Historical Methodology - Cavite Mutiny
Historical Methodology - Cavite Mutiny
arsenal on January 20, 1872, served as a pretext for Spanish persecution of the fledgling
Philippine nationalist movement. Ironically, the government's strong response ultimately helped
the nationalist movement in Spain. Despite the fact that the mutiny was promptly put down, the
Spanish administration, led by the reactionary governor Rafael de Izquierdo, exaggerated the
occurrence and used it as justification to crack down on Filipinos who had been advocating for
political reform. Several Filipino intellectuals were detained and charged of conspiring with the
mutineers. Three priests—José Burgos, Jacinto Zamora, and Mariano Gómez—were executed
in front of the public following a brief trial. Later, the three were sacrificed as martyrs for the
cause of Philippine Independence.
The Cavite Mutiny occurrence was being talked through with two different versions
coming from the alleged accused and victims — the Spanish and Filipino versions. The Spanish
account was supported by Jose Montero y Vidal, a Spanish historian, who focused his
documentation on how the event was an effort to topple the Spanish administration in the
Philippines. His narrative of the revolt received criticism for being incredibly prejudiced and
passionate for a scholar despite his status as a historian. Another narrative from the official
report authored by the then-Gov. Gen. Rafael Izquierdo blamed the indigenous clergy. actively
involved in the effort to secularize parishes. These two accounts verified one another. Izquierdo
and Montero's statements appear to be contradicted by other key reports, Dr. Trinidad
Hermenegildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher who provided a Filipino
description of the violent incident in Cavite. According to his account, the incident was simply a
result of Filipino soldiers and workers at the Cavite arsenal protesting Izquiedor's harsh policies,
which included the elimination of privileges and the ban on the establishment of Filipino schools
for the arts and trades, which the General saw as a cover for the establishment of a political
club. Tavera believes that by exaggerating the small-scale rebellion attempt, the Spanish friars
and Izquierdo utilized the Cavite Mutiny to draw attention to other problems. The Central
Government in Madrid was preparing to strip the friars of any intervening authority in matters of
civil administration and the control of educational institutions at the time. The revolt gave the
friars the opportunity they needed to defend their continued rule over the nation.
Moreover, the involvement of the priests, specifically the three priests GomBurZa and
some higher ranked officials within that event, had highly marked this occurrence to become a
history for the country. The death of Gomburza sparked intense feelings of bitterness and anger
among Filipinos. They interrogated Spanish officials and demanded reforms as a result of the
Spanish authorities' unfavorable governance. Ironically, the three priests' execution aided in the
formation of the Propaganda Movement, which sought reforms and educated the Spanish
population about the wrongdoings of the colonial rulers in the Philippine Islands.
These two accounts do not have that much differences but the real history of both is
stated in a way that their reasonings differ with each other. Some alleged reasoning for the
occurrence also came up but the reasons of the two accounts was once being argumentative in
the minds of some historians. The cause of the mutiny can be highly observed with the
statements of both accounts even if they differ in some reasonings.