Group 3 Pardo de Taveras Account of The Cavite Mutiny
Group 3 Pardo de Taveras Account of The Cavite Mutiny
Group 3 Pardo de Taveras Account of The Cavite Mutiny
The year 1872 is a historic year of two events: the Cavite Mutiny and the martyrdom of the three
priests: Mariano Gomez, Jose Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora, later on immortalized as GOMBURZA.
These events are very important milestones in Philippine history and have caused ripples throughout
time, directly influencing the decisive events of the Philippine Revolution toward the end of the
century. While the significance, is unquestioned, what made this year controversial are the different
sides to the story, a battle of perspectives supported by primary sources. In this case study, we zoom
in to the events of the Cavite Mutiny, a major factor in the awakening of nationalism among the
Filipinos of that time.
DIFFERING ACCOUNTS OF THE EVENTS OF 1872
Two other primary accounts exist that seem to counter the accounts of Izquierdo and Montero.
First, the account of Dr. Trinidad Hermenegildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar and researcher,
who wrote a Filipino version of the bloody incident in Cavite.
Primary Source: Excerpts from Pardo de Tavera's Account of the Cavite Mutiny Source: Trinidad
Pardo de Tavera, “Filipino Version of the Cavite Mutiny," in Gregorio Zaide and Sonia Zaide,
Documentary Sources of Philippine History, Volume 7 (Manila: National Book Store, 1990), 274–
280.
This uprising among the soldiers in Cavite was used as a powerful level by the Spanish residents and
by the friars... the Central Government in Madrid had announced its intention to deprive the friars
in these islands of powers of intervention in matters of civil government and of the direction and
management of the university... it was due to these facts and promises that the Filipinos had great
hopes of an improvement in the affairs of their country, while the friars, on the other hand, feared
that their power in the colony would soon be complete a thing of the past.
...Up to that time there had been no intention of secession from Spain, and the only aspiration of
the people was to secure the material and education advancement of the country...
According to this account, the incident was merely a mutiny by Filipino soldiers and laborers of the
Cavite arsenal to the dissatisfaction arising from the draconian policies of Izquierdo, such as the
abolition of privileges and the prohibition of the founding of the school of arts and trades for
Filipinos which the General saw as a smokescreen to creating a political club.
Tavera is of the opinion that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the Cavite Mutiny as a way to
address other issues by blowing out of proportion the isolated mutiny attempt. During this time, the
Central Government in Madrid was planning to deprive the friars of all the powers of intervention
in matters of civil government and direction and management of educational institutions. The friars
needed something to justify their continuing dominance in the country, and the mutiny provided
such opportunity.
However, the Central Spanish Government introduced an educational decree fusing sectarian
schools run by the friars into a school called the Philippine Institute. The decree aimed to improve
the standard of education in the Philippines by requiring teaching positions in these schools to be
filled by competitive examinations, an improvement welcomed by most Filipinos.
Another account, this time by French writer Edmund Plauchut, complemented Tavera's account and
analyzed the motivations of the 1872 Cavite Mutiny.