MR. JOJIE C.

SAYCON
Master of Arts in History
Doctor of Philosophy in Social Sciences (on-going)

Instructor GE-2 Readings in Philippine History (1st Sem. School Year 2023-2024)

What is multiperspectivity in history?

 Exploring multiple perspectives requires incorporating source materials that reflect

different views of a historical event. In recent decades’ scholars and educators have
begun to question the validity of singular (one-sided) historical narratives. Instead of just
focusing on dominant groups and communities, they recommend employing multiple
perspectives. One reason for this stems from increasing diversity and cultural pluralism,
since many groups—women, the poor, ethnic minorities, etc.—have been ignored in
traditional historical narratives.
 Another reason is disciplinary. After all, good historians don’t just settle for one
perspective on a historical issue—they piece together many (sometimes competing)
versions of a story to construct an accurate interpretation. As Ann Low-Beer explains, "In
history, multiple perspectives are usual and have to be tested against evidence, and
accounted for in judgments and conclusions."
Source: https://teachinghistory.org/teaching-materials/ask-a-master-teacher/23610
Cavite Mutiny

 (January 20, 1872), 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.
 The mutiny was quickly crushed, but the Spanish regime under the reactionary governor
Rafael de Izquierdo magnified the incident and used it as an excuse to clamp down on
those Filipinos who had been calling for governmental reform. A number of 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.
Source: https://www.britannica.com/event/Cavite-Mutiny
SPANISH ACCOUNTS OF THE CAVITE MUNITY
The documentation of Spanish historian Jose Montero y Vidal centered on how the event was
event was an attempt in overthrowing the Spanish government in the Philippines. Although
regarded as a historian, his account of the mutiny was criticized as woefully biased and rabid for
a scholar. Another account from the official report written by the Governor General Rafael
Izquierdo implicated the native clergy, who were then. Active in the movement toward
secularization of parishes. These two accounts corroborated each other.
PRIMARY SOURCE: EXCERPT FROM MONTERO’S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITE MUTINY. Source:
Jose Montero y Vidal , “Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872” in Gregorio Zaide and
Sonia Zaide , 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, attentatory [sic] of the most sacred respects
towards the dethroned majesty; the democratic and republican books and pamphlets; the
speeches and preachings 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
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 REPOST OF GOVERNOR IZQUIERDO ON
THE CAVITE MUTINY OF 1872
Source: Rafael Izquirdo , “Official Report on the Cavite Mutiny,” in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide
, 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. 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 display. The Cavitenos allegedly mistook
this as the signal to commence with the attack. The 200-men contigent 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
However, the Central Spaniards Government introduced an educational decree fusing sectarian
schools run by the friars into a school called the Philippine Institute. The decree aimed to improve
the standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching positions in these schools to
be filled by competitive examinations, an improvement welcomed by most Filipinos.
Another account, this time by French writer Edmund Plauchut , complemented Tavera’s
account and analyzed the motivations of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny. PRIMARY SOURCE:
EXCERPTS FROM PLAUCHUT’S ACCOUNT OF THE CAVITE MUTINY
Source: Edmund Plauchut , “The Cavite Mutiny of 1872 and the Martyrdom of Gom-Bur-Za,” in
the Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide , Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7
(Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 251-268.
General La Torre created a junta composed of high officials including some friars and six Spanish
officials. At the same time there was created by the government in Madrid a committee to
investigate the same problems submitted to the Manila committee. When the two finished work,
it was found that they came to the same conclusions. Here is the summary of the reforms they
considered necessary to introduced:
1. Changes in tariff rates at customs, and the methods of collection.
2. Removal of surcharges on foreign importations.
3. Reduction of export fees.
4. Permission for foreigners to reside in the Philippines, buy real state, enjoy freedom of
worship, and operate commercial transports flying the Spanish flag.
5. Establishment of an advisory council to inform the Minister of Overseas Affairs in Madrid
on the necessary reforms to be implemented.
6. Changes in primary and secondary education.
7. Establishment of an Institute of Civil Administration in the Philippines, rendering
unnecessary the sending home of short-term civil officials every time there is a change of
ministry.
8. Study of direct-tax system.
9. Abolition of the tobacco monopoly.

The arrival in Manila of General Izquierdo put a sudden end to all dreams of reforms the
prosecutions instituted by the now Governor General were probably expected as a result of the
bitter disputes between the Filipino clerics and the friars. Such a policy must really end in a strong
desire on the part of the other to repress cruelly.
In regard to schools, it was previously decreed that there should be in Manila a Society of Arts
and Trades to be opened in March of 1871 to repress the growth of liberal teachings, General
Izquierdo suspended the opening of the school the day previous to the scheduled inauguration.
The Filipinos had a duty to render service on public roads construction and pay taxes every year.
But those who were employed at the maestranza of the artillery, in the engineering shops and
arsenal of Cavite, were exempted from this obligation from time immemorial Without
preliminaries of any kind, a decree by the Governor withdrew from such old employees their
retirement privileges and declassified them into the ranks of those who worked on public roads.
The friars used the incident as a part of a larger conspiracy to cement their dominance, which
had started to show cracks because of the discontent of the Filipinos. They showcased the mutiny
as part of a greater conspiracy in the Philippines by Filipinos to overthrow the Spanish
Government. Unintentionally, and more so, prophetically, the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 resulted in
the martyrdom of GOMBUZA, paved the way to the revolution culminating in 1898.
These events are significant highlights in the Philippine history and have caused ripples right
through time, directly influencing the decisive events of the Philippines Revolution toward the
end of the century. These are considered a major factor in the awakening of nationalism among
the Filipinos of that time and will continue to serve as one up until this preset times.
The statement about the 1872 Cavite Mutiny is examined to shed light on the varying
interpretations offered by historians. Notables are as follows:
Report by Jose Montero y Vidal:

 Sees the incident primarily through the lens of an effort to depose the Spanish rule in the
Philippines.
 Its neutrality has been called into question due to allegations of prejudice and ferocity.
 Corroborates with Governor Izquierdo's testimony, demonstrating some continuity in the
tale.
Report from Governor Izquierdo:

 Possibly includes members of the native clergy, such as those who favor secularizing
churches.
 Complaints about the elimination of benefits like exemption from tribute and forced labor
at the Cavite arsenal are highlighted.
 Educated leaders, mestizos, attorneys, and Manila and Cavite locals are all implicated in
this story's suggested plot.
 Hints that priests Burgos and Zamora are involved in a plot to topple the Spanish
government and install a new leader.
Report by Edmund Plauchut:

 The political and economic setting are discussed, with an emphasis on the changes
instituted by General La Torre and the effects of Governor Izquierdo's initiatives.
 Describes the reforms that should have been made but weren't because of Izquierdo.
 The article discusses the changes in employee responsibilities at the Cavite arsenal and
the suspension of the Society of Arts and Trades.
Motivations:

 Loss of privilege, shifts in the economy, and the perception of wrongdoing all play
significant roles in fueling these frustrations.
 The significance of the native clergy is underlined, especially in light of their association
with anti-friar attitudes.
 Dissatisfaction rises when promised political and economic improvements are not carried
out.
 According to certain versions of events, the mutiny was just one aspect of a bigger plot
that was part of a larger war for independence.
Relevance to History:

 The events of the Cavite Mutiny are often cited as a turning point in Philippine history,
one that sparked a newfound sense of national pride.
 The revolt, which resulted in Gomburza's martyrdom and influenced the ensuing fight for
independence, is sometimes seen as a forerunner to the revolution of 1898.