Quailex Kwia D.

Ballais SE11 TFri 7:30 – 9:00 AM February 1, 2019

AGONCILLO AND ALVAREZ MANUSCRIPT ANALYSIS

Teodoro Agoncillo Santiago Alvarez

 A prominent 20th century Philippine  Delegado general of the provincial capital

historian.
 The two factions – Magdiwang and
Magdalong conflict are portrayed as
one being more fit to rule (Magdiwang)
than the other (Magdalo), vice-versa.
 The manuscript elaborated on how it
began or how the assembly in Tejeros
came to be.
 The meeting took place for the factions
to adopt defensive measures.
 Only those part of the Katipunan was
introduced in the text, some who are
not part of the Katipunero’s were not
made mentioned.
Analysis
of Cavite, then became captain-general
and later commander-in-chief of the
Magdiwang forces.
 It is made mention that the Magdiwang
faction received private information of
Daniel Tirona’s plans to undermine the
convention of the Magdiwang and
Magdalo faction.
 The purpose in the Tejeros Assembly was
to strengthen and bolster defenses under
control of the Magdiwang forces against
the enemy.
 Antonio Montenegro was about to be sent
in prison but was protected by Trining,
Jose Rizal’s sister.
 What proceeded after the nullified meeting
was a gathering at the Tanza parish house
of the Magdalo faction.

The manuscripts of Agoncillo and Alvarez made contrasting points. One had a flow as to how
the conflict came to be between the two factions of Magdiwang and Magdalo, the other took
into account as to what transpired during those times of the assembly without having to go back
as to how it started. Two, they had different ways as to interpreting how everything happened
and the interventions surrounded by it. Third, both sources had a subjective take to it. Despite a
number of differences in these two manuscripts, there is still a part of history in it that made and
did happen during then.

Agoncillo’s manuscript and take on the Katipunan and Bonifacio was an elaborated take on the
accounts of what happened. He made use of story-telling techniwue to convey the history behind
it. In that part of history, it is clear that the conflict between two factions was evident especially
when Bonifacio take on being partial with the other. This is a secondary source as the way it is
written is meant that the historian made use of deep imagining to recreate the past events.
Alvarez’s, on the other hand, had turn his manuscript in a straightforward way. Telling the way
how it did happen and other key persons involved aside the members of the Katipunan. Parts of
how they were able to know of private information concerning the assembly made it clear.
However, being a primary source considering that he was part of that revolution, there will be
subjectivity in his manuscript for he was part of one faction which would make him favor that
and creating a viewpoint that is linear to his beliefs and perspectives. In the Tejeros Convention,
the accounts of Santiago Alvarez is more credible than that of Agoncillo’s. It is because of the
fact that he was part of the events and despite being it in his perspective, it still holds truth within
it without having to recreate the past for he knew what transpired that time.

As part of that Revolution, being the commander-in-chief, Alvarez would know as to what went
through those events. His manuscript does not end with Andres Bonifacio nullifying the
meeting. There were also parts of the text that followed as to what happened afterwards that
meeting – the secret meeting held by the Magdalo’s in Tanza parish church and the 27th day of
March, 1897 which further elaborates the events that transpired then with eyewitnesses that
supported the happening. Overall, the Tejeros Convention took place and a lot happened during
then.