1.

Test of Authenticity
SOURCE: Katipunan and Revolution: Memoirs of a General
*Matrix
Brief Description of the Source:
The book Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of a General written by Santiago V.
Alvarez was published by the Ateneo de Manila University in 1992 and reprinted in 1996. It was
initially published in the 1920s by Sampagita, a Tagalog weekly; the memoirs are reproduced in
this volume, along with Paula Carolina Malay's English translation. This book relates what other
Filipino and American historians have disregarded without deprecating the struggle for
independence (Alvarez, 1996). The majority of the information in this book is based on the
author Alvarez's personal experiences and observations as a general during the Philippine
Revolution, which both Katipunan and the government that followed it vigorously supported. He
was continually keeping tabs on the Katipunan movement. The book was created using his
notes and records as a reference.
The Competence of the Author:
Given the fact that the author, Santiago V. Alvarez, was a very active Katipunan
member. He had already served in the Katipunan's provincial council in Cavite as a delegado
general. He advanced through the Magdiwang forces' ranks to captain-general and then
commander-in-chief. As a member of Katipunan, he was a direct participant in the event, and he
put down his experiences and observations on ordinary paper, which is why this book exists. He
was present at the Tejeros Convention, and the book is suitable for researchers, students,
professors, and others. Tejeros has helped give details about the convention. Furthermore, the
author's material is substantial; for example, as he participated in the conversation, the
speeches are precise in several ways, and the conversations underlined what the convention
attendees were talking about. It is difficult to understand and is devoid of words.
Origin of the Information Narrated:
The book's content is entirely based on Alvarez's personal experiences. It was written in
Filipino by Santiago V. Alvarez and contains a lot of information regarding the Tejeros tragedy.
He was a direct witness to everything that occurred at the Katipunan because he took part on
the election and was one of the current members present at the time, and everything he said
was based on his memory of the event. Furthermore, the data was recounted and copied on
paper with a pencil as the writing instrument.
Date of the Information and Milieu:
According to Santiago V. Alvarez's narration and the conditions at the time, it occurred
on March 25, 1897, during the revolutionary period, or during the process of dealing with the
Philippines' independence from Spain, and it complies with the convention because it concerns
the election of a new administration for the Philippine Republic. The book was released in 1927,
despite the fact that the data previously included in it dates from the Tejeros Convention, which
began on March 25, 1897, and a reported assembly of Magdalo members at the Tanza Parish
on March 27, 1897. In addition, he asserted in the foreword to the book that he learned about
the Katipunan movement while still a member from 1896 to 1901.
2. Test of Authenticity
SOURCE: The Revolt of the Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and the Katipunan
*Matrix
Brief Description of the Source:
Teodoro Agoncillo's book Revolt of the Masses: Bonifacio and the Katipunan was
published in 1947, just after World War II, and relates the story of Bonifacio and the Katipunan.
According to the book, the incident occurred on March 22, 1897, just in time for Aguinaldo's
arrival. Teodoro Agoncillo wrote Katipunan, which was initially published in 1956 by the
University of the Philippines' College of Liberal Arts. In 2002 and 2005, the second edition and
printing were released, respectively. Through the use of primary documents important to the
Philippine Revolution against Spain, the book examines the Katipunan and its Supremo Andres
Bonifacio's life.
The Competence of the Author:
Teodoro A. Agoncillo was born in Lemery, Batangas on November 9, 1912, and died on
January 14, 1985. He was a world-renowned historian, poet, short story writer, editor, and
professor. History of the Filipino People, The Revolt of the Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and
the Katipunan, Malolos: The Crisis of the Republic, and The Fateful Years: Japan's Adventure in
the Philippines are only a few of his notable works. He won the First Commonwealth Literary
Contest Award in History, the First Prize for the Republic Contest on Bonifacio and the First
Epoch of the Revolution, the Carlos Palanca Memorial Award in Philippine Literature for Short
Story (Tagalog division), the Philippine Historical Associations Award for his outstanding books
on history and literature, and the posthumous award as National Scientist in 1985.

Origin of the Information Narrated:

When it came to obtaining data, Agoncillo utilized primary sources such as interviewing
an elderly man (veteran) who experienced and had lived during the Spanish and American
periods. The information in Agoncillo's essay was derived from prior historical publications.
Bonifacio's poems and personal letters show how he formed his understanding and point of
view on the information and alluded to it in this work. He also interviewed Bonifacio's surviving
family, comrades, and relatives, according to reports. Before the writing phase, he had been
gathering information for years.
Date of the Information and Milieu:
According to the book, the Tejeros convention took place on March 22, 1897, on Gen.
Emilio Aguinaldo's birthday, and it was set against the backdrop of the concurrent war for
Philippine independence from Spanish colonialism. He used records from the time of Bonifacio
and the revolution as a basis or evidence. The respondents, including Bonifacio, were
personally interviewed at the event. In 1947, the book was prepared as part of a competition
application. It was written to bridge the gap between the current and the past. The author's
explanation of what made "the masses" revolutionary in 1956 is then presented.
3. Test of Credibility
SOURCE: Katipunan and Revolution: Memoirs of a General
*Matrix
Objectives of the Event:
The objectives of the event are to recount the events of the revolution and pinpoint the
various parts of the revolution through this work of Santiago Alvarez. Also the election of the
new officers. He also clarified and explained the events that took place before the outbreak of
the revolution, the activities of the Katipunan, the election at Tejeros, including who won certain
positions, and the events that culminated in the revolution after the untimely death of Andres
Bonifacio, the Supremo of the Sons of the People, using authentic and credible Lastly, he
depicted the conflict between the two factions: Magdiwang and Magdalo.
Persons involved in the Event:
The Katipunan members who attended the Tejeros convention were the members of the
Katipunan. Magdiwang and Magdalo. The Magdiwang Council Secretary Jacinto Lumberas,
Supremo Andres Bonifacio, Messrs. Mariano M. Alvarez, Pascua Alvarez, Ariston Villanueva,
Mariano C. Trias, Diego Mojica, Emiliano R. de Dios, Santiago V. Alvarez, Artemio Ricarte,
Santos Nocon, Luciano San Miguel, Pablo Mojica, Severino de las Alas and Santiago Rillo, all
of the members of Magdiwang. Among the Magdalo were Messrs. Baldomero Aguinaldo, Daniel
Tirona, and Cayateno Topacio. Captain General Apoy, Antonio Montenegro, Maj. Damaso
Fajos, Trinig (Jose Rizal’s Sister), Josephine (Jose Rizal’s Widow), Jose del Rosario (the
lawyer), Fr. Cenon Villafranca, and Nicolas Portilla.

Biases of the Author:

The author did not specify the events that lead to the convention and what happened
before it. The book was focused on the events at Tejeros. Because Alvarez was present at the
event, it's possible that the way he told the story was different. One of the reasons why Alvarez
has a tendency to side with Magdiwang council is that he is a member of it. The way Alvarez
told the story of the event may differ from the way Agoncillo told it, especially since it is stated in
this book that Aguinaldo discriminated against Alvarez because he suspected Magdalo
members of holding a secret meeting and election.

Similarities and Differences with Other Independent:

The book Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of a General is similar to the Revolt of
the Masses; the Story of Bonifacio and the Katipunan is that, both of the specific chapters in the
two books are tackling about what happened in the Tejeros Convention particularly the election,
providing the same objectives of the event and ending of the narration. Santiago Alvarez’s book
differes to Teodoro Agoncillo’s book is that is focused more on the election. The dates differ
between Alvarez's and Agoncillo's works, where they deviate from the dated convention; March
25, 1897 on Alvarez’s book while it dated March 22, 1897 on Agoncillo’s book. The events
before the convention was not mentioned and, in this book, there are only six (6) positions for
the election of official. This book also discussed the oath-taking ceremony that happened after
the election. The individuals engaged, where Agoncillo gave a specific list of convention
attendees. Furthermore, unlike Alvarez's work, where his accounts are the only information
presented, Agoncillo emphasized the vents before and after the convention to relate to
Bonifacio's thoughts, as well as his stream of thought and emotion.
Testimonies:

The author, Santiago V. Alvarez's testimony in his book is more thorough since he is an eyewitness, a
Katipunan active participant, and someone who was physically there during the event. The information
that the author has written is rather detailed, for example, his verbatim, because he participated in the
conversation and the dialogue clarified what the people present in the conversation were saying, rather
than being simply interpreted in simple and lacking terms. The testimonies of those present, as well as
his own testimony, are sufficient and reliable sources.

4. Test of Credibility
SOURCE: The Revolt of the Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and the Katipunan
*Matrix
Objectives of the Event:
The objective of the book was to highlight the concept of revolution and not to give
focused on the leader, which is Andres Bonifacio. Agoncillo emphasized that the book is more
about the Katipunan than its founder, Bonifacio. As quoted "the bookʼs focus on the Katipunan
rather than its founder can largely be explained by the expectations of his imagined readership.”
Also, to assess and resume the adjourned assembly on the proposal of a new revolutionary
government. In addition, to strengthen the means of defense and elect new officials for the
revolutionary government.
Persons involved in the Event:
The persons involved that was mentioned in the event are Andres Bonifacio, Baldomero
Aguinaldo, Ariston Villaneuva, Captain Mariano San Gabriel, General Emilio Aguinaldo, Mariano
Alvarez, Pascual Alvarez, Santiago Alvarez, Luciano San Miguel, Mariano Trias, Severino de
las Alas, Santos Nocon, Daniel Tirona, Cayetano Topacio, Antonio Montenegro, Jacinto
Lumbreras, Teodero Gonzales, Emiliano Reigo de Dios, Don Artemio Ricarte, and Jose Del
Rosario.

Biases of the Author:

Teodoro Agoncillo emphasizes Andres Bonifacio, believing that "Bonifacio is best seen
and appreciated against the backdrop of the revolutionary society. It suggests he was not
present at the incident and authored the book based on his perception. When he wrote the
book, Agoncillo had a bias. Furthermore, the book appears to be credible because he used
Emilio Aguinaldo, a former Katipunan member and President of the Philippines, as his primary
source.

Similarities and Difference with Other Independent:

Its similarity to Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of a General is that, both of the specific
chapters in the two books are tackling about what happened in the Tejeros Convention particularly the
election, providing the same objectives of the event and ending of the narration. It illustrated the
argument that aroused at Tejeros. Teodoro Agoncillo’s book differs to Santiago V. Alvarez’s book
because it is more of a summarization only since he got the information from different primary and
secondary sources. The author was able to describe the inside part of the convention so as the general
information was more transparent and systemized. Supremo Andre4s Binifacio’s side was described in
this book as well. It is also written in this book that there are nine (9) posisions for the election of
officials. The author also revealed the Jacinto Lumbreras actually called for a recess to cool off the
argument as well as showed what Supremo Bonifacio wrote to his uncle-in-law but in this book, the
author did no include the oath-taking ceremony that happened after the election unlike the book that
Santiago Alvarez wrote. The credibility of The Revolt of the Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and the
Katipunan is not that established since it is considered as a secondary source only. This book has a lot of
differences with Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of a General particularly with the mentioned
date of the Tejeros convention, Agoncillo implied in his book that the event happened in March 22,
1897, the birthday of General Emilio Aguinaldo.

Testimonies:

Teodoro Agoncillo, the author, was not an eyewitness. He was not in attendance for the event
which he tells. Thus, the book is regarded as a secondary source because it contains information from
other sources. He discovered different sources, which implies he interpreted it in his own way. So if I
were to put the author's testimony to the test of credibility, the answer would be no, it is not enough.
Since, he was not there at the event and is depending solely on his sources for information. What makes
the author and the book authentic and credible is because he have different sources which are reliable
and he also stated in his dedications the Former Katipunan member and current President of the
Philippines, Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo collaborated in providing Agoncillo's book with information. He was
the author's source who is an eyewitness, a participant, and is physically present throughout the event,
thus making him a credible and reliable source.

5. In your examination of the sources, what did you find out?

The difference lies in the context in which the two accounts were written: who wrote it
and when. Alvarez's account is much more credible. This is because Alvarez is considered not
only an eyewitness but also an active participant in the events that he narrated in his work.
Alvarez was the son of Mariano, who was then a general in the Magdiwang side (the faction of
Bonifacio). Alvarez narrated the events in this work when he was already fifty-five years old.
Needless to say, Alvarez's work proves invaluable as an historical document since it's a primary
source. However, it can also be argued that its subjectivity leaves more room for distortion of
the events that he narrated.
 And this is what Agoncillo had to offer in his work--the benefit of hindsight. Moreover,
Agoncillo's work had a different aim; the book was written in order to hook the present onto the
past. His writing was framed by the tumultuous events of the 1940s, namely: the Japanese
Occupation, World War II, and the eventual independence of the Philippines from the United
States. Agoncillo's work also laid more emphasis on the Katipunan than Bonifacio himself,
whereas, Alvarez, being on the side of Bonifacio as opposed to Aguinaldo, heavily favored the
the leader. Alvarez romanticized Bonifacio, while Agoncillio put him against the background of
the revolution. It's important to note, however, that Agoncillo did not intend to undermine
Bonifacio; rather, he believes that to understand the man, one must understand Katipunan first.
As a result, I came to the conclusion that primary sources, despite being the most
convincing and credible, are biased. To avoid bias, it's critical that our narration is built on a
foundation of different testimonies. Secondary sources, on the other hand, have the
disadvantage that the information passed on may differ from the original text in some ways. I
came to the conclusion that Agoncillo's book was thorough and trustworthy because it detailed
the events leading up to the convention. The division of the Katipunans in Cavite, the Magdalo
and Magdiwang, was the beginning. Then it went into detail and facts about the history and
miscommunication between the two factions that led to the Tejeros assembly. It's also similar to
Santiago Alvarez's work, the primary source, but Agoncillo's work isn't based solely on
perspective.
I found out that Agoncillo wanted to emphasize the group or the organization not the
founder, Bonifacio. He wanted to focus on the Katipunan rather than the founder. Also, he used
different types of evidence in collecting his data like he interviewed primary persona.  I think it
was criticized because maybe there is some misinterpretations. It is really important to take note
that in writing history, if there is no records or evidence, there is no history.
Again, in the eyes of a historian, Alvarez's work is invaluable as a primary source; but in
a critical analysis of the events and the characters involved, Agoncillo's work holds more water.
Hindsight has allowed Agoncillo to arrive at balanced conclusion, by scrutinizing various
inaccuracies, loopholes, and inconsistencies.