Pangasinan State University

Urdaneta City Campus

GE2 Readings in Philippine History

Comparative Analysis:
Different Accounts In the 1872 Cavite
Mutiny

Introduction: What is Cavite Mutiny?

The Cavite mutiny of 1872 was an uprising of military personnel of Fort San Felipe, the Spanish
arsenal in Cavite, Philippines on January 20, 1872. Around 200 soldiers and laborers rose in the belief
that it would elevate to a national uprising. The Mutiny was unsuccessful, and government soldiers
executed many of the participants and began to crack down on a burgeoning nationalist movement.
Many scholars believe that the Cavite Mutiny of 1872 was the beginning of Filipino nationalism that
would eventually lead to the Philippine Revolution of 1896.

Comparative analysis on different accounts of Cavite Mutiny

The Spanish account The Filipino account

The Spanish account of the 1872 mutiny was
detailed by Jose Montero y Vidal. His version
is based on the premise that the incident of
January 2, 1872, was a deliberate rebellion
against the Spanish government. Vidal’s
statement was verified by Rafael Izquidero y
Gutierrez, the Philippines general governor at
the time of the mutiny.
According to his account, the revolution
occurred due to unhappy native soldiers and
workers of the Cavite arsenal who wanted to
destroy Spanish authority. He also stated that a
band of indigenous clergymen led the
rebellion.
The Filipino version of events was recounted by
Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera, who insisted
that the incident was only a mutiny because the
Filipinos had no desire to secede from Spain at
the time but instead wanted to secure resources
and educational developments for their nation.
According to Tavera, the Cavite mutiny was a
civil uprising aided and abetted by native
military men and laborers in response to the
new cruel policies enacted by Governor-general
Rafael de Izquierdo, revoking old-time rights
that exempted all Filipino military personnel
from being forced into labor and paying yearly
tributes.

As a result, the mutineers were accused of

treason and rebellion. By such deeds, the
killing of the Gomburza priests by Spanish
authority was justified, and the punishment of
life sentences and exile for other mutineers
was fair and legal.
 Similarities: Differences:

Jose Montero Vidal and Trinidad Pardo
de Tavera were on opposite sides of the
Cavite Mutiny. They both had different
explanations for what led to the Cavite
Mutiny and how it came about.
Trinidad Pardo de Tavera was a researcher
and academic from the Philippines, whilst Jose
Montero Vidal was a writer and documentary
filmmaker from Spain. Therefore, it is obvious
that Vidal discussed the incident in favour of
Spain whereas Tavera discussed it in support
of the Philippines.

Vidal thinks the purpose of the mutiny was to

overthrow the Spanish government's power in
the Philippines, whereas Tavera thinks it was
sparked by the removal of Filipino members'
and workers' privileges.
Vidal’s view was in support of Governor Gen.
Rafael Izquierdo’s vision while Tavera blamed
him for the "abolition of privileges".

Conclusion:
Generally, there is a resemblance between the various stories of the Cavite Mutiny; there
are also differences in the narratives of the different authors. The most notable differences between
the two versions are the many possible causes of the insurgency. The literary style of Montero y
Vidal implies that the Filipinos had planned the uprising for a long time and had already
started the commotion and that the Spaniards had done nothing wrong. He appeared to
embolden the Spaniards and declared their actions to be just and proper. This is to be expected
of a Spanish author. After all, he is a Spaniard and therefore supports the Spanish
community. Governor-General Izquierdo’s account is likewise identical to that of Montero. They
both said in their stories that the native clergy were the major instigators of the revolution, and they
even identified several of them. The abolition of workers' privileges, which is the "most-believed"
probable reason for the mutiny, is attributed to Izquierdo.
Next is the description of Pardo de Tavera, a Spanish/Filipino historian. He was the person who
penned Cavite Mutiny's Filipino translation. The Cavite Mutiny accused General Izquierdo of his
cold-blooded policies, for instance, abolishing the indigenous military's privilege and prohibiting
the establishment of the Philippines of art and vocational schools. It is certain though
his narrative that, overall, Pardo de Tavera intended to simply excuse the Philippines' wrongful
and mistreated and educate the audience of the Spanish government's failures that set the way for the
event. The same goes for Edmund Plauchut, a French reporter.