Case Study: The Tejeros Convention of 1897

Background: The Katipunan Split

The Kataas-taasang Kagalang-galangang Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan (the Katipunan), commonly called by its short name, was a secret society founded by Andres Bonifacio to fight for Philippine independence from Spain. By 1896, the Katipunan had expanded rapidly and its internal structures had grown into two major factions:

• Magdiwang, based in Noveleta, led by Mariano Alvarez
• Magdalo, based in Kawit, led by Baldomero Aguinaldo

Tensions grew between Bonifacio and Emilio Aguinaldo over strategy and leadership. A series of Spanish military defeats further eroded Bonifacio's standing, especially in Cavite.

To resolve the conflict, the Tejeros Convention was held on March 22, 1897. Elections were held: Aguinaldo was elected President of the new revolutionary government. When Danielo Tirona challenged Bonifacio's qualification for the position he had been elected to, Bonifacio declared the proceedings null and void. He was later arrested, tried, and executed on charges of treason in Maragondon, Cavite, in May 1897.

The Tejeros Convention is significant to historians not only for its political outcomes but because it illustrates how different sources record the same event very differently depending on the author's position, loyalties, and purpose.

The Two Primary Sources Under Analysis

Source 1: Katipunan and the Revolution: Memoirs of a General by Santiago V. Alvarez

Santiago Alvarez (1872–?) was a member of the Magdiwang faction and a direct participant in the events of the revolution. His memoirs were originally serialized in the Tagalog weekly Sampagita in the 1920s. Because Alvarez was present at the Tejeros Convention and was a member of the Magdiwang (Bonifacio's closer allies), his account is a primary source — but one with clear potential biases stemming from his political loyalties.

Source 2: The Revolt of the Masses: The Story of Bonifacio and the Katipunan by Teodoro A. Agoncillo

Teodoro Agoncillo (1912–1985) was one of the most prominent Filipino historians of the 20th century, credited with pioneering a nationalist historiography — the view that Philippine history must be written from a Filipino perspective, centered on the experiences of ordinary Filipinos. His book, first published in 1956, argues that the masses made the revolution possible.

Because Agoncillo was not an eyewitness to the events, his work is a secondary source. However, he drew on a wide range of primary documents and is considered a major scholarly reference.

Note: The original module includes full-text excerpts (approx. 12 scanned pages) from both books as image reproductions. Students are directed to access the original published works: Alvarez (Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1992/1996) and Agoncillo, Revolt of the Masses (University of the Philippines Press, 2nd ed. 2002/2005).

Applying the Tests: A Framework for Comparison

When comparing both accounts of the Tejeros Convention, evaluate:

External Criticism (Authenticity):

• Brief description of each source (genre, form, original language, publication history)
• Competence of the author (direct participant vs. later scholar)
• Origin of the information (personal witness vs. documentary research)
• Date of composition relative to the events described

Internal Criticism (Credibility):

• What were the objectives of each author?
• Who were the key persons discussed in each account?
• What are the visible biases of each author?
• How do the accounts compare with each other and with other independent sources?