As told and as heard, every story has at least two angles to consider.

Each angle or side of the story has

its own contentions, merits, or claims. Biases and prejudices may be noticeable but they are undeniably
inevitable as they form part of the limitations of the one telling the story. To limit distortion,
exaggeration or perversion of facts, the need to expose oneself to differing versions of any event is a
necessary step in historical analysis in forming up with an informed historical consciousness. One
historical issue worth visiting Philippine history is the Cavite Mutiny of 1872. The increasing interest
given to historical events has triggered the call to unearth historical data, documents which are of great
value mainly because of their proximity to the time and place the event happened, and the credibility of
the one telling the account. has been enticing people in the academe to change the way learning history
from simple gathering or accumulating of basic historical facts which commonly answered the questions
on “who”, “when” and “where” and learning its historical details responding exclusively to the “how”
questions to historical analysis which enables any learner or historian-to-be to answer the primordial
question of the “why”. The Cavite Mutiny of 1872 has two extant versions coming from two opposing
camps namely: Spanish version and Filipino version. The Spanish version of Cavite Mutiny of 1872 is
narrated by Jose Montero y Vidal. His account anchored on the thesis that the fateful event of the 2oth
of January 1872 happens due to the concerted effort of disgruntled native soldiers and laborers of
Cavite arsenal who willfully revolted to overthrow the Spanish rule, and thus, guilty of rebellion and
sedition. By such acts, the execution of prominent critics of the Spaniards and friars by the Spanish
officials are justified, and the sentence of life imprisonment and deportation of some natives critical of
their incongruous rule is unquestionably legit if not morally blurred. The account of Jose Montero y Vidal
was even made credibly possible by no less than Rafael de Izquierdo, the governor-general of the time
when the revolt of 1872 happened. The Filipino version is told by Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera. For him,
the so-called Cavite Mutiny is a mere incident of mutiny orchestrated by native soldiers and laborers
who reacted to the harsh policy of the new governor-general, Rafael de Izquierdo, who whimsically
terminated the old-time privileges such as exempting them from paying annual tribute and from
rendering forced labor or polo. As accounted, it is made clear that the mutiny is blown-up by the Spanish
officials and friars into a revolt as a way for Filipinos to gain independence from Spanish monarch