The mystery of Bonifacio’s bones

By: Ambeth R. Ocampo - @inquirerdotnet

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 12:52 AM November 30, 2011

On Nov. 30, 1863, a boy was born in Tondo to Santiago Bonifacio and Catalina de Castro. In the church calendar
the day 30 is marked as the feast of St. Andrew, so the child was christened Andres Bonifacio. During the
Spanish period Nov. 30 was celebrated in Spanish Manila because San Andres was considered one of the
heavenly protectors of the Walled City. It is still a holiday in our times because the nation honors Andres
Bonifacio, one of our many national heroes, the Supremo of the Katipunan.

Some people make the mistake of declaring that Bonifacio is the “Hero of Manila.” That title rightfully belongs
to Soliman who defended but lost Maynila, which was enclosed by wooden palisades, to the Spaniards in the
16th century

Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/18213/the-mystery-of-bonifacio%e2%80%99s-bones#ixzz5XlO9yQgc

Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

Our history can often be confused and confusing because we keep changing the titles of our heroes, just as
quickly as we encounter changes in our street names. Epifanio de los Santos Avenue or Edsa has been with us
for a while, its name “sanctified by usage,” its name recorded in history as the site of People Power I and II.
Now a well-meaning lawmaker, without complete staff work, proposes to rename Edsa to CCAA or Corazon
C. Aquino Avenue. To complicate matters further, Cory happens to be the sainted mother of the incumbent
President.
We know that Jose Rizal is buried under the Rizal Monument in Luneta, Emilio Aguinaldo behind his mansion
in Kawit, Apolinario Mabini in Batangas, and Juan Luna in a crypt at San Agustin Church in Intramuros.
Gregoria de Jesus is joined by many other historical people in the Manila North Cemetery. But where is
Bonifacio buried? The Supremo has not been accorded a proper burial because we do not know where his
remains are.
Some bones exhumed in Maragondon, Cavite, in 1918 were said to be Bonifacio’s. I never believed these to be
authentic because history tells us that Andres and Procopio Bonifacio were executed in Maragondon on May
10, 1897. A revolutionary court found them guilty of treason and sentenced them both to death. The brothers
Bonifacio were buried in the same grave, yet only one set of bones was exhumed in 1918. If these are indeed
the remains of Andres Bonifacio, where are the remains of Procopio? If these are the bones of Procopio, then
where are the bones of Andres?
It is widely believed that the so-called Bonifacio bones exhumed in 1918 were deposited in the National
Library and Museum, where they were lost or destroyed during the Battle for Manila in 1945.
There is another story that says these bones were interred at the base of the Bonifacio Monument in Caloocan,
the masterpiece by Guillermo Tolentino that has given its name to the place everyone knows today as
“Monumento.” A certain Dr. Servando de los Angeles claimed that after the bones were examined and
“authenticated” by Dr. Sixto de los Angeles (the relation between the two is not known), they were cremated
and deposited under the Bonifacio Monument, which was completed in 1933.
Guillermo Masangkay claimed that the bones were kept and later destroyed in the Legislative Building in
1945.
If we follow the bones, as reported in the newspapers, these were exposed for veneration by the public in the
Temple of the Legionarios del Trabajo at the junction of Azcarraga and Soler in downtown Manila, until
Manuel Quezon caused them to be transferred to the National Museum where they were destroyed during the
World War II.
Then there was an item in The Independent of March 6, 1926, entitled “Desaparicion de los restos del gran
plebeyo?” that stated:
“The most salient note of the week is the mysterious disappearance of the remains, supposed or authentic, of
Andres Bonifacio which were deposited in the Templo de Jerusalem de los Legionario del Trabajo after it
arrived in Manila from Maragondon, Cavite, where they were exhumed three months ago (sic).”
ADVERTISEMENT

“No one knows for sure where the thief brought the remains of the Great Plebian, but we remember the
discussion and conflicts that were exchanged upon the transfer of the remains to Manila. While the Veteranos
de la Revolucion maintain that these remains are not Bonifacio’s, others affirm, among them the bibliographer
Epifanio de los Santos, that they are authentic. The police are engaged in the corresponding investigation.”
I believe these controversial “Bonifacio bones” disappeared because they would not have withstood closer
scrutiny. The last time they were seen was in 1926 in the Temple of the Legionarios del Trabajo. Where are
they now should not matter because the Bonifacio brothers lie somewhere in the Maragondon mountain range
waiting to be found and exhumed. Only then can the Bonifacio brothers be given a proper burial with full state
honors.
When we make floral offerings and speeches at the Bonifacio Monument in Caloocan or the Bonifacio Shrine
in Manila, we commemorate a hero before empty graves.
***
This Saturday, Dec. 3, I will deliver my last “History Comes Alive” lecture for 2011 on the Rizal Monument,
entitled “Doble Kara: Rizal in Art and Monuments,” at the Ayala Museum at 3 p.m. The public is invited.
Lecture comes with museum admission.

Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/18213/the-mystery-of-bonifacio%e2%80%99s-

bones#ixzz5XlONUxEO
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook
One of Agoncillo’s major points was the debunking of the Grito de Balintawak
tradition. Since the turn of the century, it has been widely believed that the
first cry of the revolution took place in Balintawak, Caloocan. Then along came
Agoncillo who gave the exact date for the cry as August 23, 1896, and the exact
place to be not Balintawak but Pugadlawin. Despite these becoming textbook
facts, the Balintawak tradition continues to thrive. Nick Joaquin still writes
in support of Balintawak, and I myself did not think about this very much until
I was invited to deliver a paper for the first Annual Bonifacio Lectures in
1989. Reviewing sources on the revolution, I found out that the Balintawak
tradition was more popular than that of the Pugadlawin.

This controversy remains unresolved except in our textbooks. What was so

surprising was to find out that depending on the book one read, there were five
dates for the Cry – August 20, 23, 24, 25, and 26 – and five different
venues for the first cry: Balintawak, Pugadlawin, Kangkong, Bahay Toro, and
Pasong Tamo!

Writing about it did not settle things because readers demanded an exact answer
which I was unable to give. So when and where did it actually happen? To this
day, I am still confused and stumped, and the only reply I have is that the cry
occurred towards the end of August 1896 and that all the places mentioned are
in Caloocan, which in those times was a district of Balintawak!

In 1989, after a series of articles on the controversy over Balintawak and

Pugadlawin, I received a batch of photocopied manuscripts with an invitation to
peruse the originals of what appeared to be the papers of Bonifacio. Knowing
that these were transcribed and printed by Agoncillo in two separate books, I
did not bother to decipher Bonifacio’s fine script. Months later, on a lazy
afternoon, I decided to compare the Agoncillo transcriptions with the Bonifacio
originals. I was surprised to find discrepancies in the text. While Agoncillo
reproduced the “orihinal sa Tagalog,” it proved to be slightly different
from the manuscripts. I realized immediately that Agoncillo did not have access
to the original Bonifacio papers. He merely translated an English translation
of the Bonifacio papers, which were themselves translated from Spanish by
Epifanio de los Santos who possessed the original Tagalog manuscripts.
Agoncillo’s so-called “originals” were actually a tertiary or, at least,
a second-generation translation! Missing for almost fifty years, the original
Katipunan papers were offered for sale and broken up into smaller collections
now owned by at least two private collectors and an antique dealer.
Fortunately, Bonifacio’s papers are made available by the present owners, Mr.
Emmanuel Encarnacion of Quezon City and Atty. Jorge de los Santos of Malabon;
but the notebooks of Emilio Jacinto continue to be with an antique dealer who
would not allow scholarly access unless one was interested in buying them!

If there is so much that is debatable in simple things, like the date and place
of Bonifacio’s Cry or his attire and weaponry, what more with the general
picture of the Katipunan and the Revolution? As materials resurface and new
documents and manuscripts both here and abroad are discovered, it becomes
necessary to evolve new ways of interpreting the Katipunan, such as that of
Reynaldo Ileto in his book, Pasyon and Revolution (1979). Perhaps we need
another major book on the Katipunan that will give us a view different from
that of Agoncillo’s. Instead of focusing on the great men or heroes, maybe we
can try to find out about the “underside” of history – those forgotten
men and women who fought under the Katipunan, and their beliefs, motives, and
appearances, among other things. Only then can this generation rewrite its own
history, separate myth from reality, clarify legend from truth, and thereby
gain a new way of seeing into our past and hopefully into our future. 5 July
1992