Activity #2 Riph

You might also like

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3

ACTIVITY #2

1. Who is Santiago Alvarez? How come his writing is a primary source?


2. Who is Teodoro Agoncillo? How come his writing is a secondary source?
3. Create a chart comparing in detail the accounts of the two writers regarding the
“Tejeros Convention”
4. Form your internal and external criticisms over the two sources.

ANSWERS:

Who is Santiago Alvarez? How come his writing is a primary source?

He is a general, Honorary president and founder of the directorate of the Nacionalista


party. He became famous for his bravery and courage during the battles in Cavite. He is the child
of revolutionary general named Mariano Alvarez. His writing is a primary source because he was
there when the incident happened.

Who is Teodoro Agoncillo? How come his writing is a secondary source?

He is a prominent 20th century Filipino hostoria. He and his contemporary Renato


Constantino were among the earliest Filipino hostorians known to adopt a distinctly nationalistic
view of Philippine history. His writing is secondary as he is a prominent 20th century of the
Philippine historian and reports on the events of the “Tejeros Convention”.
SANTIAGO ALVAREZ TEODORO AGONCILLO

Gen. Santiago Alvarez aka “Kidlatang Apoy” He is a historian in 20th century here in the
or “General Apoy” was a Magdiwang man Philippines. Agoncillo is more focusing on
and the Commander-in-chief. He’s focusing telling the story specifying the before and
on what happened in the election made by after the convention happens.
two factions, Magdiwang and Magdalo in
He began to point out some background
Tejeros Convention.
information on the two factions Magdalo and
Santiago’s point of view is to tell what really Magdiwang. He said there was a
happened at the convention. But he has not misunderstanding in both camps, so the
detailed Bonifacio, but highlights some of the Tejeros Convention was created to clear up
ACCOUNTS things that Bonifacio does. When he pulled the misunderstanding. The details about
out the revolver and pointed it Daniel Tirona Bonifacio were clear, as he was expected to be
because he was offended by what he said. impartial in two factions, but his actions in this
There is no Edilberto Evangelista in the case were motivated by respect for the uncle
memoirs of Santiago Alvarez. There is a scene of his wife. Mariano Alvarez, president of
in which Dr. Jose Rizal’s sister named Trining Magdiwang. He mentions the name
and her widow Josephine beg General Apoy Evangelista where Bonifacio decided that he
not to arrest Mr. Montenegro but to leave would nominate them because they are
him at the mansion where they lived. educated. Nothing said about Trining (Dr Jose
Santiago Alvarez concentrated on the Rizal’s sister) and his widow Josephine
objective approach and went to explain what pleading with General Apoy not to arrest Mr.
happened in the elections of two factions, Montenegro. The Objective of Teodoro
the Magdiwang and Magdalo convenions in Agoncillo is to draw attention to the events
Tejeros. The delegations of the interested prior to the Tejeros Congress. Mention
party are detailed and mentioned, which only important dates, battles, and events that
take place on the day of the election. Alvarez knew were different.

Create a chart comparing in detail the accounts of the two writers regarding the “Tejeros
Convention”

Form your internal and external criticisms over the two sources.

INTERNAL CRITICISMS Santiago Alvarez is a revolutionary general who is in


charge of maintaining activities in certain places. As the
main source, he only mentioned what actually happened at
the time, not knowing the truth between the opposite
factions. The narrative sounds skewed because he didn’t
tell the truth from Magdiwang and Magdalo’s point of
view.
Teodoro Agoncillo as a secondary source, he mentioned
the events before and after the election, including the
description, reason and location of the two factions and the
difference between the two.

EXTERNAL CRITICISMS For me, Santiago Alvarez is a little bit bias because it was
not detailed. He just describes chronologically without
saying the root of everything.

For Teodoro Agoncillo it was well written. But in my own


personal opinion, I don’t trust him, given the quality of his
book from which the excerpt comes. But overall the story is
still good event though the have the different ways of
telling the plot.

You might also like