Angeles University Foundation

College of Business and Accountancy

S.Y. 2019 – 2020

Module III: “One Past but Many Histories:”

“CAVITE MUTINY
Of 1872”

BSA-1C

GROUP 2

DAVID, Maria Thealyn RODRIGUEZ, LAya

GONZALES, Patricia RUBIO, Lovely Ann

MOUSSA, Omniah SAMSON, Kate

PASCUAL, Liezel TUAZON, Jazel Angela

RAMOS, Nicole Jeanvic SUN, Ivan

1
WHAT IS THE CAVITE MUTINY of 1872?

Cavite Mutiny started on January 20, 1872 during the oppression of the Spaniards which

angered the Filipinos especially those who are living in Cavite. It was formed by 200 troops

consisting of workers from Cavite that were allegedly victims of the cruelty of the Spaniards.

Cavite Mutiny was used by the Spanish friars and Izquierdo as a powerful lever by

magnifying it as a full-blown conspiracy involving not only the native army but also included

residents of Cavite and Manila, and more importantly the native clergy to overthrow the Spanish

government in the Philippines. The incident was a vast conspiracy organized throughout the

archipelago with the object of destroying Spanish sovereignty was presented by the friars.

ACCOUNTS OF THE CAVITE MUTINY: SPANISH VERSION

Jose Montero y Vidal, a Spanish historian documented the event and highlighted it as an

attempt of the Indios to defeat the Spanish government in the Philippines. Meanwhile, Gov. Gen.

Rafael Izquierdo’s official report intensified the event and made use of it to implicate the

spirituality, which was then active in the call for secularization. The two accounts complimented

and authenticated with one other, only general’s report was more vicious. Initially, both Montero

and Izquierdo scored out that the removal 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 recited by them including 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 spirituals who out of animosity against the

2
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. Izquierdo, in his report lambasted the Indios as gullible and possessed an innate

propensity for stealing.

The two Spaniards cited that the event of 1872 was planned earlier and was thought of it as a

big conspiracy among educated leaders, mestizos, abogadillos or lawyers, residents of Manila

and Cavite and the native clergy. The conspirators of Manila and Cavite planned to liquidate

high-ranking Spanish officers to be followed by the massacre of the friars. The alleged pre-

concerted signal among the conspirators of Manila and Cavite was the firing of rockets from the

walls of Intramuros.

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.

When the news reached the iron-fisted Gov. Izquierdo, he readily ordered the reinforcement

of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the revolt. The “revolution” was easily crushed when the

expected reinforcement from Manila did not come ashore. Major instigators including Sergeant

Lamadrid were killed in the skirmish, while the GOMBURZA were tried by a court-martial and

were sentenced to die by strangulation. Patriots like Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Antonio Ma.

Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa and other abogadillos were suspended by the Audencia (High Court)

from the practice of law, arrested and were sentenced with life imprisonment at the Marianas

3
Island. Furthermore, Gov. Izquierdo dissolved the native regiments of artillery and ordered the

creation of artillery force to be composed exclusively of the Peninsulares.

On 17 February 1872 in an attempt of the Spanish government and Frailocracia to instill

fear among the Filipinos so that they may never commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA

were executed. This event was tragic but served as one of the moving forces that shaped Filipino

nationalism.

ACCOUNTS OF THE CAVITE MUTINY: FILIPINO VERSION

  Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher, wrote

the Filipino version of the bloody incident in Cavite.  In his point of view, the incident was a

mere mutiny by the native Filipino soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal who turned out to

be dissatisfied with the abolition of their privileges.  Indirectly, Tavera blamed Gov. Izquierdo’s

cold-blooded policies such as the abolition of privileges of the workers and native army members

of the arsenal and the prohibition of the founding of school of arts and trades for the Filipinos,

which the general believed as a cover-up for the organization of a political club.

       On 20 January 1872, about 200 men comprised of soldiers, laborers of the arsenal, and

residents of Cavite headed by Sergeant Lamadrid rose in arms and assassinated the commanding

officer and Spanish officers in sight.  The insurgents were expecting support from the bulk of the

army unfortunately, that didn’t happen.  The news about the mutiny reached authorities in

Manila and Gen. Izquierdo immediately ordered the reinforcement of Spanish troops in Cavite. 

After two days, the mutiny was officially declared subdued.

4
      Tavera believed that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a powerful

lever by magnifying it as a full-blown conspiracy involving not only the native army but also

included residents of Cavite and Manila, and more importantly the native clergy to overthrow the

Spanish government in the Philippines.  It is noteworthy that during the time, the Central

Government in Madrid announced its intention to deprive the friars of all the powers of

intervention in matters of civil government and the direction and management of educational

institutions.  This turnout of events was believed by Tavera, prompted the friars to do something

drastic in their dire sedire to maintain power in the Philippines.

       Meanwhile, in the intention of installing reforms, the Central Government of Spain

welcomed an educational decree authored by Segismundo Moret promoted the fusion of

sectarian schools run by the friars into a school called Philippine Institute.  The decree proposed

to improve the standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching positions in such

schools to be filled by competitive examinations. This improvement was warmly received by

most Filipinos in spite of the native clergy’s zest for secularization.

       The friars, fearing that their influence in the Philippines would be a thing of the past, took

advantage of the incident and presented it to the Spanish Government as a vast conspiracy

organized throughout the archipelago with the object of destroying Spanish sovereignty. Tavera

sadly confirmed that the Madrid government came to believe that the scheme was true without

any attempt to investigate the real facts or extent of the alleged “revolution” reported by

Izquierdo and the friars.

       Convicted educated men who participated in the mutiny were sentenced life imprisonment

while members of the native clergy headed by the GOMBURZA were tried and executed by

5
garrote.  This episode leads to the awakening of nationalism and eventually to the outbreak of

Philippine Revolution of 1896.  The French writer Edmund Plauchut’s account complimented

Tavera’s account by confirming that the event happened due to discontentment of the arsenal

workers and soldiers in Cavite fort.  The Frenchman, however, dwelt more on the execution of

the three martyr priests which he actually witnessed.

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF THE ACCOUNTS

The account of Jose Montero y Vidal is the fullest account of the mutiny itself. It

embodies the official representation of the mutiny in Cavite. Published only in 1895, at the

height of the Filipino Nationalist Campaign, Montero’s account is strongly hostile to Filipino

reformist aspirations, has no doubt of the guilt of those executed or exiled, and places much of

the blame for the revolt of 1872 on the alleged tolerance of Governor-General Carlos Maria de la

Torre in the period 1879-1871.

Considering the four accounts of the 1872 Mutiny, there were some basic facts that

remained to be unvarying: First, there was dissatisfaction among the workers of the arsenal as

well as the members of the native army after their privileges were drawn back by Gen. Izquierdo;

Second, Gen. Izquierdo introduced rigid and strict policies that made the Filipinos move and turn

away from Spanish government out of disgust; Third, the Central Government failed to conduct

an investigation on what truly transpired but relied on reports of Izquierdo and the friars and the

opinion of the public; Fourth, the happy days of the friars were already numbered in 1872 when

the Central Government in Spain decided to deprive them of the power to intervene in

government affairs as well as in the direction and management of schools prompting them to

6
commit frantic moves to extend their stay and power; Fifth,  the Filipino clergy members

actively participated in the secularization movement in order to  allow Filipino priests to take

hold of the parishes in the country making them prey to the rage of the friars; Sixth, Filipinos

during the time were active participants, and responded to what they deemed as injustices; and

Lastly, the execution of GOMBURZA was a blunder on the part of the Spanish government, for

the action severed the ill-feelings of the Filipinos and the event inspired Filipino patriots to call

for reforms and eventually independence.  There may be different versions of the event, but one

thing is certain, the 1872 Cavite Mutiny paved way for a momentous 1898.

        The road to independence was rough and tough to toddle, many patriots named and

unnamed shed their bloods to attain reforms and achieve independence.  12 June 1898 may be a

glorious event for us, but we should not forget that before we came across to victory, our

forefathers suffered enough.  As weenjoy our freeedom, may we be more historically aware of

our past to have a better future ahead of us.  And just like what Elias said in Noli me Tangere,

may we “not forget those who fell during the night.”

7
REFERENCES:

http://nhcp.gov.ph/the-two-faces-of-the-1872-cavite-mutiny/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1872_Cavite_mutiny

https://www.britannica.com/event/Cavite-Mutiny

https://www.jstor.org/stable/42634842?read-now=1&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

https://prezi.com/p/r61dgzw7yf-g/cavite-mutiny/