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

Santiago Alvarez” is general, founder and honorary president of the first directorate of the
Nacionalista party. Due to his inflamed bravery and courage in Cavite’s famous battles as commander he
is named as “kidlat ng apoy” and the only child of revolutionary general Mariano Alvarez. His writing
become primary source because he is in the scene, or an eye-witnessed because he personally
experienced what happen that time.

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

He’s a prominent 20th-century Filipino historian. He and his contemporary Renato Constantino were
among the first Filipino historians renowned for promoting a distinctly nationalist point of view of
Filipino history. His writing is secondary because he is prominent historian in 20th century in the
Philippines and he tell regarding what happened in “Tejeros convention”.

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

EXCERPT FROM THE SANTIAGO EXCERPT from TEODORO AGONCILLO, “The

ALVAREZ ACCOUNT “Katipunan and
the Revolution: Memoirs of a
General”, (pp. 82-88). This is referring
to the events that transpired during
the Tejeros Convention.
Gen. Santiago Alvarez is also known as General
Apoy. He was a Magdiwang man and the
Commander-in-Chief of the said faction.
Santiago Alvarez focuses on narrating what
happened in the election made by the 2 faction
which is the Magdiwang and Magdalo in
TEJEROS CONVENTION
It is greatly state by sequence of all the events
happening. It started by stating setting of the
events.
Santiago’s point of view is to tell what actually
happen in the convention, but didn’t detailed
about Bonifacio, instead he highlights some of
the things Bonifacio do. Like when he pulled
the revolver and aim it to Daniel Tirona
Revolt of the Masses, the story of Bonifacio
and the Katipunan”,
historian in 20th century in the Philippines
Teodoro Agoncillo is more in telling the story
by indicating the events before and after the
convention happens
He started to point out a little background
about the two faction which is Magdalo and
Magdiwang. He said there is existing
misunderstanding in the both camps that is
why Tejeros convention started, to mend the
misunderstanding.
The detailed about Bonifacio was clear like for
example that he was expected to show
impartiality in two faction, but his actions in
the case were motivated by his regard for his
wife’s uncle, Mariano Alvarez, the President of
 because he feel insulted by what Daniel Tirona
said.
There is no Edilberto Evangelista in memoir of
Santiago Alvarez.
the Magdiwang.
It mention the name of Evangelista where
Bonifacio decided that he would nominate
them because they are educated.

There is a scene when Dr. Jose Nothing is stated about Trining (Dr. Jose Rizal's
Rizal’s sister named Trining, and his widow, sister) and his widow, Josephine pleading to
Josephine, pleaded with General Apoy to not General Apoy not to arrest Mr. Montenegro
arrest Mr.Montenegro, but to let him stay at
the estate house where they themselves were
staying
.

Santiago Alvarez objective focus and further
detailed what happen in the said election
made by two factions which is the
Magdiwang and Magdalo in Tejeros
convention. It is detailed and he also
mentioned the delegations of the person
involved that only happens the day of the
election.
Teodoro Agoncillo objective is to indicates
the events before Tejeros convention. It was
mentioned the dates, battle and important
events that was different in Alvarez’
knowledge.

4. Form your internal and external criticisms over the two sources.

Internal Criticism is deals with problem of credibility such as the Character of the Author, his reliability,
and his ability and willingness to tell the truth. In my personal stance, Santiago Alvarez is a revolutionary
general that have responsible for keeping what activities happen in certain places. As a primary source,
he just mentioned what actually happened that time without knowing the truth between the two-
opposing faction, which is the Magdalo and Magdiwang. I can say that the narration is sounds bias
because he didn’t tell what the truth in the point of view of Magdiwang and Magdalo. Meanwhile, in
Teodoro Agoncillo as a secondary source, he mentioned the events happened before and after the
election ,even the description, the reason and places of the two faction and the difference of the two. It
was well written. In connection to External criticism. In my opinion, I feel that Santiago Alvarez narration
is a little bit bias because it is not well detailed, he just narrates it sequentially, without telling the roots
of everything. Meanwhile, in Teodoro Agoncillo is well written, but in my personal opinion, I did not
know if I should believe in him, because of how well written his book where excerpt comes from. but
overall, the story is good even though they have different ways to tell the scenario. For me the moral of
the story, we millennial, must analyse the whole scenario before we make an assumption and I feel it is
the message why we read it, that we must be critical and must analyze the situation.

TUNGPALAN, EDMAR T.
MD 2Y1-4A

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

Santiago Alvarez” is general, founder and honorary president of the first directorate of the
Nacionalista Party. Due to his inflamed bravery and courage in Cavite’s famous battles as
commander, he is named as “KIDLAT NG APOY” and the only child of revolutionary general
Mariano Alvarez. His writing becomes a primary source because he is in the scene, or an eye-
witnessed because he personally experienced what happens at that time.

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

He’s a prominent 20th-century Filipino historian. He and his contemporary Renato Constantino
were among the first Filipino historians renowned for promoting a distinctly nationalist point of
view of Filipino history. His writing is secondary because he is a prominent historian in the 20th
century in the Philippines and he tells regarding what happened in the “Tejeros convention”.

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

 EXCERPT FROM THE SANTIAGO

ALVAREZ ACCOUNT “Katipunan and the EXCERPT from TEODORO AGONCILLO,
Revolution: Memoirs of a General”, (pp. 82- “The Revolt of the Masses, the story of
88). This is referring to the events that Bonifacio and the Katipunan”,
transpired during the Tejeros Convention.
the historian in 20th century in the Philippines
 
 
Gen. Santiago Alvarez is also known as General
 
Apoy. He was a Magdiwang man and the
Commander-in-Chief of the said faction.
 
Santiago Alvarez focuses on narrating what
Teodoro Agoncillo is more in telling the story
happened in the election made by the 2 faction
by indicating the events before and after the
which is the Magdiwang and Magdalo in
convention happens
TEJEROS CONVENTION
It is stated by a sequence of all the events He started to point out a little background about
happening. It started by stating the setting of the the two factions which is Magdalo and
events. Magdiwang. He said there is an existing
 misunderstanding in both camps that is why the
Tejeros convention started, to mend the
misunderstanding.
Santiago’s point of view is to tell what actually The detail about Bonifacio was clear like for
happens in the convention but didn’t detailed example, that he was expected to show
about Bonifacio, instead he highlights some of impartiality in two factions, but his actions in
the things Bonifacio does. Like when he pulled the case were motivated by his regard for his
the revolver and aim it to Daniel Tirona because wife’s uncle, Mariano Alvarez, the President of
he feels insulted by what Daniel Tirona said. the Magdiwang.
 It mentions the name of Evangelista where
There is no Edilberto Evangelista in the memoir
Bonifacio decided that he would nominate them
of Santiago Alvarez.
because they are educated.
 

There is a scene when Dr. Jose  

Rizal’s sister named Trining, and his widow,
Josephine, pleaded with General Apoy to not
arrest Mr.Montenegro, but to let him stay at the
estate house where they themselves were
staying
Nothing is stated about Trining (Dr. Jose Rizal's
sister) and his widow, Josephine pleading to
General Apoy not to arrest Mr. Montenegro
 

.
 
 

 Santiago Alvarez's objective focus and further

detailed what happened in the said election
made by two factions which is the Magdiwang
and Magdalo in Tejeros convention. It is
detailed and he also mentioned the delegations
of the person involved that only happens the
day of the election.
 Teodoro Agoncillo's objective is to indicates
the events before the Tejeros convention. It
was mentioned the dates, battle, and important
events that was different in Alvarez’s
knowledge.

4. Form your internal and external criticisms over the two sources.

Internal Criticism deals with the problem of credibilities such as the Character of the Author, his
reliability, and his ability and willingness to tell the truth. In my personal stance, Santiago
Alvarez is a revolutionary general that have responsibility for keeping what activities happen in
certain places. As a primary source, he just mentioned what actually happened at that time
without knowing the truth between the two-opposing faction, which is the Magdalo and
Magdiwang. I can say that the narration is sounded bias because he didn’t tell what the truth in
the point of view of Magdiwang and Magdalo. Meanwhile, in Teodoro Agoncillo as a secondary
source, he mentioned the events that happened before and after the election, even the description,
the reason and places of the two factions, and the difference between the two. It was well written.
In connection to External criticism. In my opinion, I feel that Santiago Alvarez's narration is a
little bit bias because it is not well detailed, he just narrates it sequentially, without telling the
roots of everything. Meanwhile, in Teodoro Agoncillo is well written, but in my personal
opinion, I did not know if I should believe in him, because of how well written his book where
the excerpt comes from. but overall, the story is good even though they have different ways to
tell the scenario. For me, the moral of the story, we millennial, must analyze the whole scenario
before we make an assumption and I feel it is the message why we read it, that we must be
critical and must analyze the situation.