WHAT HAPPENED IN THE CAVITE MUTINY?

A CASE STUDY OF PANGASINAN STATE UNIVERSITY, PHILIPPINES

SUBMITTED TO:

MENCHIE E. CASTILLO

(GE 2 INSTRUCTOR)

SUBMITTED BY:

BAUTISTA, MAUREEN JOY B.

FLORES, JATHNIEL F.

PATACSIL, RENALD P.

May 11, 2022

INTRODUCTION

Jointly the Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of three priests, Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and

Jacinto Zamora, later immortalized as GOMBURZA, took place in 1872. While the significance is

undeniable, it was the various perspectives on the story, a battle of viewpoints supported by primary

sources, that made this year so contentious. The events of the Cavite Mutiny, which were a major factor

in the emergence of nationalism among Filipinos at the time, are the focus of this case study.

Cavite Mutiny, on January 20, 1872, a brief uprising of two hundred Filipino troops and workers

at the Cavite arsenal that served as a pretext for Spanish repression of the fledgling Philippine nationalist

movement. In an ironic twist, the harsh response of the Spanish authorities aided the nationalist cause.

The mutiny was quickly suppressed, but the Spanish regime, led by reactionary governor Rafael

de Izquierdo, exaggerated the incident, and used it as an excuse to crack down on Filipino reformists.

Several intellectuals from the Philippines were apprehended and charged with collaborating with the

mutineers. After a brief trial, three priests, José Burgos, Jacinto Zamora, and Mariano Gómez, were

publicly executed. Later, the three became martyrs for the cause of Philippine independence.

José Antonio Julián Montero y Vidal was a Spanish writer, historian, geographer, and politician

who lived from 1851 to the first half of the twentieth century. He worked and wrote for many years about

the Spanish overseas provinces of the Philippines and Cuba. José Montero y Vidal was a corresponding

member of the Royal Academy of History for a reason: he authored essays and books about the history,

geography, and ethnography of the Philippines, an area in which he distinguished himself as one of the

greatest experts of the nineteenth century. Several of his works were deemed useful to the army and

awarded at the General Exhibition of 1887, and they are still used as a reference for Spanish-language

literature in the Philippines today.

statesman who was born on September 30, 1820, and died on November 9, 1883. He served as Governor-

General of the Philippines from 4 April 1871 to 8 January 1873. In contrast to his predecessor, Carlos

Mara de la Torre y Navacerrada's liberal government, he was known for his use of "Iron Fist"

government. He was Governor-General during the 1872 Cavite mutiny, and forty-one mutineers,

including the Gomburza martyrs, were executed. Izquierdo was Governor-General of Puerto Rico from

March to April 1862.

The documentation of Jose Montero y Vidal, a Spanish historian, focused on how the event was

an attempt to destabilize the Spanish government in the Philippines. Despite his reputation as a historian,

his account of the mutiny was widely criticized for being far too biased and rabid for a scholar. Another

account from then-Governor General Rafael Izquierdo's official report implicated native clergy, who were

active at the time in the movement to secularize parishes. Both accounts agreed.
BODY

In 1872, two major events occurred: the 1872 Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of the three

martyr priests, Fathers Mariano Gomes, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora (GOMBURZA).

Cavite Mutiny, brief uprising of 200 Filipino troops and workers at the Cavite arsenal, which

became the excuse for Spanish repression of the embryonic Philippine nationalist movement. Ironically,

the harsh reaction of the Spanish authorities served ultimately to promote the nationalist cause.  Several

Filipino intellectuals were seized and accused of complicity with the mutineers. After a brief trial, three

priests—José Burgos, Jacinto Zamora, and Mariano Gómez—were publicly executed. The three

subsequently became martyrs to the cause of Philippine independence.

Additional Note: However, not all of us were aware that there were multiple reports of the same

occurrence. All Filipinos should be aware of the various perspectives on the event, as it led to another

terrible yet significant chapter in our history: the execution of GOMBURZA, which was a major

component in the emergence of Filipino nationalism.

PRIMARY SOURCE: EXCERPTS FROM MONTERO'S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITE

Sonia Zadie, Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book

Store, 1990), 269- 273.

The abolition of privileges enjoyed by the laborers of the Cavite arsenal of exemption from the

tribute was, according to some, the cause of the insurrection. There were, however, other causes.

The Spanish revolution which overthrew a secular throne; the propaganda carried on by an

unbridled press against monarchical principles, attenuator [sic] of the most sacred respects towards the
dethroned majesty; the democratic and republican books and pamphlets; the speeches and

preaching of the apostles of these new ideas in Spain; the outbursts of the American

publicists and the criminal policy of the senseless Governor whom the Revolutionary government sent to

govern the Philippines, and who put into practice these ideas were the determining circumstances

which gave rise, among certain Filipinos, to the idea of attaining the their independence. It was

towards this goal that they started to work, with the powerful assistance of a certain section of

the native clergy, who out of spite towards friars, made common cause with the enemies of the mother

country.

At various times but especially in the beginning of year 1872, the authorities received anonymous

communication with the information that a great uprising would break out against the Spaniards, the

minute the fleet at Cavite left for the South, and that all would be assassinated, conspiracy had been going

on since the days of La Torre with utmost secrecy. At times, the principal leaders met either in the house

of Filipino Spaniard, D. Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, or in that of the native priest, Jacinto Zamora, and these

meetings were usually attended by the curate of Bacoor, the soul of the movement, whose energetic

character and immense wealth enabled him to exercise a strong influence.

PRIMARY SOURCES: EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL REPORT OF GOVERNOR

IZQUIERDO ON THE CAVITE MUTINY OF 1872

Source: Rafael Izquirdo, “Official Report on the Cavite Mutiny,” in Gregorio Zaide and SoniaZaide,

Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store,1990), 281-

286.
 It seems definite that the insurrection was motivated and prepared by the native clergy, by the

mestizos and native lawyers, and by those known here as abogadillos.

The instigators, to carry out their criminal project, protested against the injustice

of the government in not paying the provinces for their tobacco crop, and against the usury that some

practice in documents that the Finance department gives crop owners who have to sell them at a loss.

They encouraged the rebellion by pretesting what they called the injustice of having obliged the workers

in the Cavite arsenal to pay tribute starting January 1 and render personal service, from which they were

formerly exempted. The instigators, to carry out their criminal project, protested against the

injustice of the government in not paying the provinces for their tobacco crop, and against the usury

that some practice in documents that the Finance department gives crop owners who have to sell them at a

loss. They encouraged the rebellion by pretesting what they called the injustice of having obliged the

workers in the Cavite arsenal to pay tribute starting January 1 and render personal service, from which

they were formerly exempted. Up to now it has not been clearly determined if they planned to establish a

monarchy or a republic, because the Indios have no word in their language to describe this different form

of 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 is the plan of the rebels, those who guided them, and the means they counted upon for its

realization.

It is apparent that the accounts underscore the reason for the “revolution”: the abolition of

privileges enjoyed by the workers of the Cavite arsenal such as exemption from the payment of tribute

and being employed in polos y servicios, or force labor. They also identified other reasons which

seemingly made the issue a lot more serious, which include 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 Burgors and Zamora. According 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 of lofty 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, mestizos, 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 displays. 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 Manilenos who were expected to aid the Cavitenos 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 de Tavera, Antonio Ma.

Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa, and other Filipino lawyers were suspended from the practice of

law, arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment at the Marianas Island. Izquierdo dissolved the

native regiments of artillery and ordered the creation of an 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.

1872 Cavite Mutiny: Spanish Perspective

attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines. Meanwhile.

Gen. Rafael Izquierdo’s official report magnified the event and made use of it to implicate the

native clergy, which was then active in the call for secularization.

2. The two accounts complimented and corroborated with one other, only that the general’s report

was more spiteful. Initially, both Montero and Izquierdo scored out (cross out) that the abolition

of privileges enjoyed by the workers of Cavite arsenal such as non-payment of tributes and

exemption from force labor were the main reasons of the “revolution” as how they called it,

however, other causes were enumerated by them i.e. the Spanish Revolution which overthrew

the secular throne, dirty propagandas proliferated by unrestrained press, democratic,

liberal and republican books and pamphlets reaching the Philippines, and most importantly,

the presence of the native clergy who out of animosity against the Spanish friars, “conspired and

supported” the rebels and enemies of Spain. In particular, Izquierdo blamed the unruly

Spanish Press for “stockpiling” malicious propagandas grasped by the Filipinos. He reported to

the King of Spain that the “rebels” wanted to overthrow the Spanish government to install a new

“hari” in the likes of Fathers Burgos and Zamora. The general even added that the native clergy

enticed other participants by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight will not fail

because God is with them coupled with handsome promises of rewards such as employment,

wealth, and ranks in the army. Izquierdo, in his report lambasted (criticize harshly) the Indios as

gullible and possessed an innate propensity for stealing.

3. In these accounts, it was stated and proved that the Cavite mutiny happened.

4. Both accounts from Jose Montero y Vidal and Governor Izquierdo states that the mutiny is

already planned and supported by the native clergy who wants to overthrow the Spanish

Government in the country.

The Cavity Mutiny is one of the historical events happened in Philippine history during the

Spanish Government. It is about the brief uprising of two hundred (200) Filipino troops and workers in

the Cavite arsenal which was viewed by the Spanish perspectives as an attempt to overthrow their

government.

There are several accounts and viewpoints pertaining about the Cavity mutiny —when and where

the mutiny took place and why did it happened. Some of the sources are the perspective of Spanish

historian Jose Montero y Vidal’s account and the official report of Governor Rafael Isquierdo, a Spanish

military officer, politician and statesman that served as Governor General of the Philippines from April

4,1871 to January 8, 1873.

Both of Vidal’s account and Gov. Isquierdo’s report complimented with each other, only that the

governor’s report was more spiteful. They both agreed that the main reason of the mutiny is not only

about the abolition of privileges enjoyed by the workers of Cavite arsenal such as non-payment of tributes

and exemption from force labor. In addition, the two Spaniards deemed that the event of 1872 was

planned earlier and was thought of it as a big conspiracy among educated leaders, mestizos, abogadillos

or native lawyers, residents of Manila and Cavite and the native clergy to overthrow the Spanish

government in the country. They insinuated that the conspirators of Manila and Cavite planned to

liquidate high-ranking Spanish officers to be followed by the massacre of the friars.

According to the accounts of the two, on 20 January 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated the

feast of the Virgin of Loreto, unfortunately participants to the feast celebrated the occasion with

the usual fireworks displays. Allegedly, those in Cavite mistook the fireworks as the sign for the attack,
and just like what was agreed upon, the 200-men contingent headed by Sergeant Lamadrid launched an

attack targeting Spanish officers at sight and seized the arsenal.

These Spanish accounts seemed so biased about their perspectives of the mutiny and tainted

Filipinos as conspirators and instigators of the incident as a planned revolution against their government.

Although it is from the point of view of Spaniards, It is very important for Filipinos to be aware of these

various perspectives as the mutiny led to another terrible yet very significant occurrence in the history:

the execution and martyrdom of the three priests Jose Burgos, Jacinto Zamora and Mariano Gomez

(GOMBURZA) to the cause of Philippine Independence. Due to this events in the past, nationalism and

the greater desire for holistic independence in the Philippines arose in the heart and mind of Filipinos.