Spanish

 Jose Montero y Vidal, a prolific Spanish historian documented the event and highlighted
it as an attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government in the Philippines.

 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 two accounts complimented and corroborated with one other, only that the
general’s report was more spiteful. Initially, both Montero and Izquierdo scored 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”.
 They also Identified other reasons which seemingly made the issue a lot more serious,
which included the presense of the native clergy, who, out of spite agiantsthe Spanish
friars, “conspired and supported” the rebels.
 Izquierdo 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 account detail that on 20 january 1872,the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast
of the Virgin of Loreto and came with it were fireworks displays The Cavitenos mistook
the fireworks as the sign for the attack.
 The 200-men contingent led by Sergeant Lamadrid attacked Spanish officers at sight and
seized the arsenal.
 Gov. Izquierdo readily ordered the reinforcement of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell
the revolt and the “revolution” was easily crushed.

 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.

 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.
Philippines

 Dr. Trinidad Hermeneguldo Pardo De Tavera is a Filipino scholar and researcher, who
wrote a Filipino version of the bloody incident in Cavite.

 The incident was merely a munity by Filipino soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal
to the dissatisfaction arising from the draconian policies of Izquierdo, such as the
abolition of privileges and the prohibition of the founding of the school of arts and trades
for Filipinos, which the General saw as a smokescreen to creating a political club.
 Tavera is the opinion that three Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a
way to address other issues by blowing out of proportion the isolated munity attempt.
During this time, the Central Government in Madrid was planning to deprive the friars of
all the powers of intervention in matters of civil government and direction and
management of educational institutions. The friars needed something to justify their
continuing dominance in the country, and the munity provided such opportunity.
 The Central Spanish Government introduced an educational decree using sectarian
schools 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.
 French writer Edmund Plauchut, complemented Tavera’s account and analyzed the
motivations of the 1872 Cavite Munity.
 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 munity as part of a greater conspiracy in the Philippines by Filipinos to
overthrow the Spanish Government. Unintentionally, and more so, prophetically, the
Cavite Munity of 1872 resulted in the martyrdom of GOMBURZA, and paved the way to
the revolution culminating in 1898.