TOPIC: Site of the first mass: Limasawa or Butuan

MAIN PREMISE: Site of the first mass is in Limasawa

ARGUMENTS:

I believe that the site of the first mass is in Limasawa, based on the following reasons:

1. There was a change of opinion from Butuan to Limasawa due to reexamined and
more justified study of the two primary sources; Pigafetta’s account and Albo’s log.
James A. Robertson translated the Italian text of Pigafetta’s account into English
translation that give us more understanding and clarification about the said issue. It was
20th century when the Philippine scholars rejected Butuan as the site of the first mass in
the Philippines.
2. According to the log they planted a cross upon the mountain top and from there, they
were able to see three islands to the west and southwest. As I look into the Philippine
map if you were in Limasawa you can see three islands from what Albo said in his log. It
was Tintinan Island, Lumislis Island and Camiguin Island. But the three islands are
northwest of Butuan city. Albo’s log was proved that the route of Magellan’s voyage
going to Cebu never passed Butuan.
3. In accordance to Pigafetta’s account (one of the primary sources), stated that they
stayed in Mazaua for seven days.
 Thursday (March 28,1521), Magellan threw trinkets as presents to natives and
invite them to the Spanish ship. The gifts was effected and the ship anchor near
the shore.
 Friday (March 29, 1521), Magellan ask the king if he could provide food for their
expedition through sending his slave interpreter.
 Saturday (March 30, 1521), Pigafetta and his men spent their night feasting and
drinking with the native king and his son.
 Sunday (March 31, 1521), Easter Sunday, Magellan sent priest to the shore with
some of their men to prepare for the mass. Magellan brought 50 men and
celebrated the mass with the king of Limasawa and king of Butuan, they returned
to the ship for their lunch and the go back to the shore to plant the cross to the
summit of the mountain.
 Monday (April 1, 1521), Magellan sent his men to help with the harvest but they
did not finish it.
 Tuesday and Wednesday (April 2-3, 1521), they worked on harvest.
 Thursday (April 4,1521), they leave Mazaua going to Cebu.
As it was stated that the king of Butuan is also present that time that made confusion. It
was confirmed that the presence of the two kings at Mazaua. One was the king of
Mazaua and the other was his brother the king of Butuan. If Mazaua is Butuan then
there is some part that hard to explain on Pigafetta’s account. Butuan is a riverine
settlement, situated in Agusan River. But in Pigafetta’s account he never mentioned a
river. Therefore, Mazua was surrounded by a sea.

Resources:
“Diario ò derotero del viage de Magallanes desde el cabo se S. Agustin en el Brazil
hasta el regreso a Espana de la nao Victoeia, escrito por Frandsco Albo,” Document no.
xxii in Colleción de viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar los Españoles desde
fines del siglo XV, Ed. Martin Fernandez de Navarette (reprinted Buenos Aires 1945, 5
Vols.) IV, 191-225. As cited in Miguel A. Bernard “Butuan or Limasawa? The Site of the
First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence” 1981, Kinaadman: A
journal of Southern Philippines, Vol. III, 1-35.
For online resources:
https://journals.ateneo.edu/ojs/index.php/budhi/article/view/582/579

EVALUTATING THE ARGUMENT:

I used a logical argument to convince my readers. I provided facts using primary
sources to strengthen and support my claim.

HOW I ORGANIZE MY ARGUMENT:

I look into the

I identified
Philippine
what island is I look for the
map about
located at the old name of
the three
southern tip Limasawa and
islands in
of Leyte, Butuan
Albo’s
9°54N.
account.
TOPIC: Cavite Mutiny: Is it really a mutiny or rebellion

MAIN PREMISE: Cavite Mutiny: It is a mutiny

ARGUMENTS:

I believe that it was a mutiny and not a rebellion, based on the following reasons:

1. In the account of Jose Montero y Vidal there was an abolition of privileges that
caused an insurrection. In that reason it was a mutiny by the laborers and Filipino
soldiers of Cavite arsenal who are disappointed with the abolition of privileges.
2. They allegedly planned to assassinate high-ranking Spanish officer and friars. But
that doesn’t mean that it was a rebellion because there was the presence of violent
action. It was a mere mutiny because in the account of Governor Izquierdo, on 20
January 1872, Sampaloc celebrated the feast of the Virgin of Loreto and displayed
fireworks. The soldiers, laborers and people of Cavite mistook the fireworks as a signal
to commence with the attack. There were about 200 men lead by Sergeant Lamadrid in
attacking Spanish Officer. These men expecting support a bulk of army in Manila but it
didn’t happen.
3. Tavera’s account believed that the Spanish friars used the Cavite Mutiny as a strong
magnifying it as a full-blown conspiracy involving not solely the native army but also the
resident of Cavite and Manila, and importantly the overthrowing of Spanish Government
in the Philippines by the native clergy. The fear of the friars is that their power and
influence in the Philippines would be a thing in the past. And more, the Cavite mutiny
resulted n the martyrdom of GOMBURZA.

Resources:
Rafael Izquierdo, “Official Report in the Cavite Mutiny,” in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia
Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7
(Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 281-286.
Trinidad Pardo de Tavera, “Filipino Version of the Cavite Mutiny”, in Gregorio Zaide and
Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7
(Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 274-280.
Edmund Plauchut, “The Cavite Mutiny of 1872 and the Martyrdom of Gom-Bur-Za”, in
Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7
(Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 251-268.
For online resources:
http://nhcp.gov.ph/the-two-faces-of-the-1872-cavite-mutiny/

EVALUTATING THE ARGUMENT:

I used a logical argument to convince my readers. I provided facts using primary
sources to strengthen and support my claim.

HOW I ORGANIZE MY ARGUMENT:

For the
greater
conspiracy in
Philippines
Lead by Sgt. Martyrdm og
Lamadrid GOMBURZA

Mutiny
TOPIC: Retraction of Rizal: It is real or fake?

MAIN PREMISE: Retraction of Rizal: Real

ARGUMENTS:

I believe that the retraction of Rizal is real, based on the following reasons:

1. In Rizal’s Retraction that had been translated document found by Fr. Manuel Garcia
said “I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications, and
conduct has been contrary to my character as a son of the Catholic Church”-Dr. Jose
Rizal. In that case it is proven that the retraction of Rizal is real.
2.. The last account was the Eyewitness of the last hour of Rizal:
 “Senior Andrade left death row at 10 and Rizal spoke for a long while with the
Jesuit fathers, March and Vilaclara, regarding religious matters, it seems. It
appears the these two presented him with a prepared retraction on his life and
deeds that he refused to sign. They argued about the matter until 12:30 when
Rizal ate some poach egg and a little chicken. Afterward he asked to leave to
write and wrote long a long time by himself”
 “At 3 in the afternoon, Father March entered the chapel and Rizal handed him
what he had written.”
 “They entered death row and together with Rizal signed the document that the
accused had been written.
Resources:
Primary sources:
1. Rizal’s Retraction (Source: the translated form the document found by Fr. Manuel
Garcia)
2. Eyewitness Account of the Last Hour of Rizal

EVALUTATING THE ARGUMENT:

I used a logical argument to convince my readers. I provided facts using primary
sources to strengthen and support my claim.

HOW I ORGANIZE MY ARGUMENT:

There was a
translated document The last hour of Rizal
of Rizal's Retraction
TOPIC: The Cry of Balintawak: Did it happen in Balintawak or Pugad Lawin

MAIN PREMISE: The Cry of Balintawak: Occurred at Balintawak

ARGUMENTS:

I believe that the retraction of Rizal is real, based on the following reasons:

1. August 19, 1896 – The first place of refuge of Andres Bonifacio, Emilio Jacinto,
Procopio Bonifacio, Teodoro Plata, and Aguedo del Rosario was Balintawak, they
arrived on this day.
2. August 20, 1896 – Pio Valenzuela arrived in Balintawak.
3. August 22, 1896 – Some 500 members of the Katipunan met in the house and yard
of Apolonio Samson at Kangkong.
4. August 23, 1896 – The 1000 member of Katipunan met and carried out a
considerable debate and discussion that held at the Pugad Lawin, the house, store-
house and yard of Juan Ramos, son of Melchora Aquino.
5. August 26, 1896 – A big meeting was held in Balintawak, at the house of Apolonio
Samson, then cabeza of that barrio of Caloocan. Nine o’clock in the morning, 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. Three of
them opposed to start the revolution too early. Bonifacio left the session hall the talk to
the people, “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?”, the people shouted “Revolt!”.
And torn their cedulas because it is the sign of slavery of the Filipinos.

According to Guerrero, Encarnacion and Villegas, all these places are in Balintawak,
then part of Caloocan, now, in Quezon City. As for the dates, Bonifacio and his troops
may have been moving from one place to another to avoid being located by the Spanish
Government, which could explain why there are several accounts of the Cry.
References:
Primary Source: Accounts of the Cry
Guillermo Masangkay, “Cry of Balintawak” in Gregerio Zaide and Sonia Zaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8
(Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 307-309.
Pio Valenzuela, “Cry of Pugad Lawin”, in Gregoriio Zaide and Sonia Zaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8
(Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 301-302.
EVALUTATING THE ARGUMENT:
I used a logical argument to convince my readers. I provided facts using primary
sources to strengthen and support my claim.

HOW I ORGANIZE MY ARGUMENT:

Kangkong

Bahay Pigad
Toro Balintawak Lawin

Pasong
tamo