The Cavite Rebellion: Mutiny or Protest?

In 500 to 700 words, write your individual position paper on the topic assigned, highlighting the
significant findings through analysis of primary and secondary sources. Make sure to cite the sources
properly and make your argument convincing.

The Cavite Mutiny of 1872, also known as the "Tagalog Revolt," was a significant event in Philippine
history. There were several primary source documents written by different authors that provide
different perspectives and insights on the events surrounding the rebellion. This position paper will
analyze the significant findings of Trinidad Pardo de Tavera's Filipino Version of Cavite Mutiny of
1872 (Zaide 1990, vol. 7 pp. 274-280), Jose Montero y Vidal's Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of
1872 (Zaide 1990, vol 7 pp. 269-273), and Rafael Izquierdo's Official Report on the Cavite Mutiny,
(Zaide 1990, vol 7 pp. 281-286) highlighting the key differences and similarities of these primary
sources in order to provide a well-rounded understanding of the rebellion and its implications.
Trinidad Pardo de Tavera's Filipino Version of Cavite Mutiny of 1872 is a Tagalog translation of the
events of the rebellion. Pardo de Tavera was a Spanish-Filipino physician, historian, bibliographer,
and legislator. He translated the account of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 into Tagalog, in order to make
it more widely understood and appreciated by the Filipino people. The translation provides a unique
perspective as it allows Filipinos who were not fluent in Spanish to understand the events and its
implications. Jose Montero y Vidal's Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 is a primary source
written by a Spanish historian. It provides an account of the events of the rebellion and the response
of the Spanish government. Montero y Vidal's version is an important reference to understand the
perspective of the Spanish Government during the Cavite Mutiny of 1872. Rafael Izquierdo's Official
Report on the Cavite Mutiny, is a primary source written by the Governor-General of the Philippines,
Rafael Izquierdo, who was in charge of suppressing the rebellion. The official report provides an
account of the rebellion, how the Spanish government responded to it, and the aftermath. This
report is considered a primary source, as it provides insights into the Spanish perspective and official
account of the events surrounding the Cavite Mutiny. When we compared the versions of Pardo de
Tavera, Montero y Vidal and Izquierdo, it becomes apparent that there are significant differences in
their perspectives. Pardo de Tavera's Tagalog translation provides an account of the rebellion from
the perspective of the native population. In contrast, Montero y Vidal and Izquierdo's accounts are
from the Spanish perspective and primarily focus on the actions of the Spanish colonial government.
Additionally, Pardo de Tavera's translation provides a sense of the growing sense of nationalism
among the educated Filipinos, who saw the rebellion as an opportunity to challenge Spanish colonial
rule, as argued by historian Ambeth R. Ocampo in his book "Rizal without the overcoat" (Anvil
Publishing, 2000). Meanwhile, Montero y Vidal's version provides an account of the rebellion as a
military mutiny, and Izquierdo's version focuses on suppression and punishment of the rebellion. In
conclusion, Trinidad Pardo de Tavera's Filipino Version of Cavite Mutiny of 1872, Jose Montero y
Vidal's Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 and Rafael Izquierdo's Official Report on the
Cavite Mutiny, (Zaide 1990, vol 7 pp. 274-280, 269-273 and 281-286) respectively provide different
perspectives on the Cavite