College of Teacher Education

First Semester, A.Y. 2022-2023

LIFE AND WORKS OF RIZAL

Module 13: Last Trip Abroad

LESSON OBJECTIVES:
At the end of this module, students should be able to:

 Discuss how Rizal’s death became the crowning glory of his leadership.
 Expound how Rizal awakened national consciousness among Filipinos.
 Evaluate how Rizal’s efforts in nation building influenced Philippine Revolution.
 Examine Rizal’s advocacy on peaceful revolution.
 Discuss Rizal’s execution in Bagumbayan

DISCUSSION
Last Trip Abroad
Rizal left Dapitan on July 31, 1896 on board the steamer España. From the steamer that ferried him fromDapitan,
he was transferred to the cruiser Castilla, where he stayed for almost a month, pending the availability of avessel
bound for Spain. On September 3, 1896, Rizal sailed to Spain for Cuba. While on travel, the captain of theship
notified him that he was under arrest for being the guiding force of the Philippine Revolution that broke out
in August 1896. By October 3, 1896, Rizal reached Barcelona heavily guarded and was detained as a prisoner
at the steamer Isla de Panay; he was transferred to the SS Colon bound for Manila. On November 3, 1896, Rizal
arrived in Manila under heavy guard. He was brought to Fort Santiago pending the prosecution of his case and
was held uncommunicated in his detention cell.
Trial of Rizal
Rizal was accused of the complex crime of rebellion as he was the principal organizer and the living soul of the
insurrection, the founder of societies, periodicals, and books dedicated to the fermenting and propagating the
ideas of rebellion (Palma, 1949). He pleaded not guilty to the crime charged against him and his case was tried
in the jurisdiction of a military tribunal.The evidences of his guilt had been gathered by Captain Francisco de
Olive. On November 20, 1896,Colonel Rafael Dominguez, a special judge, conducted the preliminary
investigation. Rizal was interrogated without the presence of a counsel. He was not allowed to meet the
witnesses face to face. He was questioned, among other things, on his participation in various political activities,
about his membership in Masonic lodges, concerning his appointment as honorary president of the Katipunan,
about Pio Valenzuela’s meeting with him at Dapitan, and concerning the testimonies of arrested Katipunero’s
implicating him.
At the trial, Lieutenant Enrique de Alcocer presented a detailed presentation of Rizal’s case, which
culminated in his call on the members of the military tribunal to render a decision by imposing death penalty on
the accused. Alcoser’s argument rested on Rizal’s admission of the founding of La Lia, which to his mind had
something to do with Boniface’s revolution. He showed that Rizal’s writings were designed to incite anti-friar,
anti-Spanish, and separatist sentiments. Alcoser exposed Rizal as the “soul of the rebellion”.
Luis Tiivel de Andrade cited the technicality of the law for Rizal’s defense that his client’s guilt had not been
proven through any of the following means: Ocular inspection, confession of the accused, credible witnesses,
expert opinion, official documents or conclusive evidences (Guerrero, 1998). As none of these existed, Rizal was
not guilty of the crime charged against him.
As to the charge of founding illegal associations, Andrade argued that the Constitution of the La Lia Filipina did
not specify any illegal objectives. Furthermore, Andrade said, the Lia was short-lived because Rizal was
deported to Capitan before it could be fully organized and if it was revived, it was done without Rizal’s
knowledge. After Andrade’s brilliant defense, Rizal was asked by the judge advocate whether he had something
to add to what his counsel and presented. Rizal stood up and presented his own brief (Zuleika, 2004; Guerrero,
1998).
1. Aim not guilty of rebellion as I even advised Dr. Poi Valenzuela in Capitan not to rise in revolution.
2. The revolutionists used any name without my knowledge. If I were guilty, I could have escaped
from Singapore.
3. If I had a hand in the Katipunan revolution, I could have escaped Dapitan and should have not built a
house there.
4. If I were the chief of the revolution, why did they not consult me on their plans?
 5. I was not the founder of La Solidaridad and the Association Hispano-Filipino.
6. I had nothing to do with the introduction of masonry in the Philippines.
7. The La Lia did not live long. It died a natural death after my banishment to Capitan.
8. If the La Lia was re-organized nine months later, I totally very unaware of it.
9. It was true that I wrote the statutes if La Lia. The La Lia, however, is a civic association whose purposes
are unity and development of commerce and industry.
10. While it was true that there were bitter statements in my letters, it was because they were written when
my family was being persecuted, being dispossessed of their houses and lands; and my brother and
brother-in law were rusticated without due process of law.
11. It was not true that the revolution was inspired in one of my speeches. My friends knew very well about
my vehement opposition to an armed rebellion.
12. Why did the Katipunan send an emissary to me in Dapitan, who was a total stranger to me? Because
those who knew me were cognizant that I would never sanction any violent movement.
13. My life in Capitan had been exemplary, as evidenced by my productive activities for the welfare of the
people. Even the politico-military commanders and missionary priests could attest to this. On the same
day, the verdict of the military court, signed by Jose To gores, was submitted to Governor-general Polaveja.
Rizal was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt and therefore should be condemned to death byfiring
squad at the place and time to be chosen by the Governor-general Polaveja approved Judge Advocate
general Nicolas dela Pena’s recommendations on December 30 at 7:00 in the morning at Bagumbayan
Field.
Execution at Bagumbayan
Rizal was convicted of rebellion and was sentenced to death through musketry. The verdict of death sentence
was read to Rizal on December 29, 1896 (Romero, et al., 1978). At the outset, Rizal refused to sign it owing to
his innocence and objective to his being labeled as a Chinese mestizo. Later, realizing that the law required it,
he affixed his signature on the notification of the court’s decision. On December 30, 1896, Josephine Bracken
arrived at 5:30 in the morning accompanied by Josefa.Rizal embraced her and gave his last gift; the book of
Thomas kemphis entitled Imitation of Christ. The death march began at exactly 6:30 in the morning. Rizal sported
a black suit and vest with a black hat ashes came out of his cell. Rizal walked to the place of execution between
father Villaclara and Father March. At the execution square, the military physician, Dr. Felipe Ruiz y Castillo, felt
his pulse and found it normal. Rizal requested the commander of the cavalry that he be shot facing his
executioners considering that he was not a traitor. The request, however, was denied as the Spanish officer had
a standing order from higher authorities that Rizal should be shot at the back. Rizal’s execution became the
vehicle to awaken the national consciousness of the Filipinos. Its parked the fire of the Philippine revolution
against the Spanish colonizers, which elevated him as the national hero of the country.
Rizal’s Retraction Issue
Did Rizal really retract? Did he show weakness in the face of death? What really happened at the last days of
Rizal’s Life? One of the most controversial points on Rizal’s was his alleged retraction where he renounced
masonry and his religious beliefs that were anti-Catholic. Some are arguing that Rizal retracted his Masonic
views and embraced his Catholic faith before he died. The Roman Catholic is the greatest exponent of the view
that Rizal died a Catholic and retracted his Masonic views. Father Cavanna (1956) presented the following
evidences to prove the veracity of its claim:
1. Rizal recited and signed the prayer book entitled Acts of Faith, Hope and Charity. This book was offered
to Rizal after his signing of the retraction document according to father Beleaguer.
2. The testimony of the press at the time of the event, of eyewitnesses, like the head of the Jesuit order,
attested that Rizal’s retracted and signed a retraction document.
3. Rizal performed acts of piety during his last hours, as testified by the witnesses.
4. The Church through the Jesuits, solemnized Rizal’s marriage to Josephine Bracken, as attested by
witnesses.
The Catholic Church will not officiate a marriage ceremony without Rizal’s retraction of his religious errors. While
Savanna and other pro-retraction scholars presented to the following evidences to support their claim the Rizal
did not retract (Hessel, 1965)
1. The retraction document is a forgery. As pointed out by Pascal (1950), the handwriting in the document is
questionable, as only one man prepared it. The point stressed by Pascal was corroborated by the
confession made by the forger to Antonio Abad on August 13, 1901, employed by the friars earlier that same
year to make several copies of the retractions document (Runes and Buenafe, 1962)
2. The other acts and facts do not fit well with the story of retraction. Some of these are the following.
 a. There traction document was not made public until 1935. Even members of Rizal’s family did not see it.
b. No effort was made to save Rizal from death penalty after saying his retraction.
c. Rizal’s buried was kept secret. He was buried outside the inner wall of Paco cemetery.
d. The record of his burial was not placed on the page of entries of December 30 but on a special
page, where at least oneother admitted non-penitent is recorded.
e. There is no marriage certificate or public record of Rizal’s marriage with Josephine Bracken.
f. Rizal’s behavior did not point to a conversation during his last 24 hours. His Ultimo Adios and the letters he
wrote during his remaining hours do not indicate conversion.
3. The retraction is out of character. It is not in keeping with Rizal’s character and faith. It is incongruent with his
previous assertions and declarations of religious thoughts. While historians, biographers and students of Rizal’s
life, works and writings are divided on the issue of his retraction, it cannot be denied that this issue neither adds
nor diminishes his greatness as a Filipino. His contribution to nation-building makes the people revere him. In
the words of Hessel (1995): “Catholic or mason, Rizal is still Rizal; the hero who courted death to prove those
who deny our patriotism that we know how to die for our duty and our beliefs.
Rizal Remains
What happened to his remains after he was shot in Bagumbayan field on December 30, 1896? Hereunder is what
happened according to Rizal’s biographer Jose Baron Fernandez: The body of Rizal was buried in the old and
unused Paco cemetery. In his grave, they placed a plaque with the initials of his brother in reverse, R.P.J., which
means Rizal, Protacio Jose. There were no funeral ceremonies for Rizal. A few days after the Americans took
Manila in August 1898, Rizal’s sister, Narcisa,asked permission of the new authorities to exhume the remains of
Rizal. Permission was granted. When the body was exhumed, it was discovered that Rizal’s body had not even
been placed in a coffin. The remains were placed in appropriate condition and reinterred in the proper manner
at the Paco cemetery. Then the sepulcher was well-tended.In 1911, the remains of Rizal were transferred from
the Paco cemetery to the base of the monument which had earlier been erected at the Luneta (now Rizal Park).
Mi Ultimo Adios
Jose Rizal, before his execution by firing squad at Rizal or Luneta Park (formerly Bagumbayan), wrote hislast
poem Mi Ultimo Adios (My Last farewell). Interestingly enough, his original writing was said to have no title; the
title Mi Ultimo Adios was given by Mariano Ponce.The poem was Rizal’s farewell to his native land. It is an epic
poem expressive of idealism, morality and spirituality. In this poem, Rizal presented a character of a dutiful son,
an understanding brother, an ardent lover, and faithful friend. He also demonstrated his willingness, as a patriot,
to offer his life for the love of a country

Reference

 https://www.scribd.com/document/499741601/Rizal-Module-13#logout