Chapter 3

The Code of Kalantiaw- is a mythical legal code in the epic history Maragtas.
Before it was revealed as a hoax, it was a source of pride for the people of
Aklan. In fact, a historical marker was installed in the town of Batan, Aklan in
1956, with the following text: " CODE OF KALANTIAW. Datu Bendehara
Kalantiaw, third chief of Panay, born in Aklan, established his government in
the peninsula of Batang, Aklan Sakup. Considered the first Filipino Lawgiver,
the promulgated in about 1433 about penal code now known as a Code of
Kalantiaw containing 18 articles. Don Marcelino Orilla of Zaragoza, Spain,
obtained the original manuscript from an old chief of Panay which was later
translated into Spanish by Rafael Murviedo Yzamaney.

It was only in my 1968 that it was proved a hoax, when William Henry Scott,
then a doctoral candidate at the university of Santo Tomas, defended his
research on pre-Hispanic sources in Philippines history. He attributed the
Code to a historical fiction written in 1913 by Jose E. Marco titled Las
Antiguas Leyendas de lang Isla de Negros. Marco attributed the Code itself to
a priest named Jose Maria Pavon.

The premise is that not all primary sources are accessible to a general
audience, and without the proper training and background, and non historian
interpreting and primary sources may do more harm than good- a primary
source may even cause misunderstanding; sometimes, even resulting in more
problems. Interpretations of the past, therefore, vary according to who reads
primary sources, when it was read, and how it was read. As student of history
we must be well equipped to recognize
different types of interpretation.
Interpretations of history event change over time; thus, it is an important skill
for a student of history to track these changes in an attempt to understand the
past.

"Sa Aking Mga Kabata " is a poem purportedly written by Jose Rizal when he
was 8 yrs. old and is probably one of Rizals most prominent works. "Ang
hindi magmahal sa kanyang sariling wika mahigit pa sa malansang isda" was
written by Rizal, and worse the evidence against Rizals authorship of the
poem seems all unassailable.
There exist no manuscript of the poem handwritten by Rizal. The poem was
first published in a 1906, in a book by Hermenegildo Cruz. Cruz said he
received the poem from Gabriel Beato Francisco, who claimed to have
received it in 1884 from Rizals close friend, Saturnino Raselis.
. The poem was written in Tagalog and referred to the word "Kalayaan". But it
was documented in Rizals letters that he first encountered the word through a
Marcelo H. del Pilars translation of Rizals essay "El Almor Patrio", where it
was spelled as "kalayahan ". While Rizals native tounge was Tagalog, the
was educated in Spanish, starting from his mother, Teodora Alonso. Later on,
he would express disappointment in his difficulty in expressing himself in his
native tounge. The poems spelling is also suspect-the use of letters "k" and
"w" to replace "c"and " u ", respectively was suggested by Rizal as an adult.
Multiperspectivity this can be defined as a way of looking at historical events,
personalities, development, culture and societies from different perspective.
This means that there is multitude of ways by which we can view the world,
and each could be equally partial as well. Historical writing is, by definition,
biased, partial, and contain preconception. This historical decides on what
sources to use, what interpretation to make more apparent, depending on
what his end is. These are just many of the way a historian may fail in his
historical inference, description, and interpretation. With multiperspectivity as
an approach in history, welcome must understand that historical
interpretations contain discrepancies, contradiction, ambiguities and are often
the focus of dissent.

Different kinds of sources also provide different historical truth-an official

document may note different aspect of the past than, say, ah memoir of an
ordinary person on the same event. Different historical agent create different
historical truths, and while this may be a burdensome work for the historian, it
also renders more validity to the historical scholarship.

Case Study 1:Where Did the first Catholic Mass take place in the
Philippines?
The popularity of knowing where the first happened in history has been an
easy way to trivialize history, but this case study will not focus on the
significance of the site of the First Catholic Mass in the Philippines, but rather,
use it as as a historiographical exercise in the utilization of evidence and
interpretation in reading historical event. Butuan has long been believed as
the site of the first Mass. In fact, this has been the case for three centuries,
culminating in the erection of a monument in 1872 near Agusan River, which
commemorate the expedition 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, accepted interpretation of the first Mass in the
Philippines, made both by Spanish and Filipino scholars.
It must be noted that there are only 2 primary sources that historians refer to
an identifying the site of the Mass. One is the log kept by Francisco Albo, ah
pilot of one of Magellans ship, Trinidad. The was one of the 18 survivors who
returned with Sebastian Elcano in the ship Victoria after they circumnavigated
the world. The other, and the more complete, was the account by Antonio
Pigafetta, Primo viaggio intorno al mondo, (The Voyage Around the world ).
Pigafetta, like Albo, was a member of the Magellan expedition and an
eyewitness of the event, particularly, of the Mass.

Primary Source: Pigafetta and Seven Days in Mazaua Source: Emma Blair
and James Alexander Robertson, The Philippine Islands, Vols. 33 and 34, as
cited in Miguel A. Bernad, "Butuan or Limasawa? The site of the first Mass in
the Philippines:Reexamination of evidence" 1981, Kinaadman:And Journal of
Southwest Philippines, Vols. III, 1-35.
1. On the 16th of March (1521) as they sailed in a westerly course from
Landrones , They saw land towards the Northwest But owing to many shallow
places they did not approach it. They found later that its name was Yunagan.
2. They went instead that same day southwards to another small island name
Suluan, and there they anchored. There they saw some canoes but these fled
at the Spaniards’ approach. This island was at 9 and two-thirds degrees North
Latitude.
3. Departing from those two islands, they sailed westward to an uninhibited
island of “Gada” where they took in a suply of wood and water.
4. From that island they sailed westwards towards a large island name Seilani
that was inhabited and was known to have gold. It was the island of Leyte.
5. Sailing southwards along the the coast of that large island of Seilani, they
turned southwest to a small islad called” Mazava”. That island is also at a
latitude of 9 and two-thirds degrees North.
6. The people of that island Mazava were very good. There the Spaniards
planted a cross upon a mountain top, and from there they were shown three
islands to the west and southwest, where they were told there was much gold.
They showed us how the gold was gathered, which came in small pieces like
peas and lentils.
7. From Mazava they sailed northwards again towards Seilani. They followed
the coast os Silani in northwesterly direction, ascending up to 10 degrees of
latitude where they saw three small islands.
8. Form there they sailed westwards some ten leagues, and the saw three
islets, where they dropped anchor for the night. In the morning they sailed
southwest some 12 leagues, down to a latitude of 10 and one-third degree.
9. They sailed down that channel and then turned westward and anchored at
the town (la villa) of Subu where they stayed many days and obtained
provisions and entered into a peace-pact with the local king.
10. The town of Subu was on east-west direction with the islands os Suluan of
Mazava . But between Mazava and Subu , there were so many shallows that
the boats could not not go westward directly but has to go ( as they did) in a
round-about way.

then and 3rd of April. 8. Thursday, April 4-They leave Mazaua, bound for
Cebu. Using the primary sources available, Jesuit priest Miguel A. Bernard his
work Butuan or Limasawa:The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines:And
Reexamination of Evidence (1981) lays down the argument that in the
Pigafettas account, and crucial aspect of Butuan was not mentioned- the river
of Butuan is a riverine settlement, situated on the Agusan River. The beach
Masao is in the delta of said river. It is a curious omission in the account of the
river, which makes part of a distinct characteristics of Butuans geography that
seemed to be too important to be missed. The Age of Exploration is a period
of competition among European rulers to conquer and colonize lands outside
their original domain. Initially, the goal was to find alternative routes by sea to
get to Asian the main source of spices and other commodities. Existing routes
to Asian we're mainly by land and cost very expensive. And sea route to Asia
means that Europeans could access the spice trade directly, greatly reducing
costs for traders. Spains major foray into the exploration was through
Christopher Columbus, who proposed to sail westward to find a shortcut to
Asia. He was able to reach the Americans, which was then cut off from the
rest of the known world.

Spain colonized parts of the North America, Mexico, and South America in the
16th century. They were also able to reach the Philippines and claim it for the
Spanish crown. Later on, other European rulers would compete with the
activities of exploring and conquering lands. It must also be pointed out that
later on, after Magellans death, the survivors of his expedition went to
Mindanao, and seemingly went to Butuan. In this instance, Pigafetta vividly
describe a trip in a river. But note that this account already happened after
Magellans death.

government, whose head in Filipino would be called hari; but it turns out that
they would place at the head of the government a priest... that the head
selected would be D. Jose Burgos, or D Jacinto Zamora... Such as... the plan
of the rebels, those who guided them, and the means they counted upon for
its realization. It is apparent that the account underscore the reason for the
revolution; the abolition of privileges enjoyed by the workers of the Cavite
arsenal such as exemption from payment of tribute and being employed in
polos y servicios, of force labor. They also identified other reasons which
seemingly made the issu'e a lot more serious which included the presence of
the native clergy, who, out of spite against the Spanish friars “conspired and 
supported”the rebels. Izquierdo, in an obviously biased report, highlighted 
that attempt to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines to install
a new “hari” in the persons of Fathers Burgos and Zamora.‘ AIccoIrding to
him, native clergy attracted supporters by giving them Charismatic  
assurance that their fight would not fail because they had God’s support,
aside from promises Iotfy rewards such as employment,wealth, and ranks in
the army. In the Spaniard’s accounts the event of 1872 was premeditated and
' was part of a big conspiracy among the educated leaders mestizIos, lawyers,
, and residents of Manila and Cavite. They allegedly plan to liquidate high
ranking Spanish officers then kill the friars. The signal they identified among
these conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the rockets fired  from
Intramuros. The accounts detail that on 20 January 1872, the district of
Sampaloc celebrated the feast of the Virgin of Loreto, and came with it were
some  fireworks display. The Caviteños allegedly mistook this as the signal to
commence with the attack. The 200-men contingent led by Sergeant
Lamadrid attacked Spanish officers at Sight and seized the arsenal. Izquierdo,
upon learning of the attack, ordered the reinforcement of the Spanish forces in
Cavite to quell the

revolt. The “revolution” was easily crushed, when the Manilefios who were
expected to aid the Cavitends did not arrive. Leaders of the plot Were killed in
the resulting skirmish, while Fathers Gomez, Burgos and Zamora were tried
by a court martial and sentenced to be executed. Others who were implicated
such as Joaquin Pardo de Tavera,Antonio Ma. Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa,
and other Filipino lawyers were suspended from the practice of law, arrested,
andsentenced to life imprisonment at the Marianas Island. Izquierdo dissolved
the native regiments of artillery and ordered the creation of Ian artillery force
composed exclusively by Peninsulares'. On 17 February 1872, the
GOMBURZA were executed to serve as a threat to Filipinos never to attempt
to fight the Spaniards again. Differing Accounts of  the Events of 1872 Two
other primary accounts must that seem to counter the accounts of Izquierdo
and Montero. First, the account of Dr. Trinidad Hermenegildo PardO de
Tavera a Filipino scholar and researcher who Wrote a Filipino version of the
bloody incident in  Cavite.

Primary Source' Excerpts from Pardo de Tavera's Account of the Cavite

Mutiny 7. Establishment of an Institute of Civil Administration in the
Philippines rendering unnecessary the sending home of short térm civil
officials every time there is a change of ministry. 8. Study of directtax system
9. Abolition of the tobacco monopoly. The arrival in Manila of General
Izquierdo... put a sudden end to all dreams of reforms the prosecutions
instituted by the new Governor General were probably expected as a result of
the bitter disputes  between the Filipino clerics and the friars. Such a policy
must really end in a strong desire on the part of the other to repress cruelly. In
regard to schools, it was previously decreed that there should be in Manilaa
Society of Arts and Trades to be opened in March of 1871 to repress the
growth of liberal teachings General Izquierdo suspended the opening of the
school... the day previous to the scheduled inauguration. The Filipinos had a
duty to render service on public roads construction and pay taxes every year.
But those who were employed at the maestranza of the artillery, in the
engineering shops and arsenal of Cavite were exempted from this obligation
from time immemorial... Without preliminaries of any kind a decree by the
Governor withdrew from such old employees their

retirement privileges and declassified them into the ranks of those who 
worked on public roads. The friars used the incident as a part of a larger
conspiracy to cement their deminance, which had started to show cracks
because of the discontent of the Filipinos. They showcased the mutiny as part
of a greater conspiracy in the Philippines by Filipinos to overthrow the
Spanish Government. Unintentionally, and more so, prophetically, the Cavite
Mutiny of 1872 : resulted in the martyrdom of GOMBURZA and paved the way
to the revolution culminating in 1898. The GOMBURZA is the collective name
of the three martyred priests , Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto
Zamora, who were tagged as the masterminds of the Cavite Mutiny. They
were prominent Filipino priests charged with treason and sedition. It is 
believed that the Spanish clergy connected the priest to the mutiny as part of
a conspiracy to the movement of secular priests who desired to have their
own parishes instead of being merely assistants to the regular friars. The 
GOMBURZA were executed by garrote in public, a scene purportedly
witnessed by a young Jose Rizal. Their martyrdom is widen accepted as the
dawn of Philippine nationalism in the nineteenth century , with Rizal
dedicating his second novel, El Filibusterismo to their memory: “The
Government, by enshrouding your trial in mystery and pardoning your co-
accused, has suggested that some mistake was committed when your fate
was decided; and the whole of the Philippines in paying homage to your
memOry and calling you martyrs totally rejects your guilt. The Church by
refusing  to degrade you has put in doubt the crime charged against you.
Case Study 3:Did Rizal Retract? Jose Rizal is identified as a  hero of the
revolution for his writings that center on ending colonialism and liberating
Filipino minds to contribute to creating the Filipino nation. The great Volume of
Rizals lifework was committed to this end particularly the more influential
ones; Noli Me ‘ Tangere and El Filibusterismo. His essays verify not the
Catholic religion, but the friars, the main agents of injustice in the Philippine
society. It is understandable therefore that, any piece of writing from Rizal that
recants everything he wrote against the friars and the Catholic Church in the
Philippines c0uld deal heavy damage to his image as a prominent  Filipino
revolutionary. Such document purportedly exists, allegedly signed by Rizal a
few hours before his execution. This document, referred to as “The Retraction
,” declares Rizal’s belief in the  Catholic faith, and retracts everything he wrote
against the Church. Primary Source: Rizal’s Retraction. Source: Translated
from the document found by Fr. Manuel Garcia,

C. M on 18 May 1935. I declare myself a Catholic and in this is Religion in

which I was born and educated I wish to live and die. I retract with all my heart
whatever in my words, writings, publications and conduct has been contrary to
my character as son of the Catholic Church. I believe and I confess whatever
she teaches and I submit to whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as
the enemy which is of the Church, and as a Society prohibited by the Church.
The Diocesan Prelate may, as the Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make
public this spontaneous manifestation of mine in order to repair the scandal
which my acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon me.
Manila 29 of December of 1896 Jose Rizal There are four iterations of the
texts of this retraction: the first was published in La Voz Espanola and Diario
de Manila on the day of the execution, 30 December 1896. The second text
appeared in Barcelona, Spain, in the magazine La Juventud, a few months
after the execution, 14 February 1897, from an anonymous writer who was
later on revealed to be Fr. Vicente Balaguer. However, the "original" text was
only found in the archdiocesan archives on 18 May 1935, after almost four
decades of disappearance. The Balaguer Testimony Doubts on the retraction
document abound, especially because only one eyewitness account of the
writing of the document exists- that of the Jesuit friar Fr. Vicente Balaguer.
According to his testimony, Rizal woke up several times, confessed four
times, attended a Mass, received communion, and prayed the rosary, all of
which seemed out of character. But since it is the only testimony of allegedly a
"primary" account that Rizal ever wrote a retraction document, it has been
used to argue the authenticity of the document. The Testimony of Cuerpo de
Vigilancia Another eyewitness account surfaced in 2016,through the research
of Professor Rene R. Escalante. In his research, documents of the Cuerpo de
Vigilancia included a report on the last hours of Rizal, written by Federico
Moreno. The report details the statement of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia to
Moreno. Primary Sources: Eyewitness Account of the Last Hours of Rizal
Source: Michael Charleston Chua, "Retraction ni Jose Rizal: Mga Bagong
Dokumento at Pananaw," GMA News Online, published 29 December 2016.
Most Illustrious Sin, the agent of the Cuerpo de Vigilancia stationed in Fort
Santigo to report on the events during the [illegible] day in prison of the
accused Jose Rizal, informs me on this date of the following:

At 7:50 yesterday morning, Jose Rizal entered death row accompanied by his
counsel, Senor Taviel de Andrade, and the Jesuit priest Vilaclara. At the
urgings of the former and moments after entering, he was served a light
breakfast. At approximately 9, the Assistant of the Plaza, Senor Maure, asked
Rizal if he wanted anything. He replied that at the moment he only wanted a
prayer book, which was brought to him shortly by Father March. Senor
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
that 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 poached egg and a little chicken. Afterwards he asked to leave to
write and wrote for a long time by himself. At 3 in the afternoon, Father March
entered the chapel and Rizal handed him what he had written. Immediately
the chief of the firing squad, Senor del Fresno and the Assistant of the Plaza,
Senor Maure, were informed. They entered death row and together with Rizal
signed the document that the accused had written. At 5 this morning of the
30th, the lover of Rizal arrived at the prison... dressed in mourning. Only the
former entered the chapel, followed by a military chaplain whose name I
cannot ascertain. Donning his formal clothes and aided by a soldier of the
artillery, the nuptials of Rizal and the woman who had been his lover were
performed at the point of death (in aticulo mortis). After embracing him she
left, flooded with tears. This account corroborates the existence of the
retraction document, giving it credence. However, nowhere in the account
was Fr. Balaguer mentioned, which makes the friar a mere secondary source
to the writing of the document. The Retraction of Rizal remains to this day, a
controversy; many scholars, however, agree that the document does not
tarnish the heroism of Rizal. His relevance remained solidified to Filipinos and
pushed them to continue the revolution, which eventually resulted in
independence in 1898. Rizal's Connection to the Katipunan is undeniable - in
fact, the precursor of the Katipunan as an organization is the La Liga Filipina,
an organization Rizal founded, with Andres Bonifacio as one of its members.
But La Liga Filipina was short-lived as the Spaniards exiled Rizal to Dapitan.
Former members decided to band together to establish the Katipunan a few
days after Rizal's excile on 7 July 1892. Rizal may not have been officially part
of the Katipunan, but the Katipuneros showed great appreciation of his work
toward the same goals. Out of the 28 members of the leadership of the
Katipunan (known as the Kataas-taasang Sanggunian ng Katipunan) from
1892 to 1896, 13 were former members of La Liga Filipina. Katipuneros even
used Rizal's name as a password. In 1896, the Katipuneros decided to inform
Rizal of their plans to launch the revolution, and sent Pio Valenzuela to visit
Rizal in Dapitan. Valenzuela's accounts of his meeting with Rizal have been
greatly doubted by many scholars, but according to him, Rizal objected to the
plans, saying that doing so would

be tantamount to suicide since it would be difficult to fight the Spaniards who

had the advantage of military resources. He added that the leaders of the
Katipunan must do everything they could to prevent the spilling of Filipino
blood. Valenzuela informed Rizal that the revolution could inevitably break out
if the Katipunan were to be discovered by the Spaniards. Rizal advised
Valenzuela that the Katipunan should first secure the support of wealthy
Filipinos to strengthen their cause, and suggested that Antonio Luna be
recruited to direct the military movement of the revolution. Case Study 4:
Where did the Cry of Rebellion Happen? Momentous events swept the
Spanish colonies in the late nineteenth century, including the Philippines.
Journalists of the time referred to the phrase "El Grito de Rebellion" or "Cry of
Rebellion" to mark the start of these revolutionary events, identifying the
places where it happened. In the Philippines, this happened in August 1896,
northeast of Manila, wher they declared rebellion against the Spanish colonial
government. These events are important markers in the history of colonies
that struggled for their independence against their colonizers. The controversy
regarding this event stems from the identification of the date and place where
the Cry happened. Prominent Filipino historian Teodoro Agoncilo emphasizes
the event when Bonifacio tore the cedula or tax receipt before the Katipuneros
who also did the same. Some writers identified the first military event with the
Spaniards as the moment of the Cry, for which, Emilio Aguinaldo
commissioned an "Himno de Balintawak" to inspired the renewed struggle
after the Pact of the Biak-na-Bato failed. A monument to the Heroes of 1896
was erected in what is now the intersection of Epifanio de los Santos (EDSA)
Avenue and Andres Bonifacio Drive-North Diversion road, and from then on
until 1962, the Cry of Balintawak was celebrated every 26th of August. The
site of the monument was chosen for an unknown reason. Different Dates and
Places of the Cry Various accounts of the Cry give different dates and places.
A guardia civil, Lt. Olegario Diaz, identified the Cry to have happened in
Balintawak on 25 August 1896.Teodoro Kalaw, Filipino historian, marks the
place to be in Kangkong, Balintawak, on the last week of August 1896.
Santiago Alvarez, a Katipunero and son of Mariano Alvarez, leader of the
Magdiwang faction in Cavite, put the Cry in Bahay Toro in Quezon City on 24
August 1896. Pio Valenzuela, known Katipunero and privy to many events
concerning the Katipunan stated that the Cry happened in Pugad Lawin on 23
August 18. Historian Gregorio Zaide identified the Cry to have happened in
Balintawak on 26 August 1896, while Teodoro Agoncillo put it at Pugad Lawin
on 23 August 1896,according to statements by Pio Valenzuel. Research by
historians Milagros Guerrero, Emmanuel Encarnacion, and Ramon Villegas
claimed that the event took place in Tandang Sora's barn in Gulod, Barangay
Banlat, Quezon City, on 24 August 1896. Primary Sourc: Accounts of the Cry
Guillermo Masangkay

Source: Guillermo Masangkay, "Cry of Balintawak" in Gregorio Zaide and

Zonia Zaide, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8 (Manila:
National Book Store, 1990), 307-309. 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 Remegio, 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 al opposed to
starting the revolution too early... Andres Bonifacio, sensing that he would
lose in 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 (sic)
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." Pio Valenzuela Source: Pio
Valenzuela, "Cry of Pugad Lawin", in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 8 (Manila: Natinal Book
Store, 1990), 301-302. 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 was
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!.

From the eyewitness accounts presented, there is indeed marked

disagreement among historical witnesses as to the place and time of the
occurrence of the Cry. Using primary and secondary sources, four places
have been identified: Balintawak, Kangkong, Pugad Lawin, and Bahay Toro,
while the dates vary: 23,24,25, or 26 August 1896. Valenzuela's account
should be read with caution: He once told a Spanish investigator that the
"Cry" happened in Balintawak on Wednesday, 26 August 1896. Much later, he
wrote in his Memoirs of the Revolution that it happened at Pugad Lawin on 23
August 1896. Such inconsistencies in accounts should always be seen as a
red flag when dealing with primary sources. 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.