Short Summary: The Cavity Mutiny

The Cavity Mutiny is a topic every Filipino student would come across in History class. However, the only thing most of us know (and forget) about this mutiny is that it was blamed on the Gomburza, which resulted to their court trial and eventual deaths. The lives of these famous priests before they were martyred are also not discussed. The article discusses the notable first-hand and second-hand sources of information we have on the mutiny, as well as the reliability of the said information.

The first source is Jose Montero, a Spanish official who was in Manila during the priests’ trial. His version of the story can be considered the authority’s official explanation of the Cavite Mutiny. Montero’s eyewitness account leaves no doubt as to

The three priests were implied to be innocent in this version. However, Plauchut tended to be dramatic, and was most probably inspired by separatists like Joaquin Pardo de Tavera and Antonio Regidor. Also, his version contains some factual errors.

Antonio Regidor, possibly one of Plauchut’s sources, also wrote his version (obviously anti-friar) of the event in the newspaper Filipinas ante Europa. While he could not have been a witness during the trial (as he was a prisoner), his version was more detailed than the first two, containing dialogues credited to the executed priests. Since only their guards can get close to them, it is hard to believe the priests said the things Regidor claimed they said. This version also contains factual errors.

Another version was written by a Spaniard, Felipe Govantes. His version does not make clear who he blames for the mutiny. It is also mentioned most of the people involved were sentenced by the courts, but Govantes implied that not all were

The prisoners, Recoleto priest Agapito Echegoyen and Augustinian priest Antonio Piernavieja, were known to have been tortured by the rebel leader Mariano Alvarez. The documents reveal the crimes and cruelties of friars, and attribute the Gomburza’s execution to them. They claimed that four friars, who knew that a rebellion was being planned in Cavite, sent a friar who looked like Burgos to visit the rebels and give out money to them. These documents were cited in a pamphlet written by Jose Basa, addressed to the American Consul-General in Hongkong. The pamphlet, requesting the aid of Americans, tells of the mistreatments Filipinos have suffered under Spanish rule.

In the official report of the 1903 census is Trinidad Pardo de Tavera’s version. His version denies that the mutiny was a plot to overthrow the Spanish, which is the friars’ claim, but was merely due to workers expressing their feelings after being deprived of their exemption from tribute. The friars persuaded the government to brutally punish people without a fair trial. Pardo de Tavera’s version irritated Father Serapio Tamayo, leading him to write in defense of the friars. The document, however, depended greatly on Montero’s version and does not really have much