R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES

State Universities and Colleges

GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

Module 3
Readings in Philippine History

Name: _______________________________________________Course/Year & Section: ___________________

Address: _____________________________________________ Contact Number: ________________________
Instructor’s Name: _____________________________________Deadline Period: _________________________

Lesson 10: Did Rizal Retract?

Learning Objectives:

At the end of the lesson, the students should be able to:

1. Identify the conflicting views/accounts about the Rizal retraction.

2. Analyze each view or source.
3. Explain the consequences of Rizal’s retraction claim to Philippine historiography.

Activate
1. If Rizal was still alive today and you were given a chance to tell something to him, what will be it and why?

__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Acquire

Retraction- the act of taking back an offer or statement, or admitting that the previous statement was false
(dictionary.cambridge.org)

Historical Context

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 El Filibusterismo. His essays
vilify not the Catholic religion, but the friars, the main agents of injustice in the Philippine society.

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

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

Readings in Philippine History 1|P a g e

 R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES
State Universities and Colleges
GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

prominent Filipino revolutionary. Such document purportedly exists, allegedly signed by Rizal before his
execution. This document, referred to as “The Retraction,” declares Rizal’s belief in the Catholic faith, and
retracts everything he wrote against the church.

The following sources are of two kinds: the first four are the primary sources supporting that Rizal did
retract. The last two sources (which are secondary sources) doubted the story of the retraction which are critical
analyses written by Rizalist scholars.

Primary Source: Rizal’s Retraction

Source: 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 a Society
prohibited by the Church. The Diocesan Prelate may, as the Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make public
thus 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 Española 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 revealed to be Fr. Vicente Balaguer. However, the “original” text was only found in
archdiocesan archives on 18 May 1935, after almost four decades of disappearance.

Fr. Vicente Balaguer’s Statement

Fr. Vicente Balaguer was one of the Jesuit priests who visited Rizal during his last hours in Fort Santiago
and claimed that he managed to persuade Rizal to denounce Masonry and return to the Catholic fold. In affidavit
executed in 1917 when he had returned to Spain, Balaguer also claimed that he was the one who solemnized the
marriage of Josephine Bracken and Rizal hours before the hero’s execution.

The Account
At about ten o’clock in the morning (December 29), Father Vilaclara and I went to Fort
Santiago, where the chapel cell of the convict was. He received us with great affection and embraced
us. I think it convenient to point out that when the Archbishop sent his commission to the Ateneo, he
remarked that, in case of conversion, before ministering the Sacraments to him, Dr. Rizal should
make a retraction of errors publicly professed to him in words and writings and a profession of the
Catholic faith. To this effect, when the Father Superior of the Mission went to the Archbishop’s
Palace, he brought by way of precaution a retraction and profession of faith, concise, but including

Readings in Philippine History 2|P a g e

 R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES
State Universities and Colleges
GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

what he thought out to be extracted from Dr. Rizal. The Prelate read it, and declared it to be
sufficient. He said, however, that he would prepare or order to prepare another more extensive one.
Before going to the Fort, I went to the Palace in order to receive orders and instructions
from the Prelate. The Archbishop gave me the formula of retraction and profession of faith, composed
by Reverend Father Pio Pi…
Therefore, when we, the two fathers, met him in the chapel, after exchanging greetings with
him and talking on various matters, I, who knew the history and errors contained in his books, in
order to fulfil our delicate mission asked Rizal to give an explanation of his ideas on religion… He
came to say more or less explicitly that his rule of faith was the word of God contained in the Sacred
Scripture. I tried to make him see how false and indefensible such a criterion was, inasmuch as
without the authenticity of the Holy Scripture or of the books truly revealed by God; how absolutely
impossible it is for the individual reason to interpret at his will the word of God. Then he declared
himself openly a rationalist freethinker, unwell to admit any other criterion of truth than individual
reason.
I then appointed out to him that absurdity of rationalism for the lack of instruction of the
immense majority of humankind, and for the absurd monstrous errors professed by the greatest sages
of paganism… When I attacked him with the arguments of Catholic Doctrine, he began to expound
the objections of the heretics and rationalists, a thousand times refuted already… When I attacked
him with the logic and evidence of Catholic truth, I told him energy that if he did not yield his mind
and his reason for the sake of faith, he would soon appear for judgment before God and would surely
be damned. Upon hearing this threat, tears gushed from his eyes, and he said: “No I will not damn
myself.”
“Yes,”—I replied—“You will go to hell, for, whether you like it or not. Yes, out of the
Catholic Church there is no salvation. Truth is and cannot be but one.”…
At three o’clock or a little past three, I returned to the Royal fort where Father Vilaclara
had remained, and I resumed the discussion with Dr. Rizal, that lasted until dusk, arriving at the
point which I have already indicated. Then I went to the Ateneo and thence I went with Father Viza
to the Palace. Then I reported on the condition of the convict, who offered some hope for conversion,
since he had asked for the formula he had promised, and he told me that it was not yet finished. Soon
he would send it to me.
It was already night when I arrived at the Fort. I found Dr. Rizal impatient. He asked for
the formula of the Prelate. This came at last, at about ten o’clock; upon knowing it, the convict asked
me for it insistently. Without letting me read it first, he called and asked me to read it to him.
Both of us sat at a desk, where there was stationery and I began to read it. Upon hearing the
first paragraph, he told me: “Father, do not proceed. That style is different from mine. I cannot sign
that, because it should be understood that I am writing it myself.”
I brought out then the shorter and more concise formula of Father Pi. I read the first
paragraph and he said to me: “That style is simple as mine. Don’t bother, Father, to read it. Dictate
what I ought to profess and express, and I shall write, making in any case some remarks.
And thus it was done. As I suggested the idea, he proceeded to write with steady hand and
clear letters, making at times some observation or adding some phrase. Certainly, after the discussion,
Dr. Rizal was yielding to the impulse of grace, since he had retired into himself and prayed as he
had promised. Thus he appeared to be while writing his retraction…
He finished the writing, and thus it remained. It was half past eleven; it was dated December
the twenty-ninth…
This declaration of retraction was signed together with Dr. Rizal by Señor Fresno, Chief
of the Picket, and Señor Moure, Adjutant of the Plaza…
After all these acts,… he knelt down of his own accord before that altar of the Virgin, placed
in the chapel cell. In the presence of the Fathers, of the Judge Advocate, of the Chief of the Picket, of
Readings in Philippine History 3|P a g e
 R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES
State Universities and Colleges
GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

the Adjutant of the Plaza, of three artillery officers, Rizal asked me for his retraction and profession
of Fith. He proceeded to read it with pause and devotion…
Of all that has been narrated, I am positive by personal knowledge. I have personally
intervened and witnessed it myself; and I subscribe and confirm it with an oath. And lest, perhaps,
someone may think that I could not remember it with so many details, after twenty years, I testify
that on the very day of Rizal’s death I wrote a very detailed account of everything. The original of
this account I have preserved, and from it I have taken all the data of the present narration.
Before Rizal reached Bagumbayan, I went to the Ateneo and delivered the aforementioned
document to Father Pio Pi, who that very day brought it to the Palace and handed it to Archbishop
Nozaleda.

Fr. Pio Pi’s Statement

Fr. Pio Pi was the Jesuit Superior in the Philippines during the time when Rizal was executed. In 1917,
he issued an affidavit recounting his involvement in the alleged retraction of Rizal. Unlike Father Balaguer,
however, he was involved only in securing the retraction document form the Archbishop of Manila Bernandino
Nozaleda, and writing another shorter retraction document as well which was the one Rizal allegedly copied.

The Account
On the eve of the day when Dr. rizal was put in the chapel, that is. On December the twenty-
eight, I received the commission, which Archbishop Nozaleda entrusted to the Jesuit Fathers, for
the Spiritual care of the convict. We accept it most eagerly, not only because it came from the
venerable Prelate, but especially because of its object was to reconcile with God and with the Church,
and to save the soul of him who had our very distinguished and dear pupil. Rizal had always
preserved for us, the Jesuits, a special esteem and affection even after his estrangement from the
Church and had rendered us good service…
Even though I myself, who had not been acquainted personally with Rizal, did not visit him.
All the Fathers who remained with him during his stay in the chapel or who accompanied him to
Bagumbayan, the place of the execution, went there at my request or with my knowledge, and they
kept me informed of all the happenings.
In regard to conversion, at the beginning not a little difficulty was found in convincing and
persuading him. A long discussion, to which he maintained principally with Father Balaguer,
became necessary in order to revive in that soul the faith of old and his Christian sentiments. At
last, he surrendered so willingly and so completely, and the proofs of religiousness and piety were
such and so many that, with much less, the most exacting person would have been satisfied. He was
right indeed when he said, wondering at the change wrought in himself, that he was the Rizal of
some time ago, but another entirely different…
When the retraction was to be subscribed to, he found certain objections in the form of the
composition presented by Father Balaguer, the one sent by the Archbishop. The one which I had
made was shorter although conclusive, and this pleased him. Nevertheless, to make it appear more
of his own spontaneous, he wished to introduce some little modifications. He wrote it entirely in his
own hand and signed it with a steady hand… Beneath Rizal’s signature, the Chief of the Picket,
Juan del Fresno, and the Adjutant of the Plaza, Eloy Moure, also signed as witnesses.
Not satisfied with signing so explicit an adjuration, Rizal himself, without pressure from
anyone, took onto his hands his own document and knelt down before the altar of the chapel. Aloud
and slowly, and even with a certain solemnity, he read his own retraction…

Readings in Philippine History 4|P a g e

 R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES
State Universities and Colleges
GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

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 a 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

Most illustrious Sir, the agent of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia stationed in Fort Santiago to report on the
events 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, Señor
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, Señor
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 wrote for a long time by himself.
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, Señor 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 soldier of 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.

Rafael Palma’s Critical Analysis

Lawyer, writer, educator, and politician Rafael Palma was the author of Biografia de Rizal, a work on
the life of the National Hero which won a literary contest in 1938 sponsored by the Commonwealth
Government. The publication of the book, however, was postponed because of World War II and only saw print
in 1949. That same year, and English translation by Roman Ozaeta with the title Pride of the Malay Race was
published by Prentice-Hall, Inc. in the United States. The story of Rizal’s alleged retraction is found in Chapter
32 and 33 with Palma’s analysis in the latter chapter.

Readings in Philippine History 5|P a g e

 R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES
State Universities and Colleges
GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

The Analysis
For the first time in this work, those who should have spoken from the beginning because of
their direct intervention in the act of conversion and retraction of Rizal, speak and confirm in all its
parts the narrative which appeared in 1897 by Rizal y su Obra. That should be conclusive; but that
is not. All the declarations therein cited are those of ecclesiastics and their friends, and it is to be
supposed that all of the latter would not contradict the version given by the former. The only
testimony that might be considered impartial is that of Taviel de Andrade, the defense counsel of
Rizal, but his testimony to the conversion of Rizal is mere hearsay, that is to say, what he heard the
priest say, and that diminishes its value very much.
We must consider the weight and value of these testimonies which to be partial and
interested. We do not ignore the respect that is due to the sacred character of said persons; but as
Brutus said, “You are a friend, but truth is a greater friend.” Lastly, we must consider whether the
coetaneous acts performed by the ecclesiastical authorities or by the government are in accord with
the belief that Rizal had been converted for if they are not, they would not produce the moral evidence
that is needed.
Well, then, these acts tend to demonstrate that Rizal was not reconciled with the Catholic
Church, judging from the way they treated him after his death. In the first place, the document of the
retraction was kept secret so that no one except the authorities was able to see it at that time. Only
copies of it were furnished the newspapers, but, with the exception of one person, nobody saw the
original. In fact, this original was kept in such a way that it was not found until after thirty years
had transpired. In the second place, when the family of Rizal asked for the original of said document
or a copy of it as well as a copy of the certificate of canonical marriage with Josephine Bracken, both
petitions were denied. In the third place, Rizal’s burial was kept secret, the cadaver having been
delivered to the members of a Catholic association friendly to the friars instead of being delivered to
the family, who had claimed it. How is Christian charity applied to the one who dies within the
Church if not even the desire of this family to bury him on their own account is respected? In the
fourth place, in spite of what Rizal meant to the Filipinos and of what his conversion meant, no
masses were said for his soul or funeral held by the Catholics. In the fifth place, notwithstanding (the
claim) that Rizal was reconciled with the Church, he was not buried in the Catholic cemetery of Paco
but in the ground without any cross or stone to mark his grave. Only the diligence of the family was
able to identify the spot where he was buried. In the sixth place, the entry in the book burials of the
interment of Rizal’s body is not made on the page with those buried on December 30, 196, where
there was as many as six entries, but on a special page wherein appear those buried by special orders
of the authorities. Thus, Rizal figures on a page between a man who burned to death and could not
be identified and another who died by suicide; in other words, he was considered among persons who
died impenitent and did not receive spiritual aid. In the seventh and last place, there was no moral
motive for the conversion. The extraordinary or abnormal acts of a person are always to some reason
or rational motive. What was the motive that could have induced him to adjure masonry and
reconcile himself to the rites of the religion which he had fought? Did he not realize that to do so
was to be a renegade to his own history?
Rizal was a man of character and he had demonstrated it in his many circumstances of his
life. He was not likely to yield his ideas because his former preceptors and teachers talked to him.
They did it in Dapitan and did not obtain any results. Why would he renounce his religious ideas
for a few hours more of life?

****
In short, Rizal’s conversion was a pious fraud to make the people believe that that extraordinary
man broke down and succumbed before the Church which he had fought. The Archbishop was
interested in his conversion for political motives, and the Jesuits lent themselves as his instrument.
Readings in Philippine History 6|P a g e
 R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES
State Universities and Colleges
GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

The example of Rizal would have great resonance in the whole country and it was necessary to
bolster the drooping prestige of religion with his abjuration. What if Rizal was a man of valor and
convictions and his conversion would be unbelievable? So much the better. The interest of religion
was above him. His aureole of glory had to be done away with if necessary. What did it matter? He
was only an indio.

Austin Coates’ Critical Analysis

Austin Coates’ interest in Jose Rizal began when he was Assistant Colonial Secretary and Magistrate in
Hong Kong in 1950. His first study on Rizal was on the latter’s year-long stay in Hong Kong (1891-1892). At
that time, many of the personalities who knew Rizal were still alive. This early awareness on Rizal eventually
led to the writing and publication of his book—Rizal: Philippine Nationalist and Martyr (Oxford University Press,
1956)—the first Rizal biography written by a European since Vida y Escritos del Dr. Jose Rizal by Wenceslao
Retana in 1907. The second edition of the book was published in the Philippines by Solidaridad Publishing
House in 1992.
Coates’ analysis of Rizal’s retraction and other events that happened before his execution are found in
Part VII, Chapter 5 of the book.

The Analysis

The morning after the execution the newspapers of Manila and Madrid recorded the
event, and announced that on the eve of his death, Rizal had retracted his religious errors, adjured
freemasonry, and in the last hours of his life had married Josephine Bracken. In most newspapers
the text of a letter of retraction supposedly written by Rizal was printed in full. By the government
the announcement was sent to Spanish consulates abroad with the request to obtain for it the widest
possible publicity.
Those who had read Rizal’s books or who knew him closely, which at that rime meant the
family and his wide circle of personal friends, most of whom were abroad, took one look at the
announcement and dubbed it… an ecclesiastical fraud.
While unquestionably a fraud, however, to suggest that the Archbishop’s announcement was
issued knowingly, or that there was a plot among the higher ecclesiastical authorities to perpetuate a
fraud is going too far. The nature of society within the church, the society of priests, is such as to
render it virtually impossible for such things to happen. When frauds occur, they are not the planned
work of the church as an organization, though this may be what it looks like to outsiders; they are
usually the work of a small man with his own idea; and the Church, if unwittingly it accepts the
fraud as genuine, has to protect him. Rizal believed that there was a strong likelihood of fraud, and
that the prime mover of this would be the friar archbishop. It was the friars who wanted his
retraction. But while in the event Rizal’s intuition did not play him false, there is no evidence to
implicate Nozaleda. Along came a small man with what the Archbishop wanted.
Balaguer had the intelligence to perceive that everything depended on the speed and audacity
with which he declared his success. The Archbishop was waiting for a retraction, hoping for it. When
news of it came he would announce it immediately, after which it would be too late for any of
Balaguer’s colleague to gainsay it.
Certainly there was no signed letter of retraction. Rizal knew too well the damage such a letter
would do him, besides which he believed before God he had nothing to retract…
Finally, there is the minor point that in view of the public disbelief the Archbishop’s statement
provoked, had there been a signed retraction letter it would certainly have been produced for

Readings in Philippine History 7|P a g e

 R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES
State Universities and Colleges
GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

inspection, particularly to the Rizal family, who asked to see it, and to many of whom—to Teodora
Alonso in particular—it would have been a source of consolation.
Once the execution was over, and Vilaclara and March returned to be faced with Balaguer’s
claims, the fraud was apparent to the Jesuits, but it was already too late to rectify matters.
What appears with complete certainty is that neither Pio Pi y Vidal nor any of the Jesuits of
probity believed that Rizal had retracted and died confessed. Had Vilaclara and March, who were
with Rizal at his execution, been satisfied that there had been a retraction, it is inconceivable that
they would not have given him Christian burial. The Jesuits had been entrusted by the Archbishop
with the spiritual care of the condemned man; and it was their responsibility, if they were satisfied
that he had died confessed, to see he was decently buried. This the two Jesuits at the execution did
not do…
The Rizal family found it difficult to accept either the retraction or the marriage. They knew
their brother; they knew that if he had retracted he would certainly have so in his 6 a.m.
communication to his mother, knowing the consolation it would have given her.
Difficulties began as disbelief spread, and they were deepened by Balaguer’s urge to elaborate
and see himself publicly praised. As he affirmed on oath in 1909, he settled dow that very night, 29
December, to write his account, in which, since he intended it to be published it anonymously, he
included much praise of himself, an aspect which, since he admitted the authorship, renders him a
sorry and rather absurd figure.
Balaguer had in fact damaged the Church’s case. Worse than this, he had unwittingly revealed
his own fraud. In his account, he made no mention of the Ultimo Adios.
That Rizal on the night of the 29th wished to write verses Balaguer knew; he told a journalist
about it. But when the following morning only letters, books, and an alcohol burner remained to be
disposed of by the authorities, he erroneously concluded that no poem had been written and thus made
no mention of it in his account, thereby revealing the truth, which was that he was not within Fort
Santiago during the middle of that last night, and had no knowledge of what was then taking
place…
Not only did Balaguer in his account not mention the poem; he made his account so elaborate
that Rizal is allowed no time in which to write; and only a glance at the Ultimo Adios is needed
to show that it would have taken several hours to write...

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 Blaguer. According to his testimony, Rizal
woke up several times, confessed four times, attended a Mass, 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 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.

Readings in Philippine History 8|P a g e

 R EPUBLIC OF THE P HILIPPINES
State Universities and Colleges
GUIMARAS STATE COLLEGE
Buenavista, Guimaras

Assess

A. Evaluative Essay

1. In your opinion, do you think that Rizal would retract his statements?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________

2. Hypothetically, supposed that Dr. Jose Rizal did retract his statements against the Catholic church and
the Spanish government, and you were given the chance to talk to Jose Rizal, what would you say to him
about his retraction?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Apply

1. How do you think the history of the Philippines be written if it were true that Rizal retracted and that
he was not executed as a result? Could there had been a revolution?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________

References:

Candelaria, J. & Alporha, V. (2018). Readings in Philippine History. Manila, Philippines: REX Book Store.

Torres, J. V. (2018). Batis: Sources in Philippine History. Quezon City, Philippines: C & E Publishing, Inc.

Readings in Philippine History 9|P a g e