NAME: CLUTARIO, Kenneth R.

SECTION: II-PS3

LESSON 2: 1872 Motin de Cavite or Cavite Mutiny

In this lesson, we will examine data about the 1872 Motin de Cavite or Cavite Mutiny using
Sucesos del 1872 of Manuel y Rey which contains different testaments from witnesses and
details of the three martyr priests or the GOMBURZA.

WHAT I KNOW?
What do you know about the three-martyr priest?

• I've known the story of these three notable Filipinos since elementary school, and what I
know about them is that Mariano Gomez, José Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora, also known
as the "GOMBURZA," were three Filipino Catholic priests who were executed in the public.
The Ilustrado movement was inspired by the three priests, and Jose Rizal honored them
in his second novel, El Filibusterismo.

Where and how they were executed?

• The three murdered Priests (GOMBURZA) were executed by the Spaniards at

Bagumbayan on February 17, 1872, using a garrote or a portable ligature of rope, scarf,
or chain to strangle a person in connection with the 1872 Cavite Mutiny.

What is the reason behind their execution?

• The three priests earned the wrath of the Spanish rulers by conducting a campaign against
abusive Spanish friars and campaigning for priestly equality. They fought over unresolved
questions over Philippine secularization, resulting in a split between religious regulars and
church seculars. The Cavite Mutiny, which began as a peaceful protest by employees at
the naval shipyard's arsenal about pay cuts due to higher taxes, grew into a violent revolt
that was used by Spanish authorities to suppress proponents of secularization.
Prosecutors in Spain bought a witness to testify against three priests accused of sedition
and treason, leading to their execution by garrote.
 WHAT CAN I DO?
Accomplished the table and state your conclusion.
Name of Readings: CAVITE MUTINY
Background of the issue: State a description of a specific topic and important persons.

• The Cavite Mutiny took place in 1872 and involved up to 200 Filipino troops and
employees at the Cavite Arsenal. The insurrection was promptly put down by the colonial
authority, but it became historically significant because it was used as a justification to
persecute Filipino nationalists who demanded government change. The revolt served as
the foundation for the prosecution and execution of three Filipino priests, José Burgos,
Jacinto Zamora, and Mariano Gómez, also known as Gomburza, whose sacrifice fueled
Filipino nationalism and eventually led to the 1896 Revolution. The uprising is thought to
have begun when Governor-General Rafael de Izquierdo imposed a personal tax on
soldiers and workers, which they had previously been exempt from. The levy required both
monetary payment and the supply of polo y servicio or forced labor. It was tax-deductible
when the workers got their pay. They revolted on January 20, 1872, led by mestizo
sergeant Fernando La Madrid. The Fuerza San Felipe was besieged, and 11 Spanish
officers were murdered. The strikers expected the soldiers to accompany them to Manila.
The commencement of the war should have been heralded by fireworks from Intramuros
that night. Unfortunately, the signal they saw and followed was only a firework display for
the feast of the Virgin of Loreto, Sampaloc's patron saint. A party of troops commanded
by General Felipe Ginoves stormed the San Felipe tower, fearing the start of a bigger
revolution. The strikers surrendered, including La Madrid, and Ginoves' command was
shot upon. All troops were disarmed at the arsenal after the insurrection and banished to
Mindanao. Those accused of aiding the insurrection were apprehended and executed or
banished. The rebellion included many affluent and intellectual individuals. This excuse
was utilized by the colonial administration and Spanish friars to imprison the three priests
now known as Gomburza. The three priests were hung in public with a garrote after a
quick and mysterious trial. Rather than being terrified, the patriots saw it as proof of the
conquerors' wickedness.
Comparison of the different versions:

VERSION 1 BY: VERSION 2 BY: VERSION 3 BY:

Jose Montero Y Vidal Dr. T.H Pardo De Tavera Rafael Izquiedero

DESCRIPTION OF THE DESCRIPTION OF THE DESCRIPTION OF THE

EVENT: EVENT: EVENT:

The author only gave a
summary of what transpired
on January 20, 1892; he did
not go into great depth on
what happened. He merely
mentioned in his version that
when the signal for the
The Cavite rebellion,
according to Tavera, was
likely the beginnings of the
strained relationship between
the Spanish administration
and the Filipinos. And that the
colony's calm rule was
The Cavite mutiny had also
been briefly reported by
General Rafael. He began by
setting fire to the Tondo
neighborhood as a sign of the
revolution's beginning, and
while the authorities were
commencement of the damaged by that incident, busy by putting out the fire,
insurgency, which was the which he dismissed as minor the military unit crept into Fort
shooting of a rocket into the but was the beginning of the Santiago and fired cannons to
sky, was given, the native rebels' political power over the signal the indigenous or
troops, along with Sergeant Spaniards. Tavera stated in Cavite mutineers. Following
La Madrid, assaulted and his account of the January 20, that statement, he did not
murdered the fort1872, incident that the elaborate on what transpired
commander, as well as revolution began that night or who was murdered by the
injuring his wife. According to with the troops and Sergeant rebels; also, unlike Montero y
Montero y Vidal, the natives in La Madrid who took part in it. Vidal and Tavera, he did not
Cavite misread the signal, The commanding and cite the date of the attack in
leading to the troops' Spanish officers in charge of his report on the Cavite
insurrection at the fort. patrolling the fort that night mutiny.
Montero y Vidal had focused was both assassinated
on the Cavite Mutiny because of the mutiny. In his REASON FOR
conspiracy, the instigators narrative, he also claimed that INVESTIGATING THE
and rebels, their arrests, and the whole Cavite military base MUTINY:
punishments, some of which was hostile and complicit in
resulted in death or life the attack, contrary to popular According to General
imprisonment. His account belief at the time. However, Izquierdo, the reasons were:
did not include adequate data the garrison's expectation of injustice in that the
about the Cavite Mutiny; it is having a backup that night by government did not pay the
exceedingly confusing and the anticipated declaration of provinces for their tobacco
incoherent since he did not rebellion against Spain in the crop, lending of money by
clarify the circumstances of three islands did not some officials in order to
the attack that night. materialize, and they were handle documents that the
duped, because General department of finance gives to
REASON FOR Izquierdo had dispatched the crop owners who have to sell
INVESTIGATING THE commander general to their crops at a loss, and
MUTINY: apprehend and punish the finally, the removal of the
rebels when he received news exemption from paying tribute
He said that the old Governor, of the Cavite natives' revolt. and rendering of working
La Torre, was removed from hours from the Cavite arsenal
office, and the new governor's REASON FOR workers. General Izquierdo
system of governance after INVESTIGATING THE had given a different reason,
just a year in office has MUTINY: which was not included in
prompted the Cavite arsenal's Montero y Vidal or Tavera's
workmen to consider an The reasons for the mutiny's accounts.
uprising against the new initiation were described
government. Because of the similarly by Tavera and IMPLICATION OF THE
new governor's leadership, Montero y Vidal, with the GOMBURZA:
their advantages of being free exception that Tavera's
from paying tribute were narrative was more detailed. According to General
taken away. Furthermore, The reasons, according to Izquierdo, the three Filipino
Montero y Vidal stated in his him, were that the arsenal priests were involved in the
account of the Cavite Mutiny workers in Cavite were mutiny because Burgos and
that some Filipinos exempt for a long time from Zamora were among the
considered declaring paying the tribute tax and candidates for the position of
independence because of the were required to labor for a leader of the Filipino
Spanish revolution, which few days each year for public government. Gomez was
abolished the secular type of projects. However, when detained as a parish priest
throne and imposed a
criminal policy, which was
then put into practice because
the revolutionary government
sent an insensible governor to
the Philippines. He plainly
blames the Filipinos, who
were the ones who suffered
the most under the Spanish
dictatorship.
IMPLICATION OF THE
GOMBURZA:
They were implied as to the
principal leaders of the Cavite
mutiny along with D. Joaquin
Pardo de Tavera. The Filipino
priests weren’t even
mentioned a lot in Montero y
Vidal’s account, yet they were
the ones who were sentenced
to strangulation. He stated
that they all had meetings at
the house of Tavera or
Zamora, with Gomez serving
as the movement's spirit.
According to my
understanding, he indicates
that the three Filipino priests
organized the mutiny in
Cavite and utilized their ties to
assemble rebels who were
opposed to the Spanish rule.
All those assumptions were
predicated on the conspiracy
he was aware of, and I believe
he lacked sufficient
knowledge about the
GomBurZa.
General Izquierdo took over accused of being a mutineer
for the prior General L a Torre, because of an abandoned
they were dissatisfied and sailboat laden with weaponry
protested because Izquierdo discovered near his home. He
took away their privilege of further said that the three
being free from paying tribute. were among the Cavite local
The desire for independence clerics who urged the
was also included among the arsenal's native troops and
causes. In addition, General workmen to join a revolt
Izquierdo forbade the against the Spanish
development of art and trade authorities. He and Montero y
schools, accusing the Vidal were implying the same
Filipinos of being the thing about GomBurZa.
instigators of the revolt
against the Spanish authority.
Unlike Montero y Vidal's
version of the Cavite mutiny,
Tavera clarified what a tribute
was at the time, making his
tale more accessible.
Because the major reason
was the elimination of the
Cavite arsenal laborers'
exemption from paying
tribute.
IMPLICATION OF THE
GOMBURZA:
Tavera regarded the three
Filipino priests as those who
dared to resist the Spanish
friars, resulting in their
punishment. They were
against the friars because of
their rights to various regions'
tasks. Because anybody who
opposed or called out the
Spanish friars for their vile
activities was deemed
resistance to the Spanish
government at the time, the
three martyrs were
condemned to death by
strangling in front of a large
crowd at the Bagumbayan.
Burgos and Zamora are half-
blooded Filipinos, Burgos is
half-Spaniard, and Zamora is
half-Chinese, according to
him, whereas Gomez is a
pure-blooded Tagalog native.
 In the two narratives of the
Cavite revolt, his inferences
concerning the three Filipino
martyrs were different.

Conclusion:
1. State YOUR conclusion on the topic discussed.

• In conclusion, due to the variations in the material mentioned, the three versions provided
contradictory and ambiguous information about the Cavite mutiny, and a historian can only
detect minor commonalities. The only similarity between the three versions is the main
reason for the formation of the group or gathering of soldiers and arsenal workers in
Cavite: General Izquierdo has cancelled or removed the privilege of being exempt from
paying tribute and rendering days of service for the government and public. There was
also mention in the three versions that the Filipinos had already had the concept of
attaining independence from Spain and had been plotting for it since 1872; however, there
is no confirmation of those charges or plots.

2. Indicate which version do you think is more credible/ possible and why?

• Among the three versions, I think the most credible and possible was the account of Dr.
T.H Padro de Tavera because first, he is a scholar and a researcher. So, therefore, he
would spend his time studying the case of Cavite Munity. Aside from that, all the important
situations are cited by date and reasons that I mentioned on the table unlike on the version
of Vidal and Izquiedero.

3. What did you learn / contributing on the specific event in the Philippine History?

• On my realization and learning I just want to pint out some of my ideas and reflection about
the certain situations in Cavite Munity. First, once Gen. Izquierdo revoked their rights,
there was unhappiness among the arsenal employees as well as members of the native
army. Second, Gen. Izquierdo implemented tight and stringent regulations that caused the
Filipinos to flee and turn away from the Spanish administration. Third, the central
government neglected to undertake an inquiry into what really happened, instead relying
on reports from Izquierdo and the friars, as well as popular opinion. Fourth, the friars'
happy days were numbered in 1872, when the Spanish Central Government chose to strip
them of their ability to meddle in government matters. Fifth, Filipinos were active
participants at the time, responding to what they saw as injustices. Finally, the execution
of GOMBURZA was a blunder on the part of the Spanish government, as it shattered
Filipino feelings and inspired Filipino patriots to demand reforms and eventually
independence. The path to freedom was long and winding, and many heroes, both known
and unknown, sacrificed their lives to achieve it. Our forebears went through enough
hardships, and we must not forget that before we triumphed. May we be more historically
conscious of our history while we enjoy our freedom in order to have a better future ahead
of us.