in every corner of the world for the possible resources
that they can use to meet their needs which in the aftermath used them to make wars and
colonization. One civilization led to downfall of another civilization; an empire colonized
other empire; a kingdom destroyed nearby kingdoms, and men declared war against to his
fellowmen just to have the resources for his multiplying needs.

Some of these occurrences are written in the history of mankind. History might be
written on the papyrus, walls, temples, museum, sphinx, obelisks, and other monumental
relics of the past. Ancient scribers and writers wrote the most important event in their
time for memoriam but their written texts eventually become the reference to understand
the succeeding events.

The present civilization has the glimpse of the past in so many referential books in
order for them to decipher the exciting events happened in the past that shaped the
present and possibly the effect the future. The day after yesterday is very important in
order for the people to understand why they are doing a certain task in the present and
how it will affect the coming days, because the day after tomorrow is also important for
the humanity whom always want to leave a footprint through their collected knowledge
for the next generation. They want their legacy be inherited and be used by their
predecessors for a belief that men live on Earth in a glimpse of an eye and because of this
they want to be immortalized by time.

These are the reasons why humanity invented the social science of history that deals
on the study of the past events. The past is intriguing and through the process of
exploration, research and discovery, you will not only learn so much from it, you will
also explore different worlds, periods, peoples and times.

History allows you to travel to places through a world of books, documents, artifacts,
digital media, and images. Studying history is excellent in developing attributes for life
and a range of skills for employment, and it provides you with a curiosity and creativity
to understand the world (UCCHistory).
 Primary and Secondary Sources

Primary sources.
 It provide direct or firsthand evidence about an event, object, person, or work of
art.
 It contains “firsthand” knowledge about the historical events, figures, and people.
 It provides compelling and direct evidence of human activity.
 These are the things that were created or in use during the period of time which is
being studied.
 These sources are actual records that have survived from the past.

Secondary sources
 It is something that was not made by someone or by group of people who
participated in the historical era which is being studied.
 These are usually created by historians and scholastic writers based on their
interpretation of the primary sources.
 These sources of historical data which are created later or after the historical event
which is being studied and provided by the people who were not present on that
event.
 It describes, discuss, interpret, comment upon, analyze, evaluate, summarize, and
process primary sources.

Primary Sources Secondary Sources

Autobiography
Memoirs Biography
Eyewitness Encyclopedia
Accounts Textbooks
Diary Thesis
Fossils Dissertations
Relics Interviews
Letters News reports
Photographs Movies
Speeches News article
Documents Scholarly Journals
Ornaments Dictionaries
Clothing Transcriptions
Tools Almanacs
Videos
Legal
 Evaluating Historical Data

Internal Criticism

 It looks within the data itself to try to determine the truth-facts and the
reasonable interpretation.
 It includes looking at the apparent or possible motives of the person
providing the data.
 It indicates the accuracy, trustworthiness and veracity of the materials to
which historical data will be based.

External Criticism

 It applies experiment science to certify the authenticity of the material

that holds the data in which historical information will be based.
 It entails such physical and technical test as dating of paper where a
document is written on.
 It involves knowledge of when certain things existed or it supports the
claim whether it is possible to exist.
 It evaluates the authenticity and genuineness of data.
 Chapter II

Analyzing Primary Sources

In order to analyze a primary source and Secondary source you need information
about two things: the document itself and the era from which it comes.

The following questions may be helpful to you as you begin to analyze the sources:

1. Look at the physical nature of your source. This is particularly important and
powerful if you are dealing with an original source such as an actual old letter,
rather than a transcribed and published version of the same letter. What can you
learn from the form of the source? Was it written on fancy paper in elegant
handwriting, or on scrap-paper, scribbled in pencil? What does this tell you?
2. Think about the purpose of the source. What was the author’s message or
argument? What was she or he trying to across? Is the message explicit, or are
there implicit message as well?
3. How does the author try to get the message across? What methods does he or she
use?
4. What do you know about the author? Race, Sex, class, occupation, region, age,
political beliefs? Does any of this matter? How?
5. Who constituted the intended audience? Was this source meant for one person’s
eyes, or for the pubic? How does that affect the source?
6. What can a careful reading of the text or even an object tell you? How does the
language work? What are the important metaphors or symbols? What can author’s
choice of words tell you?
There are 6 C’s that guide as to effectively analyze primary sources:

1. Content. You must identify the main idea. For documents, list important
points, phrases, words, and sentences. For images, describe what you see.
2. Citation. You must identify the creator of the document and the time is
created.
3. Communication. You must identify the biases of the author. A bias is
prejudice or a tendency to see something in a particular way. Also, it is
important for you to examine the point of view of the author. There will be a
separate discussion about the author’s point of view.
4. Context. You must understand what is going on in the world, country, region,
or locality when the document is created.
5. Connections. You must recognized the connection of the primary source to
what you already know.
6. Conclusions. You must determine the contributions of the primary source to
our understanding of history.
 Chapter III

CONTENT AND CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PRIMARY

SOURCES

The Content and Contextual Analysis is simply a studying of a text that helps us to
assess that text within the context of its historical and cultural setting.

 Philippines have a rich history and heritage of its own. Today, we acknowledge
ourselves as a product of racial intermarriages.
 As a functional member of society, we understand that we have a social origin
that helps explain our roles.
 Before the arrival of the Spanish invaders, natives of the Philippine island had a
heritage of their own—vastly affluent and colorful.
 The vastness of our pre-colonial culture was described in some documents written
by Spanish government officials and priests who travelled across the archipelago.

Below is the Example of Primary Source of Historical Data:

Based on the excerpt from “CUSTOMS OF THE TAGALOGS”

by: Fr. Juan de Plasencia
Barangay-The name originated when the people came to this land by means of boat
called barangay. The head is called Dato.
Datos- the chief who governed the people and were captains in their wars whom they
obey and reverence.

The three castes namely:

Nobles-the free-born-Whom they call Maharlica. They do not pay tax or tribute to the
Dato.
The Commoners- Who are called Aliping Mamamahay. They live in their own houses
and are lords of their own property and gold.
The Slaves- Who are called Aliping Saguiguilid. They serve their master in his house
and on his cultivated lands and may be sold.

 In these three cases, those who are maharlicas on both the father’s and mother’s
side continue to be so forever, and if it happens that they should become slaves, it
is through marriage.
 If two persons married of whom one was a Maharlica and the other a Slave, the
children was divided.
 Maharlicas could not after marriage move from one village to another without
paying a certain fine in gold as arranged among them.
 They had laws by which they condemned to death a man of low birth who
insulted the daughter or wife of a chief.
  For loans, the debtor is condemned to a life of labour. Borrowers become slaves
and after the death of the father, the children pay the debt.
 For inheritance, the legitimate children of a father and mother inherit equally.
 Dowries are given by men to the women’s parents before marriage. If the parents
are both alive, they both enjoy the use of it.
 In case of divorce, if the wife left the husband for the purpose of marrying
another, all her dowry will go to the husband but if he did not marry another, the
dowry was returned.

Customs of the Tagalogs, just like any other colonial texts written during the Spanish
colonial period, was intentionally made to provide unusual description of the Tagalog
natives.

On the other hand, according to Fr. Francisco Colin, a Jesuit Priest, the Visayan
people had different term designated to each social class.
Dato (maginoo)- The Chiefs
Timauas (maharlica)- The Common people
Oripuen (alipin)- The slaves

Origin of Slaveries:
 From loans which are not paid
 Tyranny or cruelty of their masters
 Vengeance on enemies which prisoners remained slaves
 Caught during the war and being punished for any kind of service
 Historical Importance of Text Understanding in Philippine History

 Historical text is an important part of the past and without it, memories, stories,
and characters have less meaning.

 In more technical terms, historical text refers to the social, religious, economic,
and political narratives during a certain time and certain place. Basically, it is all
the details of the time and place in which a situation occurs, and those details
enable us to interpret and analyze works and events in the past

 The arrival of the Spaniards during the 16th century ushered in a three hundred
year long process of colonization of the Philippines. You have been taught before
that the primary goal of the Spanish Conquistadores was to gather spices and
other resources from the island of Moluccas. Their motive, however, turned into
something greater in importance to spread Christianity.

 Although the indoctrination by the Spaniards was reluctantly accepted by the

natives, an event unfolded in Mactan, Cebu that defined who we are as a Filipino
today. The battle that ensued between the forces of Magellan against the brave
people of Lapu- Lapu was recorded by the chronicler of the Spanish expedition
,Antonio Pigafetta (1491-1534)

THE 3 GOALS OF EUROPEAN

 Ferdinand Magellan
was a Portuguese explorer who organized the Spanish expedition to the East Indies
from 1519 to 1522, resulting in the first circumnavigation of the Earth, completed by
Juan SebastiánElcano.

 Lapu-Lapu

Lapu-Lapu was a ruler of Mactan in the Visayas. Modern Philippine society regards
him as the first Filipino hero because he was the first native to resist Imperial Spanish
colonization.
  Antonio Pigafetta

was an Italian scholar and explorer from the Republic of Venice. He traveled with
the Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan and his crew by order of the King Charles I
of Spain on their voyage around the world

 Rajah Humabon

Rajah Humabon, later baptized as Don Carlos, was the Rajah of Cebu at the time of
Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan's arrival in the Philippines in 1521. There is no
official record of his existence before the Spanish contact in 1521

Excerpt of battle of Mactan

The battle of Mactan was fought in the Philippines on 27 April 1521, prior to
Spanish colonization. The warrior of Lapu-lapu a native chieftain of Mactan Island,
defeated Spanish forces under the command of Ferdinand Magellan , who was killed in
the battle . On 16 March 1521 (Spanish calendar), Magellan sighted the mountains of
what is now Samar while on a mission to find a westward route to the Moluccas Island
for Spain. This event marked the arrival of the first Europeans in the Archipelago. The
following day, Magellan ordered this men to anchor their ships on the shores of
Homonhon Island. Magellan befriended Rajah Kulambo and Rajah Siagu the chieftain of
Limasawa , who guided him to Cebu. He, and his queen were Baptist into the Catholic
faith, taking the Christian names Carlos, in honor of king Charles of Spain , and Juana , in
honor of King Charles’ mother.to commemorate this event , Magellan gave Juana the
Santo Niño. In this battle Magellan is being defeated by Lapu-lapu.
 Chapter V

Examining the Author’s Main Argument and Point of View

Point of view

Refers to perspective of the author toward a particular person or issue that has
been shaped over a period of time due to his or her experiences, motives, beliefs, origin,
age, gender, social status, and ideology.

In analyzing author’s argument and point of view, you should ask yourselves the
following questions:

1. Who is the speaker/ source?

(Age, gender, profession or work, social status, etc.)
2. What is the occasion?
(Circumstances, current situation, place, time, etc.)
3. Who is the intended audience?
(Written privately or written to be read or heard by others)
4. What is the purpose?
(Motives, beliefs, ideology, etc.)
5. What is the subject?
(Topic, content, ideas)
6. What is the tone?
(Emotions, etc.)
 Pag Ibig sa Tinubuang Lupa

by: Andres Bonifacio

Aling pag ibig pa ang hihigit kaya?

Sa pagkadalisay at pagkadakila

Gaya ng pag ibig sa tinub'ang lupa?

Aling pag-ibig pa?Wala na nga, wala.

Ulit-ulitin mang basahin ng isip

At isa-isahing talastasing pilit

Ang salita't buhay na limbag at titik

Ng sangkatauhan ito'y namamasid.

Banal na Pag-Ibig!Pag ikaw ang nukal

Sa tapat na puso ng sino't alinman,

Imbi't taong-gubat,maralita't mangmang,

Nagiging dakila at iginagalang.

Pagpupuring lubos ang palaging hangad

Sa bayan ng taong may dangal na ingat;

Umawit,tumula,kumatha't sumulat,

Kalakhan din niya'y isinisiwalat.

 Walang mahalagang hindi inihandog

Ng may pusong mahal sa Bayang nagkupkop:

Dugo,yaman,dunong,katiisa't pagod,

Buhay ma'y abuting magkalagot-lagot.

Bakit?Alin ito na sakdal nang laki

Na hinahandugan ng buong pagkasi?

Na sa lalong mahal nakapangyayari

At ginugulan ng buhay na iwi?

Ay!Ito'y ang Inang Bayang tinubuan,

Siya'y ina't tangi na kinamulatan

Ng kawili-wiling liwanag ng araw

Na nagbigay-init sa lunong katawan.

Sa kaniya'y utang ang unang pagtanggap

Ng simoy ng hanging nagbibigay-lunas

Sa inis na puso na sisinghap-singhap

Sa balong malalim ng siphayo't hirap.

Kalakip din nito'y pag-ibig sa Bayan

Ang lahat ng lalong sa gunita'y mahal

Mula sa masaya't gasong kasanggulan

Hanggang sa katawa'y mapa salibingan.

 Ang nangakaraang panahon ng aliw,

Ang inaasahang araw na darating

Ng pagkatimawa ng mga alipin,

Liban pa sa Bayan saan tatanghalin?

At ang balang kahoy at ang balang sanga

Ng parang n'ya't gubat na kaaya-aya,

Sukat ang makita't sasaalaala

Ang ina't ang giliw, lumipas na saya.

Tubig n'yang malinaw na anaki'y bubog,

Bukal sa batisang nagkalat sa bundok,

Malambot na huni ng matuling agos,

Na nakaaaliw sa pusong may lungkot.

Sa aba ng abang mawalay sa Bayan!

Gunita ma'y laging sakbibi ng lumbay,

Walang alaala't inaasam-asam

Kundi ang makita'y lupang tinubuan.

Pati ang magdusa't sampung kamatayan

Wari ay masarap kung dahil sa Bayan

At lalong maghirap, O!himalang bagay,

Lalong pag-irog pa ang sa kanya'y alay.

 Kung ang Bayang ito'y nasasapanganib

At siya ay dapat na ipagtangkilik,

Ang anak,asawa,magulang,kapatid

Isang tawag niya'y tatalikdang pilit.

Dapat kung ang bayan ng Katagalugan

Ay nilapastangan at niyuyurakan

Katuwiran,puri niya't kamahalan

Ng sama ng lilong taga-ibang bayan.

Di gaano kaya ng paghihinagpis

Ng pusong Tagalog sa puring nilait?

Aling kalooban na lalong tahimik

Ang di pupukawin sa paghihimagsik?

Saan magbubuhat ang paghinay-hinay

Sa paghihiganti't gumugol ng buhay

Kung wala ding iba na kasasadlakan

Kundi ang lugami sa kaalipinan?

Kung ang pagkabaon n'ya't pagkabusabos

Sa lusak ng saya't tunay na pag-ayop

Supil ng panghampas,tanikalang gapos

At luha na lamang ang pinaagos?

Sa kaniyang anyo'y sino ang tutunghay?

Na di aakayin sa gawang magdamdam?

Pusong naglilipak sa pagkasukaban

Ang hindi gumugol ng dugo at buhay.

Mangyayari kaya na ito'y masulyap

Ng mga Tagalog at hindi lumingap

Sa naghihingalong Inang nasa yapak

Na kasuklam-suklam sa Kastilng hamak?

Nasaan ang dangal ng mga Tagalog?

Nasaan ang dugong dapat na ibuhos?

Baya'y inaapi, bakit i kumilos

At natitilihang ito'y mapanuod?

Hayo na nga kayo,kayong nangabuhay

Sa pag-asang lubos na kaginhawahan

At walang tinamo kuni kapaitan

Hayo na't ibigin ang naabang Bayan.

Kayong natuy'an na sa kapapasakit

Ng dakilang hangad sa batis ng dibdib,

Muling pabalungi't tunay na pag-ibig

Kusang ibulalas sa Bayang piniit.

 Kayong nalagasan ng bunga't bulaklak,

Kahoy nyaring buhay na nilanta't sukat

Ng bala-balaki't makapal na hirap

Muling manariwa't sa Baya'y lumiyag.

Kayong mga pusong kusang napapagal

Ng daya at bagsik ng ganid na asal,

Ngayon ay mabango't Bayan ay itanghal

Agawin sa kuko ng mga sukaban.

Kayong mga dukhang walang tanging lasap

Kundi ang mabuhay sa dalita't hirap,

Ampunin ang Bayan kung nasa ay lunas

Pagkat ang ginhawa niya ay sa lahat.

Ipaghandog-handog ang buong pag-ibig,

At hanggang may dugo'y ubusang itigis

Kung sa pagtatanggol,buhay ay mapatid

Ito'y kapalaran at tunay na langit.

Mga Aral ng Katipunan
Emilio Jacinto

1. Ang kabuhayang hindi ginugugol sa isang malaki at banal na kadahilanan ay

kahoy na walang lilim, kundi man damong makamandag.

2. Ang gawang magaling na nagbubuhat sa pagpipita sa sarili, at hindi sa talagang

nasang gumawa ng kagalingan, ay di kabaitan.

3. Ang tunay na kabanalan ay ang pagkakawanggawa, ang pag-ibig sa kapwa, at

ang isukat ang bawat kilos, gawa't pangungusap sa talagang katuiran.

4. Maitim man at maputi ang kulay ng balat, lahat ng tao'y higton sa dunog, sa
yaman, sa ganda, ngunit di mahihigtan sa pagkatao.

5. Ang may mataas na kalooban, inuuna ang puri kaysa pagpipita sa sarili; ang may
hamak na kalooban, inuuna ang pagpipita sa sarili kaysa puri.

6. Sa taong may hiya, salita'y panunumpa.

7. Huwag mong sasayangin ang panahon: ay yamang mawala'y mangyayaring

magbalik; nguni't panhong nagdaan na'y di na muli pang magdadaan.

8. Ipagtanggol mo ang inaapi, at kabakahin ang umaapi.

9. Ang taong matalino'y ang may pag-inagat sa bawat sasabihin; at matutong

ipaglihim ang dapat ipaglihim.

10. Sa daong matinik ang kabuhayan, lalaki ay isang patnugot ng asawa't mga anak;
kung ang umaakay ang tungo sa sama, ang patutunguhan ng inaakay ay kasamaan
din.

11. Ang babae ay huwag mong tignang isang bagay na libangan lamang, kundi isang
katuang at karamay sa mga kahirapan nitong kabuhayan; gamitan mo nang buong
pagpipitagan ang kanyang kahinaan, at alalahanin ang inang pinagbuhata't nagiwi
sa iyong kasanggunian.

12. Ang di mo ibig gawin sa asawa mo, anak at kapatid ay huwag mong gagawin sa
asawa, anak, at kapatid ng iba.
13. Ang kamahalan ng tao'y wala sa pagkahari, wala sa tangos ng ilong at puti ng
mukha, wala sa pagkaparing kahalili ng Ditos, wala sa mataas na kalagayan sa
 balat ng lupa: wagas at tunay na mahal na tao, kahit laking gubat at walang
nababatid kundi sariling wika, yaong may magandang asal, may isang
pangungusap, may dangal at puri, yaong di nagpapaapi't; yaong marunong
,agdamdam at marunong lumingap sa bayang tinubuan.

14. Paglaganap ng mgab aral na ito, at maningning na sisikat ang araw na mahal na
kalayaan dito sa kaaba-abang sangkapuluan at sabungan ng matamis niyang
liwanag ang nangagkaisang magkakalahi't magkakapatid, ng liwanang ng walang
katapusan, ang mga ginugol na buhay, pagod, at mga tiniis na kahirapa'y labis
nang matutumbasan.

June 12 1898 - Emilio Aguinaldo declared the Independence on the Philippine in

Kawit, Cavite.

The United State of America, we do hereby proclaim and declare solemnly in

the name and by Authority of the people of these Philippine Islands.

White triangle- signifying the distrinctive emblem of the famouse society of the
"katipunan" .

Three stars- signifying the three principle Island of this archepelago.

Luzon, Panay, Mindao

The Sun- representing the gigantic steps made by the sons of the country along
the path of progress and civilization.

Eight rays- signifying the eight provinces; Manila, cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga,
Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Laguna, and Batangas.

Blue, Red, and White- commemorating the flag of the United State of North
America, as a manifestation of our profound gratitude towards the Great nation
for its disinterested protection which it lent us and continues lending us.
 CHAPTER VI

Controversies and Conflicting Views in Philippine History

Site of the First Mass

The First recorded Christian Mass was held on Easter Sunday, March 31, 1521 at a little
Island-Port named Mazaua,which officiated by Father Pedro Valderrama.
Filippino historianshave long contested the idea that Limasawa was the site of the first
Catholic Mass in the country.
• Historian Sonia Zaide identified Masao (also Mazaua) in butuan as the location
of the First Christian Mass. Zaide basis his claim on the diary of Antonio
Pigafetta chronicler of Magellan's voyage.
• Congresswoman Ching Plaza of Agusan del Norte-Butuan City in 1995 filed a
bill in congress contesting the Limasawa hypothesis and asserting the site of the
first mass was Butuan.
• National Historical Institute chair Dr. Samuel K. Tan reaffirmed Limasawa as the
site of first Mass.
For the past centuries, innumerable numbers of Filippino's including the top experts in
education, history, religion, politics and other subject are still debating as to the exact
location of the “First Mass”. According to the number 1 pro-Butuan author, the word
“first” was not recorded during the observance of Easter Sunday on March 31, 1521
(Salazar 2015)
According to Pigafetta paragraph translated by Lord Stanley of Alderly
“On sunday the last day of March and Feast of Easter the captain sent the
chaplain ashores early to say mass” When it was time for saying the mass the captain
went ashore with fifty men, not with their arms, but only with their swords, and
dressedas well as each one was dress.
FOUR SITE OF THE FIRST MASS
1. LIMASAWA-ISLAND - an Island town in Southern Leyte which the Philippine
Goverment recognized as the actual site of the first mass. The powerful Roman Catholic
Church also recognized Limasawa Island as the site where Magellen and his crew landed
and held the First Mass.
2. Masao or Mazaua in Butuan City, Agusan del Norte - the Butuanons and their
supporters advocate that Magellan and his men landed in Mzaua for the reason that it has
the anchorage,rice fields, gold, antique “balangha”and other artifacts which theu
unearthed in scattered areas in Butuan City.
The pro-Butuan proponents claimed that Magellan and his troops landed in Mazaua,
Butuan City because Pigafetta wrote his logbook about the small gift items made of gold.
Furthermore the pro-Butuan suppporters claimed that the antique “balanghai” tha some of
them found under the ground in Masao or Mazaua, Butuan is one proof that Magellan
was in Mzaua.
Salazar(2015) refer the writtings of de Jesus article entitled Mazaua; Magellan's Lost
Harbor.

He wrote:
“Two events define the meaning of Mazaua for most Filipinos, the Easter mass and
the planting of a large cross atop the tallest hill.
3. Homonhon Island, Eastern Samar - some people in Homonhon Island and also
claimed that Magellan and his fellow sailors must have some kind of religious festivity
shortly after they landed on the Island. According to the groups supporting the “First
Mass” in Homonhon, Magellan and his sailors had a mass in the Island to thank God for
their safe trip from Guam and vast of Pacific Ocean.
“Pigaffetta did not exactly say that it was their first mass, he only reported that a mass
was celebrated on Easter Sunday (in Mazzaua Island).Atty. Mendiola concludes in his
paper, 'that the mass on Homonhon island on the 19th day of March 1521 was the first
one celebrated in the Philippines not one at Limasawa or Mazaua on the 31st of that
month.'
4. Mahaba Island, Placer, Surigao del Norte - another group of people in Northeastern
Mindanao claimed that Magellan's expedition actually had the First Mass in Mahaba
Island in Surigao del Norte.
“It was recorded that when he was nearing the shores of Mindanao, Magellan saw lights
of a settlement which he avoided and sailed farther north (actually south) and anchored
near an island named Mazzava, now mark on maps as Mahaba Island.
 Cavite Mutiny

Fr. Robert Reyes heads GomBurZa, a cause orientated organization of priest, nuns,
brother and laity who are committed to the struggle for justice, which they believe is an
essential part of witnessing to the Gospel. This group is named after three catholic priest
who crusaded for reform of the Spanish colonial government and were executed by
Garrotte in Bagumbayan, Manila on February 17,1872 for allegedly instigating the
Cavite. The Three priest are Father Mariano Gomez, Jose Apolonio Burgos and Jacinto
Zamora they are all graduates of University of Santo Tomas were brilliant mean who
used their education to fight for reform. To break the 300 year old dominance of the
Spanish government. They headed the secularization movement which alleviated the
fight of Filipino priest by insisting on the prior right of the native secular clergy. To
assignment in parishes over that of Friars newly arrived from Spain. Burgos, the youngest
and most brilliant of three, was especially vulnerable in this regard since he was the
synodal examiner of parish priest. He got into a tiff more than once with then archbishop
of Manila Gregorio Martinez in this regard.

The lay Group was headed buy Juaquin Pardo de Tavera while the cleric section,
which included Gomez and Zamora and was headed by Burgos. This reform committee
was staged demonstrations both during the liberal administration of General Carlos Me.
De La Torre and the reactionary period under General Rafael Izquierdo.

The 1872 revolt in Cavite generally see it as a Mutiny of soldiers and arsenal
workers over local grievances, often instigated by the Friars with the intention of priest
and lawyers for reform. This basing itself principally on the extensive account by
Governor Rafael Izquierdo to overseas ministers, accepts his charactization of the revolt
as a separatist revolution, rejecting his conclusion as to the instigators of the revolt ties to
Izquierdo.

In 1972 revealed that “ the fact remains, however, that still processes on
definitive account of the cavite mutiny , nor as satisfactory biography of the tree priest .
 FIRST-HAND ACCOUNTS

First-hand accounts - being direct personal observation or experience during war, had a
first-hand view of the turmoil that wracked the region.

Jose Montero y Vidal, a Spanish official in Manila. He has the fullest accounts of
Mutiny. It has the full interpretation of Cavite Mutiny that directed into three priest
(GOMBURZA).

 It aims the assassination of the Governor-General and a general massacre of

all Spaniards.
 Published only in 1895 at the height of the Filipino nationalist campaign.
 Montero's account are hostile of the Filipino reformist and to those executed
or exiled at the blame for the revolt of 1872 on the tolerance of Governor-
General Carlos Maria de la Torre on 1869 - 1871.
Edmund Plauchut, a Frenchman resident in Manila for some years. He indignantly
denied the allegations of the latter.

 Plauchut's narrative is a series of articles on the Philippines known as French

Journal, Revenue des Mendes in Paris in 1877.
 His accounts of 1872 “The Filipino version" translated into Spanish and
published in La Solic Earidad in 1892.
 There is a problem on the account about the source of his knowledge on the
events prior to the execution to which he could not have been an eyewitness.
 Plauchut's accounts contains melodramatic details which do not have inspired
by the separtistas antiespafioles de Filipinas.
The third major and the most important accounts of all appeared in 1900 in Madrid
newspaper "Filipina ante Europa" edited by Isabelo de Los Reyes, the article appeared
anonymously, but there can be no doubt that it was the work of Antonio Regidor.

 Regidor's account deserve the most careful attention.

 Regidor could not be an eyewitness, since he is one of the prisoner but his
account is more detailed.
The second part of Regidor's narrative details with the trial of the three priests.

 Some of the details somewhat improbable.

 There were various errors (from data of execution - Feb. 28 instead of Feb.27)
others being correspondingly correct. Regidor's account is the most
informative, particularly on the general backgrounds of the events.
  Two contemporary accounts that wrote the subject of Cavite Mutiny entitled
Resefia que demuestra el fundamento y causus de la insurrection Del 20 de
Enero en Filipina.
 Felipe M. de Govantes in his Compendio Historico de Filipinas was a long
time Peninsular Spaniard resident of the Philippines.
 His account of regime of Governor de la Torre disapproving the letters
democratic method that nothing to scorn indignation of Montero y Vidal.
 He narrates the revolt of Cavite and nothing making clear whom he attributes
the responsibility.
Other contemporary account whose author cannot be determined which published only
indirectly.

The published version contained Father Pablo Pastel's history of the Jesuit Philippine
mission in 19th century. Pastel arrived in Manila only in 1875.

 Entitled " Historico del Colegio de la Immaculada Conception que tiene La

Mission de la Compana de Jesus de Las Islas Filipina in Manila.
 This account written by a Jesuit resident in Ateneo, completed by 1874 at the
latest.
 This account only supports Montero y Vidal's rejection of the dramatic
incidents related by Plauchut. The original account was not written for
publication and eventually took place only in 1916.
The account possess reliability for the covered superior that others have been treating
here.
 SECOND HAND ACCOUNTS

In this group may be included those who assert that they have received their
information from contemporaries of the events or because of their relationship to such
men may be legitimately supposed to have done In the category fall of two documents
which through they remain unpublished as a whole;

The two documents in question were written by Father Agapito Echegoyen,a

Recoleto, and Father Antonio Piernavieja,an Augustinian,both of this were taken
prisoners by the revolutionary forces in Cavite in 1896.Both documents confess to
condemn various crimes and committed by the friars, the period just prior to the Cavite
Muntiny.

Both accounts agree in attributing the execution of the three priest to friar
intrigues. Allegedly the four friar Provincials meet to decide on how to eliminate their
opponents, and for the purpose knowing that revolt was in the offing in Cavite sent a friar
similar in appearance to Burgos to stir up the prospective rebels under the name and to
distribute money among them.

The provincial are alleged to have bribed Izquierdo as to bring him to execute the
three priest when the revolt break out and they were implicated by the capture rebels.

Piernavieja did not give the source of his knowledge but Echegoyen came to the
Philippines a few months after the events that his account came from a fellow- friar
Father Cipriano Navarro.

The account of Echegoyen does not name the supposed impersonator of Burgos
but declares him to have been a Franciscan.

The account of Piernavieja, attributes the deed to a Father Claudio del Arcos he
does not further identify but was actually a Recoleto Parist Priest of Sta.Cruz, Zambales.

Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera, nephew of Joaquin Pardo de Tavera brought up in

his household.

Pedro Paterno; son of Maximo Paterno exiled to the Marianas in 1872.

The account of Pardo de Tavera was originally written for the official report of the
census in 1903,aspart of general survey of Philippine history, denies that there was any
plot to overthrow Spanish rule, sees the Cavite Mutiny simply as uprising due to the
disaffection of the arsenal workers who had had been deprived of their traditional
exemption from the Filipino troops who sympathized with them.

In Manila including the friars took as proof that who had expressed reformist
under the governorship of De la Torre were plotting to overthrow Spanish sovereignty.

Pardo makes no direct mention of friar conspiracy it bring about the Cavite affair
after the fashion of Regidor, he sees the punishments meted out as the result of a false
conviction in the part of government that all of the friars were enemies of Spanish rule
and attributes the disaffection of the Filipinos with Spain which led to the Revolution of
1896 to this identication of Spanish interest with friar interest beginning from1872.Might
have detailed knowledge of the events of 1872 from his uncle the accounts show little
evidence.

The incorrect interpretation of the attitude of De la Torre, there are several of details
to identify of men who executed or exiled as a result of mutiny.

Pardo de Tavera have no detailed knowledge of facts. The anti friar bias much of
Pardo de Tavera provoked an indignant and equally pugnacious refutation from Father
Serapio Tamayo.

Tamayo came to the Philippines in 1891.It might expected that he was a official
defense of the friars against Pardo de Tavera,he might have derived the information
which he based his own version from older colleagues who had been contemporary to the
events in Manila.

The events of 1869-1872 shows a narration or an interpretation of events which

adds nothing that Montero y Vidal, which it principally not wholly depends to lengthy
quotation from that source.

The last author who deserves attention by reason of the possibility of his
processing information from an immediate contemporary of the events is Pedro Paterno
father Maximo had been deported to the Marianas in 1872,through young Pedro himself
at that time was a student in Spain. During Spanish era he published many works
purporting to be historical but the great majority of them death with the Pre-Hispanic
period of Philippine history.

He published a two part Sypnosis dela Historia de Filipinas, which he give some
mention to events of 1872 while treating the revolt of the 19th century.

The friars conjured up an insurrection in Cavite, when in reality it was nothing more
than a military mutiny.
 The account of Paterno in succeed is thinly veiled panegyric of himself and his
accomplishments in which he appears as the true inspiration of Rizal and the soul of the
late 19th century nationalist movement

In Paterno adds nothing to previous accounts and he possessed any personal

knowledge of events.

One document stemming in part from one participants or victims of the Cavite revolt

Jose M.Basa, survives though it is not precisely a historical document. It is printed

pamphlet addressed to the American Consul-General in Hongkong signed by Jo
M.Basa,Doroteo Coros, and A.G. Medina and dated January 29,1897.

The pamphlet attacks Spanish abuses and misgovernment in the Philippines and ask
the Consul to request American intervention to force Spanish withdrawal from
Philippines promising any concessions which the Americans may desire in return.

Among the Spanish crimes are the executions and exiles of 1872,said to be due to
friar intrigues and bribery of the government.

The alleged incident found in the Piernavieja account of the impersonation of

Burgos by a Recoleto friar here but to be from Zambales, who distributed money to stir
up the revolt is repeated.

The name of Basa gives the historian little more reason to accept the story than the
extorted account of Piernavieja.

Other contemporaries

Two other figures of approximately the same generation as those just treated but
without known direct contacts with contemporaries as the events were Father Salvador
Pons and Apolinario Mabini.Both spoke briefly about the events of 1872 in connection
with their other writings.

Pons was an Augustinian friar who first came to the Philippines in 1884, left his
order in 1899 in Manila, and for the next decade spent much of his time in writing against
the friars., and cooperating with the founders of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente.Finally
being reconciled with the Catholic Church , he re-entered the Augustinians and spent the
rest of his life in a monastery in Germany. Since retracted his anti-friar and anti-Catholic
writings as a whole,and spent much of the rest of his life in refuting them.
 The two works in question here are Defensa del Clero Filipino, and El Clero
Filipino.The first of these reproduces Plauchut’s account and for the rest contains no facts
that could not be found in Montero y Vidal, and indeed , it is in general short on facts.The
second book contains a series of biographies and bibliographies of outstanding Filipino
secular priests among them Burgos and Gomez.In his account of Burgos academic
career , he attributes the revolt of 1872 to the friars, “as was said almost publicly”. The
reason given is that Burgos had incurred the ire of the Recoletos by his defense of the
rights of the Filipino clergy, and of the Dominicans by his just severity in refusing to give
a passing grade to incapable friars when he acted as a member of the board of examiners
for candidates for degrees at the University of Santo Tomas.Given the many factual
errors and open contradiction in the account, it may be safely ignored as an Independent
source, and is dependent on Plauchut and/or Regidor. The bography of Gomez is
similarly dependent on Regidor, as would seem to be shown by the erroneous statement
that the former founded the Madrid newspaper La Verdad, exclusively dedicated to the
defense of Filipino interests, La Verdad was, of course, the newspaper in which the
attacks on the Filipino clergy by the Recoleto procurator in Madrid, Father Guillermo
Agudo, were published, provoking the Manifiesta of Burgosn in 1864.

Mabini devotes one chapter of his posthumously published work La Revolution

Filipina to our subject, ‘Causa y electo de le ejecucion de los Padres Burgos, Gomez y
Zamora’.

Mabini makes no claim to have had first first hand knowledge of the events, but without
taking any position on the cause of the revolt, states clearly that the three first priests
were innocent of it , it was used by their enemies-principally the friars.

Mabini’s chapter is not a narrative ,but rather a discussion of the place of the martyrs-
priest in the Revolution. Hence factual details are almost completely lacking but from his
reference to Burgos protest of his innocence on the scaffold, it would seem that he is
dependent on the account of Plauchut, whose translation was published in La Solidaridad
while Mabini was intimately involved with the newspaper’s support in Manila.

The works of one final author deserve special examination, even though he cannot be
considered a source in the strict sense, Manuel Artigas y Cuerva wrote extensively on
Philippine history, more so perhaps than any other person in the first three decades after
the Revolution.Though he treated the events of 1872.In various periodical publications
and as part of books on broader subjects, his major work was Los Sucessos de 1872.This
book, though somewhat unsystematic in organization, is the fullest account of the Cavite
mutiny and its background which has appeared up to the present.Moreover, Artigas
reproduces in full a number of documents of the period not then previously
published.Through unfortunately ,he gives no sources for these documents, some at least
are certainly which creates a strong probability that Artigas, who worked in the National
Archives collections and access to documents which have since disappeared or been
destroyed , so that they remain only in his volume.

Artigas has depended principally on the accounts of Regidor, together with the
alleged confessions of Fathers Plernavieja and Echegoyen,which are reproduced in part
his book.Though he accepts all of themes authentic accounts in general , he vaciilates in
various places in his book as to the degree of confidence to be place in them.Thus he
qoutes the Piernavieja-Echegoyen accounts of the friar impersonator of Burgos and assets
that this should be accepted, “since we are dealing with an authentic document of
indisputable veracity,” In a succeeding chapter on the other hand, he cites Regidor for the
assertion that the promoters of the mutiny were the two Peninsular officers Montesinos
and Morquecho, the lay brother of the Order of San Juan de Dios, Fray Antonio Rufino,
and Father Juan Gomez, Prior of the Recoleto Convento of Cavite, the latter being the
principal instigator among the workers and soldiers of the arsenal, persuading them to
revolt.

Artigas is apparently not aware that the role he attributes to Father Juan Gomez , on
confirmation of Regidor, is in contradiction ith the rest of the Piernavieja account which
attributes the role of impersonator to Father Claudio del arco.Moreover, the document
which in one context he declares to be authentic and of indisputable veracity , is later
cited as merely giving all signs of probability.Shortly before this Artigas had made a
judgment which comes much closer to being an accurate picture of the true measure of
Regidor’s trustworthiness.

Senior Regidor had this disadvantage as a writer, that he was not a researcher.He id
not search for authentic data, an relied much on that beautiful memory which Providence
granted him,but which on occasions was unfaithful.This is the reason for the deficiencies
which can be found in his writings.
 The verdict seems to be in accord with our previous remarks on Regidor that he ha
access to much information, but he cannot be relied on for details, whether this is because
of failures of memory , as Artigas judges , or from a tendency to dramatize his account
and tendentiously to paint the role of the friars in the darkest color.

Being heavily dependent on Regidor, Artigas of course shares some of the formers
weaknesses. It could not be saidof him, however, that he was not a researcher , rather the
great value of his works is that he has gathered testimonies and documents from many
sources. His great weakness, however, is that he does not cite the sources of his
documents, so that the reader might evaluate their reliability. Secondly, the tendency of
his works is to accumulate information of all kinds without giving much evidence of
critical evaluation on his own part. The remark cited from Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera,
that Artigas was a “cajon de sastre”, is not completely unfair. Though he did attempt to
apply historical criticism to his sources at times, as in the case of some of the
extravagances and inconsistencies of Regidor, he cannot be termed critical historian as
appears clearly from the contradictions. His works remains valuable for the information
and documentation it brought together, and though it does certain errors and
inconsistencies, there is no evidence of conscious distortion of facts on the part of
Artigas.

With Artigas the published histories of the events of 1872 based on immediate
knowledge or direct information come to an end. All subsequent books and articles on the
subjects were based on the sources which have been treated in this article , apart from
those making use of the pseudo-Burgos forgeries which began to appear shortly before
the last war , and which further complicated the already difficult problem of the
contradictions in the published accounts of the four decades after the events.

RETRACTION OF RIZAL

"I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings ,publication and conduct has
been contrary to my character as a son of the catholic church."Several historians report
that Rizal retracted his anti-catholic ideas through a documents. For decades, the
authenticity of Jose Rizal's retraction documents have raised issues, skepticism, and
heated debates among those who seek to know the truth regarding this controversy .
 REASONS FOR RETRACTION

1. There are those who insist that the Rizal to be remembered and honored is the
"converted“ Rizal. This is the official Roman Catholic position. In the only "official"
book dealing with all aspects of the Retraction ("official" in the sense that it bears the
imprimatur of Archbishop Santos),Rizal's Unfading Glory, Father Cavanna says in the
preface: Rizal's glory as a scholar, as a poet, as a scientist, as a patriot, as a hero, may
someday fade away, as all worldly glories, earlier or later do. But his glory of having
found at the hour of his death what unfortunately he lost for a time, the Truth, the Way,
and the life, that will ever be his UNFADING GLORY. This is same sentiment is echoed
in the statement issued by the catholic welfare Organization in 1956 and signed by the
archbishop with Noli and Fili:...We have to imitate him [Rizal] precisely in what he did
when he was about to crown the whole work of his life by sealing it with his blood; we
ought to withdraw, as he courageously did in the hour of his supreme sacrifice, whatever
in his works, writings, publications, and conduct had been contrary to his status as a son
of the Catholic Church.

2.There are those who have argued that Rizal throughout his mature life was a "free
thinker and unbeliever";thus the retraction id necessity a lie. My previous writing has
tried to demonstrate that the major premise on which this thesis is based is not true.

3.A third implied view may be summarized as follows: the Rizal that matters is the pre-
Retraction Rizal; therefore one can ignore Retraction. The fundamental assumption here
is held by many students and admirers of Rizal, this bring us to the fourth possible
attitude toward the Retraction.

4.Scholarly investigation of all facets of Rizal's life and thought is desirable in the interest
of truth, the truth to which Rizal gave such passionate devotion, we have every right, and
also an obligation to seek to know the facts with regard to the Retraction.

MAJOR ARGUMENTS OF RETRACTION

1.Since the discovery in 1935 ,the Retraction "Document " is considered the chief witness
to the reality of the Retraction, itself. In fact since, then by words or implication, the
defenders have said "the burden of proof now rests with those who question the
Retraction"
2.The testimony of the press at the time of the event, of 'eye-witnesses' and other
'qualified witnesses', i,e. those closely associated with the events such as the head of the
Jesuit order, the archbishop, etc.

3.Acts of faith, hope, and charity "reportedly recited and signed by Dr. Rizal as attested
by "witnesses“ and signed prayer book. This is very strong testimony if true, for Rizal
was giving assent to Roman Catholic teaching not in a general way as in the case of the
Retraction statement but specifically to a number of beliefs which he had previously
repudiated. According to the testimony of Father Balaguer, following the signing of the
Retraction a prayer book was offered to Rizal,“ he took the prayer book ,read slowly the
acts accepted them, and took the pen and saying Credo(I believe he signed the acts with
his name in the book itself.

4.Acts of piety performed by Rizal during his last hours as testified to by "witnesses".
Rafael Palma- a young man who later became the president of the University of the
Philippines. He is the witnessed the last moment of Rizal, the great Filipino nationalist
and martyr.

5.His Roman Catholic Marriage to Josephine Bracken as attested to by "witnesses".

There could be no marriage without a retraction. Josephine Bracken is he’s last love.
They get married after the catholic rite on the 12/30/1986 of five o’clock in the early
morning two hours before Rizal gets executed.

Cry of Pugad Lawin or Balintawak

Nineteenth-century journalist used the phrase ’el grito de rebellion” or ‘Cry of

Rebellion’ to describe the momentous events sweeping the Spanish colonies: in Mexico it
was the ‘Cry of Dolores’ (16 September 1810), Brazil the ‘City of Ypiraga’ (7 September
1822), and in Cuba the ‘Cry of Mantaza’ ( 24 February 1895). In August 1896,
northeast of Manila, Filipinos similarly declared their rebellion against the Spanish
colonial government. It was Manuel Sastron, the Spanish historian, who institutionalized
the phrased for the Philippines in his 1897 book, La Insurrection en Filipinas. All these
‘Cries’ were