Filipino Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872

By Dr. T. H. Pardo de Tavera

• The Cavite Mutiny of 1872, as described by Trinidad H. Pardo de Tavera, was a rebellion
by Filipino soldiers and laborers against Governor Rafael de Izquierdo's harsh policies.
• Izquierdo's authoritarian governance, symbolized by his statement of ruling with "a
crucifix in one hand and a sword in the other," provoked dissent.
• The mutiny was sparked by Izquierdo's abolition of privileges like exemption from
tribute taxes and forced labor, causing discontent among workers.
• The uprising led to the assassination of Spanish officers but was swiftly suppressed by
Spanish troops.
• The mutiny was exploited by Spanish residents and friars to discredit Filipino hopes for
reform.
• The Spanish government's harsh reprisals, including executions and imprisonments,
exacerbated tensions and fueled aspirations for independence.
• The influence of religious orders in the Philippines increased as a result of the mutiny,
strengthening Spanish control.
• Governor Izquierdo's actions spurred resentment and deepened divides between Filipinos
and Spaniards, contributing to long-term animosity and political unrest.
 Spanish Version of the Cavite Mutiny of 1872
By Jose Montero y Vidal

• Jose Montero y Vidal, a Spanish historian residing in Manila during the Cavite Mutiny,
provides a biased account in his book "Historia General de Filipinas" (1895), presenting a
version favoring Spanish interests.
• Montero y Vidal portrays the mutiny as a seditious movement fueled by influences such
as the Spanish revolution, republican literature, and discontent with Governor Izquierdo's
policies.
• The narrative implicates Filipino leaders, including priests like Burgos, Gomez, and
Zamora, as well as prominent figures such as Jose Ma. Basa and Joaquin Pardo de
Tavera, in the uprising.
• According to Montero y Vidal, the rebellion was planned by Filipino and Manila
garrisons, aiming to assassinate Spanish officials and friars, with signals misinterpreted
leading to premature action on January 20, 1872.
• Spanish forces swiftly suppressed the mutiny, leading to numerous arrests and harsh
sentences, including death penalties for several individuals, including the priests Burgos,
Zamora, and Gomez.
• The aftermath saw the suspension of Filipino practitioners of law and the dissolution of
native regiments, replaced by Peninsular forces, underlining Spanish efforts to tighten
control over the colony.
• Montero y Vidal's account serves to justify Spanish actions, portraying the mutiny as a
treasonous act against Spanish rule, with severe repercussions for Filipino leaders and
institutions.
 Official Report of Governor Izquierdo on

the Cavite Mutiny of 1872

• Governor General Rafael de Izquierdo's official report, addressed to the Spanish Minister
of War, dated January 23, 1872, attributes the Cavite Mutiny to a conspiracy orchestrated
by native clergy, mestizos, lawyers, and agitators, including the Madrid-based reformist
newspaper El Eco Filipino.
• Izquierdo characterizes the mutiny as an insurrection aimed at overthrowing Spanish rule,
citing grievances such as alleged government injustice in handling tobacco crops and
imposition of tribute and forced labor on workers in the Cavite arsenal.
• The report details the rebels' plans, including offering promises of wealth, employment,
and ranks in a new army, led by native battalions, with the aim of establishing a
government possibly headed by priests like Jose Burgos or Jacinto Zamora.
• The mutiny involved a wide range of participants, including infantry and artillery
regiments, civilians, mestizos, and some educated individuals from the provinces.
• The rebels intended to ignite a revolution by setting fire to Tondo district in Manila and
seizing Fort Santiago, aided by rebel forces in Cavite, including the navy and a group led
by pardoned leader Camerino.
• Despite the rebels' attempts, timely precautions by loyalist forces prevented the mutiny
from spreading, leading rebels to take refuge in San Felipe fort in Cavite.
• Izquierdo suggests longstanding preparations for the uprising, citing the existence of a
junta in Manila since 1869, possibly influenced by advanced ideas from Madrid, as well
as the distribution of reformist newspapers like El Eco Filipino.
• Izquierdo acknowledges receiving anonymous warnings but expresses confidence in his
ability to suppress any uprising, maintaining vigilance despite limited resources.