FIRST CRY OF THE PHILIPPINE REVOLUTION

Introduction:
The First Cry of the Philippine revolution remains a puzzling discussion among Filipinos as it is still open
for debates regarding its timeline and location given by the eyewitnesses of the event. Nonetheless, this
significant episode in our history tells the tale of Filipinos putting an end to the oppression and slavery
that was caused by the Spanish colonization.
Synopsis:
The first cry marked the start of the Philippine revolution against the 300 years of colonization by Spain,
this is where the remarkable tearing of cedulas took place—which for Andres Bonifacio is the sign of
slavery of Filipinos to the Spaniards. This event happened after the members of Katipunan were tracked
and imprisoned after being exposed to the Spaniards. Bonifacio then rose up in revolt somewhere outside
the city with the agenda of attacking the Spanish government. The revolt later grew in strength and spread
to 8 provinces including Manila, Bulacan, Cavite, Pampanga, Tarlac, Laguna, Batangas, and Nueva Ecija
— which were eventually represented by the eight rays of the sun in the present Filipino flag.
Definition of “Cry”
The debate has long been clouded by a lack of consensus on exactly what is meant by the “Cry”. The term
has been applied to three related but distinct events –
▪ the “pasya” – the decision to revolt;
▪ the “pagpupunit” – the tearing of cedulas; and
▪ the “unang labanan” – the first encounter with Spanish
These three events, to state the obvious, did not all happen at the same time and place. When and where
the “Cry” should be commemorated thus depends on how it is defined.
Many of the older sources on the “Cry” do not say precisely which event they mean, and often we can
only guess. This problem is so embedded in the literature that it is impossible to eradicate totally, but
wherever practicable these notes will avoid the fluid, contested “Cry” word, and will seek instead to
specify which distinct event is being discussed – the pasya, the pagpupunit or the unang labanan.
Among the historians who have studied the “Cry” in greatest detail, there is a sharp divergence of opinion
as to how the term should be defined.
▪ Teodoro A. Agoncillo equates the term with the pagpupunit, which he says happened
immediately after the pasya.
▪ Isagani R. Medina also takes the “Cry” to mean the pagpupunit, but says it happened before the
decision to revolt had been taken.
▪ Soledad Borromeo-Buehler takes the view – the traditional view that KKK veterans took, she
says - that the “Cry” should mean the unang labanan.
Significance to Philippine History and Commemoration
The Cry is commemorated as National Heroes' Day, a public holiday in the Philippines. The first annual
commemoration of the Cry occurred in Balintawak in 1908 after the American colonial government
repealed the Sedition Law. In 1911 a monument to the Cry (a lone Katipunero popularly identified with
Bonifacio) was erected at Balintawak; it was later transferred to Vinzons Hall in the University of the
Philippines-Diliman, Quezon City. In 1984, the National Historical Institute of the Philippines installed a
commemorative plaque in Pugad Lawin.
The''Cry of Pugad Lawin'' was a cry for freedom. Its historic significance to us consists of the realization
that the Filipino people had finally realized the lasting value of freedom and independence and the need to
fight in order to prove themselves worthy to be called a truly free people.
The Ongoing Controversy
The controversy among historians continues to the present day. The “Cry of Pugad Lawin” (August 23,
1896) cannot be accepted as historically accurate or precise of the location and date. It lacks positive
documentation and supporting evidence from the witness. The testimony of one of the eyewitnesses, Dr.
Pio Valenzuela is not enough to authenticate and verify a controversial issue in history. Historians and
their living participants, not politicians and their sycophants, should settle this controversy.
Different Accounts of Eyewitnesses
Different Katipunan personalities contradicted the time and place of the First Cry of the Philippine
Revolution, among them were Pio Valenzuela, Santiago Alvarez, and Guillermo Magsangkay.
1. Pio Valenzuela y Alejandro (July 11, 1869 – April 6, 1956)
A Filipino Physician and revolutionary leader. Pio Valenzuela was studying medicine at the University of
Sto. Tomas when he joined Bonifacio’s Katipunan. At that time, Katipunan was barely a week old. As
one of its original members, the doctor took on the responsibility of establishing factions of the secret
society in different parts of Morong or Rizal Province and Bulacan.
▪ Account on the First Cry (Cry of the Pugad Lawin)
oBased on the accounts of Pio Valenzuela, the first place of refuge of the Katipunan was in
Balintawak specifically at the house and yard of Apolonio Samson at Kangkong on
August 22, 1896. Among himself were Andres Bonifacio, Procopio Bonifacio, Emilio
Jacinto, Teodoro Plata, and Agueldo del Rosario. There was no big decision made there
rather only views were exchanged.
o His second account—taken from his book Memoirs of Revolution, claims that the Cry
took place at Pugad Lawin on August 23, 1896, in the store-house and yard of Juan
Ramos. It is here wherein they debated whether the revolution against the Spanish
government was to be started or not on August 29, 1896. Only Teodoro Plata protested
and fought against a war. After the intense debate, the people tore their cedula certificates
and shouted “Long live the Philippines! Long live the Philippines!”
▪ Arguments Regarding his claim
o His version gained a particular weight due to several reasons: his seniority in the
Katipunan, status as physician, political career, relation with other historians and more
evidently his prominence at commemorations of the revolution.
o Teodoro Agoncillo, author of Revolt of the Masses, acknowledged Valenzuela's
testimony about the Cry due to reasons of the latter being an eyewitness of this historic
event claiming it was "complete with details." The term Pugad Lawin then gained greater
currency after it was emphasized in Agoncillo's Revolt of the Masses.
 o Author John Schrumacher debates against Agoncillo claiming that Valenzuela gave
multiple accounts about what took place during the Cry, to which he refuses to give much
credence due to the inconsistent narratives given.
2. Santiago Virata Álvarez (July 25, 1872 – October 30, 1930)
A revolutionary general and a founder and honorary president of the first directorate of the Nacionalista
Party. Prior to the revolt, he was already a delegado general of the provincial council of the Katipunan in
Cavite. He is also penned as “Kidlat ng Apoy” because of his bravery and dedication of Cavite’s famous
battles.
▪ Account on the First Cry (Cry of the Bahay Toro)
oAccording to him the cry happened on August 24, 1896 at the Bahay Toro in Pugad
Lawin.
o His narration of the event tells that they went through a tiring journey to the house of
Apolonio Samson at Kangkong. On August 22, 1896, Bonifacio assigned guards and
placed detachments at the Balintawak boundary where they were gathered. Later on the
Supremo was worried of an enemy attack so he decided to move to a site called Bahay
Toro.
o It was on August 23, 1896 wherein they arrived at the residence of Cabesang Melchora.
By the next day Katipuneros were increased and crowded the house and yard.
o On the 24th at ten o' clock, Bonifacio called a meeting inside the barn along with his side
were Valenzuela, Jacinto, Torres, Pacheco and others. The approved matters were: the
uprising shall take place at midnight of Saturday, August 29, 1986; stay on alert so that
the Katipunan forces could strike where the enemy was at its disadvantage.
o After the meeting was adjourned, there were loud shouts “Long live the Sons of the
People!”
▪ Arguments Regarding his claim
o He presented an account devoid of any dramatic description as it is merely a narration of
the events that happened in Bahay Toro.
3. Guillermo Masangkay (June 25, 1867 – May 30, 1963)
Also one of the first members of the Katipunan and played a key role in the Filipino-American War as a
revolutionary general. He is a friend and adviser of Andres Bonifacio, his accounts contributed to the
understanding of the Cry of Balintawak and the death of Bonifacio.
▪ Accounts on the First Cry (Cry of Balintawak)
o The uprising happened on August 26, 1896 at Balintawak. Just like the first two
perspectives from earlier, the main goal of the meeting was to decide when the uprising
was to take place
o In his narrative, a big meeting was held in Balintawak in the house of Apolonio Samson
with the presence of Andres Bonifacio as the presider, Emilio Jacinto as the secretary,
Aguedo del Rosario, Tomas Remigio, Briccio Pantas, Teodoro Plata, Pio Valenzuela and
others.
o According to him, Plata, Pantas, and Valenzuela opposed the idea of starting the
revolution too early and without adequate preparation.
 o Bonifacio asked the people to pledge in revolt through destroying their cedulas, once the
pledge was obtained the board of directors were told that the people were to revolt. It is
said that if they were not to start the uprising early, hundreds might be shot. Everyone
then voted for revolution despite the protests of other leaders.
o After the decision was made, the people shouted "Long Live the Philippine Republic."

Similarities of each account

● The location where they will all meet, which is the house of Apolinio Samson in Kangkong,
Balintawak.
● The date of the first meeting in the house of Apolonio Samson which is August 22, 1896.
(Narratives were similar except for Masangkay)
● The third detail is the second location of their second meeting which is in Bahay Toro in Pugad
Lawin that is now part of the Project 8 of Quezon City, which is the house of Melchora Aquino,
which is so called as the “Mother of Katipunan”
● The estimated number of Katipuneros that came for the second meeting in Bahay Toro, which is
more than 1000 members.
● The fifth detail is similar to each other except for Santiago Alvarez’ account, this is about the
disapproval of certain Katipuneros in starting the revolution too early. In Pio Valenzuela’s
account, he mentioned that Teodoro Plata is the only person who disagree on starting the
revolution on August 29, 1896 but in Guillermo Masangkay’s account, he mentioned that
Teodoro Plata and two others, which is Briccio Pantas and Pio Valenzuela opposed on starting
the revolution early.
● Last detail is when they tore their cedulas. In Dr. Pio Valenzuela’s account and Guillermo
Masangkay’s account, the Katipuneros tore their cedulas but in Santiago Alvarez, they did not.
Historian’s Take
● Teodoro Agoncillo:
1. His narration of Cry in his book followed Valenzuela's "Memoirs'', claiming that Pasya was taken
at Juan Ramo's place in Pugad Lawin. However, he did not fully adhere to Valenzuela's version
of events, there was no disclosure regarding this matter. The only sources he cites alongside
Valenzuela’s at this juncture in Revolt are two other KKK veterans, Guillermo Masangkay and
Francisco Carreon, neither of whom ever acknowledged the existence of a place called Pugad
Lawin at all.
2. Mainly upon his advice, it is commonly said that the Philippine government ruled that the term
“Cry of Balintawak” should be discarded in favor of “Cry of Pugad Lawin.”
● Dr. Milagros Guerrero, Ramon Villegas and Emmanuel Encarnacion
1. Each location told by the eyewitnesses are located in Balintawak/Caloocan and if the
narratives are combined, it depicts that Bonifacio and the Katipunan were travelling to
different places in the area to avoid getting caught by the Spaniards.
2. According to them August 29, 1896 should be the commemorated date because it was
then that the birth of the revolution took place.
ANALYSIS/CONCLUSION
This episode in our history signifies the legacy that was brought upon by Andres Bonifacio and the
Katipunan. The changes within the narration of this historic event prompted various perspectives
concerning its credibility and accuracy, inciting the neverending debates that are still existing to this day.
Since our past is part of our identity, it is indeed important to know the specific details that are attached to
these kinds of events, especially those of which entails a great magnitude in our life. However, what
should be imparted in this lesson is not which side you will take on, whether it is Pugadlawin or
Balintawak, the one thing we should acknowledge the most is the battle of our countrymen for our
independence and the right to rule our own country. While it is important to value the particular figures of
this historic event, the bravery and heroism of the Katipunan should dominate our recognition for their
bequest as it is the one that paved the way for the freedom that we are currently experiencing. Witnessing
the start of the Katipunan up until the resistance, we can adapt the same unity and patriotism that each of
them embodied. Furthermore, this proves the necessity of learning local history as it is through this that
we can see the humble beginnings of the key personalities that contributed to the development of the
Filipino society.