Comparison of Cavite Mutiny version by Jose Montero y Vidal and Trinidad Pardo de Tavera

On January 20, 1872, about 200 Filipino military personnel of fort San Filipe, the Spanish arsenal
in Cavite, Philippines, staged a mutiny in belief that it would elevate to a national uprising. The 1872
Cavite Mutiny was precipitated by the removal of long-standing personal benefits to workers such as tax
(tribute) and forced labor exemptions on order from the Governor-General Rafael de Izquierdo. The
mutiny was unsuccessful, and government soldiers executed many of the participants and began to crack
down on a burgeoning Philippines nationalist. The aftermath of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny is believed to be
the spark that ignited the desire of Filipinos to claim freedom from the rule of the Spaniards after more
than three hundred years. This led to the Philippine Revolution in 1896.
The record of the history of Cavity Mutiny have four different accounts in reference of the said
event with two different perspective, the Spanish and Filipino perspective. But, was it really a mutiny or
was it just an attempt of the Indios to overthrow Spanish government?

In this paper, we will discuss about Jose Montero y Vidal account and Trinidad Pardo de Tavera
account of reference of event.
Trinidad Hermenegildo José María Juan Francisco Pardo de Tavera y Gorricho (April 13, 1857 –
March 26, 1925) was a Filipino physician, historian and politician of Spanish and Portuguese descent.
Trinidad, also known by his name T. H. Pardo de Tavera was known for his writings about different
aspects of Philippine culture.

Comparison
Vidal
 According to Vidal, the event was
premeditated and the primary instigator
were the three priests ― GOMBURZA,
and its caused was not only just because of
the uplifting of the tax exemptions to the
laborers of the Cavite Arsenal but also a
revolt to overthrow the Spanish rule from
assassination of the Governor-General to
general massacre of all Spaniards
including the friars.
 It was stated in his account that the Cavite
Mutiny is part of greater conspiracy to
overthrow the Spanish rule here in the
Philippines.
 According to Vidal, the event was
premeditated and the primary instigator
were the three priests ― GOMBURZA. In
contrast to Tavera’s account, Because of
the proposed secularization of church of
Filipino, the friars used the Cavite Mutiny
as an opportunity to cement their
dominance here in the Philippines and
indicted the GOMBURZA as the leader of
the rebellion which lead to the death of the
three priests.
 they enjoyed before.
Tavera
 Tavera wrote the Filipino version of the
Cavite Mutiny of 1872. For Tavera, the
incident was nothing more than a plain
mutiny of the laborers in Cavite Arsenal
against the harsh policy of despotic
Governor-General Rafael de Izquierdo
which abolished their old-time privileges
of exemption from paying the annual
tribute and from rendering the polo (forced
labor). The loss of these privileges was
naturally resented by the soldier and
laborers.
 Because of the proposed secularization of
church of Filipino, the friars used the
Cavite Mutiny as an opportunity to cement
their dominance here in the Philippines
and indicted the GOMBURZA as the
leader of the rebellion which lead to the
death of the three priest.
 The Cavite Mutiny is an isolated case
where native people in Cavite has no
intention of overthrowing the Spanish Rule
but their only aspiration was to secure the
material and education of advancement of
the country and to return the privileges

This study source was downloaded by 100000839104976 from CourseHero.com on 01-18-2022 06:46:50 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/96946640/Comparison-of-Cavite-Mutiny-version-by-Jose-Montero-y-Vidal-and-Trinidad-Pardo-de-Taveradocx/
 CONCLUSION:
The account of Vidal and Tavera were totally different to each other. Vidal’s version represents the
Spanish perspective and Tavera version represent the Filipino perspective of the Cavite Mutiny. Jose
Montero y Vidal account is in the side of Spanish as he is a Spanish historian. He was biased and perceive
only the side of Spanish in his record of the event. He did not tell the other side of the story. He denoted
that the Spaniards were not guilty of crime and it was the Filipinos who started it to overthrow the ruling
of the Spaniards here in the Philippines. He represents the and stands in Spanish community

In my conclusion, Jose Montero Y Vidal was biased and one-sided. He neither considered nor
empathized to the general public’s feelings. He was a Spaniard and thus he perceives, represents
and stands with the Spanish community. However, as Spanish historian, he should have weighed
the authenticity of all accounts, not merely those that contradict a favored view.

Tavera did an amazing job on writing the Cavite Mutiny in a Filipino perspective. He
rebutted on the claims and allegations of Montero and Izquierdo into what the main cause of the
revolt. With that, he also explained the other side of the coin with transparency.
For me, the main purpose of the author in his article was to inform the readers of the
Spanish’s shortcomings that led to the incident and persuade the general people who were able to
read the Spanish historian’s version.
I believed it was a clever move from Tavera to defend and represent the Filipinos part and
perspective on the Cavite mutiny. In this, it helped the readers to gather other vital informations
rather than to focus on Montero’s version. It now depends on the readers to measure the
credibility and reliability of the authors.

There may be different versions of the event, but one thing is certain, the 1872
Cavite Mutiny paved way for a momentous 1898. The Spanish colonizers have always been
taken advantage of the Philippines natural resources and the Filipinos innocent and gullible
minds that were ready to endure no matter the circumstances were. But as the famous saying
goes, by Martin Luther King Jr., “Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever, the
yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself”. 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 w eenjoy 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.”
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

This study source was downloaded by 100000839104976 from CourseHero.com on 01-18-2022 06:46:50 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/96946640/Comparison-of-Cavite-Mutiny-version-by-Jose-Montero-y-Vidal-and-Trinidad-Pardo-de-Taveradocx/
 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
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.

CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the account of Vidal and Tavera have similarities and differences. However, the
differences outweigh the similarities of the event. Some information that was in the record of the two
accounts were the central pieces of the event but indicated from a different perspective. The account of
Vidal represents the Spanish perspective and, the account of Tavera represents the Filipino perspective of
the Cavite Mutiny. Both Spanish and Filipino versions unveiled the reason for the mutiny in Cavite was
due to the unjust decision of Governor-General Izquierdo, to abolish the privileges of the workers in
Cavite. However, Vidal and Izquierdo added some information that benefited the side of the Spanish.
The account of Jose Montero y Vidal was on the side of Spanish as he is a Spanish historian. He
was biased and perceived only the side of Spanish in his record of the event. He did not tell the other side
of the story. He denoted that the Spaniards were not guilty of the crime and, it was the Filipinos who
started the chaos to overthrow the ruling of the Spaniards here in the Philippines. He represents and
stands in the Spanish community.
On the other hand, Dr. Trinidad Hermenegildo Pardo de Tavera’s version
Vidal
 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”.
 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.
 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 Island.
 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

This study source was downloaded by 100000839104976 from CourseHero.com on 01-18-2022 06:46:50 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/96946640/Comparison-of-Cavite-Mutiny-version-by-Jose-Montero-y-Vidal-and-Trinidad-Pardo-de-Taveradocx/
 were executed. This event was tragic but served as one of the moving forces that shaped Filipino
nationalism.

Tavera
 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.
 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 news about the mutiny reached authorities in Manila and Gen. Izquierdo immediately
ordered the reinforcement of Spanish troops in Cavite.
 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 garrote.
This episode leads to the awakening of nationalism and eventually to the outbreak of Philippine
Revolution of 1896.
idal
1. both Montero and Izquierdo scored out that the abolition of privileges enjoyed through the people of
Cavite arsenal such as non-payment of tributes and exemption from pressure labor have been the
predominant reasons of the “revolution”.
2. on 20 January 1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast of the Virgin of Loreto, alas
participants to the feast celebrated the occasion with the standard fireworks displays. Allegedly, those in
Cavite mistook the fireworks as the sign for the attack, and simply like what used to be agreed upon, the
200-men contingent headed by means of Sergeant Lamadrid launched an attack concentrated on Spanish
officers at sight and seized the arsenal.
3. When the news reached the iron-fisted Gov. Izquierdo, he without problems ordered the reinforcement
of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the revolt.
4. Patriots like Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Antonio Ma. Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa and different
abogadillos had been suspended via the Audencia (High Court) from the exercise of law, arrested and
have been sentenced with existence imprisonment at the Marianas Island.
5. On 17 February 1872 in an try of the Spanish authorities and Frailocracia to instill worry among the
Filipinos so that they may in no way commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA were executed. This
tournament used to be tragic however served as one of the moving forces that formed Filipino
nationalism.

Tavera
1. his point of view, the incident was once a mere mutiny via the native Filipino soldiers and employees
of the Cavite arsenal who grew to become out to be disenchanted with the abolition of their privileges.

This study source was downloaded by 100000839104976 from CourseHero.com on 01-18-2022 06:46:50 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/96946640/Comparison-of-Cavite-Mutiny-version-by-Jose-Montero-y-Vidal-and-Trinidad-Pardo-de-Taveradocx/
 2. On 20 January 1872, about 200 men comprised of soldiers, worker's of the arsenal, and residents of
Cavite headed by means of Sergeant Lamadrid rose in arms and assassinated the commanding officer and
Spanish officers in sight.
3. The news about the mutiny reached authorities in Manila and Gen. Izquierdo without delay ordered the
reinforcement of Spanish troops in Cavite.
4. Convicted educated men who participated in the mutiny were sentenced existence imprisonment while
participants of the native clergy headed by using the GOMBURZA were tried and achieved by way of
garrote. This episode leads to the awakening of nationalism and eventually to the outbreak of Philippine
Revolution of 1896.

This study source was downloaded by 100000839104976 from CourseHero.com on 01-18-2022 06:46:50 GMT -06:00

https://www.coursehero.com/file/96946640/Comparison-of-Cavite-Mutiny-version-by-Jose-Montero-y-Vidal-and-Trinidad-Pardo-de-Taveradocx/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)