Danica Jen M.

Villanueva
ME – 1108

MAIN TOPIC III – LEARNING TASK

1. Using the internet, search for additional primary and secondary sources to enhance your
knowledge about each controversial issues presented.

A. The First Mass Site in the Philippines

1. Primary Sources
• Antonio Pigafetta’s memoirs stating the celebration of the first mass in the
Philippines on March 31, 1521 by Fr. Pedro de Valderama along the shores
of what was referred by Pigafetta as “Mazaua”
– Pigafetta’s testimony about their route
– Evidence of Pigafetta’s map
– Their seven days at “Mazaua”
– Two native chieftains
• Logbook of Fransisco Albo, the pilot of Trinidad, one of Magellan’s ships
that circumnavigated the world
2. Secondary Sources
• James Roberton’s English translation of the original Italian manuscript of
Pigaffeta's account certified by the University of the Philippines'
Department of European Language.
• French version currently kept in Yale University’s Beinecke Rare Book &
Manuscript Library
• Italian version in the Veneranda Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan, Italy
• Two French versions in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France
• Schreurs, Peter. “The First Mass Site Revisited. Philippine Quarterly of
Culture and Society”. Vol. 9, No. 3 (September 1981), pp. 192-216
• Arnaiz, Jani. “1st Mass controversy: It's Limasawa”. Inquirer Visayas (April
15, 1999)
• De Jesus,Vicente C. “Mazaua: Magellan’s Lost Harbor”. Pacific Maritime
History. (2000)
• Borrinaga, Rolando O. “Barangay Triana: The Right Site of the First Mass
in Limasawa in 1521”. The Journal of History. Vol. 54, No. 1 (2008)
• Makabenta, Yen. “Magellan never went to Butuan”. Manila Times. (January
31, 2019)
• Yumol, David Tristan. “NHCP affirms Limasawa Island as site of first
Catholic mass in the country”. CNN Philippines. ( August 20, 2020)
 • Mayol, Vincent Ador & Gabieta, Joey. “Limasawa, not Butuan, affirmed as
site of first Mass in PH”. Inquirer.Net (August 21, 2020)
• Reyes, Ronald O. “Historians favor Limasawa as site of Philippines’ first
Easter Sunday Mass”. Sunstar PH. (August 21, 2020)

B. The Two Faces of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny

1. Primary Sources
• The Archbishop’s exposition regarding the history of antagonism between
secular and regular clergy. (Archbishop Gregorio Melitón Martinez to
Marshal Fransisco Serrano, Regent of Spain)
• Documents concerning the censorship of mail addressed to various
individuals, among them. Father Burgos and other Filipino priests.
• Documents indicating that no real evidence of disloyal or illegal activity
existed against Fr. Burgos as late as September 1871.
• Telegrams indicating the progress of the Cavite revolt from January 21 to
January 22.
• The letter of Archbishop Gregorio Meliton Martinez to the Governor-
General pleading clemency for the guilty.
• A communication to the Governor-General from the President of the Court-
Martial.
• A copy of the sentence imposed on Fr. Jose Burgos, Fr. Jacinto Zamora and
Fr. Mariano Gomez
• Accounts from Jose Montero y Vidal (Spanish Historian) and Gov. Gen.
Rafael Izquierdo against accounts from Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de
Tavera (Filipino Scholar and researcher) and Edmund Plauchut
2. Secondary Sources
• Schumacher, John N. & Cushner, Nicholas P. “Documents Relating to
Father Jose Burgos and the Cavite Mutiny of 1872”. Philippine Studies Vol.
17, No. 3 (1969), pp. 457-529
• Schumacher, John N. “The Cavite Mutiny: An Essay of the Published
Sources”. Philippine Studies Vol. 20, No. 4 (Fourth Quarter 1972),
pp. 603 – 632
• Guerrero, Leon Maria. “The First Filipino”. Guerrero Publishing (2010)
pp. 16 - 18
• Schumacher, John N. “The Cavite Mutiny Toward a Definitive History”.
Philippine Studies Vol. 59 , No.1 (March 2011), pp. 55 - 81
 • Piedad-Pugay, Chris Antonette. “The Two Faces of the 1872 Cavite
Mutiny”. National Historical Commission of the Philippines.
(September 5, 2012)
• Koh, Eusebio. “The 1872 Cavite Mutiny”. Manitoba: Filipino Journal. Vol.
26, No. 4

C. Cry of Balintawak or Pugadlawin?

1. Primary Sources
• Pio Valenzuela’s Controversial “Cry of Pugad Lawin” (August 23, 1896)
• Santiago Alvarez;s The “Cry of Bahay Toro” (August 24, 1896)
• Gregoria de Jesus’ Version of the First “Cry” (August 25, 1896)
• Guillermo Masangkay’s The “Cry of Balintawak” (August 26, 1896)
2. Secondary Sources
• Zafra, Nicolas P. “The ‘Cry of Balintawak’ as a Historical Problem”.
Historical Bulletin. Vol. 3 (September 1960), pp. 13 - 4
• Paredes, Joel. “Search for ‘Cry’ Site Takes a New Twist”. Times Journal.
(July 11, 1983). P. 678
• Borromeo-Buehler, Soledad. “The Cry of Balintawak: A Contrived
Controversy”. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press. (1998),
pp. 18 - 20
• Guerrero, Milagros C. , Encarnacion, Emmanuel N. & Villegas, Ramon N.
“In Focus: Balintawak: The Cry for a Nationwide Revolution”. NCCA.gov
(June 6, 2003)
• Pardon, Renato. “Cry of Pugadlawin: 1896 Philippine Revolution Against
Spain”. Munting Nayon. (August 11, 2015)
• Elefante, Fil V. “The Katagalugan Republic and the Cry of Pugad Lawin”.
Business Mirror. (June 14, 2016)
• Gomez, Corrie. “Cry of Balintawak or Pugad Lawin”. StuDocu. Ateneo de
Davao University. (2019)
• Richardson, Jim. “Notes on the “Cry” of August 1896”. Kasaysayan-KKK.
(March 2019)
• Ojo, Praise. “The Cry of Pugad Lawin and the Birth of the Revolution”.
War History Online.
2. Make a suggestion about alternative ways to writing a position paper

An alternative way of writing a position paper is dividing it into an introduction, body

and conclusion. In a position paper, one must convince his audience that his argument is the most
valid and defensible. One way to do this is to be critical in choosing the topic. The agreeability of
the said topic must first be established by ensuring that it is well-supported. This can be done
through research and inquiry which will help the author know the pros and cons of his argument.
Another consideration is regarding the audience in order to know the concepts one should
elaborate on, the background information the audience needs, and the key points he must focus
on to convince them.

After considering these factors, an argument can now be established from the formulated
pros and cons of each position. All of these will cover the Introduction part of the position paper.
It must be informative and organized in such a way that the audience will understand one's stand
in the paper given the background information presented. It shall also include the thesis
statement which will clearly state the argument of the author.

The next part of the position paper is the body which shall encompass one's
counterarguments and arguments. He must address the claims of the other side by providing
supporting information and disproving them through evidence. After considering the
counterarguments, he can now assert points for his claim in his argument. This is done by giving
an empirical opinion and supporting them with proof or evidence.

The last part would be the conclusion which will restate and summarize the argument and
dismiss counterarguments briefly. It may also provide recommendations or suggestions but must
not introduce new information. Proofreading the whole text should also be done to ensure that
there would be no more corrections or errors in the position paper.