FABRIKAM RESIDENCES PRESENTS:

THE ULTIMATE IN MODERN LIVING

THE CAVITE
MUTINY
Profile of the Gomburza
 Mariano Gomez – born on August 2, 1799 at Santa Cruz Manila by
Marina Guard and Francisco Gomez, he was designated as head priest
in Cavite in 1824 and was a member of GOMBURZA later on. He was
executed during the Cavite Mutiny in 1872.
 Jose Apolonio Burgos – was a Filipino mestizo secular priest, accused of
mutiny by the Spanish colonial authorities in the Philippines in the 19th
century he was born on February 9 1837 by Florencia Garcia and Don
Jose Burgos in Vigan Ilocos Sur. He was executed along with Mariano
Gomez and Jacinto Zamora.
 Jacinto Zamora – born August 14, 1835 in Manila. He was placed in a
mock trial and summarily executed in Manila along with two other
clergymen. He was a Roman Catholic priest. The Gomburza execution
was carried out on February 17, 1872 at Bagumbayan Field in Manila
during Cavite mutiny in the 19th century.
RECALLING THE GOMBURZA
EDMOND PLAUCHUT, AS QUOTED BY JAIME VENERACION

 Late in the night of the 15th of February 1872, a Spanish court

martial found three secular priests, Jose Burgos, Mariano
Gomez and Jacinto Zamora, guilty of treason as the instigators
of a mutiny in the Cavite navy-yard a month before, and
sentenced them to death. The judgement of the court martial
was read to the priests in Fort Santiago early in the next
morning and they were told it would be executed the
following day. Upon hearing the sentence, Burgos broke into
sobs, Zamora lost his mind and never recovered it, and only
Gomez listened impassively, an old man accustomed to the
thought of death.
RECALLING THE GOMBURZA
EDMOND PLAUCHUT, AS QUOTED BY JAIME VENERACION

When dawn broke on the 17th of February there

were almost forty thousand of Filipinos (who
came from as far as Bulacan, Pampanga,
Cavite and Laguna) surrounding the four
platforms where the three priests and the man
whose testimony had convicted them, a former
artilleryman called Saldua, would die.
RECALLING THE GOMBURZA
EDMOND PLAUCHUT, AS QUOTED BY JAIME VENERACION

The three priests followed Saldua: Burgos

‘weeping like a child’, Zamora with vacant eyes,
and Gomez head held high, blessing the
Filipinos who knelt at his feet, heads bared and
praying. He was next to die. When his confessor,
a Recollect friar , exhorted him loudly to accept
his fate, he replied: “Father, I know that not a
leaf falls to the ground but by the will of God.
Since He wills that I should die here, His holy will
be done.”
RECALLING THE GOMBURZA
EDMOND PLAUCHUT, AS QUOTED BY JAIME VENERACION

 Zamora went up the scaffold without a word and

delivered his body to the executioner; his mind had
already left it.
 Burgos was the last, a refinement of cruelty that
compelled him to watch the death of his companions.
He seated himself on the iron rest and then sprang up
crying: “But what crime have I committed? Is it
possible that I should die like this. My God, is there no
justice on earth?”
RECALLING THE GOMBURZA
EDMOND PLAUCHUT, AS QUOTED BY JAIME VENERACION

 A dozen friars surrounded him and pressed him down

again upon the seat of the garrote, pleading with him
to die a Christian death. He obeyed but, feeling his
arms tied round the fatal post, protested once again:
“But I am innocent!”
 “So was Jesus Christ,’ said one of the friars.” At this
Burgos resigned himself. The executioner knelt at his
feet and asked his forgiveness. “I forgive you, my son.
Do your duty.” And it was done.
THE CONTROVERSY
THE TWO FACES OF THE 1872 CAVITE MUTINY
By: Chris Antonette Piedad-Pugay
 The 12th of June of every year since 1898 is a very
important event for all the Filipinos. In this particular
day, the entire Filipino nation as well as Filipino
communities all over the world gathers to celebrate
the Philippines’ Independence Day. 1898 came to be
a very significant year for all of us— it is as equally
important as 1896—the year when the Philippine
Revolution broke out owing to the Filipinos’ desire to
be free from the abuses of the Spanish colonial
regime. But we should be reminded that another year
is as historic as the two—1872.
THE TWO FACES OF THE 1872 CAVITE MUTINY
By: Chris Antonette Piedad-Pugay
 Two major events happened in 1872, first was the 1872
Cavite Mutiny and the other was the martyrdom of the
three martyr priests in the persons of Fathers Mariano
Gomes, Jose Burgos and Jacinto Zamora
(GOMBURZA). However, not all of us knew that there
were different accounts in reference to the said
event. All Filipinos must know the different sides of the
story—since this event led to another tragic yet
meaningful part of our history—the execution of
GOMBURZA which in effect a major factor in the
awakening of nationalism among the Filipinos.
1872 Cavite Mutiny:
Spanish Perspective
The Spanish Perspective
 Jose Montero y Vidal, a prolific Spanish historian documented the event and
highlighted it as an attempt of the Indios to overthrow the Spanish government
in the Philippines. Meanwhile, Gov. Gen. Rafael Izquierdo’s official report
magnified the event and made use of it to implicate the native clergy, which
was then active in the call for secularization. The two accounts complimented
and corroborated with one other, only that the general’s report was more
spiteful. Initially, both Montero and Izquierdo scored out that the abolition of
privileges enjoyed by the workers of Cavite arsenal such as non-payment of
tributes and exemption from force labor were the main reasons of the
“revolution” as how they called it, however, other causes were enumerated by
them including the Spanish Revolution which overthrew the secular throne, dirty
propagandas proliferated by unrestrained press, democratic, liberal and
republican books and pamphlets reaching the Philippines, and most
importantly, the presence of the native clergy who out of animosity against the
Spanish friars, “conspired and supported” the rebels and enemies of Spain.
The Spanish Perspective
 In particular, Izquierdo blamed the unruly Spanish Press for
“stockpiling” malicious propagandas grasped by the
Filipinos. He reported to the King of Spain that the “rebels”
wanted to overthrow the Spanish government to install a new
“hari” in the likes of Fathers Burgos and Zamora. The general
even added that the native clergy enticed other participants
by giving them charismatic assurance that their fight will not
fail because God is with them coupled with handsome
promises of rewards such as employment, wealth, and ranks
in the army. Izquierdo, in his report lambasted the Indios as
gullible and possessed an innate propensity for stealing.
The Spanish Perspective
 The two Spaniards deemed that the event of 1872
was planned earlier and was thought of it as a big
conspiracy among educated leaders, mestizos,
abogadillos or native lawyers, residents of Manila and
Cavite and the native clergy. They insinuated that the
conspirators of Manila and Cavite planned to liquidate
high-ranking Spanish officers to be followed by the
massacre of the friars. The alleged pre-concerted
signal among the conspirators of Manila and Cavite
was the firing of rockets from the walls of Intramuros.
The Spanish Perspective
 According to the accounts of the two, on 20 January
1872, the district of Sampaloc celebrated the feast of
the Virgin of Loreto, unfortunately participants to the
feast celebrated the occasion with the usual fireworks
displays. Allegedly, those in Cavite mistook the
fireworks as the sign for the attack, and just like what
was agreed upon, the 200-men contingent headed by
Sergeant Lamadrid launched an attack targeting
Spanish officers at sight and seized the arsenal.
The Spanish Perspective
When the news reached the iron-fisted Gov.
Izquierdo, he readily ordered the reinforcement
of the Spanish forces in Cavite to quell the
revolt. The “revolution” was easily crushed
when the expected reinforcement from Manila
did not come ashore. Major instigators
including Sergeant Lamadrid were killed in the
skirmish, while the GOMBURZA were tried by a
court-martial and were sentenced to die by
strangulation.
The Spanish Perspective
Patriots like Joaquin Pardo de Tavera, Antonio
Ma. Regidor, Jose and Pio Basa and other
abogadillos were suspended by the Audencia
(High Court) from the practice of law, arrested
and were sentenced with life imprisonment at
the Marianas Island. Furthermore, Gov.
Izquierdo dissolved the native regiments of
artillery and ordered the creation of artillery
force to be composed exclusively of the
Peninsulares.
The Spanish Perspective
n 17 February 1872 in an attempt of the Spanish
government and Frailocracia to instill fear
among the Filipinos so that they may never
commit such daring act again, the GOMBURZA
were executed. This event was tragic but served
as one of the moving forces that shaped Filipino
nationalism.
 A Response to
Injustice: The Filipino
Version of the
Incident
The Filipino Perspective
 Dr. Trinidad Hermenigildo Pardo de Tavera, a Filipino scholar
and researcher, wrote the Filipino version of the bloody
incident in Cavite. In his point of view, the incident was a
mere mutiny by the native Filipino soldiers and laborers of the
Cavite arsenal who turned out to be dissatisfied with the
abolition of their privileges. Indirectly, Tavera blamed Gov.
Izquierdo’s cold-blooded policies such as the abolition of
privileges of the workers and native army members of the
arsenal and the prohibition of the founding of school of arts
and trades for the Filipinos, which the general believed as a
cover-up for the organization of a political club.
The Filipino Perspective
 On 20 January 1872, about 200 men comprised of
soldiers, laborers of the arsenal, and residents of
Cavite headed by Sergeant Lamadrid rose in arms
and assassinated the commanding officer and
Spanish officers in sight. The insurgents were
expecting support from the bulk of the army
unfortunately, that didn’t happen. The news about the
mutiny reached authorities in Manila and Gen.
Izquierdo immediately ordered the reinforcement of
Spanish troops in Cavite. After two days, the mutiny
was officially declared subdued.
The Filipino Perspective
 Tavera believed that the Spanish friars and Izquierdo used the
Cavite Mutiny as a powerful lever by magnifying it as a full-
blown conspiracy involving not only the native army but also
included residents of Cavite and Manila, and more
importantly the native clergy to overthrow the Spanish
government in the Philippines. It is noteworthy that during the
time, the Central Government in Madrid announced its
intention to deprive the friars of all the powers of intervention in
matters of civil government and the direction and
management of educational institutions. This turnout of events
was believed by Tavera, prompted the friars to do something
drastic in their dire sedire to maintain power in the Philippines.
The Filipino Perspective
 Meanwhile, in the intention of installing reforms, the
Central Government of Spain welcomed an
educational decree authored by Segismundo Moret
promoted the fusion of sectarian schools run by the
friars into a school called Philippine Institute. The
decree proposed to improve the standard of
education in the Philippines by requiring teaching
positions in such schools to be filled by competitive
examinations. This improvement was warmly received
by most Filipinos in spite of the native clergy’s zest for
secularization.
The Filipino Perspective
 The friars, fearing that their influence in the Philippines
would be a thing of the past, took advantage of the
incident and presented it to the Spanish Government
as a vast conspiracy organized throughout the
archipelago with the object of destroying Spanish
sovereignty. Tavera sadly confirmed that the Madrid
government came to believe that the scheme was
true without any attempt to investigate the real facts or
extent of the alleged “revolution” reported by
Izquierdo and the friars.
The Filipino Perspective
 Convicted educated men who participated in the mutiny
were sentenced life imprisonment while members of the
native clergy headed by the GOMBURZA were tried and
executed by garrote. This episode leads to the
awakening of nationalism and eventually to the outbreak
of Philippine Revolution of 1896. The French writer Edmund
Plauchut’s account complimented Tavera’s account by
confirming that the event happened due to
discontentment of the arsenal workers and soldiers in
Cavite fort. The Frenchman, however, dwelt more on the
execution of the three martyr priests which he actually
witnessed.
Unravelling the Truth
Unravelling the Truth
 Considering the four accounts of the 1872 Mutiny, there were
some basic facts that remained to be unvarying: First, there
was dissatisfaction among the workers of the arsenal as well
as the members of the native army after their privileges were
drawn back by Gen. Izquierdo;
 Second, Gen. Izquierdo introduced rigid and strict policies that
made the Filipinos move and turn away from Spanish
government out of disgust;
 Third, the Central Government failed to conduct an
investigation on what truly transpired but relied on reports of
Izquierdo and the friars and the opinion of the public;
Unravelling the Truth
 Fourth, the happy days of the friars were already numbered in
1872 when the Central Government in Spain decided to
deprive them of the power to intervene in government affairs
as well as in the direction and management of schools
prompting them to commit frantic moves to extend their stay
and power;
 Fifth, the Filipino clergy members actively participated in the
secularization movement in order to allow Filipino priests to
take hold of the parishes in the country making them prey to
the rage of the friars;
 Unravelling the Truth
 Sixth, Filipinos during the time were active participants,
and responded to what they deemed as injustices; and
 Lastly, the execution of GOMBURZA was a blunder on the
part of the Spanish government, for the action severed
the ill-feelings of the Filipinos and the event inspired
Filipino patriots to call for reforms and eventually
independence. There may be different versions of the
event, but one thing is certain, the 1872 Cavite Mutiny
paved way for a momentous 1898.
 Unravelling the Truth
 The road to independence was rough and tough to
toddle, many patriots named and unnamed shed their
bloods to attain reforms and achieve independence. 12
June 1898 may be a glorious event for us, but we should
not forget that before we came across to victory, our
forefathers suffered enough. As we enjoy our freedom,
may we be more historically aware of our past to have a
better future ahead of us. And just like what Elias said in
Noli me Tangere, may we “not forget those who fell
during the night.”
THE END.