DIFFERIN

G
ACCOUNT
OF THE
EVENTS
OF 1872
 Learning
Objectives
 To interpret historical events using primary source;
 To recognize the multiplicity of interpretation that can be read from a
historical text;
 To identify the advantages and disadvantages of employing critical
tools in interpreting historical events through primary sources;
 To demonstrate the ability to argue for or against a particular issue
using primary sources.
Experts from
Pardo de
PRIMAR
Tavera’s Y
SOURCE
Account of
the Cavite
Mutiny
Two other primary accounts exist that seem to counter the
accounts of Izquierdo and Montero. First, the account of Dr.
Trinidad Hermenegildo Pardo de Tevara.

A Filipino physician, historian and

politician of Spanish and
Portuguese

A Filipino scholar and researcher

Wrote a Filipino version of the

bloody incident in Cavite
This uprising among soldiers in Cavite was used a powerful
level by the Spanish residents and by the friars.. the Centarl
Government in Madrid had announced its intention to deprive
the friars in these islands 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 PARDO DE TAVERA

The incident was merely a mutiny by Filipino

soldiers and laborers of the Cavite arsenal to
the dissatification arising from the draconian
policies of Izquierdo (abolition of priveleges
and prohibition of the founding of the school
of arts and trades)
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 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 school to be filled by
competitive examinations, an improvement welcomed by most
Filipinos.
 Experts
02 from
Plauchut’s
PRIMARY
SOURCE
Account of
the Cavite
Mutiny
A French writer

Complemented Tavera’s accounts and

analyzed the motivation of the Cavite
Mutiny
General La Torre.. created a junta
composed of high officials, including some
friars and six Spanish officials. At the same
time, there was created by the government
in Madrid a committee to investigate the
same problems submitted to the Manila
committee. When the two finished work, it
was found that they came to the same
conclusions.
Here is the summary of the reforms they considered necessary
to introduce:
1. Changes in the tariff rates at customs, and the methods of collection.
2. Removal or surcharges on foreign importations.
3. Reduction of export fees.
4. Permission for foreigners to reside real estate, enjoy freedom of worship, and
operate commercial transports flying the Spanish
5. Establishment of an advisory council to inform the Minister of Overseas Affairs in
Madrid on the necessary reforms to be implemented.
6. Changs in primary and secondary education.
7. Establishment of an Institute of Civil Administration in the Philippines,
rendering unnecessary the sending home of short term civil officials every time
there is a change of ministry.
8. Study of direct-tax system.
9. Abolition of the tobacco monopoly.
The arrival in Manila of General Izquierdo put a sudden end to
all dream of reforms, the prosecutions instituted by the new
Governor General were probably expected as a result of the
bitter disputes between the Filipino clerics and the friars.
Such a policy must really end in a strong desire on the part of
the other to repress cruelly.
In regard to schools, it was previously decreed
that there should be in Manila a Society of Arts
and Trades to be opened in March of 1871.
To repress the growth of liberal teachings,
General Izquierdo suspended the opening of the
school. The day previous to the scheduled
inauguration.
The Filipinos had a duty to render service on public roads
construction and pay taxes every year. But those who were
employed at the maestranza of the artillery, in the
engineering shops and arsenal of Cavite, were exempted
from this obligation from time immemorial. Without
preliminaries of any kind, a decree by the Governor withdrew
from such old employees their retirement privileges and
declassified them into the ranks of those who worked on
public roads.
The friars used the incident as a part of a larger conspiracy
to cement their dominance, which had started to show
cracks because of the discontent of the Filipinos. They
showcased the mutiny as part of greater conspiracy in the
Philippines by Filipinos to overthrow the Spanish
Government. Unintentionally, and more so, the Cavite
Mutiny of 1872 resulted in the martyrdom of GOMBURZA,
and paved the way to the revolution culminating in 1898.
 GOMBURZA
Collective name of the three
martyred priests.

Tagged as the masterminds of

Cavite Mutiny.

They were prominent Filipino

priests charged treason and
sedition
The Spanish clergy connected
the priests to the mutiny as
part of a conspirarcy to stifle
the movement of secular
priests who desired to have
their own parishes instead of
being assistants to the
regular friars.
“The government, by enshrouding your trial in
mystery and pardoning your co-accused, has
suggested that the same mistake was
committed when your fate was decided; and
the whole of the Philippines, in paying
homage to your memory calling your martyrs,
totally rejects your guilt. The Church, by
refusing to degrade you, has put in doubt the
crime charged against you”.
Thank you
DID
RIZAL
RETRACT
 What is Retract
A retraction is a public statement made about an
earlier statement that withdraws, cancel, refutes,
or reverse the original statement or ceases and
desist from publishing the original statement .
 Case Study 3: Did Rizal Retract?
Jose Rizal is identified as a hero of the revolution for his
writing that center on ending colonialism and liberating
Filipino minds to contribute to creating the Filipino
Nation.

The great volume of Rizal’s lifework was committed to

this end, particularly the more influential ones, Noli Me
Tangere and El Filibusterismo. His essays vilify not the
catholic religion, but the friars, the main agents of
injustice in the Philippine society.

It is understandable, therefore, that any piece of writing

from Rizal that recants everything he wrote against the
friars and the Catholic Church in the Philippines could
deal heavy damage to his image as a prominent Filipino
revolutionary. Such document purportedly exists,
allegedly signed by Rizal a few hours before his
execution.
 I declare myself a catholic and this religion in which I was born and
educated I wish to live and die.

I retract with all my heart whatever in my words, writings, publications

and conduct has been contrary to my character as son of the Catholic
Church. I believe and I confess whatever she teaches and I submit to
whatever she demands. I abominate Masonry, as the enemy which is of
the Church, and as Society prohibited by the church. The Diocesan
Prelate may, as the Superior Ecclesiastical Authority, make public this
spontaneous manifestation of mine in order to repair the scandal which
may acts may have caused and so that God and people may pardon me.

March 29 of December of 1896

Source: Translated form the document by

Fr. Manuel Garcia, C. M on MAY 18, 1935 Jose Rizal

 There are four iterations of the texts of this
retraction
The first was published in La Voz Española and Diario de Manila on the day
1 of the execution, December 30,1896.

The second text appeared in Barcelona, Spain, in the magazine La Juventud,

2 a few months after the execution, February 14, 1897, from an anonymous
writer who was later on revealed to be Fr. Vicente Balaguer.

The third one that was said to be the “original text” was discovered in the
3 Archdiocesan archives on May 18, 1935 after it disappeared for thirty-nine
from the afternoon of the day when Rizal was shot.

The fourth text appeared in El Imparcial on the day after Rizal’s execution. It
4 is the short formula of the retraction.
Thank you
You can enter a subtitle here if you
need it
You can enter a subtitle here if you
need it
Multimedia
If you want, you can insert your multimedia content
here
 A picture is
worth a thousand
words
Notes
●