Updated Rphsit Modulel Unit3and4

Unit
3 CONTENT AND CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PRIMARY SOURCES
LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
1. Analyze the context, content and perspective of different kinds of primary resources.
2. Determine the contribution of different kinds of primary source in understanding history.
3. Develop critical and analytical skills with exposure to primary sources
4. Practice skills of critical oral expression and dialogue through interpreting and analyzing primary and
secondary sources.
5. Explain the significance of enhancing global partnership to achieve sustainable development (SDG
17)
The goal of this Unit is for you to be familiarize with the primary documents in different historical periods,
You will be looking at a number of primary sources and be able to evaluate its content in terms of historical
value and examine the context of their production.
PRETEST: Write T if the statement is correct and F if incorrect.

_____1.The of the cover of the Manunggul jar features three faces.
_____2. The Three human figures in a boat represent a voyage to the afterlife.
_____3. The first Christian Mass celebrated on the Philippine soil was made in an island which
Pigafetta called as “Mazaua.”
_____4.The Manunggul jar can be found in the 500 peso bill.
_____5.There is only one account of the First Catholic Mass in the Philippines.
_____6.Jose Rizal is considered as the First Philippine hero.
_____7.Ambrosio Rianzares-Bautista designation is as a War Counselor and special delegate.
_____8.Supremo was the title given to Emilio Aguinaldo during the reading of the Act of
Philippine independence?
_____9.Emilio Aguinaldo waved the Philippine Flag for the first time in Kawit, Cavite.
_____10. The leader who denied the over lordship of either Humabon or the King of Spain was
Rajah Sikatuna.
A Self-regulated Learning Module 38

LESSON 1: MANUNGGUL JAR
The Manunggul Jar dated back to around 710-890 BCE. It was discovered in 1964 in
Manunggul Cave in Palawan. The jar’s cover has two human figures riding on a boat. The human
figure at the back is holding a paddle with both hands while the one in front has its two arms crossed
against the chest. The boat also has eyes and mouth. The upper portion of the jar has curved scrolls.
Archaeological findings show that this jar was used for secondary burial, a prehistoric burial practice
wherein only the bones were put in a jar within a year after the death of a person. The bones were
washed and painted with a red hematite as part of the preparatory practices for secondary burial. The
jar was then placed in the most lighted and attractive part inside the cave. (Source:
http://philmuseaum.tripod.com/archaeo.html (last accessed on 16 January 2013)
THE MANUNGGUL JAR AS A VESSEL OF HISTORY

by: Michael Charleston B. Chua
(Lifted from http://www.artesdelasfilipinas.com/archives/50/the-manunggul-jar-as-a-vessel-of-history)
"…the work of an artist and master potter."--Robert Fox
27th April 1995—I was 11 years old when I visited the National Museum -- the repository of our cultural,
natural and historical heritage. I remembered the majesty of climbing those steps and walking past the Neo-
classical Roman columns until I was inside the Old Congress Building.
Today, if the Metropolitan Museum’s identifying piece was the painting Virgenes Cristianas Expuestas Al
Populacho by Felix Resurrecion Hidaldo and the GSIS Museum its Parisian Life by the painter Juan Luna,
the National Museum’s, El Spoliarium, Luna’s most famous piece. Many people come to the museum just
for this painting. But another less-popular but quite significant piece was the Manunggul jar.
The Manunggul jar was one of the numerous jars found in a cave believed to be a burial site (Manunggul,
was part of the archaeologically significant Tabon Cave Complex in Lipuun Point, Quezon, Palawan) that
was discovered on March 1964 by Victor Decalan, Hans Kasten and other volunteer workers from the
United States Peace Corps. The Manunggul burial jar was unique in all respects. Dating back to the late
Neolithic Period (around 710 B.C.), Robert Fox described the jar in his landmark work on the Tabon Caves:
The burial jar with a cover featuring a ship-of-the-dead is perhaps unrivalled in Southeast Asia; the work of
an artist and master potter. This vessel provides a clear example of a cultural link between the
archaeological past and the ethnographic present. The boatman is steering rather than padding the "ship."
The mast of the boat was not recovered. Both figures appear to be wearing a band tied over the crown of
the head and under the jaw; a pattern still encountered in burial practices among the indigenous peoples in
Southern Philippines. The manner in which the hands of the front figure are folded across the chest is also
a widespread practice in the Islands when arranging the corpse.
The carved prow and eye motif of the spirit boat is still found on the traditional watercraft of the Sulu
Archipelago, Borneo and Malaysia. Similarities in the execution of the ears, eyes, nose, and mouth of the
figures may be seen today in the woodcarving of Taiwan, the Philippines, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia.
My familiarity with the Manunggul jar was spurred by the image in the PHP1,000 bill, circulated in 1995.

Viewing the artifact up close fascinated me tremendously. I saw the artistry of the early Filipinos reflected in
those fine lines and intricate designs. We were definitely not as dumb as the Spaniards told us we were!
After a few years, when I took a cultural history subject during my undergraduate course in UP Diliman
under Dr. Bernadette Lorenzo-Abrera, the Manunggul jar was given a whole new meaning. When an
archaeological find was explained anthropologically, it was imbibed with far-reaching implications in re-
writing its history.
The Manunggul jar served as a proof of our common heritage with our Austronesian-speaking ancestors
despite the diversity of cultures of the Philippine peoples. Traces of their culture and beliefs were seen in
different parts of the country and from different Philippine ethno-linguistic groups.
It was also a testament of the importance of the waters to our ancestors. The seas and the rivers were their
conduit of trade, information and communication. According to Peter Bellwood, the Southeast Asians first
developed a sophisticated maritime culture which made possible the spread of the Austronesian-speaking
peoples to the Pacific Islands as far Madagascar in Africa and Easter Island near South America. Our
ships—the balanghay, the paraw, the caracoa, and the like—were considered marvelous technological
advances by our neighbors that they respected us and made us partners in trade. These neighbors later
then, grew to include the imperial Chinese.
Many epics around the Philippines would tell us of how souls go to the next life aboard boats, passing
through the rivers and seas. The belief was very much connected with the Austronesia belief in the anito.
Our ancestors believed that man is composed of the body, the life force called the ginhawa, and the
kaluluwa (soul). The kaluluwa, after death, can return to earth to exist in nature and guide their
descendants. This explained why the cover of the Manunggul jar featured three faces: the soul, the boat
driver, and of the boat itself. For them, even things from nature have souls and lives of their own. That’s
why our ancestors respected nature more than those who thought that it can be used for the ends of man.
Seeing the Manunggul jar once more, I was also reminded of the inventiveness of the early Filipinos as well
as the concepts and values they hold most-- their concept of the soul, for example, are believed to exist
only on good-natured and merciful people. The belief was that the soul gave life, mind, and will to a person
and if this was what our ancestors valued and exemplified, then our nation was not only great, but lived by
compassionate people.
However, the colonial masters in the past labeled our ancestors no good and even tried to erase our
legacies and values, and despite the media today showing how shameful, miserable and poor our country
is, from time to time there would be people who echo the same values that our ancestors lived by.
In the 1890s, the Katipunan movement of Andres Bonifacio, which spearheaded the Philippine Revolution,
tried to revive the values of magandang kalooban. During the People Power Uprising in1986, we showed
the world the values of pananampalataya, pakikipagkapwa, pakikiramay, pagiging masiyahin, bayanihan,
pagiging mapayapa, and pagiging malikhain --values that were deeply rooted in the Filipino culture. It was
the country's national hero, José Rizal, who once wrote, in his essay, Filipinas Dentro de Cien Años, (The
Philippines Within a Century) that:
With the new men that will spring from her bosom and the remembrance of the past, she will perhaps enter
openly the wide road of progress and all will work jointly to strengthen the mother country at home as well
as abroad with the same enthusiasm with which a young man returns to cultivate his father’s farmland so
long devastated and abandons due to the negligence of those who had alienated it. And free once more,
like the bird that leaves his cage, like the flower that returns to the open air, they will discover their good old
qualities which they are losing little by little and again become lovers of peace, gay, lively, smiling,

hospitable, and fearless.
The Manunggul jar was a symbol of the National Museum’s important role in spearheading the preservation
the cultural heritage—pamana—using multi-disciplinary techniques. It was a testament of how art can be a
vessel of history and culture with the help of scholars. In this light, a simple jar became the embodiment of
the history, experiences, and aspirations of the people and how the values of maka-Diyos, makatao at
makabansa became part the value system of the Filipinos.
I have visited the manunggul jar numerous times since that April of 1995 at the Kaban ng Lahi room of the
National Museum II—The Museum of the Filipino People (former Department of Finance Building).
Everytime, I look at it I am reminded of how great and compassionate the Filipinos are and how I could
never be ashamed of being a Filipino. Everytime I look at the Manunggul jar, I see a vision that a new
generation of Filipinos will once more take the ancient balanghay as a people and be horizon seekers once
more.
TASK1: Complete the following concept map (40 points)
Beliefs
Discovery of represented in
the Jar the Jar
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
Source: https://www.nationalmuseum.gov.ph
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
Purpose of
Description
the Jar
of the Jar
___________________________ a. To the early Filipino people

___________________________ ______________________
___________________________ ______________________
___________________________ ______________________
___________________________ ___________
___________________________ b. Present generation
___________________________
______________________
___________________________
______________________
___________________________
TASK2. ESSAY: Explain the meaning of “Manunggul Jar as a Vessel of History.” (20 points)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
15 10 5 1
Complete Explanation of Partial or Inadequate

explanation of topic is incomplete explanation of
CONTENT topic, with specific, satisfactory, with explanation of topic with
accurate, and mostly sufficient topic, with inadequate or
relevant evidence, but insufficient missing evidence
information. mostly general. evidence and and many factual
More detail inaccuracies errors
needed. Some
factual errors
5 3 2 1
Information is Student presents Reader has Sequence of

ORGANIZATION logical, interesting information in difficulty following information is
sequence which logical sequence work because difficult to follow
reader can follow. which reader can student jumps
follow. around

LESSON 2: BATTLE OF MACTAN
Read the narrative of Antonio Pigafetta about the events that occurred on that fateful day of April 27, 1521.
Carlos V. Francisco Watercolor Stock
On Friday, April 26, Zula, a chief of the island of Matan, sent one of his sons to present two goats to
the captain-general, and to say that he would send him all that he had promised, but that he had not
been able to send it to him because of the other chief Cilapulapu, who refused to obey the king of
Spagnia. He requested the captain to send him only one boatload of men on the next night, so that
they might help him and fight against the other chief. The captain-general decided to go thither with
three boatloads. We begged him repeatedly not to go, but he, like a good shepherd, refused to
abandon his flock. At midnight, 60 men of us set out armed with corselets and helmets, together with
. . .some of the chief men. . .We reached Matan three hours before dawn. The captain did not wish to
fight then, but sent a message to the natives. . .to the effect that if they would obey the king of Spagnia,
recognize the Christian king as their sovereign, and pay us our tribute, he would be their friend; but if
they wish otherwise, they should wait to see our lances wounded. They replied that if we had our
lances they had lances of bamboo and stakes hardened with fire. [They asked us] not to proceed to
attack them at once; but to wait until morning, so that they might have more men. They said that in
order to induce us to go in search of them; for they had dug certain pit holes between the houses in
order that we might fall into them. When morning came, 49 of us leaped into the water up to our thighs
and walked through water for more than two crossbow flights before we could reach the shore. The
boats could not approach thereafter because of certain rocks in the water. The other eleven men
remained behind to guard the boats. When we reached land, those men had formed in three divisions
to the number of more than 1500 persons. When they saw us, they charged down upon us with
exceeding loud cries, two divisions on our flanks and the other on our front. When the captain saw
that, he formed us into two divisions, and thus did we begin to fight. The musketeers and crossbowmen
shot from a distance for about half-hour, but uselessly, for the shots only passed through the shields
which were made of thin wood and the arms (of the bearers.) The captain cried to them, ”Cease firing!
Cease firing! But his order was not at all heeded. When the natives saw that we were shooting our

muskets to no purpose, crying out they determined to stand firm, but they redoubled their shouts.
When our muskets were discharged, the natives would never stand still, but leaped hither and thither,
covering themselves with their shields. They shot so many arrows at us and hurled so many bamboo
spears (some of them tipped with iron) at the captain-general, besides pointed stakes hardened with
fire, stones and mud, that we could scarcely defend ourselves. Seeing that, the captain-general sent
some men to burn their houses in order to terrify them. When they saw their houses burning, they
were roused to greater fury. Two of our men were killed near the houses, while we burned 20 or 30
houses. So many of them charged down upon us that they shot the captain through the right leg with
a poisoned arrow. On that account, he ordered us to retire slowly, but the men took to flight, except 6
or 8 of us who remained with the captain. The natives shot only at our legs, for the latter were bare;
and so many were the spears and stones that they hurled at us, that we could offer no resistance. The
mortars in the boats could not aid us as they were too far away. . .The natives continued to pursue
us, and picking up the same spear four or six times, hurled it at us again and again. Recognizing the
captain, so many turned upon him that they knocked his helmet off his head twice, but he always
stood firmly like a good knight, together with some others. . .An Indian hurled a bamboo spear into the
captain’s face, but the latter immediately killed him with his lance, which he left in the Indian’s body.
Then, trying to lay hand on sword, he could draw it out but halfway, because he had been wounded
in the arm with a bamboo spear. When the natives saw that, they all hurled themselves upon him.
One of them wounded him on the leg with a large cutlass. .. That caused the captain to fall face
downward, when immediately they rushed upon him with iron and bamboo spears and with their
cutlasses, until they killed our mirror, our light, our comfort, and our true guide. When they wounded
him, he turned back many times to see whether we were all in the boats. Thereupon, beholding him
dead, we, wounded, retreated, as best we could, to the boats, which were already pulling off.
Source: Pigafetta, Antonio. “First Voyage Around the World.” In the Philippine Islands, Vol. 33, edited by E. Blair and J.
Robertson, 175, 177, 179, 181. Cleveland: A.H. Clark, 1909. Reprinted by Cacho Hermanos, 1973

TASK1: Make a timeline of what happened on 27 April 1521 from the point of view of the
Spaniards.(20 pts.)
DATE/TIME EVENTS
TASK2. Make a Contextual (PEST) Analysis on the Battle of Mactan by completing the chart
below. (20 pts.)
CONTEXTUAL (PEST) ANALYSIS
Geography Economy Social Technology

Based from the PEST Analysis, what do you think is the reason/are the reasons why the group of Magellan
was defeated? (20 points)
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
15 10 5 1

needed. Some
factual errors
5 3 2 1

follow. around

LESSON 3: ACT OF DECLARATION OF PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE
Read the Act of Declaration of Philippine Independence written and read by Ambrocio Rianzares-
Bautista on June 12, 1898 at Cavite el Viejo (Kawit).
Proclamation of Philippine Independence in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898

Ambrocio Rianzares-
Bautista
In the town of Cavite-Viejo, Province of Cavite, this 12th day of June 1898: BEFORE ME,
Ambrocio Rianzares-Bautista, War Counsellor and Special Delegate designated to proclaim and
solemnize this Declaration of Independence by the Dictatorial Government of the Philippines, pursuant
to, and by virtue of, a Decree issued by the Egregious Dictator Don Emilio Aguinaldo y Famy. . .
And having as witness to the rectitude of our intentions the Supreme Judge of the Universe,
and under the protection of the Powerful and Humanitarian Nation, the United States of America, we
do hereby proclaim and declare solemnly, in the name and by authority of the people of those
Philippine Islands. That they are and have the right to be free and independent; that they have ceased
to have any allegiance to the Crown of Spain; that all political ties between them are and should be
completely severed and annulled; and that, like other free and independent States, they enjoy the full
power to make War and Peace, conclude commercial treaties, enter into alliances, regulate
commerce, and do all other acts and things which an independent State has a right to do. . .And
imbued with firm confidence in Divine Providence, we hereby mutually bind ourselves to support this
Declaration with our lives, our fortunes, and with our most sacred possession, our Honor.
We recognize, approve, and ratify, with all the orders emanating from the same, the
Dictatorship established by Don Emilio Aguinaldo whom we revere as the Supreme Head of this
Nation, which today begins to have a life of its own, in the conviction that he has been the instrument
chosen by God inspite of his humble origin, to effectuate the redemption of this unfortunate country
as foretold by Dr. Don Jose Rizal in his magnificent verses which he composed in his prison cell prior
to his execution, liberating it from the Yoke of Spanish domination. .

Moreover, we confer upon our famous Dictator Don Emilio Aguinaldo all the powers necessary
to enable him to discharge the duties of Government, including the prerogatives of granting pardon
and
amnesty.
And lastly, it was resolved unanimously that this Nation, already free and independent as of
this day, must use the same flag which up to now is being used, whose design and colors are found
described in the attached drawing, the white triangle signifying the distinctive emblem of the famous
Society of the Katipunan which by means of blood compact inspired the masses to rise in revolution;
the three stars, signifying the three principal islands of this Archipelago – Luzon, Mindanao and Panay
where this revolutionary movement started; the sun representing the gigantic steps made by the sons
of the country along the path of Progress and Civilization; the eight rays, signifying the eight provinces
– Manila, Cavite, Bulacan, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Bataan, Laguna, and Batangas – which declared
themselves in a state of war as soon as the first revolt was initiated; and the colors of Blue, Red, and
White, commemorating the flag of the United States of America, as a manifestation of our profound
gratitude towards this Great Nation for its disinterested protection which it lent us and continues
lending us. . .
In witness thereof, I certify that this Act of Declaration of Independence was signed by me and
by all people here as assembled including the only stranger who attended those proceedings, a citizen
of the U.S.A., Mr. L. M. Johnson, a Colonel of Artillery.
Source: “Declaration of Philippine Independence.” In The Laws of the First Philippine Republic (The Laws of Malolos),
edited by Sulpicio Guevara, 203-206. Manila: National Historical Commission, 1972
TASK: Answer the following questions briefly.
1. Who is Ambrosio Rianzares-Bautista? Give three significant facts about him.

a. ______________________________________________________________________________
b. ______________________________________________________________________________
c. ______________________________________________________________________________
2. What does the document want to convey? (10 points)

________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
3. How did the Filipinos regard the United States of America based on the
document? (5 points) What is your stand on this? Do you agree with the Filipinos the way they looked
at the Americans? (15 points)
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________

4. What is the importance of this document in the history of our country? (10 points)
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
LESSON 4: LAGUNA COPPERPLATE INSCRIPTION
LAGUNA COPPERPLATE TRANSLITERATION
The Laguna Copperplate Inscription:

An Ancient Text That Changed the Perception of the History of the Philippines
A high-contrast copy of the Laguna Copperplate Inscription.

Tagalog Translation
Mabuhay! Taóng Siyaka 822, buwán ng Waisaka, ayon sa aghámtalà. Ang ikaapat na araw ng pagliít
ng buwán, Lunes. Sa pagkakátaóng itó, si Dayang Angkatán sampû ng kaniyáng kapatíd na
nagngangalang Buka, na mga anák ng Kagalang-galang na si Namwarán, ay ginawaran ng isáng
kasulatan ng lubós na kapatawarán mulâ sa Punong Pangkalahatan sa Tundún sa pagkatawán ng
Punong Kagawad ng Pailáh na si Jayadewa.
Sa atas na itó, sa pamamagitan ng Tagasulat, ang Kagalang-galang na si Namwarán ay pinatawad
na sa lahát at inalpasán sa kaniyáng utang at kaniyáng mga náhulíng kabayarán na 1 katî at 8
suwarna sa harapán ng Kagalang-galang na Punong Kagawad ng Puliran na si Ka Sumurán, sa
kapangyarihan ng Kagalang-galang na Punong Kagawad ng Pailáh.
Dahil sa matapát na paglilingkód ni Namwarán bilang isáng sakop ng Punò, kinilala ng Kagalang-
galang at batikáng Punong Kagawad ng Binwangan ang lahát ng nabubuhay pang kamag-anak ni
Namwarán na inangkín ng Punò ng Dewatà, na kinatawán ng Punò ng Medáng.
Samakatwíd, ang mga nabubuhay na inapó ng Kagalang-galang na si Namwarán ay pinatawad sa
anumán at lahát ng utang ng Kagalang-galang na si Namwarán sa Punò ng Dewatà. Itó, kung sakalì,
ay magpapahayag kaninumán na mulâ ngayón kung may taong magsasabing hindî pa alpás sa utang
ang Kagalang-galang...
The Laguna Copperplate Inscription is the name of an inscription written on an artifact that has great
significance for the understanding of the history of the Philippines during the 10th century AD – a time
when many scholars believed that the area was isolated from the rest of Southeast Asia.
Political Entities in Southeast Asia in the 10th Century

During the 10th century, a number of political entities were in existence in Southeast Asia. One of the
most famous of these was the Khmer Empire, which dominated much of the Southeast Asian
mainland. To its east, the modern country of Vietnam was divided between the Chinese in the north,
and the Kingdom of Champa in the south. The seas below the Southeast Asian mainland were beyond
the reach of the Khmers and were largely controlled by a maritime empire known as Srivijaya.
However, there is little information on the area in the part of this region where the modern country of
the Philippines is now situated. This lack of information led many scholars to believe that it was isolated
from the rest of the region. Thus, the Laguna Copperplate Inscription is an important artifact, as it has
allowed scholars to re-evaluate the situation in this part of Southeast Asia during the 10th century AD.
Characteristics of the Laguna Copperplate
The Laguna Copperplate is a thin piece of copper sheet measuring about 20 x 20 cm (7.9 x 7.9 inches),
which was discovered around 1987. It has been reported that this artifact was found during dredging
activities with a mechanical conveyor in the Lumbang River, which is situated in the Province of
Laguna. This province is located to the east of Manila, the capital of the Philippines. It is interesting to
note that the Laguna Copperplate only came to the attention of scholars in 1990, when it was offered
for sale to the National Museum in Manila, after attempts to sell it in the antiques market had been
met with little interest.
An Incomplete Artifact
Investigations by Antoon Postma, a Dutch anthropologist, have revealed that the inscription on the
Laguna Copperplate is incomplete, and it is highly likely that there was another similar piece of
copperplate with inscriptions on it that has been lost. In an article published in 1992, Postma wrote
that:
“Moreover, certain persons, after viewing a photo of the LCI (Laguna Copperplate Inscription), alleged,
without being asked, that they had seen a similar piece of copperplate with inscriptions around the
same time (1987). Its importance, however, was not realized then, and the possible second page of
the LCI might have ended up in a local junk yard and been irretrievably lost to posterity.”
Origins of the Inscription on the Laguna Copperplate
The inscription on the surviving copperplate is in itself intriguing, and has provided enough material
for scholars to analyze. For instance, the type of script used in the Laguna Copperplate Inscription
has been identified as the so-called ‘Early Kawi Script,’ a writing system that originated in the
Indonesian island of Java, and was used across much of maritime Southeast Asia during the 10th
century AD.
In fact, this script is said to have been derived from the Pallava script, which has its origins in India.
As for the language of the inscription, it has been found to be heavily influenced linguistically by
Sanskrit, Old Malay, and Old Javanese. Both the type script, and the language of the Laguna
Copperplate Inscription, therefore, shows that this area was not actually isolated from the rest of
Southeast Asia, as had been previously assumed.
The Inscription
The inscription begins by providing a date:

“Hail! In the Saka-year 822; the month of March-April; according to the astronomer: the fourth day of
the dark half of the moon; on Monday.”
The Saka era has its origins in India (supposedly marking the ascension of the Kushan emperor
Kanishka), and the year 822 is said to correspond with the year 900 AD in the Gregorian calendar.
The use of this calendrical system is further evidence that there were cultural links between this area
of Southeast Asia and its neighbors, which at that time, were largely under the cultural influence of
India.
As for the subject matter of the Laguna Copperplate Inscription, it has been suggested that the
inscription is a “semi-official certificate of acquittal of a debt incurred by a person in high office, together
with his whole family, all relatives and descendants.”
This acquittal is also said to be confirmed by other officials/leaders, some of whom have been
mentioned by name, along with their area of jurisdiction. These officials include “His Honor the Leader
of Puliran, Kasumuran; His Honor the Leader of Pailah, representing Ganasakti; (and) His Honor the
Leader of Binwangan, representing Bisruta.” The recording of these names suggests that there was
some sort of political and social organization in the Philippines of the 10th century AD.
To conclude, the Laguna Copperplate, which would probably not attract instant public attention as
gold or silver artifacts would, is in fact an immensely important object. This seemingly insignificant
artifact has sparked a re-assessment of the history of the Philippines prior to the coming of the
Spanish, in particular the 10th century AD, and the archipelago’s relationship with the rest of Southeast
Asia.
Ernesto Legisma Alberto Dealino Alfredo Evangelista

(sand laborer) (Head, Anthropology Div.
(antique dealer)
of the National Museum)
Antoon Postma Dr. Johann de Hector Santos

(Dutch Casparis (Filipino
Anthropologist; (Dutch expert on anthropological
ancient writing scripts Indonesian writing) enthusiast)
in SEA region)
 old Hindu calendar  Monday, April 21,
 ancient Indonesian (900 C.E.) 900 C.E.
writing called Kavi
 Saka year 822

Wawa, Lumbang River, Laguna
Map showing
the places
inscribed in LCI
according to
Antoon
Postma
Map showing
the places
inscribed in LCI
according to
Jaime Figueroa
Tiongson
Sources: lifted from Readings in Philippine History Manual

Some Key Terms and Names to Remember
 Antonio Pigafetta  Manunggul Jar

 Ambrosio Rianzares-Bautista  Philippine Independence
 Cilapulapi  Battle of Mactan
TASK1. Compare and contrast the past and present meanings that we attach to the symbols
and colors of the Philippine flag. Your output will be graded based on accuracy of information.
(30 points)
PAST PRESENT
(based from the Act of Declaration of Philippine
Independence)

TASK 2. POSITION PAPER. Read the following issues and write 500-1000 words position paper
about it.
(70 points)
Issue #1. Sen. Pacquiao files a bill proposing 9th ray in sun in PH flag
(https://mb.com.ph/2021/01/30/sen-pacquiao-files-bill-proposing-9th-ray-in-sun-in-ph-flag/)
Issue #2. Tolentino proposes to add fourth star to PH flag

(https://mb.com.ph/2019/06/13/tolentino-proposes-to-add-fourth-star-to-ph-flag/)
Issue #3. Sotto wants Philippine national anthem revised

(https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/19/18/sotto-wants-philippine-national-anthem-revised)
NAME of STUDENT: _________________________ SCORE: ________/70__

SCHEDULE and SECTION: ___________________ DATE: ___________
CRITERIA 10 7 5 3
Score
Attention The introductory The introductory The author has an The introductory
Grabber paragraph has a paragraph has a interesting paragraph is not
strong hook or hook or attention introductory interesting AND is
attention grabber grabber, but it is paragraph but the not relevant to the
that is appropriate weak, rambling or connection to the topic.
/10
for the audience. inappropriate for topic is not clear.
This could be a the audience.
strong statement, a
relevant quotation,
statistic, or question
addressed to the
reader.
Focus or The thesis The thesis statement The thesis The thesis
Thesis statement clearly names the topic of statement outlines statement does not
Statement names the topic of the essay. The some or all of the name the topic AND
the essay and author'sposition is main points to be does not preview /10
outlines the main stated discussed but does what will be
points to be not name the topic. discussed.
discussed. The
author's position is
strongly and clearly
stated.

Support for Includes 3 or more Includes 3 or more Includes 2 pieces of Includes 1 or fewer
Position pieces of evidence pieces of evidence evidence (facts, pieces of evidence
(x2) (facts, statistics, (facts, statistics, statistics, examples, (facts, statistics,
examples, real-life examples, real-life real-life experiences) examples, real-life
experiences) that experiences) that that support the experiences).
/20
support the position support the position positionstatement.
statement. The statement.
writer anticipates the
reader's concerns,
biases or arguments
and has provided at
least 1 counter-
argument.
Sequencing Arguments and Arguments and A few of the Many of the
support are support are support details or support details or
provided in a provided in a fairly arguments are not arguments are not
logical order that logical order that in an expected or in an expected or /10
makes it easy and makes it logical order, logical order,
interesting to reasonably easy distracting the distracting the
follow the author's to follow the reader and making reader and making
train of thought. author's train of the essay seem a the essay
thought. little confusing. seem very
confusing.
Writing Piece is clearly Author paid Errors may be Errors make it
Mechanics written with no attention to writing present and may difficult to read
grammar, spelling, conventions; slightly take away and/or
punctuation, or Minor errors do from the clarity; yet, understand the /10
capitalization not distract from the writer’s paper.
errors. meaning. meaning can be
determined.
Closing The conclusion The conclusion is The author's There is no
Paragraph is strong and recognizable. The position is restated conclusion -
leaves the reader author's position within the closing the paper just
solidly is restated within paragraph, but not ends.
understanding the first two near the beginning. /10
the writer's sentencesof the The essay body is
position. closing paragraph not summarized.
Effective and is followed by
restatement of a summary of the
the position essay body.
statement begins
the closing
paragraph and is
followed by an
effective
summaryof the
essay body.
TOTAL SCORE /70

ASSIGNMENT: Revisit Corazon Aquino’s speech before the U.S. Congress during the joint session and
was delivered at Washington D.C. on September 18, 1986.
1. Read the transcript of her speech or you can also watch it as
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZnnvbKyNCQ[/youtube.
2. Write an ESSAY discussing the (1) importance of the text, (2) the background of the author, (3) the
context of the document, and (4) the text’s contribution to understanding Philippine history
Speech
of
Her Excellency Corazon C. Aquino
President of the Philippines
During the Joint Session of the United States Congress
Three years ago, I left America in grief to bury my husband, Ninoy Aquino. I thought I had left it also to lay to
rest his restless dream of Philippine freedom. Today, I have returned as the president of a free people.
In burying Ninoy, a whole nation honored him. By that brave and selfless act of giving honor, a nation in
shame recovered its own. A country that had lost faith in its future found it in a faithless and brazen act of
murder. So in giving, we receive, in losing we find, and out of defeat, we snatched our victory.
For the nation, Ninoy became the pleasing sacrifice that answered their prayers for freedom. For myself and
our children, Ninoy was a loving husband and father. His loss, three times in our lives, was always a deep
and painful one.
Fourteen years ago this month was the first time we lost him. A president-turned-dictator, and traitor to his
oath, suspended the Constitution and shut down the Congress that was much like this one before which I am
honored to speak. He detained my husband along with thousands of others – senators, publishers and anyone
who had spoken up for the democracy as its end drew near. But for Ninoy, a long and cruel ordeal was
reserved. The dictator already knew that Ninoy was not a body merely to be imprisoned but a spirit he must
break. For even as the dictatorship demolished one by one the institutions of democracy – the press, the
Congress, the independence of the judiciary, the protection of the Bill of Rights – Ninoy kept their spirit alive
in himself.
The government sought to break him by indignities and terror. They locked him up in a tiny, nearly airless cell
in a military camp in the north. They stripped him naked and held the threat of sudden midnight execution
over his head. Ninoy held up manfully–all of it. I barely did as well. For 43 days, the authorities would not tell
me what had happened to him. This was the first time my children and I felt we had lost him.
When that didn’t work, they put him on trial for subversion, murder and a host of other crimes before a military
commission. Ninoy challenged its authority and went on a fast. If he survived it, then, he felt, God intended
him for another fate. We had lost him again. For nothing would hold him back from his determination to see

his fast through to the end. He stopped only when it dawned on him that the government would keep his body
alive after the fast had destroyed his brain. And so, with barely any life in his body, he called off the fast on
the fortieth day. God meant him for other things, he felt. He did not know that an early death would still be his
fate, that only the timing was wrong.
At any time during his long ordeal, Ninoy could have made a separate peace with the dictatorship, as so many
of his countrymen had done. But the spirit of democracy that inheres in our race and animates this chamber
could not be allowed to die. He held out, in the loneliness of his cell and the frustration of exile, the democratic
alternative to the insatiable greed and mindless cruelty of the right and the purging holocaust of the left.
And then, we lost him, irrevocably and more painfully than in the past. The news came to us in Boston. It had
to be after the three happiest years of our lives together. But his death was my country’s resurrection in the
courage and faith by which alone they could be free again. The dictator had called him a nobody. Two million
people threw aside their passivity and escorted him to his grave. And so began the revolution that has brought
me to democracy’s most famous home, the Congress of the United States.
The task had fallen on my shoulders to continue offering the democratic alternative to our people.
Archibald Macleish had said that democracy must be defended by arms when it is attacked by arms and by
truth when it is attacked by lies. He failed to say how it shall be won.
I held fast to Ninoy’s conviction that it must be by the ways of democracy. I held out for participation in the
1984 election the dictatorship called, even if I knew it would be rigged. I was warned by the lawyers of the
opposition that I ran the grave risk of legitimizing the foregone results of elections that were clearly going to
be fraudulent. But I was not fighting for lawyers but for the people in whose intelligence I had implicit faith. By
the exercise of democracy, even in a dictatorship, they would be prepared for democracy when it came. And
then, also, it was the only way I knew by which we could measure our power even in the terms dictated by
the dictatorship.
The people vindicated me in an election shamefully marked by government thuggery and fraud. The
opposition swept the elections, garnering a clear majority of the votes, even if they ended up, thanks to a
corrupt Commission on Elections, with barely a third of the seats in parliament. Now, I knew our power.
Last year, in an excess of arrogance, the dictatorship called for its doom in a snap election. The people
obliged. With over a million signatures, they drafted me to challenge the dictatorship. And I obliged them. The
rest is the history that dramatically unfolded on your television screen and across the front pages of your
newspapers.
You saw a nation, armed with courage and integrity, stand fast by democracy against threats and corruption.
You saw women poll watchers break out in tears as armed goons crashed the polling places to steal the
ballots but, just the same, they tied themselves to the ballot boxes.
You saw a people so committed to the ways of democracy that they were prepared to give their lives for its
pale imitation. At the end of the day, before another wave of fraud could distort the results, I announced the
people’s victory.

The distinguished co-chairman of the United States observer team in his report to your President described
that victory:
“I was witness to an extraordinary manifestation of democracy on the part of the Filipino people. The ultimate
result was the election of Mrs. Corazon C. Aquino as President and Mr. Salvador Laurel as Vice-President of
the Philippines.”
Many of you here today played a part in changing the policy of your country towards us. We, Filipinos, thank
each of you for what you did: for, balancing America’s strategic interest against human concerns, illuminates
the American vision of the world.
When a subservient parliament announced my opponent’s victory, the people turned out in the streets and
proclaimed me President. And true to their word, when a handful of military leaders declared themselves
against the dictatorship, the people rallied to their protection. Surely, the people take care of their own. It is
on that faith and the obligation it entails, that I assumed the presidency.
As I came to power peacefully, so shall I keep it. That is my contract with my people and my commitment to
God. He had willed that the blood drawn with the lash shall not, in my country, be paid by blood drawn by the
sword but by the tearful joy of reconciliation.
We have swept away absolute power by a limited revolution that respected the life and freedom of every
Filipino. Now, we are restoring full constitutional government. Again, as we restored democracy by the ways
of democracy, so are we completing the constitutional structures of our new democracy under a constitution
that already gives full respect to the Bill of Rights. A jealously independent Constitutional Commission is
completing its draft which will be submitted later this year to a popular referendum. When it is approved, there
will be congressional elections. So within about a year from a peaceful but national upheaval that overturned
a dictatorship, we shall have returned to full constitutional government. Given the polarization and breakdown
we inherited, this is no small achievement.
My predecessor set aside democracy to save it from a communist insurgency that numbered less than 500.
Unhampered by respect for human rights, he went at it hammer and tongs. By the time he fled, that insurgency
had grown to more than 16,000. I think there is a lesson here to be learned about trying to stifle a thing with
the means by which it grows.
I don’t think anybody, in or outside our country, concerned for a democratic and open Philippines, doubts
what must be done. Through political initiatives and local reintegration programs, we must seek to bring the
insurgents down from the hills and, by economic progress and justice, show them that for which the best
intentioned among them fight.
As President, I will not betray the cause of peace by which I came to power. Yet equally, and again no friend
of Filipino democracy will challenge this, I will not stand by and allow an insurgent leadership to spurn our
offer of peace and kill our young soldiers, and threaten our new freedom.
Yet, I must explore the path of peace to the utmost for at its end, whatever disappointment I meet there, is
the moral basis for laying down the olive branch of peace and taking up the sword of war. Still, should it come

to that, I will not waver from the course laid down by your great liberator: “With malice towards none, with
charity for all, with firmness in the rights as God gives us to see the rights, let us finish the work we are in, to
bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and for his
orphans, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all
nations.”
Like Lincoln, I understand that force may be necessary before mercy. Like Lincoln, I don’t relish it. Yet, I will
do whatever it takes to defend the integrity and freedom of my country.
Finally, may I turn to that other slavery: our $26 billion foreign debt. I have said that we shall honor it. Yet
must the means by which we shall be able to do so be kept from us? Many conditions imposed on the previous
government that stole this debt continue to be imposed on us who never benefited from it. And no assistance
or liberality commensurate with the calamity that was visited on us has been extended. Yet ours must have
been the cheapest revolution ever. With little help from others, we Filipinos fulfilled the first and most difficult
conditions of the debt negotiation the full restoration of democracy and responsible government. Elsewhere,
and in other times of more stringent world economic conditions, Marshall plans and their like were felt to be
necessary companions of returning democracy.
When I met with President Reagan yesterday, we began an important dialogue about cooperation and the
strengthening of the friendship between our two countries. That meeting was both a confirmation and a new
beginning and should lead to positive results in all areas of common concern.
Today, we face the aspirations of a people who had known so much poverty and massive unemployment for
the past 14 years and yet offered their lives for the abstraction of democracy. Wherever I went in the
campaign, slum area or impoverished village, they came to me with one cry: democracy! Not food, although
they clearly needed it, but democracy. Not work, although they surely wanted it, but democracy. Not money,
for they gave what little they had to my campaign. They didn’t expect me to work a miracle that would instantly
put food into their mouths, clothes on their back, education in their children, and work that will put dignity in
their lives. But I feel the pressing obligation to respond quickly as the leader of a people so deserving of all
these things.
We face a communist insurgency that feeds on economic deterioration, even as we carry a great share of the
free world defenses in the Pacific. These are only two of the many burdens my people carry even as they try
to build a worthy and enduring house for their new democracy, that may serve as well as a redoubt for freedom
in Asia. Yet, no sooner is one stone laid than two are taken away. Half our export earnings, $2 billion out of
$4 billion, which was all we could earn in the restrictive markets of the world, went to pay just the interest on
a debt whose benefit the Filipino people never received.
Still, we fought for honor, and, if only for honor, we shall pay. And yet, should we have to wring the payments
from the sweat of our men’s faces and sink all the wealth piled up by the bondsman’s two hundred fifty years
of unrequited toil?
Yet to all Americans, as the leader of a proud and free people, I address this question: has there been a
greater test of national commitment to the ideals you hold dear than that my people have gone through? You

have spent many lives and much treasure to bring freedom to many lands that were reluctant to receive it.
And here you have a people who won it by themselves and need only the help to preserve it.
Three years ago, I said thank you, America, for the haven from oppression, and the home you gave Ninoy,
myself and our children, and for the three happiest years of our lives together. Today, I say, join us, America,
as we build a new home for democracy, another haven for the oppressed, so it may stand as a shining
testament of our two nation’s commitment to freedom.
Source: https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1986/09/18/speech-of-president-corazon-aquino-during-the-joint-session-of-the-u-s-
congress-september-18-1986/
NAME: _____________________________ SCORE: ________/50

SCHEDULE and SECTION: _____________ DATE: __________
CRITERIA 10 7 5 3 Total
Ideas and Strong Good Elaboration only Lacks /20

Content (x2) elaboration on elaboration on present on some elaboration or
all ideas with most ideas with ideas with supporting
abundant most supporting adequate details
supporting detail detail present supporting detail
Content is
present present
Content is vague and
Content is interesting and Content is unoriginal
engaging and original vague and
original original
Paragraph Every paragraph Writing is One or two No paragraphs /10

Development has a topic presented in paragraph or the
(stated or paragraphs division of
inferred) paragraphs
does not help
Organization Excellent Effort to Minimal No organization /10

organization organize is organization
apparent
Mechanics Written work has Written work is Written work has Written work has /10
no errors in word relatively free of several errors serious and
selection and errors in word persistent errors
in word selection
use, sentence selection and in word selection
and use,
structure, use, sentence and use,
sentence
spelling, structure, sentence
structure,
punctuation, and spelling, structure,
spelling,
capitalization spelling,

punctuation, and punctuation, and punctuation, and
capitalization capitalization capitalization
Total /50
LINK IT!
Sustainable Development Goal 17 (SDG17) aims to strengthen the means of implementation and
revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.
The Laguna Copperplate inscription proves that prior to the coming of the colonizers, the Philippines
was already a society with international trading networks. This is only compounded by the mention of Medang
Kingdom in Indonesia, which implies that pre-Spanish Philippines already had a strong cultural and trade
links with other empires across Southeast Asia
Write an essay explaining the significance of enhancing global partnership to achieve sustainable
development (30 points)
15 10 5 1

needed. Some
factual errors
15 10 5 1

follow. around

Unit
4 “ONE PAST BUT MANY HISTORIES”: CONTROVERSIES AND CONFLICTING

VIEWS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY
LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
1. Demonstrate the ability to formulate arguments in favor or against a particular issue
using primary sources.
2. Use conflicting evidence in a paper or in other learning activities to achieve historical accuracy
3. Demonstrate the ability to evaluate and explain multiple, complex sources or ideas when
explaining a thesis statement or arguments
4. Give ways on how efforts to protect and safeguard the region's cultural and natural
heritage (SDG 10)
In this Unit, four issues with different conflicting views and interpretations will be discussed.
Interpretations vary according to who reads the primary source, when it was read, and how it was read. As
history students, you must be trained and equipped to recognize different types of interpretations, and how
they differ from each other.
Historians use facts gathered from primary sources and then shape them so that their audience can
understand and make sense of them. This process is called as interpretation. In order to study
interpretations students need to be able to recognise different types of interpretations, know why they might
differ, and how to critically evaluate them. Moreover, it is also important that one should be able to grasp
the idea of history as a construct otherwise he will be unable to make sense of conflicting and competing
accounts of the past which present themselves in their daily lives.
PRETEST: Write T if the statement is correct and F in incorrect.
_____1. The first Christian Mass celebrated on the Philippine soil was made in an island which Pigafetta
called as “Mazaua.”
_____2.There is only one account of the First Catholic Mass in the Philippines.
_____3.The Cry of Pugadlawin marked the end of Bonifacio’s leadership on the KKK
_____4.The execution of Gomburza was a blunder on the part of the Spanish government.
_____5.The execution of GOMBURZA inspired Filipino patriots to call for reforms and eventually
independence.
_____6.Using primary and secondary sources, there were five places identified as the site of the Cry of the
Rebellion.
_____7.Cry of the rebellion happened in present-day Quezon City.
_____8. The document of the retraction of Jose Rizal is being hotly debated as to its authenticity.
_____9. Rizal retracted while he was in Dapitan.
_____10. The Cry of Pugadlawin was the beginning of the Philippine Revolution against the Spaniards.

LESSON 1: THE SITE OF FIRST MASS: A RE-EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCE
Butuan has long been believed as the site of the first Mass. This has been the case for three
centuries, culminating in the erection of a monument in 1872 near Agusan River, which commemorates the
expedition’s arrival and celebration of Mass on April 8, 1521. The Butuan claim has been based on a rather
elementary reading of primary sources from the event. It must be noted that there are only two primary
sources that historians refer to in identifying the site of the first Mass. One is the log kept by Francisco Albo,
a pilot of one of Magellan’s ship, Trinidad. The other and the more complete was the account by Antonio
Pigafetta, First Voyage Around the world. Pigafetta like Albo, was a member of the Magellan expedition and
an eyewitness of the events, particularly, of the first Mass.
READ the two articles.

1. Magellan never went to Butuan by Yen Makabenta
2. Butuan or Limasawa: The Site of the First Mass I the Philippines: A Re-
examination of the Evidence
(https://journals.ateneo.edu/ojs/index.php/budhi/article/view/582/579)
MAGELLAN NEVER WENT TO BUTUAN

Yen Makabenta
https://www.manilatimes.net/2019/01/31/opinion/columnists/topanalysis/magellan-never-went-to-
butuan/504604/
IN the book, The Great Island, Fr. Miguel Bernad, S.J., also included a long scholarly essay on the
centuries-old controversy regarding the site of the first mass celebrated in the Philippine islands, which has
exercised many Filipinos and scholars, including those of our present generation.
According to Antonio Pigafetta, the Italian chronicler of the Magellan expedition, the mass was held on
Easter Sunday, on an island called “Mazaua.” Two native chieftains were in attendance, the rajah of
Mazaua, and the rajah of Butuan.
After the mass, the party went up a little hill and planted a wooden cross upon its summit.”
The subject of controversy is the identity of Mazaua. There are two conflicting claims as to its identity. One
school of thought points to the small island south of Leyte, which on the map is called Limasawa. The other
school rejects that claim and points instead to the beach called ‘ao,’ at the mouth of the Agusan River in
northern Mindanao, near the village (now the city) of Butuan.
In his article, Fr. Bernad reexamines and assesses the evidence for these two claims. He gives each claim
its due and a hearing of whatever evidence are in its favor.
I should disclose here that I am not the first to take up this subject in the Manila Times. Just recently, a
colleague, Michael ‘Xiao’ Chua, in his column of Jan. 20, 2019 reported that a panel has been created to
review the Butuan claim to have been the site of the first mass.uck takes her brood bagel shopping

01:01/01:18
The Butuan claim
Fr. Bernad’s presentation of the historical records and his assessment of the arguments speak eloquently
for itself. He backs up each finding with generous citations in his notes and a bibliography.
I was frankly surprised by Fr. Bernad‘s report that the Butuan claim has been the more ascendant and
persistent, reigning over public opinion for some three centuries, the 17th, the 18th and the 19th century.
On the strength of this tradition, a monument was erected in 1872 at the mouth of the Agusan River. The
monument was erected apparently at the instigation of the parish priest of Butuan, who at the time was a
Spanish friar of the Order of Augustinian Recollects. The date given for the first Mass was April 8, 1521, an
obvious error that may have been due to an anachronistic attempt to translate the original date in the
Gregorian calendar.
The monument is a testimonial to the Butuan tradition that remained vigorous until the end of the 19th
century, which held that Magellan and his expedition landed in Butuan, and celebrated there the first mass
on Philippine soil.
Because the Butuan tradition had already been established by the middle of the 17h century, it was
accepted without question by two Jesuit historians who got misled by their facts.
On historian was Fr. Francisco Colin, S.J. (1592-1660), whose Labor Evangelica was first published in
Madrid in 1663, three years after his death. He provided in the book an account of Magellan’s arrival and
the first mass.
The other Jesuit writer of the mid-17th century was Francisco Combes S.J. (1620-1665), who had lived and
worked as a missionary in the Philippines. His Historia de Mindanao y Jolo was printed in Madrid in 1667,
four years after Colin’s work was published.
Colin and Combes gave different accounts of the route taken by Magellan. But they asserted that Magellan
landed in Butuan and there planted the cross in a solemn ceremony.
Both Colin and Combes pictured Magellan as visiting both Butuan and Limasawa.
Both Colin and Combes agree that it was from Limasawa and with the help of Limasawa’s chieftain that the
Magellan expedition went to Cebu. Magellan arrived in Cebu on April 7, 1521, one week after the first mass.
In the 19th century, the Butuan tradition was taken for granted and it is mentioned by writer after writer,
each copying from the previous one, and being in turn copied by those who came after.
The accumulated errors of three centuries are found in the work of Dominican friar, Valentin Morales y
Marin, whose two-volume treatise on the friars was published in Santo Tomas in Manila in 1901.
As late as the 1920s, the Philippine history textbook used at the Ateneo de Manila used the Butuan
tradition.
Opinion shifts to Limasawa

How did the shift in opinion from Butuan to Limasawa come about?
Blame was at first laid on the Americans Emma Blair and James Alexander Robertson, who authored the
55-volume collection of documents on the Philippines Island that was published in Cleveland from 1903 to
1909.
The cause of the shift in opinion was the publication in 1894 of Pigafetta’s account, as contained in the
Ambrosian Codex.
Pigafetta was the chronicler of the Magellan expedition in 1521 that brought Europeans for the first time to
the archipelago.

Pigafetta’s narrative was reproduced with English translation, notes, bibliography and index in Blair and
Robertson’s The Philippine Islands, volumes 33 and 34.
Following the publication of the Pigafetta text in 1894, two Philippine scholars called attention to the fact
that the Butuan tradition had been a mistake. One of the scholars was Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera. The
other was the Spanish Jesuit missionary, Pablo Pastells, S.J.
Fr. Pastells prepared a new edition of Fr Colin’s Labor Evangelica, which was published in 1902, and which
contained a correction about the first mass.
Pastells‘ shift in opinion from Butuan to Limasawa was due to a rediscovery and a more attentive study of
the primary sources on the subject:
Pigafetta’s account and Francisco Albo’s log of the expedition. Pigafetta and Albo were eyewitnesses.
Pastells wrote:
“Magellan did not go to Butuan. Rather, from the island of Limasawa, he proceeded directly to Cebu.”
Among the Philippine scholars of the early 20th century who rejected the Butuan tradition in favor of
Limasawa was Jayme de Veyra.
Since then, the Limasawa opinion has been generally accepted, although there remains a small but
vigorous group determined to push the Butuan claim.
Fr. Bernad summarized the evidence for Limasawa as follows:

1. The evidence from Albo’s logbook
2. The evidence of Pigafetta
a. Pigafetta’s testimony regarding the route
b. The evidence of Pigafetta’s maps
c. The two native kings
d. The seven days at ‘Mazaua’
3. Confirmatory evidence from the Legazpi expedition.
Consequently, the Butuan claim as the site of the first Mass has no leg to stand on.
Ferdinand Magellan never visited Butuan.
The Resil Mojares panel has a huge mountain to scale in Fr. Bernad’s scholarly reexamination and
analysis.

TASK: After reading the two articles, write an argumentative essay about the First Mass in the
Philippines. An argumentative essay is a type of essay that presents arguments about both sides
of an issue. It could be that both sides are presented equally balanced, or it could be that one
side is presented more forcefully than the other. (60 points)
Name: _____________________________ Score: ______/60

Schedule and Section: ________________ Date: __________
Criteria 10 7 5 3 Score
Introduction Well-developed Introductory Introduction states Thesis and/or
Background/hi introductory paragraph contains the thesis but does problem is vague or /10
storyDefine paragraph contains some background not adequately unclear. Background
the problem detailed background , information and explain the details are a
Thesis a clear explanation or states theproblem, background of the seemingly random
Statement definition of the but does not explain problem. The collection of
problem, and a thesis using details. States problem is stated, information, unclear,
statement the thesis of the but lacks detail. or not relatedto the
paper. topic.
Conclusion Conclusion
summarizes the Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion does
main topics summarizes main summarizes main not adequately
without repeating topics. Some topics,but is repetitive. summarize the
previous suggestions for No suggestions for main points. No
sentences; writer’s change are change and/or suggestions for
opinions and evident. opinions are change or opinions
suggestions for included. are included.
change are logical
and well thought
out.
MAIN POINTS Three or more main Three or more main Three or more main Less than three /20
Body points are well points are present points, but all lack main points,with
Paragraphs developed with but may lack detail development. poor
Refutation supporting details. and development in development of
(x2) one or two. ideas.
Refutation Refutation Refutation
paragraph(s) paragraph(s) paragraph(s) Refutation missing or
acknowledges the acknowledges the missing and/or vague.
opposing view and opposing view but vague
summarizes their main doesn’t summarize
points. points.
Logical, compelling Overall, the Progression of ideas in Arrangement of /10
progression of paper is logically essay essay is unclear and
ideas in essay;clear developed. is awkward, yet illogical. The writing
structure which Progression of moves the reader lacks a clear sense
ORGANIZATION enhances ideas in essay through the text of direction. Ideas,
and showcases the makes sense without too much details or events
central idea or theme and moves the confusion. The writer seem strung
and moves the reader easily sometimes lunges together in a loose
reader throughthe through the text. ahead too quickly or or random fashion;
text. Organization spends too much time there is no

flows so smoothly Strong on details that do not identifiable internal
the reader transitions exist matter. Transitions structure and
hardly thinks about it. throughoutand appear sporadically, readers have trouble
Effective, mature, add to the but not equally following the writer’s
graceful transitions essay’s throughout the line of thought. Few,
exist throughout the coherence ssay. forced transitions in
essay. the essay or no
transitions are present.
Source material is Source material is Source Lacks sources and/or

smoothly integrated used. material is sources arenot /10
WORKS CITED into the text. All All sources are used, but accurately
sources are accurately integration documented.
accurately documented,but a may be Format is incorrect for
documented in the few are not in the awkward. all sources.
desired format both desired format. Some All sources are
in the text and on sources lack accurately
the Works Cited page. credibility. documented, but
many are not in the
desired format or lack
credibility.
Sentence Sentence structure is Work contains Work contains /10
MECHANICS structure is generally correct. structural multiple incorrect
Sentence correct. Some awkward weaknesses sentence
Structure Punctuation and sentences do and structures.
Punctuation capitalization are appear. There are grammatical There are four or
& correct. one or two errors in errors. more errors in
Capitalization punctuation and/or There are three or four punctuation and/or
capitalization. errors in capitalization.
punctuation and/or
capitalization.
TOTAL /60

LESSON 2: CAVITE MUTINY
On January 20, 1872,the Cavite Mutiny, an uprising of military personnel at the Spanish arsenal in
Cavite, took place. This event subsequently led to the execution of the Filipino priests Mariano Gomez,
Jose Burgos and Jacinto Zamora, otherwise known as GOMBURZA. The Cavite Mutiny is a major factor in
the awakening of Filipino nationalism at that time.
THE TWO FACES OF THE 1872 CAVITE MUTINY

By Chris Antonette Piedad-Pugay
(https://nhcp.gov.ph/the-two-faces-of-the-1872-cavite-mutiny/)
The 12th of June of every year since 1898 is a very important event for all the Filipinos. In this
particular day, the entire Filipino nation as well as Filipino communities all over the world gathers to celebrate
the Philippines’ Independence Day. 1898 came to be a very significant year for all of us— it is as equally
important as 1896—the year when the Philippine Revolution broke out owing to the Filipinos’ desire to be free
from the abuses of the Spanish colonial regime. But we should be reminded that another year is as historic
as the two—1872.
Two major events happened in 1872, first was the 1872 Cavite Mutiny and the other was the martyrdom
of the three martyr priests in the persons of Fathers Mariano Gomes, Jose Burgos and Jacinto Zamora
(GOMBURZA). However, not all of us knew that there were different accounts in reference to the said
event. All Filipinos must know the different sides of the story—since this event led to another tragic yet
meaningful part of our history—the execution of GOMBURZA which in effect a major factor in the awakening
of nationalism among the Filipinos.
1872 Cavite Mutiny: Spanish Perspective
Jose Montero y Vidal, a prolific Spanish historian documented the event and
highlighted it as an attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in Mutiny – is a revolt
the Philippines. Meanwhile, Gov. Gen. Rafael Izquierdo’s official report magnified among a group of
the event and made use of it to implicate the native clergy, which was then active people to oppose,
in the call for secularization. The two accounts complimented and corroborated change, or overthrow
with one other, only that the general’s report was more spiteful. Initially, both an organization to
Montero and Izquierdo scored out that the abolition of privileges enjoyed by the which they were
workers of Cavite arsenal such as non-payment of tributes and exemption from previously loyal. The
force labor were the main reasons of the “revolution” as how they called it, however, term is commonly used
other causes were enumerated by them including the Spanish Revolution which for a rebellion against
overthrew the secular throne, dirty propagandas proliferated by unrestrained press, any force.
democratic, liberal and epublican books and pamphlets reaching the Philippines,
and most importantly, the presence of the native clergy who out of animosity
against the Spanish friars, “conspired and supported” the rebels and enemies of Spain. In particular,
Izquierdo blamed the unruly Spanish Press for “stockpiling” malicious propagandas grasped by the
Filipinos. He reported to the King of Spain that the “rebels” wanted to overthrow the Spanish government to
install a new “hari” in the likes of Fathers Burgos and Zamora. The general even added that the native clergy

enticed other participants by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight will not fail because God is
with them coupled with handsome promises of rewards such as employment, wealth, and ranks in the
army. Izquierdo, in his report lambasted the Indios as gullible and possessed an innate propensity for
stealing.
The two Spaniards deemed that the event of 1872 was planned earlier and was thought of it as a big
conspiracy among educated leaders, mestizos, abogadillos or native lawyers, residents of Manila and Cavite
and the native clergy. They insinuated that the conspirators of Manila and Cavite planned to liquidate high-
ranking Spanish officers to be followed by the massacre of the friars. The alleged pre-concerted signal among
the conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the firing of rockets from the walls of Intramuros.
According to the accounts of the two, on 20 January 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast of
the Virgin of Loreto, unfortunately participants to the feast celebrated the occasion with the usual fireworks
displays. Allegedly, those in Cavite mistook the fireworks as the sign for the attack, and just like what was
agreed upon, the 200-men contingent headed by Sergeant Lamadrid launched an attack targeting Spanish
officers at sight and seized the arsenal.
When the news reached the iron-fisted Gov. Izquierdo, he readily ordered the reinforcement of the
Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the revolt. The “revolution” was easily crushed when the expected
reinforcement from Manila did not come ashore. Major instigators including Sergeant Lamadrid were killed
in the skirmish, while the GOMBURZA were tried by a court-martial and were sentenced to die by
strangulation. Patriots like Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Antonio Ma. Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa and other
abogadillos were suspended by the Audencia (High Court) from the practice of law, arrested and were
sentenced with life imprisonment at the Marianas Island. Furthermore, Gov. Izquierdo dissolved the native
regiments of artillery and ordered the creation of artillery force to be composed exclusively of the
Peninsulares.
On 17 February 1872 in an attempt of the Spanish government and Frailocracia to instill fear among the
Filipinos so that they may never commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA were executed. This event
was tragic but served as one of the moving forces that shaped Filipino nationalism.
A Response to Injustice: The Filipino Version of the Incident
Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher, wrote the Filipino version
of the bloody incident in Cavite. In his point of view, the incident was a mere mutiny by the native Filipino
soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal who turned out to be dissatisfied with the abolition of their
privileges. Indirectly, Tavera blamed Gov. Izquierdo’s cold-blooded policies such as the abolition of privileges
of the workers and native army members of the arsenal and the prohibition of the founding of school of arts
and trades for the Filipinos, which the general believed as a cover-up for the organization of a political club.
On 20 January 1872, about 200 men comprised of soldiers, laborers of the arsenal, and residents of
Cavite headed by Sergeant Lamadrid rose in arms and assassinated the commanding officer and Spanish
officers in sight. The insurgents were expecting support from the bulk of the army unfortunately, that didn’t
happen. The news about the mutiny reached authorities in Manila and Gen. Izquierdo immediately ordered
the reinforcement of Spanish troops in Cavite. After two days, the mutiny was officially declared subdued.
Tavera believed that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a powerful lever by
magnifying it as a full-blown conspiracy involving not only the native army but also included residents of Cavite
and Manila, and more importantly the native clergy to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines. It
is noteworthy that during the time, the Central Government in Madrid announced its intention to deprive the

friars of all the powers of intervention in matters of civil government and the direction and management of
educational institutions. This turnout of events was believed by Tavera, prompted the friars to do something
drastic in their dire sedire to maintain power in the Philippines.
Meanwhile, in the intention of installing reforms, the Central Government of Spain welcomed an
educational decree authored by Segismundo Moret promoted the fusion of sectarian schools run by the friars
into a school called Philippine Institute. The decree proposed to improve the standard of education in the
Philippines by requiring teaching positions in such schools to be filled by competitive examinations. This
improvement was warmly received by most Filipinos in spite of the native clergy’s zest for secularization.
The friars, fearing that their influence in the Philippines would be a thing of the past, took advantage of
the incident and presented it to the Spanish Government as a vast conspiracy organized throughout the
archipelago with the object of destroying Spanish sovereignty. Tavera sadly confirmed that the Madrid
government came to believe that the scheme was true without any attempt to investigate the real facts or
extent of the alleged “revolution” reported by Izquierdo and the friars.
Convicted educated men who participated in the mutiny were sentenced life imprisonment while members
of the native clergy headed by the GOMBURZA were tried and executed by garrote. This episode leads to
the awakening of nationalism and eventually to the outbreak of Philippine Revolution of 1896. The French
writer Edmund Plauchut’s account complimented Tavera’s account by confirming that the event happened
due to discontentment of the arsenal workers and soldiers in Cavite fort. The Frenchman, however, dwelt
more on the execution of the three martyr priests which he actually witnessed.
Unraveling the Truth
Considering the four accounts of the 1872 Mutiny, there were some basic facts that remained to be
unvarying: First, there was dissatisfaction among the workers of the arsenal as well as the members of the
native army after their privileges were drawn back by Gen. Izquierdo; Second, Gen. Izquierdo introduced rigid
and strict policies that made the Filipinos move and turn away from Spanish government out of disgust; Third,
the Central Government failed to conduct an investigation on what truly transpired but relied on reports of
Izquierdo and the friars and the opinion of the public; Fourth, the happy days of the friars were already
numbered in 1872 when the Central Government in Spain decided to deprive them of the power to intervene
in government affairs as well as in the direction and management of schools prompting them to commit frantic
moves to extend their stay and power; Fifth, the Filipino clergy members actively participated in the
secularization movement in order to allow Filipino priests to take hold of the parishes in the country making
them prey to the rage of the friars; Sixth, Filipinos during the time were active participants, and responded to
what they deemed as injustices; and Lastly, the execution of GOMBURZA was a blunder on the part of the
Spanish government, for the action severed the ill-feelings of the Filipinos and the event inspired Filipino
patriots to call for reforms and eventually independence. There may be different versions of the event, but
one thing is certain, the 1872 Cavite Mutiny paved way for a momentous 1898.
The road to independence was rough and tough to toddle, many patriots named and unnamed shed
their bloods to attain reforms and achieve independence. 12 June 1898 may be a glorious event for us, but
we should not forget that before we came across to victory, our forefathers suffered enough. As we enjoy
our freedom, may we be more historically aware of our past to have a better future ahead of us. And just like
what Elias said in Noli me Tangere, may we “not forget those who fell during the night.”

TASK1: Compare and Contrast the two conflicting perspectives on the Cavite Mutiny.
SPANISH PERSPECTIVES FILIPINO PERSPECTIVE
TASK 2. “The Historical If”

1. Write a 300 word essay entitled “What if Cavite mutiny did not happen.” In this essay you
should be able to support your argument.
Name of Student: _____________________________ Score: ________/30

Schedule and Section: ________________________ Date: ____________
Criteria 10 7 5 3
Organization Strong and Organized Some organization ; No organization;

organized beginning/middle/en attempt at a lack
beginning/middle/en d beginning/middle/en beginning/middle/en
d d d
Understandin Writing shows Writing shows a Writing shows Writing shows little
g strong clear understanding adequate understanding of
understanding of of the topic/activity understanding of the topic/activity
the topic/activity the topic/activity
Mechanics Virtually no spelling, Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
punctuation or punctuation or spelling, punctuation and
capitalization errors capitalization errors punctuation or capitalization errors
capitalization errors

LESSON 3: RETRACTION OF RIZAL
For decades, the authenticity of Jose Rizal’s retraction documents have raised Retraction means a
issues, scepticism, and heated debates among those who seek to know the truth statement saying
regarding this controversy. However, the lack of evidence and different statements that something you
by significant people involved have only contributed to the complications and said or wrote at an
uncertainty which envelope this fiery argument. "I retract with all my heart whatever earlier time is not
in my words, writings, publications and conduct have been contrary to my character true or correct
as a son of the Catholic Church.", this was the statement in the document which
made the historians believed that Rizal had retracted.
Raging Controversy.
Several historians report that Rizal retracted his anti-Catholic ideas through this document However,
there are doubts of its authenticity given that there is no certificate of Rizal's Catholic marriage to Josephine
Bracken. Also there is an allegation that the retraction document was a forgery. Ricardo Pascual concluded
that the retraction document, said to have been discovered in 1935, was not in Rizal's handwriting.
Senator Rafael Palma, a former President of the University of the Philippines and a prominent Mason,
argued that a retraction is not in keeping with Rizal's character and mature beliefs. He called the retraction
story a "pious fraud." Others who deny the retraction are Frank Laubach, a Protestant minister; Austin
Coates, a British writer; and Ricardo Manapat, director of the National Archives. Those who affirm the
authenticity of Rizal's retraction are prominent Philippine historians such as: Nick Joaquin, Nicolas
Zafra of UP León María Guerrero III, Gregorio Zaide, Guillermo Gómez Rivera, Ambeth Ocampo, John
Schumacher, Antonio Molina, Paul Dumol and Austin Craig They take the retraction document as authentic,
having been judged as such by a foremost expert on the writings of Rizal, Teodoro Kalaw (a 33rd degree
Mason) and "handwriting experts...known and recognized in our courts of justice", H. Otley Beyer and Dr.
José I. Del Rosario, both of UP.
Historians also refer to 11 eyewitnesses when Rizal wrote his retraction, signed a Catholic
prayer book, and recited Catholic prayers, and the multitude who saw him kiss the crucifix before
his execution. A great grandnephew of Rizal, Fr. Marciano Guzman, cites that Rizal's
4confessions were certified by 5 eyewitnesses, 10 qualified witnesses, 7 newspapers, and 12
historians and writers including Aglipayan bishops, Masons and anti-clericals. One witness was
the head of the Spanish Supreme Court at the time of his notarized declaration and was highly
esteemed by Rizal for his integrity. Because of what he sees as the strength these direct
evidence have in the light of the historical method, in contrast with merely circumstantial
evidence, UP professor emeritus of history Nicolas Zafra called the retraction "a plain unadorned
fact of history." Guzmán attributes the denial of retraction to "the blatant disbelief and
stubbornness" of some Masons.

Supporters see in the retraction Rizal's "moral courage...to recognize his
mistakes," his reversion to the "true faith", and thus his "unfading glory, "and a return to the
"ideals of his fathers" which "did not diminish his stature as a great patriot; on the contrary, it
increased that stature to greatness." On the other hand, Senator Jose Diokno stated, "Surely
whether Rizal died as a Catholic or an apostate adds or detracts nothing from his greatness as a
Filipino... Catholic or Mason, Rizal is still Rizal - the hero who courted death 'to prove to those
who deny our patriotism that we know how to die for our duty and our beliefs'."
THE RIZAL RETRACTION AND OTHER CASES

by Peter Jaynul V. Uckung
September 19, 2012
The flow of history is as inexorable as the tidal flow of an angry ocean. But ever, so often in
our collective recollection, it is remembered that sometimes the skillful use of forgery can redirect
the flow of history itself.
In the Philippines today, forgery is usually resorted to redirect the flow of money from the
rightful beneficiary to the unworthy pockets of invisible people. That money is usually the target of
forgery is known and practiced all over the world, but forgery in the hands of the wily, has power
to effect a redirection of events and undoing of history. It has the power to obscure or belie an
occurrence or create an event that did not actually transpire. It also has the power to enslave and
destroy.
In October 1600, the Muslim Ottoman Army and a Christian army, led by Austrians, with
Hungarian, French, Maltese and German troops were battling it out for territory called Kanizsa.
The Ottoman army was outgunned and outmanned, but the Ottoman commander, Tiryaki Hasan
Pasha was a clever man. He knew that the Hungarians were not too happy to be allied with the
Austrians. So he sent fake letters, designed them to be captured by the Austrians. The letters
contained Hungarian alliance with Ottoman forces. The Austrian upon reading the fake letters
signed by a reliable source (obviously forged) decided to kill all Hungarian soldiers. The
Hungarians revolted and the Christian army disintegrated from within. Thus, did the Ottomans
won the battle, by issuing forged communication.
During World War II, the British, to protect the secrecy of the Allied plan to invade Sicily in
1943, launched operation Mincemeat. This was a deception campaign to mislead German
Intelligence about the real target of the start of the Allied Invasion of Europe. A series of
seemingly genuine secret documents, with forged signatures, were attached to a British corpse
dressed in military uniforms. It was left to float somewhere in a beach in Spain, where plenty of
German agents were sure to get hold of it.
The body with the fake documents was found eventually and its documents seen by
German agents. The documents identified Sardinia and Corsica as the targets of the Allied
invasion. The Germans believed it, and was caught with their pants down when allied forces hit

the beaches of the real target, which was Sicily.
This kind of deception was also used by the British against the Germans in North Africa. They
placed a map of British minefields, then attached them to a corpse. The minefields were non-
existent but the Germans saw the map and considered it true. Thus, they rerouted their tanks to
areas with soft sand where they bogged down.
In 1944, a Japanese sea plane crashed near Cebu. According to Japanese military officials
who were captured, and later released, they were accompanying Gen. Koga, Commander in
Chief of the Japanese Combined Fleet. Gen. Koga died in the crash. A little later, Filipino
fisherman recovered some Japanese documents. They delivered the documents to US
Intelligence. The documents revealed that Leyte was lightly defended. As a result, the Americans
shifted their invasion target to Leyte instead of Cotabato Bay in Mindanao.
On October 17, 1944 the invasion of Leyte went underway. Leyte was lightly defended as the
Koga papers have indicated. But it was during the invasion of Leyte when the Japanese navy
launched their last offensive strike against the US fleet, with the objective of obliterating it once
and for all. They nearly succeeded. After this near-tragic event, the Koga papers were considered
by some military strategists as spurious and could have been manufactured by the Japanese to
mislead the American navy into thinking that Leyte was a defenceless island. That Leyte was a
trap. And the Americans nearly fell into it.
In recent memory, there was an incident in which the forging of documents served to negate
the existence of an independent Philippines.
In 1901, the Americans managed to capture a Filipino messenger, Cecilio Segismundo who
carried with him documents from Aguinaldo. The American then faked some documents complete
with forged signature, telling Aguinaldo that some Filipino officers were sending him guerrillas
with American prisoners. With the help of a Spanish traitor, Lazaro Segovia, the Americans
assembled a company of pro-American Filipino soldiers, the Macabebe scouts. These were the
soldiers who penetrated the camp of Aguinaldo, disguised as soldiers of the Philippine Republic.
They managed to capture Aguinaldo. With the president captured, his generals began to
surrender, and the Republic began to fall.
The document of the retraction of Jose Rizal, too, is being hotly debated as to its
authenticity.
It was supposed to have been signed by Jose Rizal moments before his death. There were
many witnesses, most of them Jesuits. The document only surfaced for public viewing on May 13,
1935. It was found by Fr. Manuel A. Gracia at the Catholic hierarchy’s archive in Manila. But the
original document was never shown to the public, only reproductions of it. However, Fr. Pio Pi, a
Spanish Jesuit, reported that as early as 1907, the retraction of Rizal was copied verbatim and
published in Spain, and reprinted in Manila. Fr. Gracia, who found the original document, also
copied it verbatim.

In both reproductions, there were conflicting versions of the text. Add to this the date of the
signing was very clear in the original Spanish document which Rizal supposedly signed. The date
was “December 29, 1890.” Later, another supposedly original document surfaced, it bears the
date “December 29, 189C”. The number “0” was evidently altered to make it look like a letter C.
Then still later, another supposedly original version came up. It has the date “December 29,
1896”. This time, the “0” became a “6”.
So which is which?
Those who strongly believed the faking of the Rizal retraction document, reported that the
forger of Rizal’s signature was Roman Roque, the man who also forged the signature of Urbano
Lacuna, which was used to capture Aguinaldo. The mastermind, they say, in both Lacuna’s and
Rizal’s signature forging was Lazaro Segovia. They were approached by Spanish friars during the
final day of the Filipino-American war to forge Rizal’s signature.
This story was revealed by Antonio K. Abad, who heard the tale from Roman Roque himself,
them being neighbours.To this day, the retraction issue is still raging like a wild fire in the forest of
the night. Others would like to believe that the purported retraction of Rizal was invented by the
friars to deflect the heroism of Rizal which was centered on the friar abuses. Incidentally, Fr. Pio
Pi, who copied verbatim Rizal’s retraction, also figured prominently during the revolution. It was
him, Andres Bonifacio reported, who had intimated to Aguinaldo the cessation of agitation in
exchange of pardon.
There are also not a few people who believe that the autobiography of Josephine
Bracken, written on February 22, 1897 is also forged and forged badly. The document
supposedly written by Josephine herself supported the fact that they were married under the
Catholic rites. But upon closer look, there is a glaring difference between the penmanship of the
document, and other letters written by Josephine to Rizal.
Surely, we must put the question of retraction to rest, though Rizal is a hero, whether he
retracted or not, we must investigate if he really did a turn-around. If he did not, and the
documents were forgeries, then somebody has to pay for trying to deceive a nation.
TASK 1: Read each item below and answer the question in a separate document. (40 points)
1. What are the reasons of the prominent historians in affirming the authenticity of Rizal's
retraction? (10 points)
_______________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
2. What are the proofs used to defend the authenticity of Rizal’s retraction? (10 points)

_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
3. What possible reasons could have pushed Jose Rizal to write his retraction document according
to those who believe that he really retracted? (10 points)
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
4. What are the major arguments/issues on Rizal’s retraction? (10 points)

_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
Task 2: Read the article about Rizal’s retraction and write a 500 words position paper on the
retraction of Rizal (50 points)
Name of Student: _______________________ Score:

________/60
Schedule and Section: ___________________ Date: ___________
10 7 5 3
CATEGORY Score
Attention The introductory The introductory The author has an The introductory /10
Grabber paragraph has a paragraph has a interesting paragraph is not
strong hook or hook or attention introductory interesting AND is
attention grabber grabber, but it is paragraph but the not relevant to the
that is appropriate weak, rambling or connection to the topic.
for the audience. inappropriate for topic is not clear.
This could be a the audience.
strong statement, a
relevant quotation,
statistic, or question
addressed to the
reader.

Focus or The thesis The thesis statement The thesis The thesis /10
Thesis statement clearly names the topic of statement outlines statement does not
Statement names the topic of the essay. The some or all of the name the topic AND
the essay and author'sposition is main points to be does not preview
outlines the main stated discussed but does what will be
points to be not name the topic. discussed.
discussed. The
author's position is
strongly and clearly
stated.
Support for Includes 3 or more Includes 3 or more Includes 2 pieces of Includes 1 or fewer /20
Position pieces of evidence pieces of evidence evidence (facts, pieces of evidence
(x2) (facts, statistics, (facts, statistics, statistics, examples, (facts, statistics,
examples, real-life examples, real-life real-life experiences) examples, real-life
experiences) that experiences) that that support the experiences).
support the position support the position positionstatement.
statement. The statement.
writer anticipates the
reader's concerns,
biases or arguments
and has provided at
least 1 counter-
argument.
Sequencing Arguments and Arguments and A few of the Many of the /10
support are support are support details or support details or
provided in a provided in a fairly arguments are not arguments are not
logical order that logical order that in an expected or in an expected or
makes it easy and makes it logical order, logical order,
interesting to reasonably easy distracting the distracting the
follow the author's to follow the reader and making reader and making
train of thought. author's train of the essay seem a the essay
thought. little confusing. seem very
confusing.
Writing Piece is clearly Author paid Errors may be Errors make it /10
Mechanics written with no attention to writing present and may difficult to read
grammar, spelling, conventions; slightly take away and/or
punctuation, or Minor errors do from the clarity; yet, understand the
capitalization not distract from the writer’s paper.
errors. meaning. meaning can be
determined.
Closing The conclusion The conclusion is The author's There is no /10
Paragraph is strong and recognizable. The position is restated conclusion -
leaves the reader author's position within the closing the paper just
solidly is restated within paragraph, but not ends.
understanding the first two near the beginning.
the writer's sentencesof the The essay body is
position. closing paragraph not summarized.
Effective and is followed by
restatement of a summary of the
the position essay body.
statement begins
the closing
paragraph and is

followed by an
effective
summaryof the
essay body.
LESSON 4: THE FIRST CRY OF THE REVOLUTION
The Philippine Revolution of 1896 began with what later known as the “First Cry” or the initial
move of the Filipinos to begin the revolution for independence.
The tearing up of cedulas and proclaiming the start of the fight for independence happened after the
Katipunan was exposed on August 19, 1896 and the Spaniards began to crack down on suspected rebels.
It was believed that the first cry occurred there on August 26, however it was contradicted by the different
Katipunan personalities who claimed that they were there at that time. National Historical Commission of
The Philippines claimed that, the First cry of the Philippine Revolution of 1896 happened on August 23,
1896 at Pugadlawin, now part of Project 8 in Quezon City.
Different Accounts of the Nationwide Cry

1. Dr. Pio Valenzuela’s “Cry of PugadLawin”
The official date and place of the First Cry were largely based on his account.He is an official of the
Katipunan and a friend of Andres Bonifacio, who was present during the event.In 1935, Pio
Valenzuela, along with BriccioPantas and Enrique Pacheco said (in English translation)."The first Cry
of the revolution did not happen in Balintawak where the monument is, but in a place called
PugadLawin."
In 1940, a research team of a forerunner of the National Historical Institute (NHI) which included
Valenzuela identified the location as part of sitioGulod, Banlat, Kalookan City. IN 1964, the NHI
described this location as the house of Tandang Sora.
The first place of refuge of Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, Procopio, Bonifacio, Teodoro Plata,
Aguedo del Rosario, and myself was Balintawak, the first five arriving there on August 19, and I on
August 20, 1896. The first place where some 500 members of the Katipunan met on August 22, 1896,

was the house and yard of Apolonio Samson at Kangkong. Aside from the persons mentioned above,
among those who were there were Briccio Pantas, Alejandro Santiago, Ramon Bernardo, Apolonio
Samson, and others. Here, views were only exchanged, and no resolution was debated or adopted. It
was at Pugad Lawin, the house, store-house, and yard of Juan Ramos, son of Melchora Aquino,
where over 1,000 members of the Katipunan met and carried out considerable debate and discussion
on August 23, 1896. The discussion was on whether or not the revolution against the Spanish
government should be started on August 29, 1896... After the tumultuous meeting, many of those
present tore their cedula certificates and shouted "Long live the Philippines! Long live the Philippines
2. Guillermo Masangkay
Masangkay is a friend and fellow Katipunero of Andres Bonifacio.In his interview with the Sunday
Tribune magazine, Masangkay said that the first Cry happened in Balintawak on August 26, 1896. In
the first decade of American rule, it was his account that was used by the government and civic
officials to fix the date and place of the First Cry which capped with the erection of the “Monument to
the Heroes of 1896” in that place.In another interview published in the newspaper Bagong Buhay on
August 26, 1957, Masangkay changed his narrative stating that the revolution began on August 23,
1896, similar to the assertion of Dr. Pio Valenzuela. But later changed again when his granddaughter,
Soledad Buehler-Borromeo, cited sources, including the Masangkay papers, that the original date was
August 26.
Guillermo Masangkay’s The Cry of Balintawak
On August 26th, a big meeting was held in Balintawak, at the house of Apolonio Samson, then
cabeza of that barrio of Caloocan. Among those who attended, I remember, were Bonifacio, Emilio
Jacinto, Aguedo del Rosario, Tomas Remigio, Briccio Pantas, Teodoro Plata, Pio Valenzuela, Enrique
Pacheco, and Francisco Carreon. They were all leaders of the Katipunan and composed the board of
directors of the organization. Delegates from Bulacan, Cabanatuan, Cavite, and Morong were also
present.
“At about nine o'clock in the morning of August 26, the meeting was opened with Andres Bonifacio
presiding and Emilio Jacinto acting as secretary. The purpose was to discuss when the uprising was
to take place. Teodoro Plata, Briccio Pantas, and Pio Valenzuela were all opposed to starting the
revolution too early...Andres Bonifacio, sensing that he would lose the discussion then, left the
session hall and talked to the people, who were waiting outside for the result of the meeting of the
leaders. He told the people that the leaders were arguing against starting the revolution early, and
appealed to them in a fiery speech in which he said:"You remember the fate of our countrymen who
were shot in Bagumbayan. Should we return now to the towns, the Spaniards will only shoot us. Our
organization has been discovered and we are all marked men. If we don't start the uprising, the
Spaniards will get us anyway. What then, do you say?" "Revolt!" the people shouted as one.
Bonifacio then asked the people to give a pledge that they were to revolt. He told them that the sign of
slavery of the Filipinos were the cedula tax charged each citizen. "If it is true that you are ready to
revolt... I want to see you destroy your cedulas. It will be a sign that all of us have declared our
severance from the Spaniards.
The Cry of Balintawak occurred on August 26, 1896. The Cry, defined as that turning point when the
Filipinos finally refused Spanish colonial dominion over the Philippine Islands. With tears in their eyes,
the people as one man, pulled out their cedulas and tore them into pieces. It was the beginning of the
formal declaration of the separation from Spanish rule."Long Live the Philippine Republic!", the cry of
the people. An article from The Sunday Tribune Magazine on August 21, 1932 featured the

statements of the eyewitness account by Katipunan General Guillermo Masangkay, "A Katipunero
Speaks". Masangkay recounts the "Cry of Balintawak", stating that on August 26,1896, a big meeting
was held in Balintawak at the house of Apolonio Samson, then the cabeza of that barrio of Caloocan.
At about nine o'clock in the morning of August 26, the meeting was opened with Andres Bonifacio
presiding and Emilio Jacinto acting as Secretary. In August 1896, after the Katipunan was discovered,
Masangkay joined Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto, and others in a clandestine meeting held on the 26th of
that month at Apolonio Samson’s house in Caloocan.
Initially, the leaders of the movement quarreled over strategy and tactics, and many of its members
questioned the wisdom of an open rebellion due to the lack of arms and logistical support. However,
after Bonifacio’s intense and convincing speech, everyone destroyed their cedulas to symbolize their
defiance towards Spain and, together, raised the cry of “Revolt".
3. Santiago Alvarez
Alvarez is one of the leaders of the Cavite revolution. Alvarez presents an account devoid of any
dramatic description as it is merely a narration of the events that happened in Bahay Toro.
Santiago Alvarez The “Cry of Bahay Toro”
The account of Santiago Alvarez regarding the Cry of Balintawak flaunted specific endeavors, as
stated:
“We started our trek to Kangkong at about eleven that night. We walked through the rain over dark
expanses of muddy meadows and fields. Our clothes drenched and our bodies numbed by the cold
wind, we plodded wordlessly. It was nearly two in the morning when we reached the house of Brother
Apolonio Samson in Kangkong. We crowded into the house to rest and warm ourselves. We were so
tired that, after hanging our clothes out to dry, we soon feel asleep. The Supremo began assigning
guards at five o'clock the following morning, Saturday 22 August 1896. He placed a detachment at the
Balintawak boundary and another at the backyard to the north of the house where we were gathered.
No less than three hundred men assembled at the bidding of the Supremo Andres Bonifacio.
Altogether, they carried assorted weapons, bolos, spears, daggers, a dozen small revolvers and a rifle
used by its owner, one Lieutenant Manuel, for hunting birds. The Supremo Bonifacio was restless
because of fear of sudden attack by the enemy. He was worried over the thought that any of the
couriers carrying the letter sent by Emilio Jacinto could have been intercepted; and in that eventuality,
the enemy would surely know their whereabouts and attack them on the sly. He decided that it was
better to move to a site called Bahay Toro. At ten o'clock that Sunday morning, 23 August 1896 we
arrived at Bahay Toro. Our member had grown to more than 500 and the house, yard, and warehouse
of Cabesang Melchora was getting crowded with us Katipuneros. The generous hospitality of
Cabesang Melchora was no less than that of Apolonio Samson. Like him, she also opened her
granary and had plenty of rice pounded and animals slaughtered to feed us. The following day,
Monday, 24 August, more Katipuneros came and increased our number to more than a thousand. The
Supremo called a meeting at ten o'clock that morning inside Cabesang Melchora's barn. Flanking him
on both sides at the head of the table were Dr. Pio Valenzuela, Emilio Jacinto, Briccio Pantas, Enrique
Pacheco, Ramon Bernardo, Pantelaon Torres, Francisco Carreon, Vicente Fernandez, Teodoro Plata,
and others. We were so crowded that some stood outside the barn. The following matters were
approved at the meeting:
i. An uprising to defend the people's freedom was to be started at midnight of Saturday, 29 August
1896;

ii. To be on a state of alert so that the Katipunan forces could strike should the situation arise where the
enemy was at a disadvantage. Thus, the uprising could be started earlier than the agreed time of
midnight of 29 August 1896 should a favorable opportunity arise at that date. Everyone should steel
himself and be resolute in the struggle that was imminent; and
iii. He immediate objective was the capture of Manila.
After the adjournment of the meeting at twelve noon, there were tumultuous shouts of "Long live the
Sons of the Country” (Mabuhay anf mga Anak ng Bayan)!
4. Gregoria de Jesus also known as the “Lakambini of the Katipunan”.
"Oriang", as Gregoria de Jesus was called, was the "Maria Elena" in a Santacruzan in Caloocan
when she first met Andres Bonifacio who was introduced by her cousin Teodoro Plata, also a
katipunero.
Right after Gregoria de Jesus and Andres Bonifacio were maried in March 1893, Oriang was
immediately sworn into the Katipunan and she took the name "Lakambini". As wife of the Supremo,
she was kept the seal of the Society and its secret lists of recruits and supporters. The town beauty
married not only the Supremo of the Katipunan but the cause of liberty. More than a year after Andres
Bonifacio and his brother Procopio were killed, Gregoria de Jesus married Julio Nakpil who was
commander of all the Katipunan troops in the north. Oriang and Julio Nakpil had eight children.
Gregoria de Jesus’ Version of the First Cry
Her story is best told in her own words, excerpts from her autobiography. It is interesting to see the
Katipunan from the eyes of a woman who loved and lived with the Supremo, Andres Bonifacio.
Gregoria de Jesus wrote:
". . . . . As the Katipunan’s activities had reached nearly all corners of the Philippine Archipelago and some
of its secrets had already been divulged, we returned immediately to Kalookan. However as we were
being watched closely, most of the men, including Andres Bonifacio, after a few days, left town. It was
then that the uprising began with the cry for liberty on 26 August 1896. While I was with my parents,
through friends, I learned that I too would apprehended. I therefore decided to escape right away and I did
so at eleven o’clock at night with the intention of returning to Manila under cover going through the
ricefields direct to La Loma. I was treated like an apparition, for, sad to say, from every house where I tried
to get a little rest, I was driven away as if the people therein were mortally frightened. However, I learned
later that the occupants of the houses I visited were seized and severely punished and some even exiled –
one of them was an uncle of mine whom I visited that night to kiss his hand, and he died in exile. My father
and two brothers were also arrested at this time.. . . .”
Kalookan, Rizal
5 November 1928
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 the Spanish forces
These three events 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.

TASK 1. Compare and contrast the different accounts by accomplishing the chart below.
DEATAILS DR. PIO SANTIAGO GREGORIA GUARDIA GUILLERMO

VALENZUELA ALVAREZ DE JESUS CIVIL’S MASANGKAY
REPORT
POSITION/
BACKGROUND
OF THE
PERSON
DATE
PLACE
NUMBER OF
PARTICIPANTS
WHAT
HAPPENED

TASK 2. Essay (30 points)
1. On your own analysis of the reading, why there were differences in their accounts? (10 points)
2. What is the significance of determining the date and place of the Cry? (10 points)
3. What is your own stand on the issue? Is it Pugadlawin? Or Balintawak? (10 points)
Name of the Student: _____________________________ Score: ________/30

Schedule and Section: ___________________________ Date: ____________
SCORE
CRITERIA 1 3 5 Q1 Q2 Q3
Relevance of The essay did not Answer is brief Answer is
answer to the answer the with insufficient complete;
question question detail. Unrelated sufficient detail
issues were provided to
introduced and/or support
minor errors in assertions;
content. answer focuses
only on issues
related to the
question; factually
correct.
Thoroughness of None of the Most of the basic Deals fully with the
answer relevant details details are entire question.
were included included but some
are missing.
Score /10 /10 /10

LESSON 5: PHILIPPINE AMERICAN WAR or INSURRECTION
The Philippine Insurrection (1898-1901)
Source: lifted from https://www.niu.edu/clas/cseas/_pdf/lesson-plans/fulbright-hays/philippine-

american-war.pdf
When the United States went to war with Spain, the US Pacific Fleet was dispatched to the
Philippines to defeat the Spanish Pacific fleet. Under Commodore Dewey, the United States sankthe
entire Spanish fleet without losing a single ship (and suffering only one man wounded) in theBattle of
Manila Bay.
After this, a strange 3-way negotiation developed between Commodore Dewey of the
American Navy, the Spanish army in the Philippines, and Filipino rebels under General Emilio
Aguinaldo.Although the Americans and the Filipinos had a common enemy in Spain, they were not
formally allied, and the Spanish commander refused to surrender to his former colonists under
Aguinaldo.
Eventually, as more American troops began to arrive in the Pacific, the Spanish garrison
surrendered to the Americans, even though the Filipinos had a much larger force, and one that had
been just outside of Manila since the naval battle there. The new American commander of Manila
refused to let the Filipino Army into the city until he received instructions from PresidentMcKinley about
what was planned for the Philippines.
When the Spanish-American War ended with the signing of the Treaty of Paris, the United
Statesincluded a payment of $20 million to Spain for its colonial rights to the Philippines. U.S. President
McKinley announced a policy of “benevolent assimilation”: U.S. colonial rule of the Philippines to help
prepare the Filipinos for self-rule.
Before the US Senate ratified the treaty, on February 4, 1899, a member of the Filipino rebel
force tried to enter U.S.-occupied Manila, and was killed by an American soldier. This began theFilipino
insurrection, fighting between the U.S. Army and the Filipino rebels. The insurrection eventually ended
in 1901, when Aguinaldo was captured by American troops in a daring raid.
The Philippines remained an American colony until 1942—when it was conquered by the
Japanese in World War 2—and again beginning in 1945, until it was granted independence in1946.

Lie #1: On Philippine Independence
As early as May 24, 1898, a few days after the Americans’ victory against the Spaniards in the
Battle of Manila Bay and after the Philippine revolution against Spain, Aguinaldo established a
government for the Filipinos. On June 12, 1898, he declared Philippine independence.
The Americans in the Philippines witnessed and were well aware of these acts of Aguinaldo; yet,
in the midst of all these, they remained silent, neither showing support for Aguinaldo’s pronouncements
nor expressing objections. In the meantime, U.S. troop reinforcements kept arriving in the islands when
there was clearly no need for them—Aguinaldo and his men had all but defeated the Spaniards, driving
their top officials to hide within the walls of Manila.
Stealthily, the U.S. government negotiated peace with Spain, the latter ceding the Philippines to
the U.S. in exchange for money.
On December 21, 1898, a few days after Aguinaldo learned of the contents of the Treaty of Paris,
President McKinley issued his Benevolent Assimilation Proclamation, where he explicitly announced that
the U.S. was taking control of the Philippine islands. Then and only then was Aguinaldo able to confirm his
suspicion: the Filipinos’ allies were traitors after all. They had no intention of granting independence to the
Filipinos when the Spaniards had been driven away, as they had either promised or led the Filipinos to
believe. Rather, they fully intended to fill in the shoes of the Spaniards.
Lie #2: McKinley’s “Benevolent Assimilation” Proclamation
Americans have been taught that their great native land acquired the right to rule the Philippines
on December 10, 1898, pursuant to the provisions of the Treaty of Paris. Being the champions offreedom
that they were known to be, however, the Americans declared that their decision to exercise sovereignty
over a people two oceans away from their own land was prompted by their desire to help organize these
people so that they may enjoy the true blessings of democracy.
According to President McKinley, “the mission of the United States [in the Philippines] is one of
benevolent assimilation, substituting the mild sway of justice and right for arbitrary rule.” This “high mission”
is to “[support] the temperate administration of affairs for the greatest good of thegoverned.”
Yet only a few months earlier, McKinley had given instructions to the American peace
commissioners in Paris which included the following statement: “Incidental to our tenure in thePhilippines
is the commercial opportunity to which American statesmanship cannot be indifferent. It is to use every
legitimate means for the enlargement of American trade.”
Lie #3: The “Philippine Insurrection”
What the government of U.S. President William McKinley called the “Phillipine Insurrection
(insurrection: a revolt against an established authority or government) of 1899” was in truth theFilipinos’
fight for their nation’s independence, which their leader then, Emilio Aguinaldo, declared on June 12,
1898, but which the American in these islands completely and deliberately ignored, prompting the
Filipinos to attempt to realize it by way of force.

Coldly and objectively, it was the Philippine-American War—a war waged by a people who were
about to taste their full freedoms, thanks to their own efforts at defending such freedoms and to the help
of their “gallant protectors” from a distant land. Little did they know that their so-called “protectors” were
really aggressors, or that the sheep were actually wolves.
Lie #4: “They Started It!”
While the true intentions of the U.S. government in the Philippines were made known with
President McKinley’s Benevolent Assimilation proclamation, Aguinaldo, hoping that the USSenate would
not ratify the Treaty of Paris (which would render it null and void), tried diplomatic ways of convincing
the American officials to grant the Philippines their independence. The Americans went along with
Aguinaldo’s moves: they were buying time.
After the incident of February 4, 1899, word reached the U.S. that the Philippine-American War
was triggered by a violent attack by the natives. This lie served its purpose—two days after the incident,
the U.S. Senate ratified the Treaty of Paris.
To the American civilians and other foreigners in the islands, however, it was clear that the
Philippine-American War was started by the American soldiers, not the Filipino rebels. How elsecould the
following be explained? On February 2 and 3, 1899, the Filipinos employed in differentcapacities in the
American ships were dismissed. On February 4, 1899, 200-300 American soldiers were sent to Sta. Ana,
where the incident that triggered the Philippine-American War took place. All the foregoing point to one
clear fact: the February 4, 1899 incident was premediated by the Americans to justify the start of hostilities.
Lie #5: The Ugly Truth about the Philippine-American War
The American authorities hid from the American public the ugly truth about the Philippine- American
War. As mentioned earlier, it was publicized as the Philippine Insurrection of 1899, when it was in fact a
people’s heroic fight for their much desired freedom and independence. Not many Americans in their
homeland came to know the extent of the human rights abuses that the Americans committed in that war.
The American soldiers employed some methods of torture during the Philippine-American War,
aimed at extracting confessions from the Filipino rebels regarding the names of their fellow rebels, the
site of their headquarters, or where they were hiding their arms and ammunition.
Sometimes, the same methods of torture were used as punishment for certain “crimes” of the
natives—as when the latter failed to pay “taxes” to American soldiers. American soldiers described
these incidents of torture (and said they were used hundreds of times) in their lettershome.
The American soldiers described other human rights violations they committed. One officer wrote
home, “We burned hundreds of houses and looted hundreds more. Some of the boys madegood hauls of
jewelry and clothing… Caloocan was supposed to contain seventeen thousand inhabitants. The Twentieth
Kansas swept through it, and now Caloocan contains not one living native…”

Lie #6: The Philippine-American War Lasted for Three Years
Perhaps the most successful lie perpetrated by the U.S. military and media was that the
Philippine-American War ended in 1901 after Aguinaldo’s capture. While it is true that Aguinaldo was the
recognized leader of the rebels and, as such, when he laid down his arms, hismen followed suit, it is
nonetheless true as well that many Filipino rebels held on to their weapons and continued the fight, though
sporadically or in a fragmented way.
What is hardly known to the American public and Filipinos alike is that when the war in the
northern part of the Philippines subsided with Aguinaldo’s capture, the American troops werepulled out
of there and sent to the South—to the island of Mindinao—to commence the war against the Muslim
Flipinos there. The Americans had succeeded in postponing the war until about 1903, because of the
Bates Agreement they had signed with the leaders of the Muslims, which promised the latter self-rule
in exchange for their recognition of U.S. rule in name. In 1903, when they were ready to fight the
Muslims after pulling their men out of the north, the Americans cancelled the agreement and waged
war against the Muslims, with the aim of establishing full U.S. control over Mindinao.
The war against the Muslims lasted until the end of 1913. Months before the war ended in 1913,
the U.S. troops massacred about 500 Muslim Filipinos at Bud Bagsak.
What conclusion can you draw regarding the US’s conduct or motivations during
the Philippine-American War? Explain your answer
Some Key Terms and Names to Remember
 “Cry”  Secularization
 Mutiny  Garrotte
 “Iron Fist”  Retraction
 Rafael Izquierdo  Roman Roque
 Insurrection

TASK 1. Read and complete the following sentences. Choose your answer from the box below.

TASK2. Complete the crossword puzzle below (2 points each).

LINK IT!
Sustainable Development Goal 11 (SDG11) aims to strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the
cultural and natural heritage.
In every country, cultural heritage is both a record of life and history and also an irreplaceable source of
creativity and inspiration. It includes the sites, things, and practices a society regards as old, important, and
worthy of conservation
Write an essay explaining the importance of cultural heritage to history (30 points).
15 10 5 1
Complete Explanation of topic Partial or Inadequate

explanation of is satisfactory, with incomplete explanation of topic
CONTENT topic, with specific, mostly sufficient explanation of with inadequate or
accurate, and evidence, but topic, with missing evidence
relevant mostly general. insufficient and many factual
information. More detail evidence and errors
needed. Some inaccuracies
factual errors
15 10 5 1

follow. around

Updated Rphsit Modulel Unit3and4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Updated Rphsit Modulel Unit3and4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Unit

3 CONTENT AND CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PRIMARY SOURCES

PRETEST: Write T if the statement is correct and F if incorrect.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 38

THE MANUNGGUL JAR AS A VESSEL OF HISTORY

"…the work of an artist and master potter."--Robert Fox

A Self-regulated Learning Module 39

A Self-regulated Learning Module 40

TASK1: Complete the following concept map (40 points)

___________________________ a. To the early Filipino people

Complete Explanation of Partial or Inadequate

Information is Student presents Reader has Sequence of

A Self-regulated Learning Module 42

Carlos V. Francisco Watercolor Stock

A Self-regulated Learning Module 43

A Self-regulated Learning Module 44

CONTEXTUAL (PEST) ANALYSIS

Geography Economy Social Technology

A Self-regulated Learning Module 45

Complete Explanation of Partial or Inadequate

Information is Student presents Reader has Sequence of

A Self-regulated Learning Module 46

Proclamation of Philippine Independence in Kawit, Cavite on June 12, 1898

A Self-regulated Learning Module 47

TASK: Answer the following questions briefly.

1. Who is Ambrosio Rianzares-Bautista? Give three significant facts about him.

2. What does the document want to convey? (10 points)

A Self-regulated Learning Module 48

LESSON 4: LAGUNA COPPERPLATE INSCRIPTION

LAGUNA COPPERPLATE TRANSLITERATION

The Laguna Copperplate Inscription:

A high-contrast copy of the Laguna Copperplate Inscription.

A Self-regulated Learning Module 49

Political Entities in Southeast Asia in the 10th Century

A Self-regulated Learning Module 50

Characteristics of the Laguna Copperplate

Origins of the Inscription on the Laguna Copperplate

A Self-regulated Learning Module 51

Ernesto Legisma Alberto Dealino Alfredo Evangelista

Antoon Postma Dr. Johann de Hector Santos

A Self-regulated Learning Module 52

Sources: lifted from Readings in Philippine History Manual

A Self-regulated Learning Module 53

 Antonio Pigafetta  Manunggul Jar

A Self-regulated Learning Module 54

Issue #2. Tolentino proposes to add fourth star to PH flag

Issue #3. Sotto wants Philippine national anthem revised

NAME of STUDENT: _________________________ SCORE: ________/70__

A Self-regulated Learning Module 55

A Self-regulated Learning Module 56

A Self-regulated Learning Module 57

A Self-regulated Learning Module 58

A Self-regulated Learning Module 59

A Self-regulated Learning Module 60

NAME: _____________________________ SCORE: ________/50

Ideas and Strong Good Elaboration only Lacks /20

Paragraph Every paragraph Writing is One or two No paragraphs /10

Organization Excellent Effort to Minimal No organization /10

A Self-regulated Learning Module 61

Complete Explanation of Partial or Inadequate

Information is Student presents Reader has Sequence of

A Self-regulated Learning Module 62

4 “ONE PAST BUT MANY HISTORIES”: CONTROVERSIES AND CONFLICTING

NAME of STUDENT: ___________________ SCORE: /70

NAME: _____________________ SCORE: /50

Name: _______________________ Score: /60

Name of Student: _____________________ Score: /30

Name of the Student: _____________________ Score: /30