Republic of the Philippines

BOHOL ISLAND STATE UNIVERSITY

Vision: A premier Science and Technology university for the formation of world class and virtuous human resource
for the sustainable development in Bohol and the country.
Mission: BISU is committed to provide higher quality education in the arts and sciences, as well as in the
professional technological fields; undertake research and development and extension services for the sustainable
development of Bohol.

GE05
READINGS IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY

REASEARCH: CAVITE MUTINY

Perocho, Reyzel L.
BSCE-2A

Miss Maria Nemia L. Malate

Rationale
 On January 20, 1872, about 200 Filipino military personnel of Fort San

Felipe Arsenal in Cavite l, Philippines l, staged a mutiny against the Governor General

Rafael de Izquierdo, who replaced Governor General Carlos Maria de la Torre some

months before 1871. The widely know story was that the removal of longstanding

personal benefits to the workers such as tax and forced labor exemptions on order from

Izquierdo fueled the mutiny that led to the execution of Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora

and eventually, in a way, the Philippine Revolution in 1896.

However, there are two sides of the story. The debate revolves around the

question of whether the Cavite mutiny was simply a labor issue or there were people

particularly the native clergy who supported the rebels to overthrow the Spanish

government and proclaim a new ruler in the names of Burgos and Zamora. The sources

stated in this research are primary and secondary in which are collected from textbooks,

electronic books and articles.

The Cavite Mutiny has made a big impact towards the Philippine history

and a conclusion as to what really happened is important for people to know to know

the truth and where to stand.

I.
Filipino Perspective

The account of Pardo de Tavera which was originally written for the official report

of the census of 1903, he denies that there was a plot to overthrow the Spanish rule and

that the Cavite mutiny was simply an uprising because of the arsenal workers who had

been deprived of their rights as workers (Schumacher, 1972 ). 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 (Piedad-Pugay, 2012).

The increasing ease of communication events in Europe were already in the ears

of Filipinos who were beginning to think anew and their awakening was empowered by

the support of Father Burgos who appealed to the Spanish throne and Rome for the

recovery of the parishes to be returned to the Spanish and Filipino secular clergy in

accordance with canon law (Mabini, 1925/1969). The friars threatened by the just and

lawful petition, claimed that the petitioners were agitators whose aim was to seize the

parishes in order to organize a revolt against the Spanish regime in the Philippines

(Mabini, 1925/1969).

In the night of the 15th of February 1872, a Spanish court martial found the secular

priests, Jose Burgos, Mariano Gomez and Jacinto Zamora, guilty of treason as the

instigators of a mutiny in the Cavite arsenal a month before, and sentenced them to

death and the judgement of the court martial was read to the priests in Fort Santiago
early in the next morning and they were told it would be executed the following day

(Plauchut, 1877).

The 17th of February came and there were almost forty thousand of Filipinos who

came from as far as Bulakan, Pampanga, Kabite and Laguna) surrounding the four

platforms where the three priests and the man whose testimony had convicted them, a

former artilleryman called Saldua, would die (Plauchut, 1877).

Burgos Gomez and Zamora had worked for the rights of the people as a whole,

yet had they asked for justice, and died for it (Mabini, 1928/1969). Slandered by the

friar-scribes because of their attempt to overthrow the friars from their administration of

the parishes which were the seat of their power and influence over the people and their

primary source of their wealth and it was the reason that the Filipinos keep them in their

hearts and they were called then as the martyrs to justice (Mabini, 1924/1969).

According to Emilio Jacinto (1896), “The day that Gomez, Burgos and Zamora

were executed was a day of degradation and wretchedness. Twenty-four years had

since passed, but the excruciating wound inflicted that day on Tagalog hearts had never

healed; the bleeding had never been staunched. Though the lives of the three priests

had been extinguished that day, their legacy would endure forever. Their compatriots

would honor their memory, and would seek to emulate their pursuit of truth and justice.”
Spanish Perspective

      Jose Montero y Vidal, a Spanish historian documented and highlighted the

Cavite Mutiny as an attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in the

Philippines (Piedad-Pugay, 2012). Montero’s account embodies the general

interpretation that the mutiny was a part of a general revolt led by the priests Gomez,

Burgos, Zamora, and their lay and clerical colleagues and the aim of the mutiny was the

assassination of the Governor-General and a general massacre of all Spaniards

(Schumacher, 1972 ).

Gov. 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.   The

accounts of Montero and Izquierdo complimented with one other, only that the general’s

report was more spiteful (Piedad-Pugay, 2012). Montero and Izquierdo crossed out that

the abolition of privileges of the arsenal workers were the main reasons of the revolution

but in their accounts the dirty propagandas by the unrestrained press, liberal and

Republican books reaching the Philippines, and the presence of the native clergy that

supported the enemies of Spain to overthrow the Spanish government to proclaim new

rulers in the likes of Burgos and Zamora (Piedad-Pugay, 2012).

       Montero and Izquierdo says that the mutiny was planned and was a part of a big

conspiracy among educated leaders, mestizos, abogadillos or native lawyers, residents

of Manila and Cavite and the native clergy (Piedad-Pugay, 2012). Montero and

Izquierdo insinuated that the conspirators planned to liquidate high ranking Spanish

insinuated that the conspirators of Manila and Cavite planned to liquidate high-ranking
Spanish officers to be followed by the massacre of the friars (Piedad-Pugay, 2012). The

firing of rockets from the walls of Intramuros was the the-concerted signal (Piedad-

Pugay, 2012).

    In the accounts of the Montero and Izquierdo, on 20 January 1872, the district of

Sampaloc celebrated the feast of the Virgin of Loreto and unfortunately, participants to

the feast celebrated the occasion with fireworks displays and this in Cavite mistook the

fireworks as a sign of attack and 200 men lead by Sergeant Lamadrid launched the

mutiny (Piedad-Pugay, 2012).

   The news reached Gov. Izquierdo and ordered the reinforcement of the Spanish

forces in Cavite to stop the revolt which was easily crushed when the expected

reinforcements from Manila did not came and Sergeant Lamadrid was killed during the

fight and the GOMBURZA were tried to court and sentenced to die and suspended

Patriots like de Tavera, Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa and other abogadillos (Piedad-

Pugay, 2012).

Conclusion

The Cavite Mutiny in 1872 had facts that remained the same in every account.

The injustices experienced by the workers of the arsenal and the members of the native

army because of the iron-fisted Governor General Izquierdo was indeed true. With the

support of the native clergy in the likes of Fathers Burgos, Jacinto and Zamora, rebels

from Manila and other people that wanted the secularization of the churches, they were
empowered to fight even more. General Izquierdo, angered by the sudden revolt

showed the power of his rule and set forth his men and stopped the mutiny.

In 1872, the Central Government of Spain decided to take away the privileges of

the friars to meddle in government affairs. The petition for the secularization of the

churches made by Father Burgos made the friars think that the native clergy wants to

overthrow them from their seat of power and did frantic measures to extend their stay

and power that’s why they pushed for the punishment of GomBurZa. Hailed as traitors,

Gomez, Burgos and Zamora faced trials in court but was immediately sentenced to

death by garrote on the 15th of February, 1872. The day of the 17th of February broke

out and the sentence for the three priests was done.

According to Edmond Plauchut (1877), almost forty thousand people from

different places like Bulacan, Pampanga, Cavite and Laguna came to witness the event.

Montero Vidal argues that Plauchut’s account was a romanticized version of the story to

appeal to his French readers. It was indeed difficult to believe that thousands of people

would go to such great lengths to witness the event and ignore the harsh rules of

Governor Izquierdo that time (Schumacher, 1972 ). Meanwhile Pardo de Tavera also

countered Montero’s account as biased and partial and that Montero does not speak as

a historian but that of a Spaniard bent in perverting that facts at his pleasure.

Regardless of Pardo de Tavera's comment on Montero’s account and Montero’s

xenophobic attacks, the account of the execution itself agrees on substantial points with

that of Montero’s. The thing is, the Central Government failed to conduct a thorough

investigation regarding the issue with the mutineers and the accusations against the
GomBurZa. The Central Government instead sided with the reports of General

Izquierdo.

The Filipino revolutionaries’ journey towards freedom and democracy was sad,

rough and bloody. The Cavite Mutiny became the light that started the fire. The death of

GomBurZa added more fuel to this fire and it reached the hearts of the Filipinos. The

Cavite Mutiny awakened the burning desire of the Filipinos to take back what’s rightfully

theirs and that is the country and along with it, their freedom.

In Jose Rizal's letter to Mariano Ponce, he stated that “Without 1872 there would

not now be a Plaridel, a Jaena, a Sanciangco, nor would the brave and generous

Filipino colonies exist in Europe. At the sight of those injustices and cruelties, though

still a child, my imagination awoke, and I swore to dedicate myself to avenge one day so

many victims. With this idea I have gone on studying, and this can be read in all my

works and writings. God will grant me one day to fulfill my promise.”
 Reference List

Ligan, V., Apsay, L., Espino, L., Porras, C.S., Salinas and E., Lemana, J. (2018).

Readings in Philippine History. 105 Engineering Road, Araneta University

Village, Potrero, Malabon City: Mutya Publishing House, Inc.

Schumacher, J. (1972). The Cavite Mutiny: An Essay On the Published Sources [PDF

File]. Philippine Studies Vol.20, no.4 :603-632. Ateneo de Manila University.

Schumacher, J. (2011). The Cavite Mutiny Towards a Definitive History. [PDF File].

Philippine Studies Vol. 59, nno.1.Ateneo de Manila University.

Piedad-Pugay, C.A.(2012). The Two Faces of the Cavite Mutiny. Retrieved from the

National Historical Commission o the Philippines. Online website:

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

Mabini, Apolinario. La Revolución Filipina [ The Philippine Revolution]. Translated by

Leon Ma. Guerrero. Manila: Republic of the Philippines, Department of

Education, National Historical Commission, 1969. Retrieved from: Malacañan

Palace Presidential Museum and Library. Online website:

http://malacanang.gov.ph/8143-the-philippine-revolution-by-apolinario-mabini/
Jacinto, Emilio. Gomez, Burgos, at Zamora! [Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora!]. Translated

by Jim Richardson. Retrieved from: Katipunan: Documents and Studies. Online

website: http://www.kasaysayan-kkk.info/kalayaan-the-katipunan-

newspaper/emilio-jacinto-gomez-burgos-at-zamora-april-30-1896

Plauchut, Edmond (1877). Recalling the GomBurZa: The Execution of the GomBurZa. Quoted

by Jaime Veneracion. Retrieved from Malacañan Palace Presidential Museum and

Library. Online website: http://malacanang.gov.ph/7695-the-martyrdom-of-the-gomburza/

GE05 Readings in Philippine History Miss Maria Nemia L. Malate

Rationale

On January 20, 1872, about 200 Filipino military personnel of Fort San

Felipe Arsenal in Cavite l, Philippines l, staged a mutiny against the Governor General

Rafael de Izquierdo, who replaced Governor General Carlos Maria de la Torre some

months before 1871. The widely know story was that the removal of longstanding

personal benefits to the workers such as tax and forced labor exemptions on order from

Izquierdo fueled the mutiny that led to the execution of Gomez, Burgos, and Zamora

and eventually, in a way, the Philippine Revolution in 1896.

However, there are two sides of the story. The debate revolves around the

question of whether the Cavite mutiny was simply a labor issue or there were people

particularly the native clergy who supported the rebels to overthrow the Spanish

government and proclaim a new ruler in the names of Burgos and Zamora. The sources

stated in this research are primary and secondary in which are collected from textbooks,

electronic books and articles.

The Cavite Mutiny has made a big impact towards the Philippine history

and a conclusion as to what really happened is important for people to know to know

the truth and where to stand.