Snapshots to the Philippine Past

Snapshots into the Philippine Past

The Use of Reports of Diocesan and Other Visitations to

Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Parishes

Strengths and Weaknesses, Utility and Limitations

Bruce Cruikshank

4 March 2017©

Essay                                                                                                         2

Selected Bibliography of Manuscript and Published Sources                    19               

Appendices                                                                                             21

Archbishop of Manila

                                                     1760                                                22

                                                         1773-1775                                       25   

                                                         1776                                                31

                     Bishop of Cebu

                                                        1815                                                32

                                                        1866                                                41

                                                        1881                                             42                           

                     Bishop of Nueva Cáceres

                                                         1830, 1832                                      43

                     Bishop of Nueva Segovia

                                                     1849-1850                                       50

Snapshots into the Philippine Past

The Use of Reports of Diocesan and Other Visitations to

Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Parishes

Strengths and Weaknesses, Utility and Limitations

Bruce Cruikshank©

         The late Dr. Salvador Escoto, friend and colleague, has argued that “episcopal visitation records are rich quarries that yield a plethora of information for researchers and historians—windows through which scholars are able to take a good look at the demography and daily life of the people as well as their religious, social, moral, and cultural values….”[1]  These reports could “ascertain the population of each town based on the tributes and the classification of those exempted from paying taxes by reason of lineage, rank, personal service, sex, age, and physical disability.” (241).  Quoting further, we can see in the concerns of a Manila archbishop topics of interest for scholars today:

         To ascertain the spiritual status of the people and to eradicate the prevalent vices

in the communities such as adultery, fornication, robbery, usury, indecent apparel,

witchcraft, and other public sins.  To make certain that commercial activities

(fairs or tianggues) during Sundays and holy days as well as parties during the

Holy Week and designated days of abstinence are banned.

During Mass, the Archbishop would have read out “a list of public sins,” both in Spanish and in the local language, “to the assembled congregation, which was enjoined to report any miscreants” (242).  Furthermore, Dr. Escoto continues:

The parish priests and/or the parishioners reported the prevailing vices in the

town or the immoral lives of some individuals.  The prelate then summoned the

transgressors and admonished them personally, threatening them with punishment

if they persisted in their sinful practices.  Likewise, the pastors themselves were

not spared severe reprimand for personal misbehavior or serious dereliction of duty.

         In his conclusion to his essay, Dr. Escoto emphasized the value of the material one can find in the reports of the visitas made by the archbishops and bishops in the Spanish colony:

         Episcopal visitation during the Spanish colonial period had a far-reaching

         significance—much more than its modest ecclesiastical term suggests.  The

         bulky documents it generated reveal many interesting facts and fascinating

         incidents that are now priceless source material in local Philippine history.

         They tell among other things what was unique or noteworthy about a certain

         town, and the differences in the cultural, educational, and moral milieu

         between a provincial town, a port, or a hacienda and the suburbs of Manila.

         …  Most important of all, these documents are a valuable contribution to

         demography and other areas of inquiry that shed light on the life of the

         common people.  (267)

Sal Escoto adds a striking elaboration on these points in the last paragraph of his essay (271):

         While other documents focus their attention on powerful government officials,

royal decrees, and a variety of colonial issues, episcopal visitation worked at the grassroots level, shedding light on the quotidian bustle of the ordinary folks, and

on the terrain and ethos of the towns where they lived.  It offers a plethora of

diversified information on the indigenous population, its public sins and scandals

and other earthy, sometimes humorous, incidents—a veritable smorgasbord of

data for historians and scholars to feast on. 

Sal then changes from a Scandinavian buffet simile to a perspectival one:

The episcopal visitation documents are more like windows through which

Filipinists can have a good look at the livelihood of the common people, their

social life and economic problems, their foibles and moral lapses, and the

educational and cultural condition in the community.

         Good points all.  Any reportage of the lives of Filipinos[2] in the pueblos[3] and parishes of former times is valuable to us today as we try to understand the history of the Philippine past.  As John Smail argued over half a century ago regarding the Dutch imperial enterprise in what is now Indonesia:[4]

         … there is an authentic Indonesian body beneath the clothes we call the

         Netherlands Indies …this body has its own history, autonomous in the

         fundamental sense.  I am arguing that we are dealing here with a society

that is coherent and alive and not merely a rubble used by the Dutch for a

new building, a society which, by being alive, generates its own history—

which like any other history must be seen first of all from the inside—and

does not merely receive it.  Finally I am laying emphasis on the great bulk

of this society, absolutely and relatively to the minute Dutch elite, for scale

is important in practice though not in theory.

It should be apparent that Sal Escoto’s insight into the utility of diocesan reports speaks directly to their value for trying to envisage a Filipino set of societies, “coherent and alive,” worth viewing from inside as best we can, a population that in its size dwarfed the Iberian colonial elites that claimed imperial sovereignty over the “authentic [Filipino] body.” 

Sal uses the images of smorgasbord and windows.  I would suggest we might add to the metaphors by exploring the trope or figurative image of snapshots, which I mean as suggestive, brief sources focusing on a place and a single or few moments’ record in time.  Here we can draw on the insights of one of the well-known contemporary practitioners of photography, Sally Mann.  She suggests some of the issues when dealing with such “snapshots” from the past:[5]

At its most accomplished, photographic portraiture approaches the

eloquence of oil painting in portraying human character, but when we allow

snapshots or mediocre photographic portraits to represent us, we find they

not only corrupt memory, they also have a troubling power to distort character

and mislead posterity.  Catch a person in an awkward moment, in a pose or

expression that none of his friends would recognize, and this one mendacious

photograph may well outlive all corrective testimony, people will study it for

clues to the subject’s character long after the death of the last person who

could have told them how untrue it is.

When only one photograph survives, its authority is unimpeachable,

and we are in the position of jurors who have to decide a case based on one

witness’s unchallenged testimony.  …

The power of any one photograph to falsify a person’s character is, of

course, diminished by the evidence contained in every other surviving photograph

of that person.  …

But since we have just this one picture …, we have no way of knowing

if it’s a distortion or true to life.  ….

         Mann is speaking of the probity from and of a picture of the past, how the surviving evidence might distort the truth of the individuals portrayed and the realities implied.  Traditional historiography speaks to these very issues with its concerns with the 5Ws and 1H—who, when, where, what, why, and how.  Mann is reminding us of the dual meanings that the “when” contains, both as a point in time and as duration, evidence over time.  Photographs taken over time, in or as a sequence are best.  Snapshots over time better permit a full or at least a fuller context over a period in order to best reconstruct the who, where, what, why, and how.  Problems of data and interpretation arise when dealing with source materials not providing what might be called chronological or durational depth.

         With these points in mind, I think that Sal overstates the comprehensiveness of the type of source he champions.  The data presented usually are based on a brief visit, are recorded as selected and isolated observations, and with no context in time or setting.  Almost always they are in the voice of an outside, male observer, usually Spanish.  We can see some of the problems evidenced in diocesan reports as we look carefully at the ecclesiastical comments.  For instance this one Sal which quotes from the 9-10 February 1773 visita by the Archbishop of Manila to Antipolo:

         “A woman was denounced as a witch, but after a thorough examination the

archbishop found the accusations unfounded.  He considered her a good

Christian and threatened punishment to those who persisted in calling her a witch.”[6]

How could the Archbishop settle the matter in two days (the usual length of time of his visitas in most cases), even assuming the parish priest had done preliminary work?  Who accused her, what reasons beyond misplaced piety might have been behind the accusations, who was she, what family and economic status did she have, what punishments might have been threatened, how was she in fact treated after the Archbishop left Antipolo?  Was witchcraft commonly observed, reported, and punished in the Philippines at this time?  How was it observed, who made the accusations, how were the charges subject to proof, how were the convicted witches punished, were there penalties for false accusation?  On all of these questions the visita record is silent.  (Admittedly, that we even think to ask these questions is a credit to Sal and the record of the archibishop’s visita.) 

         One of the dimensions not evidenced in the archbishop’s reference is what social and political position and rivalries might be involved.  Only rarely do we have reference in these reports to those with more power and status in pueblo society, even more rarely to those with less power and status.  Only occasionally do we encounter references to different political and social groupings within a pueblo, e.g. Santa Cruz (“Inhabitants comprise three gremios (corporate groups), natives, Chinese mestizos, and ‘various Spanish families’”).[7]   The Archbishop of Manila observed that there were very few Europeans or Spanish mestizos in the Pampangan parishes he visited in 1776, whereas Chinese mestizos were present in all but four of the twenty-two parishes described.  Chinese mestizo numbers were particularly notable in Bacolor, San Fernando, México, and Gapang.[8]

         Indeed, what is most apparent is the very point that Sally Mann makes.  Here is a “picture” from one instant conveying an “image” chosen by the recorder.  What happened over time before and after the observation?  More broadly, how often did a superior ecclesiastical official ever visit these parishes?  The record suggests that such visitas were as rare as they were fleeting.  The Bishops and the Archbishop of Manila did not visit the parishes in their jurisdiction with consistent regularity.  A priest observed in 1773 that the former Bishop of Cebu was unable to visit the parishes of his diocese due to the danger from Moro raids—and it was true for his predecessor as well, meaning that in the parishes in the farthest reaches of the diocese no Bishop had visited there for some time.[9]  The Bishop for Nueva Caceres estimated that his 1830 visita took three months and three days, which would have been a significant expenditure of time and energy.  He did not make a visita in 1831 and in fact finished the 1830 visita in April and May of 1832.[10]  The Bishop for the diocese of Nueva Segovia wrote in 1850 that many, perhaps most, of the parishes in his diocese had not been visited in twelve years.[11]  Conversely, the Bishop of Cebu observed in 1866 that he had made his third visit to the eastern areas of his diocese (Leyte and Samar) some six years earlier.  Equally significant is that the Bishop also reported that he had been weak ever since because of an illness he had contracted making that visita.[12]  Presumably he had not had the strength to go there since.  Another Bishop of the Cebu diocese mentioned that in his 1878-1879 visita he went to twenty-three parishes in Leyte and Samar but was unable to visit nineteen other parishes in northern, eastern, and southern Samar.[13]

We also see that observations are biased, usually focused on the half of the population that was male.  Did the sex of the observer—all bishops were priests in the Roman Catholic hierarchy and thus male-- automatically eliminate access to the spheres and voices of the girls and women of the parish?  For instance, in a visit to Cainta[14] from 13-15 February 1773, the Archbishop wrote that “A prominent resident (magnate) was living in sin with a woman, and had previously ignored the parish priest’s threat of arrest, but finally begged pardon from the archbishop.  For atonement, the accused was ordered to ask forgiveness in front of the church congregation for three consecutive Sundays during high mass, with a sincere promise to amend his life.”[15] Who was the woman, what age and background did she have, was she punished in some way?  Adultery and the Archbishop’s response to it seem to have been fairly consistent—in Bulacan in the visita  of October 1775, Sal Escoto writes that “A married man had an illicit relationship with a woman, and the archbishop obliged him to end the affair and one of them (the woman?) was required to move to another town” (260).  Detail is often lacking for either sex.  The Archbishop in 14 March 1773 (Binondo) mentions a case where the woman “was denounced for living in sin with her lover, and the pair was forced to separate.”[16]  Was she of the upper caste and thus a target; or, vice versa, was the [male] lover of more prominence making an accusation against her less risky? 

Nonetheless, there are useful suggestions of Filipino practices, particular for marriage.   The Archbishop in 19 March 1773 said that “immoral cohabitations” in the Parian were common, suggesting that Filipinos were flexible regarding such arrangements.  The custom of having a prospective groom live and work in the home of the prospective bride before marriage (often called “personal service”) was occasionally denounced as well.  The Archbishop of Manila mentioned it once in his 1760 visita, for Santo Tomás de los Montes;[17] and again in reference to the parish of Tunasan.[18]  Celebrations could also lead to problems, at least as seen by the archbishop.  The Manila Archbishop, when he made a visita in 1760 to the parishes in his diocese, indicated that alcohol consumption led to significant problems during festivities during marriage feasts and that the priest in Santo Tomás de los Montes was to prohibit its use.[19] 

More broadly, does the rank and foreignness of the observer, probably not fluent in the local language, close off dimensions from his observation and reporting?  While Spanish was reportedly used to teach the catechism in some pueblos (e.g. Mariquina, Archbishop of Manila, 16-17 February 1773), use of Spanish in other contexts in most pueblos was probably not generally known nor commonly employed.  While preaching in Spanish was encouraged, indeed mandated by royal order, its actual use in church functions seems to have been problematic—see, for instance, an admonition 20-22 February 1773 to the parish priest of San Pedro Makati by the Archbishop “to preach to the faithful in Spanish.”[20] 

         There are occasional observations indicating that a priest’s influence and power were limited.  In a visit to Silang in January of 1774, the Archbishop observed that while “the people at large are generally good, there were reported cases of gambling, drunkenness, illicit cohabitations, and moral turpitude, and the pastor has limited success in curbing these vices.” [21]  The priest in this case was a Chinese mestizo, suggesting linguistic ability was not the only consideration for a priest to be able to communicate with and lead his flock.  The Archbishop’s report from 1760 mentioned significant Filipino resistance in one of the visitas in the parish of Tunasan to voluntary labor to improve or repair the church.[22]

         Priests also had difficulties enforcing the rules because of population dispersion.  In 1760, the Archbishop of Manila made dispersion and consequent vices and neglect of duties the tenth of nineteen strictures for the parish priests in his archdiocese.[23]  For the parish of Biñan, he noted that the territory and scattered population made it “very difficult and at times impossible to administer those sitios farthest away.”[24]   The Bishop of Cebu in 1881 wrote that dispersion in Leyte and Samar, combined with poor roads or safe waterways, led directly to poor attendance at Sunday services and at other religious ceremonies meant to be obligatory.[25]

         Sometimes too there are hints that the priest was complicit.  For instance, a Chinese mestizo priest (who otherwise demonstrated an “exemplary life”) in Malabon tolerated trade activities on Sundays and special church days:

         Furthermore, fairs (tianggues) are held on Sundays and holy days.  The

archbishop severely reprimanded the pastor for turning a blind eye on

these trading activities, threatening him with grave punishment if he again

allows such abuses.”[26]

In the pueblo of Bulacan, the Archbishop observed that vendors sold items on Sundays and days of obligation and threatened both to confiscate the goods and to replace the Augustinian priest with a diocesan priest if such practices did not cease (260).  The same threat was given to the Augustinian priest at Guiguinto when the Archbishop observed that “ferias were held on Sundays and holy days” (260).  Other sources also mention trade in pueblos on Sundays and special, religious days, though without direct linkage of permission for such trade to the parish priest.  For instance, the scholar Manchado López indicates, but without detail, that the Archbishop mentioned such commercial activity was a common practice in Pampangan parishes in 1776.[27] 

         Other interesting and potentially significant information regarding Filipinos can be found in reports regarding some of the pueblos visited.  I have quoted or summarized the substantive comments of the report writers in the appendices to this essay below, organized by archdiocese or diocese and time the visita or inspection trip was made.  In the 1773-1775 inspection trip Sal studied, for instance, we find in the report references to usury—

Binondo, 14 March 1773 (“The archbishop publicly rebuked many others

who were denounced for usury”[28]);

Bulacan, 14-16 October 1775 (“Usury is rampant not only in the town,

but in the entire province.  It usually consists of charging weekly interest

of 4 reales (half peso) for a P10 loan, or demanding two or three times

the amount for every quantity of rice lent” (260). 

In the 1776 visita to the Pampangan parishes, the archbishop expressly mentioned usury as a common and important harmful practice, particularly practiced by Chinese mestizos as a mechanism to acquire the lands of other Pampangans. Also mentioned were “hoarding of items later sold at abusive prices” (“Los préstamos usurarios, la práctica de entregar prendas que eran retenidas y el acaparamiento de productos que después eran vendidos a precios abusivos …”).[29]

I agree with Dr. Salvador Escoto regarding the importance for researchers of reports of visitas to the parishes under diocesan administration.  They are not sufficient in themselves, but the pieces of information are often unique and suggestive.  We clearly need more reports found and published, along with the other work with primary sources that awaits us.  Sal’s initiative in this regard will, I hope, be replicated by other scholars as they work through the materials in the archives in the Philippines, Mexico, the USA, and Spain with significant collections of Filipiniana.  Clearly such reports give us information and data we might not find elsewhere.  It is apparent too that these snapshots into the lives of Filipinos in pueblos around the archipelago bring rare and potentially valuable information for those studying the Philippine past in regions and settlements away from Manila.

Even though priests and bishops would not necessarily have known everything that Filipinos chose to do and every detail of their lives, beliefs, and practices, Escoto is clearly correct in pointing out the importance of these sources.  I have only been able to locate a few.  Undoubtedly there are others that perhaps other researchers will unearth and publish.  What I have extracted here, though, ratifies Sal’s insight into their usefulness.  As John Smail said, “I am arguing that we are dealing here with a society that is coherent and alive …, a society which, by being alive, generates its own history—which like any other history must be seen first of all from the inside.”  I suggest that in order to understand Philippine history we need to focus on the bulk of Filipinos living in and around the municipalities away from Manila, as Jack Larkin argued half a century ago.[30]  Their experiences and histories have been neglected.  Their experiences and histories must be seen as fundamental and the center of our efforts in the future.

         I had originally anticipated that Sal Escoto’s insight regarding the utility of diocesan reports from visitas, supplemented by observations from others, would suggest a way to get to histories of Filipino life and lives in the pueblos before 1898.  I envisaged building a mosaic with these glittering or commonplace pieces of glass into a history of the Philippine past.  Problems of quantity, coverage over time, and depth of field for any one or even a group of pueblos are certainly significant challenges for a historian.  Two of the more promising possibilities to build a picture of the daily, pueblo past before 1898 exist.  A well-documented local or regional conflict allows one to build a story of event, place, socio-economic class, female and male participants, geography, epidemiology, demography, trade, and natural or human disasters or crises.  Sources of course permit or constrain how much of each theme can be excavated, but the possibility to construct a history is there.  Rebellions and quarrels over inheritance or politics in municipalities might produce valuable materials to use for a history.  Indeed any extensive set of manuscripts focused on the pueblo level and involving some reportage concerning or by Filipinos should be explored.

         A second approach would be to take the photographs or pieces of glass and arrange them in region and in a time span by theme.  From these one could write a regional study, using

o   materials on trade,

o   population dispersion,

o   agriculture,

o   fishing,

o   epidemiology,

o   Moros,

o   gambling,

o   drinking,

o   socio-economic classes and interactions,

o   tax payment and avoidance,

o   what the local priest might know or not,

o   Filipino movement to or from pueblos,

o   relations with highlanders and itinerant merchants,

o   educational opportunities and achievements,

o   popular festivities,

o   gender roles, and so forth. 

Thematic histories of various regions over the third of a millennium that the Spanish claimed to rule the archipelago could be both illuminating in themselves and perhaps show us the Philippine past in novel ways. 

         Some ecclesiastics anticipated this possibility by phrasing their observations not as separate instances in specific pueblos but as themes.  They described patterns of behavior or practices they witnessed without specifying who, when, or where, but suggesting instances widespread in time and space.  For instance, the Bishop in Cebu wrote a report in 1815 on his diocese and presented observations,[31] inter alia, on why Spanish was not commonly spoken outside of port towns and other commercial centers,[32] marriage costs and personal or bride service (Paragraph 14), the more common vices (Paragraphs 23 and 24), as well as usury and sharecropping (Paragraphs 25 and 26). He mentions in two paragraphs ((9 and 13) that Filipino women tended to be more devout and observant of church mandates and practices. [33]

         We can also turn to parish priests and their observations of lives in the parishes they administered for the Roman Catholic church.  In May of 1731, for instance, the Franciscan parish priest of Polo wrote criticizing habitual or excessive card playing in and around his parish:[34]

                     … every day there are quarrels and robberies—nothing is safe in the

houses—and every day that there are card players there are fights.  Not only

is there dissension among the gamblers, it is a rare day that their wives don’t

come to me to request that I sever them from their husbands … since the

husbands do not just gamble they also wager the household’s clothing, gold,

jewelry, and even their bodies.  This last week there came to me a woman,

crying, hungry and with a babe at her breast, asking for separation from her

husband.  He not only gambles every morning and afternoon … but comes

home angry from the game and beats her for not having food on the table.  … 

Another woman came to me crying and asked that I support her against her

father who had gambled at cards and lost in a game with Manila men in the

barrio of Passolo.  The father had lost two water buffalo, his land, rice, more

than fifty pesos, and everything else that they had in the house.  The wife

and other children had nothing to eat.  …

The addictiveness of gambling as well as the use of conclaves for indulgence and kept secret from the priests are described in another May 1731 report, this one by a Franciscan from Sampaloc:[35]

         On Holy Tuesday of 1730, … I and P. Fr. Juan Francisco de San Antonio …

left on a banca from the Parian and disembarked up river at the house of Don

Manuel de Tauregui in front of the pueblo of Pandacan, planning to go from

there by land.  It was about 9 p.m. when we accidentally found a large group

playing cards …  They were so absorbed that we were not noticed until we

spoke.  The worst is that neither pleas nor threats could get them to make their

[annual] confessions and comply with Church [rules].

         It is clear that sources of data of use are not limited to ecclesiastical visits by Archbishops and Bishops.  When supplemented by reports by other ecclesiastics, government officials, and the random traveler, one begins to glimpse a fuller reality of Filipino lives than that which has been traditionally recounted in standard histories of the archipelago under Spanish rule.  One thinks of well-known publications by Jagor, Huerta, et al.[36]  Such travelogues and overviews often have valuable insights.[37]  Even some of the classic institutional or analytical histories and regional studies such as those by Larkin and Owen often have details of Filipino local life of utility.[38]

         One also gets hints of how Filipino pueblo officials manipulated the system and occasionally were able to turn situations into opportunities to bargain for concessions from the Iberian regime.  I have already discussed manipulation in my essay “Gaming the System

The Tribute System in the Spanish Philippines, 1565-1884” and there is no need to recapitulate examples and arguments here.  Bargaining for concessions or advantages from the colonial master, however, is worth documenting here in its own right. 

In 1785, the Governor General of the Philippines made an inspection trip north from Manila into the provinces of Pangasinan and Ilocos.[39]  When he arrived in Malasiqui, he was received by the pueblo officials and the usual welcoming dance by young people.  The next day the officials asked a boon from the Governor General:  during the war against the English in 1762-1764, Malasiqui was part of the general rebellion against Spanish rule, a rebellion centered to the north, in the Ilocos provinces.  After the treaty with the British and the full re-assumption of power by the Spanish, some of those who had fought against Spanish rule were hanged in Malasiqui—with the added proviso that the gallows would be preserved as a reminder of what happens to rebels against Spanish dominion.  Now, almost two dozen years later, the gallows still stood as a painful reminder and an “embarrassment” to the relatives of those executed.  The pueblo’s officials “entreated his lordship in writing that he would deign, as a gift from the King whose birthday they celebrated, to permit the gallows to be destroyed.”  The Governor General, who did not “want to frustrate the confidence shown by those who came and invoked the name of our sovereign to request a boon,” ordered the Spanish governor of the province to have them destroyed, an order which was received with “repeated vivas.”   Well done!  A request in writing (presumably in Spanish), reference to the king’s birthday, supplication and reference to a boon, and the final touch, “repeated vivas” when the gallows were ordered to be demolished. 

         Thanks to these “snapshots” we also get hints of Filipino lives pursued without the knowledge or approval of Spaniard or Filipino priests and Spanish civil authorities, as we saw with the 1731 case of gambling near Pandacan two priests accidentally discovered quoted earlier.  Non-ecclesiastical Spaniards also have reports that open glimpses into the autonomous or independent lives of Filipinos.  For instance, as a result of Capitán D. José María Peñaranda’s attempts in the early 1830s to make contact with and suppress bandit gangs in the Mount Banahaw area of southeastern Laguna, he also investigated the areas around the mountain that he described in 1831 as “the object of superstition by the indios who go there on pilgrimage and it appears they have been converted … to the cult [and religious practices devoted to] their idols in that same mountain.”[40]  In May 1833, he found the following site, one clearly in use as a religious pilgrimage center:[41] 

         On the 25th [of May] in the morning they broke camp and by noon had arrived

at the “ravine that runs from San Cristoval to Mahayhay, where all we found

were tracks of carabao and horses that had been stolen in Batangas being taken

for sale in Laguna or (going in the other direction) taking contraband of wine

and tobacco.  After forty minutes they arrived at the sitio of Mambuhan.  The

first thing that caught my attention was the ridge about one hundred brazas long

and twelve in width, perfectly leveled and clean except for tall and leafy trees

surrounding it as a protection from the sun.  There were benches made out of

tree trunks, three crosses at one of the extremes and toward the other end an

enormous balete [tree]” with a small hut “big enough for three or four persons

and signs that it had been inhabited at some times.”  Towards the south was a

river in a ravine with steep walls.  They found on the walls drops of wax and

shells that might have been used for candles. 

The site had obviously been prepared with a significant amount of labor, was maintained (perfectly leveled and clean”), and showed use with candles, either for general illumination or for religious purposes and illumination.  Peñaranda continued:

         This appeared to the site called the Puerta de Jerusalem and the Jordan River

where [believers] went to purify themselves.  Higher up was a great rock with

a cave inside called San Isidro, again with traces of candles.  … It is quite

difficult to verify or, better said, impossible [to establish] the origins of this

superstitious devotion that attracts so many people from the immediate

provinces, even from the capital, especially during the Easter season when

hundreds gather.  …  Two of those with me had been on a pilgrimage here

and from one I was able to learn that they came with some friends and were

obligated to pray and afterwards bathe at different hours of the day and night

… and when they asked to whom they should pray since there was no image,

they were commanded to be quiet.  In fact I believe that no one knows what is

the object of this cult.  It is carried from one to another, passed from parents to

children, and the custom is to hold some sites sacred ….

The site would appear to have been used by a popular form of Christianity.  His informants apparently gave him the names of the river and the cult center.  It appears to have been a site that attracted many people from a wide area.  Many even came from Manila, with popular participation particularly marked during the Easter season.  It is of course nonsense to say “that no one knows what is the object of this cult”—but what is clear is that Spaniards were not privy to the knowledge and that for many Filipinos the devotions practiced there superseded in importance the religious practices mandated by formal Christianity in the pueblos during the Easter season.

         This is a remarkable description and a particularly useful one with which to end this essay examining diocesan reports as a way to find out about the Filipino experience on the ground.  The irony for our essay is that Peñaranda’s report suggests that parish priests in the region were apparently not privy to what was happening on the mountain, where a non-orthodox Christianity was centered, attended, and attracting fervent participants from their pueblos.  Regardless of constraints in the sources that have down to us, it is clear that there was a lot happening amidst and between the Filipinos under Spanish rule.  Smail’s insight regarding the Dutch colony of what is now Indonesia seems to be readily transferable to the Spanish colony of the Philippines.  Much of what was going on amidst the colonized was unrecorded, perhaps even unknown to the Spanish.  Filipinos seem to have actively moved from place to place as they chose, married with or without church ceremony, pursued economic opportunity or traded or borrowed money as they decided, and had social as well as interior lives kept secret in whole or in part from priests and Spanish officials. 

         Filipinos in the Spanish colony were officially subject to civil and ecclesiastic regulation, demands, and oversight.  Some Filipinos helped the Spanish imperial demands.  Others dutifully or perforce accepted the demands and supervision.  However, many seem to have had their own lives, priorities, and practices carefully hidden and separate from Spanish knowledge and control. 

To understand the Filipino experience in the pueblos and boondocks under ostensible Spanish rule, one needs to recognize and focus on the importance and obscured reality of how the actual lives of most Filipinos played out.  Yes, we have difficulties in the sources.  Yes, often what materials we have are presented without sequence, without antecedents and further developments, without a socio-political context, tend to neglect women and their experiences, are usually written by foreign and male observers without Filipino or Filipina voices surviving in the documents, and so forth.  Nonetheless, to write Philippine history we must commit ourselves  to elicit and elucidate Filipino beliefs, priorities, actions, and reactions.  By definition, in order to write histories of the Philippine past, this is our obligation.  Filipinos are not just part of the story, fundamentally they must be the centerpiece for histories we construct of the Philippine past.

Bibliography of Selected Manuscripts and Published Sources

Manuscripts Used

Archivo General de Indias, Audiencia de Filipinas, Legajo 1069A, “Papeles por agregar.”  Contestación que dá el Obispo de Zebú Don Fray Joaquin Encaba de la Virgen de Sopetran Agustino Recoleto descalzo, al interrogario formado por la Governación de Ultramar en la Ciudad de Cadiz, en 6 de Diciembre de 1812, y recibido por el expresado Obispo en 22 de Noviembre de 1814. 

Archivo Histórico Nacional (Madrid), Ultramar, Legajo 2166, #13: Visita Diocesano del Obispado de Nueva Segovia.  5ff., 15 September 1850, from Vigan.

Archivo Histórico Nacional, Ultramar, Legajo 2211.  El Obispo de Cebu informa sobre el estado general de aquella Diocesis rogando se dictasen algunas providencias necesaria para que prosperazen aquellas islas tan fertiles como bien situadas.  Sent to Spain 1 March 1866, by

“Fr. Romualdo Obispo.” 

Archivo Histórico Nacional (Madrid), Ultramar, Legajo 2854, Estados, Asuntos Eclesiásticos, paraphrasing from an 11 October 1773 letter (from Madrid) to the king of Spain from a P. Fr. Francisco de la Concepcion Villanueva la Serena.

Museo Naval, Ms. 2237, Doc. 15: 2 June 1833.  Parte del Capitán D. José María Peñaranda referente a la batida que se llevó a Cabo contra los ladrones y contrabandistas que se abrigaban en los montes de San Cristóbal.  Copia.  Ff. 98-105.

Philippine National Archives.  Patronato. Unclassified. [1830 and 1832 Visita Eclesiastica, by El Yllmo. y Rmo. Señor Don Fray Juan Antonio de Lillo, Obispo, Nueva Caceres].  24 ff., Nueva Cazeres [sic], Palacio Episcopal, 13 October 1832.

Selected, Published Sources

Elordi Cortés, Pilar

“Una visita pastoral del arzobispo Manuel Antonio Rojo a la diócesis de Manila [1760],” Missionalia Hispánica,  38: 114 (September-December 1981), 319-391.

Escoto, Salvador P.

“The Manila Archbishop’s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People,” Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272. 

Manchado López, Marta María

         “La Visita de 1776 a las Parroquias Pampangas de Filipinas.”  Revista de Indias, 56, no. 206 (1996), 77-97.

Appendices

Details regarding names and dates of office of the Archbishops and Bishops listed in the footnotes on this page are taken from http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dmanp.html .

Archbishop of Manila

                                                         1760[42]                                              22

                                                         1773-1775[43]                                    25   

                                                         1776[44]                                              31

                     Bishop of Cebu

                                                        1815[45]                                              32

                                                        1866[46]                                         41

                                                        1881[47]                                             42                           

                     Bishop of Nueva Cáceres

                                                         1830, 1832[48]                                    43

                     Bishop of Nueva Segovia

                                                         1849-1850[49]                                    50

1760 Visita by the Archbishop of Manila,

Summary Only Available[50]

         This essay was published in 1981.  The source of the lengthy manuscript that it presented in transcription was not given.  In a lengthy introduction to the Archbishop and his career (319-326), we learn (320) that the Archbishop’s name was Don Manuel Antonio Rojo y Vieyra, later to gain a negative reputation for his collaboration with the British when they occupied Manila (1762-1764). 

The length of time the Archbishop spent in each pueblo during the visita is imprecise since that information is not given and other documents included in the report were by other writers and were almost certainly written and dated after the individual visitas by the archbishop had ended. 

Even though the transcription presents the inspection journey parish by parish, remarkably little information regarding Filipinos and their pueblos emerges.  Most detail has to do with condition of church buildings, routines of indoctrination, population numbers, and so forth.  The only substantive information for my purposes is reference to Spanish provincial governors and their withholding of funds supposed to have been made to church officials and school teachers (one comment was made in Cabuyao[51] and one in Tunasan (372)).[52]  Even that is marginal in utility.

The only other material of some value are lengthy insertions setting forth the edicts for the visita 331-336), checklist of possible defects in parish priests (Edicto Remitido a los Curas con esta Carta, 19 January 1760, 339),[53] and pp. 352-355 (‘Ordenanzas’ Reformadas por S. S. I. para la Buena Adminisración de los Curas).[54]

         The visita officially began on January 10th of 1760 (330), and the full edict by the Archbishop announcing the inspections can be found on pp. 331-334, dated 12 January 1760; subsidiary edicts can be found on pp. 334-336, along with the inspection of the Manila cathedral (336-340).  Cavite was the first parish inspected, 23-?26 January 1760, pp. 340-342, and 378. 

The subsequent parishes or other entities the Archbishop visited were:    

Santuario de Ntra Señora de la Soledad de Puerta Vaga, 26 January 1760, 342-343

         San Roque, 26-?28 January 1760, 343-344

         Bacoor, 28-?29 January 1760, 344-346

         Malabón (and a hacienda site), 29 January-?1 February 1760, 346-348

         Balayán, 6 February-?9 February, ?11 February, 348-350, 352, 386[55]

         Liang, 9-?10 February 1760, 350-352[56]

         del Rosario, 22-?24 February 1760, 355-357

         Santo Tomás de los Montes, 28 February-?2 March 1760, 357-360, 367-368

                     p. 359 has references to drinking alcohol during marriages and to personal service

                                 practices, both of which I mentioned in the essay

         Visita de la Estancia de San Juan Bautista de Calamba, 3-?6 March 1760, 360-363

         Cabuyao, 7-?8 March 1760, 364-366

         Biñan (on a hacienda), 9-?12 March 1760, 367-369, 371, 386

         Balibago, 12 March 1760, 369-370.  There is a discussion on page 369 of population

                     dispersion and the visita of Balibago, as I indicated in the essay, with mention as

                     well of the visitas of Calabozo, Mapalasan, Malaban, Tubigan, Tagapo, Dila, and

                     Angostura.

         Tunasan (and a hacienda site), 13-?14 March 1760, 371-373.  Page 373 has a reference to

                     resistance from the visita of Muntin Lupa to voluntary labor to work on church

                     repairs and reconstruction.  Page 373 has a reference to personal service.  Both are

                     noted in the essay.

         Santiago, 18-?29 March 1760, 373-375

         Quiapo, 20-?31 March 1760, 375, 376-377

Visita del Pueblo de la Hermita, 24 March - ?1 April 1760, 375, 377-378

San Roque, 1 April 1760, 377

Angono, 9 April 1760, 378-382[57]

Visita de San Juan de Buenavista, 27 April-4 May 1760, 382-384

Lubán, not visited due to danger from weather and Moros, 329[58] and 387[59]

Archbishop of Manila’s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775[60]

Archbishop Basilio Sancho de Santa Justa y Rufina was the Archbishop.  He recounted his visit to thirty-nine parishes in four distinct time periods, from 5 February 1773 to 16 November 1775.

         Topics and themes noted in this appendix include dispersion, exposure to Spanish language, diversity, market activity, usury (only one e.g. but probably more widespread), estate lands, rich folks (implied levels of wealth and well-being variations based on that wealth)

First Phase: Province of Tondo[61]

Name of Pueblo     Province                 Date(s) of Visitation                     

Taytay                     Tondo          6-8 February 1773                          

Comments   reference to earthquake of 1771 and damage it caused to church

                                 “People are docile, devout, and industrious, and they reside mostly in the

town (en mucha sociedad) and not scattered in distant sites.” (243)

Antipolo                  Tondo          9-10 February 1773

         Comments   “Due to Antipolo’s lack of arable land and stony soil, its people live

miserably.  Many work as farmhands in neighboring towns and return on  weekends to hear mass.  A woman was denounced as a witch, but after a thorough

examination the archbishop found the accusations unfounded.  He considered her

a good Christian and threatened punishment to those who persisted in calling her a witch.”  (243)

Bosoboso                Tondo          11-12 February 1773   No comments of use for this essay.

Cainta                      Tondo          13-15 February 1773. 

         Comments   Reference to damage to church by an earthquake, no date of quake given

                                 “A prominent resident (magnate) was living in sin with a woman, and had

                     previously ignored the parish priest’s threat of arrest, but finally begged pardon

                     from the archbishop.  For atonement, the accused was ordered to ask forgiveness

                     in front of the church congregation for three consecutive Sundays during high

                     mass, with a sincere promise to amend his life.” (244)

Mariquina                Tondo          16-17 February 1773

         Comments   “Inhabitants well indoctrinated and most of them learn catechism in

                     Spanish.  The economy is based on agriculture and hunting.” (244)

San Mateo               Tondo          18-19 February 1773

         Comments   Reference to damage to church from an earthquake, date not given.

                                 “Although most people reside in the community, some live in the

                     mountains and are reluctant to settle in the town.”  (244)

San Pedro Makati   Tondo          20-22 February 1773

         Comments   Reference to damage to church from an earthquake, date not given.

                                 “The archbishop exhorted the pastor to give more religious instruction to

                     hacienda tenants, who are mostly transients and hardly catechized, to preach to

                     the faithful in Spanish, and to catechize the children in the same language.” (245)

Second Phase: Extramuros (Parishes outside the city walls)

Quiapo                                Extramuros  28 February 1773

         Comments   Reference to significant damage to the church from the 1771 earthquake.

                                 “Practically all live in the town (mucha reducción y sociabilidad).  Most

                     people are poor, but well indoctrinated in the faith.  Many are good

                     scribes/copyists and dedicate their time to the art of good handwriting (Buenos

                     plumarios y aplicados a las letras).  (245)

Santa Cruz              Extramuros  7 March 1773

         Comments   “Inhabitants comprise three gremios (corporate groups), natives, Chinese

                     mestizos, and ‘various Spanish families.’  Residents told the archbishop that the

                     evildoers in the community come from other towns.”  (250)

Binondo                  Extramuros  14 March 1773  

         Comments   “Inhabitants are mostly natives and Chinese.  There are also many

                     distinguished Spanish families, whose household members and servants do not

                     pay taxes, thus making it difficult to determine the exact number of the

                     population.  Furthermore, being a port town, Binondo has a large mix of

                     ‘nationalities.’  When the time comes to register residents, many people move out

                     of town.  A woman was denounced for living in sin with her lover, and the pair

                     was forced to separate.  The archbishop publicly rebuked many others who were

                     denounced for usury and sinful cohabitations.”  (250)

Parian                      Extramuros  19 March 1773

         Comments   “Usury and immoral cohabitations are the common public vices.” (250)

San Miguel              Extramuros  21 March 1773

         Comments   earthquake (no date or year specified) destroyed the church, “totally”

                                 “Inhabitants are generally poor, but docile” (251)

Ermita                     Extramuros  25 March 1773

         Comments   earthquake (no date or year specified) destroyed the church, “totally”

Santiago                  “located at the main entrance of the city” (251)     28 March 1773

         Comments   “No church but a decent camarín” (251)

“ ‘With Holy Week approaching, visitation was suspended and Archbishop Sancho de Santa Justa y Rufina returned to Manila, April 5, 1773’” (251)

Third Phase: Provinces of Laguna de Bay, Balayan, and Cavite

“The data in this section come from the following source material: ‘Testimonio en relato de las Iglesias y Curatos,’ 15 February 1774, Filipinas, legajo 635, AGI”, 251)

Cavite el Viejo, 18-? January 1774

         Comments   “People are generally docile, devout, and industrious.  Two couples were

                                 reported to be living separately from their spouses without ‘the

                                 magistrate’s permission’ and were ordered to live together” (252)

Silan[g], 21-? January 1774

         Comments   “The archbishop also ordered the pastor to stop the allegedly Jesuit-

                                 initiated practice of bringing the sick [slung in a hammock] from the

                                 barrios to the church, in order to receive the last sacrament” (253)

                     “Although the people at large are generally good, there were reported cases of

                                 gambling, drunkenness, illicit cohabitations, and moral turpitude, and the

                                 pastor has limited success in curbing these vices” (253)

Indan[g], 24-? January 1774

         Comments   Church is described as being “in ruins” and that “People are very remiss in

                                 hearing mass.  Residents in Indan[g] and in the two immediate preceding

                                 towns have improved in learning Spanish, especially the school children,

                                 who talk [sic, by Dr. Escoto], read, and pray in Spanish” (253).

Tunasan, “(hacienda town),” 26-27 January 1774 

         Comments   “A new, strongly built church (de cal y canto) is about to be finished ….”

                                 “Much of the prevailing vices in the hacienda are carnal in nature

                                 (lascivia); gambling, usury, and swindling are committed mostly by

                                 transients” (253 and 254))

Biñan, “(hacienda town),” 28 January 1774

         Comments   the church and the rectory were “totally destroyed by the British during

                                 the war in the early 1760s” (254).  The church has been rebuilt but not the

                                 parish house yet. 

                     “ ‘Ungovernable, the worst of all haciendas, impossible to govern because houses

                                 are widely dispersed.  Notorious for its excesses in lechery, drunkenness,

                                 robbery, swindling, greed, and usury, because fugitives (foragida), and

                                 violent (sanguine), vicious people (gente de mal vivir) could enter and

                                 leave with ease’” (254).

Cabugao a.k.a. Tabuco (“near the hacienda of Calamba”), 31 January 1774

         Comments   earthquake (no date or year specified) destroyed the church, “totally”

                     “ ‘Inhabitants poor and small in number.  Despite its long distance from Manila,

                                 the people have made much progress in learning the Spanish language,

                                 especially the school children, who talk [sic, by Dr. Escoto], read, and

                                 pray in Spanish” (254).

Santo Tomás de los Montes, 1 February 1774

         Comments   “People very poor and inclined to idleness” (255)

Rosario, 2 February 1774

         Comments   “Although far from Manila, the natives are the most reasonable (racional)

 among the Tagalog, very docile, and well disposed to learn the Spanish

language, especially the school children” (256)

Balayan, 3-4 February 1774

         Comments               none excerpted for this essay

Maragondong, 5 February 1774

         Comments   “The people of Maragongdong are quite lax in hearing mass on Sundays

                                 and holy days of obligation.  Excluded in the census is another group of

                                 people of ‘different ethnicity’ (otra casta de gente) called Mardicas, who

                                 live along the sandbar outside the town and are exempted from paying

                                 tribute.  There are about 400 to 500 of them …  Their number has been

                                 dwindling due to malnutrition (lack of rice) and the almost yearly raids of

                                 the Moros” (256).

Malabon, “no date reported”

         Comments   “Fornication and abductions of women (rapto de mujeres) are prevalent. 

                                 Furthermore, fairs (tianggues) are held on Sundays and holy days.  The

                                 archbishop severely reprimanded the pastor for turning a blind eye on

                                 these trading activities, threatening him with grave punishment if he again

                                 allows such abuses” (256).

Bacoor, 7 February 1774

         Comments   “The town has very limited parcels of land.  …  Many landless people

                                 roam around throughout the year.  Since they have nothing to do to keep

                                 them busy, they have become gamblers, thieves, and pickpockets.  The

                                 archbishop suggested that the pastor coax the nonresidents to settle

                                 permanently in the town and, if unsuccessful, ask the civil authorities

                                 (arma secular) for help” (257).

San Roque, 8 February 1774

         Comments   “The old beautiful church was destroyed by an earthquake; the new church

                                 is of wood and brick with a tile roof” (257).

Cavite Port, 9 February 1774

         Comments   “Being a port town, it has a large concourse of Spanish, French, English,

                                 Chinese mestizo, Pampangueño, Ilocano, and Pangasinense residents. 

                                 There are very many bad people in the port that lead dissolute lives,

                                 vicious vagabonds that contaminate the morals of native Caviteños” (258).

“The episcopal visitation was ended because it was almost Lent” (258).

Visitation of Parishes under the Augustinians[62]

Bulacan, 14-16 October 1775

         Comments   Church damaged in the war with the British but is “under repair” (258)

                                 “A married man had an illicit relationship with a woman, and the

                     archbishop obliged him to end the affair and one of them (the woman?) was

                     required to move to another town.  Usury is rampant not only in the town, but in

                     the entire province.  It usually consists of charging weekly interest of 4 reales

                     (half peso) for a P10 loan, or demanding two or three times the amount for every

                     quantity of rice lent.  The prelate ordered restitution be given to the victims and

                     wrote letters to the alcalde mayor and provincial magistrates to punish the

                     miscreants.  Furthermore, he forbade vendors from selling a variety of textiles

                     (ferias de varios géneros) on Sundays and holy days of obligations, a common

                     practice in the town, and warned violators that their merchandise would be seized

                     and distributed to the poor of the town and to the prisoners in the province. 

                     Unless the violations were rectified, the archbishop threatened to replace the

                     pastor with a secular priest” (260).

Guiguinto, 16-17 October 1775

         Comments   The Archbishop learned that ferias were held on Sundays and holy days

                     here and made the same threat to the Augustinian parish priest that he had made

                     in Bulacan (260).

Malolos, 18-20 October 1775

         Comments   “Again, feria is held on forbidden days” (261).

Palombong, 20-21 October 1775                Comments               none of use for this essay

Hagonoy, 20-22 October 1775                  

         Comments   “The people in Hagonoy are described as apathetic and lax (desidioso y

                     flojo) in complying with their religious duties.  The archbishop posted on the

                     church door his petition to the alcalde mayor to provide boats and bamboo rafts so

                     that the people could cross the river and thus eliminate their alibi for not hearing

                     mass on Sundays.  A fortune-teller was denounced and therefore summoned by

                     the archbishop who requested her to predict a future.  The soothsayer demurred,

                     saying she had lost her instruments.  Furthermore, she insisted that she had not

                     dissented from any teachings of the Catholic Church.  As penance, the prelate told

                     her to discontinue prognosticating, make a general confession, and dismiss her

                     proselytes, if she has any” (262).

Calumpit, 23-24 October 1775                   Comments               none of use for this essay

Quingua “(now Plaridel),” 25-? [sic] 1775

         Comments   “People are quite docile.  A man was reported to have an illicit

                     relationship with his stepdaughter.  Despite his protestation of innocence, they

                     were forced to separate” (263).

“[After Quingua, the archbishop must have gone back to Manila for a short break.]”

Baliwag, 2-5 November 1775

         Comments   “Some rich families claimed exemption from tributes and church

                     contributions with the alibi that they had their domiciles elsewhere, but the

                     archbishop forced them to pay their dues” (263).

Angat, 6-9 November 1775

         Comments   “People are docile and industrious” (263).

Biga-a, 9-12 November 1775

         Comments   “Very good town people.  A husband, together with the executor, was

                     denounced for failure to fulfill his wife’s last will” (263).

Tambobong, 12-14 November 1775           Comments               none of use for this essay

Tondo, 14-16 November 1775       

         Comments   “Former church destroyed by the British” (264).

                                 “People are highly cultured and dedicated to music, poetry, and writing.”

Visitation of Other Religious Institutions[63]

The visitation of the institutions took place from 24 November to 19 December 1773, and it was conducted by two delegates, one each by the Governor-General and by the Archbishop.  The places visited were San Lázaro Hospital, San Gabriel Hospital, Royal Hospital,[64] Colegio de Santa Potenciana,[65] Beaterio de la Compañía, and the Beaterio de San Sebastian.

The 1776 Archbishop of Manila’s Visita to Pampanga Parishes[66]

         This essay is a summary and analysis of the Archbishop of Manila’s tour of inspection to Pampangan parishes in 1776.  This was the “first such tour of inspection since the violent secularization of the twenty-two parishes five years earlier.  Based on unpublished sources from the General Archive of the Indies, the study describes the situations of the churches, the working conditions of the priests in the twenty-two parishes, and the degree of conversion of the native peoples” (97, English-language abstract).  As suggested by the preceding quotation, the material is organized thematically. [67]  I have noted items of particular relevance for and in my introductory essay. 

The visita began January 8th in 1776 in Macabebe and lasted a bit longer than a month, ending on February 15th in Apalit (79).  From the first appendix in the essay (96), we learn that the Archbishop visited the following parishes, perhaps in this order but with no dates nor length of inspection specified:  Macabebe, Minalin, Guagua, Sexmoán, Lubao, Betis, Bacolor, Santa Rita, San Fernando, México, Magalang, Tarlac, Santa Ana, Arayat, Gapán, Santor, San José, Candava, San Miguel, San Luis, San Simón, and Apalit.

         The archbishop noted the earthquake damage suffered by church buildings, particularly from that of 1771 (80 and ff.).  Usually, except for the practices of usury and profiteering (summarized in my essay), the archbishop’s impressions of the Pampangans are positive (as seen by the Spanish authorities).  The Pampangans were described as “quiet, docile, peaceful, and humble,” devoted to agriculture and hunting (86).[68]  Some parish priests were more critical, with the priest in Lubao saying his parishioners were “restless and depraved;” the priest in Betis said that there was unrest, and the parish priest of Bacolor apparently mentioned gossip and intrigues as common (86).[69] Unfortunately, details are lacking.

1815 Report on the State of the Diocese of Cebu[70]

         This is a set of 36 paragraphs by the bishop of Cebu setting forth his replies to what appears to have been a set of questions sent to him in 1812.  The questions are not included but the topics asked are clear from the bishop’s responses.  The manuscript is presented in good handwriting on five and one-half double pages, eleven pages in all.  I have left the transcription in the original Spanish to facilitate use of the material by other researchers.  I made a full transcription, including sections of little use for me in this essay, again to help make access by other researchers easier.  The spelling in the transcription is often imperfect and idiosyncratic; I may also have made typographical errors in my copying, so some caution should be used with the material presented below.

Primero. Las Poblaciones de este mi Obispado estan dividas en creollos, ó hijos de Españoles en muy corto numero: en Europeos que son muy pocos: en Yndios que son la mayor parte: en mestizos de Sangley que son bastantes: en Negros naturales de estas yslas, especialmente en Mindanao, en ysla de Negros, y en la Paragua: y en Sangleyes, ó Chinos que son pocos.

2.o  El origen de los naturales son los Malayos.  Los naturales, ó habitantes de estas Yslas eran negros, y solo se hallan en las Yslas espresadas arriba.

3.o  Son varios los Ydiomas de los Yndios reducidos, los principales son, el Zebuano que se habla en la Provincia de Zebu, en la Ysla de Mindanao, en la parte oriental de la Ysla de Negros, y en la parte occidental de la Provincia de Leyte.  El Segundo es el que llaman hilongote ó Panayanon, este se habla en las tres Provincia de la Ysla de Panay Capis, Yloylo y Antique, en la parte occidental de la Ysla de Negros; en el Presidio de Zamboanga en la Yslas de Cagayancito [sic]; en la Ysla de Cuyo que pertenece á la Provincia de Calamianes: esta Provincia tiene varios idiomas uno que llaman Calamian, otro el de la Paragua, y en esta los Ynfieles tienen varios idiomas.  El 3o es el que llaman Guivano, que se habla en la parte oriental de la Provincia de Leyte, y en la parte occidental de Samar, pues en la parte oriental de esta Provincia hablan bastante distinta que llaman de Ybabao.  Los Ynfieles de la Ysla de Mindanao tienen tantos idiomas como rios grandes: pero todos se conoce que dimanan de la lengua Malaya, asi como lo restante de estas Yslas.  La lengua Española la entienden bastantes en las Cavezeras, en los Puertos de tráfico y Comercio, y en las demas poblaciones la entienden algunos en corto numero.

4.o  Tienen amor, y grande, á sus Mugeres y á sus hijos, aunque no lo manifiestan con las espresiones que usan los Europeos: pero sienten sus ausencias, sus enfermedades, y sus muertes.[71]  La educacion que les dan á los hijos en materia de Religion es ninguna: á exepcion [sic] de algunos pocos que les enseñan la doctrina Christiana.  Los Naturales los aplican de sus hijos á la labranza, esto es, á arar las tierras, si son llanas, y si son montuosas á rozarlas, quemar los árboles que cortan, y despues sembrar sus semillas de arroz, Maiz, y Borona, y plantar las raizes de Camote, gave, ube, y palao que los mantienen con una robustez mediana.  Los mestizos de Sangley los dedican á sus hijos á Tráfico y comercio.

5.o  No manifiestan odio á los Europeos, pero si son ricos, Ministros de Justicia, ó Eclesiasticos los respetan.  A los Americanos por lo regular los desprecian por sus vicios.  Odio y mala voluntad solo tienen á los Ministros de Justicia, y á los que les castigan, si conciben que no tienen Culpa, ó el que les castiga carece de Justificacion.

6.o  El modo de cortar este odio, y mala voluntad es el procurer que los Ministros que vayan á administrar Justicia á las Provincias sean de Buena conducta: y que estos celen paraque los Españoles que viven en otras Provincias de asiento, ó que trafican al Comercio no les permitan ultrajarles ni de obra, no de palabra.

7.o  Si se procura cortar en los muchachos la desidia, que es muy natural en estos Yndios, tienen inclinacion á leer y á escribir en qualquiera idioma.  En las escuelas por falta de papel escriben en ojas de plantano solamente.

8.o  Vista las providencias que se han tomado por el Govierno tanto Secular, como Eclesiastico, y Regular, y lo poco que se ha adelentado en esta materia, no es facil se discurrir medios sencillos y faciles para que aprovechen, y faciliten á estos naturales en hablar la lengua Española.  El Superior Gobierno ha mandado repetidas veces, que no de den empleos de Justicia á los que no sepan la lengua Española.  Los prelados eclesiasticos, y regulares han dado orden á los Curas Parrocos, y Ministeros de Doctrina para que prediquen á lo menos la salvacion en español, y se ha adelantado muy poco hasta aora.  La causa principal de este atraso es la falta de trato y comunicacion con Españoles, y el vivir dispersos y sin reduccion: pues de nota que en los Pueblos de Comercio, y en los que estan reducidos y pajo de Campana, se halla mas Yndios que saben español, que los que viven dispersos.

9.o  No se halla entre ellos mas virtud dominante que la sumision y obediencia á sus Principales, especialmente si conciben que mira por su bien.  Son Caritativos unos con otros, pues sin llevar plata ni comestible alguno quando van de un Pueblo á otro, en qualquiera Casa que entren, les dan de comer: en lo que manifiestan ser generosos, y compasivos unos con otros.  Las mugeres son devotas por lo regular mas que los hombres, y en los Pueblos que estan reducidos oyen Misa con bastante freguencia: y muchos se confiesan amenudo, especialmente si los Padres Curas, ó Ministros se dedican al Confesionario.

10.  Son muchas las Superticiones [sic] que les dominan, especialmente á los Ynfieles, y recien convertidos, y á los que tienen trato con ellos.  El graznido de un pajaro les hace retroceder de una formada comenzada.  El matar á los hijos de las Langostas lo tienen por muy prejudicial, pues dizen, que de este modo se multiplican.  En estando una muger proxima á parir baxan de las Casas desnudos, y se ocupan en dar cuchilladas, para que no entre el pajaro que llaman vacvac á comerse la criatura.  En habiendo un arbol grande, especialmente de Valete le llaman Nono: le hacen inclinacion quando paran por él; pues estan en la creencia que en el residen las almas de sus mayores, y que desde alli les protexen, si los veneran, y si lo contrario los castigan.  Tambien estan en la creencia que estos Nonos, ó almas de sus mayores asisten en las sementeras, y en la mar y asi les ofrecen comida quando siembran, y quando ván á pescar.  Tienen por mal agüero el nombrar quando estan embarcados á los animals terrestres con sus propios nombres: é inventan otros quando van navegando.  Quando entierran á sus difuntos, algunos les ponen plata en la boca, y si pueden, comida en la sepulture.  Y en bastantes Pueblos de este Obispado se ha notado, que sacan los cuerpos de noche con mucho sigilo, y se los llevan á los montes á enterrarlos con sus mayores, hacienda ataudes con figura de Cayman, ó cocodrillo, y de otras especies.  Quando van á cortar el arroz, todo el mundo esta parado hasta [?que] el dueño corta un manojo, y despues comienzan todos, y hasta que este da una buelta al monton nadie puede acercarse á él; pues lo contrario tienen por mal agüero.  Quando canta un Gallo solo desde á las nueve de la noche hasta las doze, tienen por cierta noticia, que al dia siguiente ha de haber embarcacion forastera.

11.  Hay catecismos de doctrina Cristiana aprobadas por los obispos en las lenguas Zebuana, Guivana, ó de Ybabao, Panayana, y Calamiana. 

12.  Entre los Ynfieles se hallan algunos idolillos, ó figuras mal formadas de la especie humana, a quienes dan culto ridiculo.  Entre los Christianos apenas se ven estos idolillos; pero se ofrecen sacrificios al Demonio, y á sus Antepasados: matando puercos, enborrachandose, Armando bayles, y practicando acciones obcenas, y esto con tanto exeso como sigilo, pues nuevamente se han descubierto estos delitos en los Pueblos de Cuyo Provincia de Calamianes, en el de Sibalon y Pao [sic] Provincia de Antique: y habrá como treinta años que de descubrio lo mismo en el Pueblo de Xaro Provincia de Yloylo, en los quales sacrificios estaba complicada quasi toda la Provincia.  En Sibalon se desenterró á la sacerdotiza que llaman babaylana, que se la enterró en lugar profane.  En Cuyo se quemaron publicamente los instrumentos destinados á sus sacrificios, y las drogas, aquienes daban eficacia divina para curar de sus enfermos: con esto, y con avengonzan publicamente á los authores, se ha remediado algun tanto, pues no se ha hallado otro medio mas eficaz para que se enmienden.

13.o  En virtud de lo que se esperimenta ahora, y lo que se ha esperimentado en los años pasados, ascendiendo á sus conversion del Paganismo, se nota que hay menos superticiones: que son mas politicos, especialmente en los Pueblos que se ha conseguido su reduccion; pero ha mas de treinta años que su Cristiandad va de mal en peor.  Entre los hombres son pocos los que se confiesan anualmente, los Domingos y fiestas de guarder la mayor parte de estos las quebrantan.  Los amancebamientos son muchos y con descaro.  En una palabra la irreligion se ha apoderado de la mayor parte de los hombres: las mugeres son mas moderadas, y la mayor parte se confiesan anualmente.  Las causas principales son las mismas que en Europa, esta es, la decadencia del Christianismo por los malos exemplos, y no haber freno, que contenga á los que se extravian de la moral Christiana.  El Govierno discurrirá los medios que tubiere por convenientes, para que se exite [sic] el zelo antiguo, que antes reynaba en los Cristianos: pues ya esta visto que no se adelanta nada con medios dulces y suaves.

14.o  En quanto á los Matrimonios que se celebran entre los Yndios naturales, son tan gravosos á los varones que pretenden Casarse, que muchos se mantienen amancebados años y años por no poder verificar los pactos, ó condiciones, que se observan en la mayor parte de las Provincias de este obispados.  En primer lugar, ha de pagar el dote, no á la novia, sino á sus Padres, que sube de precio segun fuere la mayor, ó menor herarquia; de modo que no baja de diez pesos, y sube hasta mas de quarenta el dote que llaman bugay.  A la Madre se la gratifica con una mediana cantidad por haber dado el pecho á su hija, que llaman el pagsoso.  A la abuela tambien se la gratifica por haber tenido en brazos á la novia, quando era criatura, que llaman el guinapohan.  A los hermanos tambien se les gratifica para que compren armas, para que defiendan al q. [sic] ha de ser su cuñado: que llaman panganur.  La primera vez que ha de subir á la Casa de la novia, tambien le hacen pagar lo que llaman sinaian.  Por entrar á ver la novia en su quarto paga otra cantidad que llaman sinudlan.  Por casarse con la hermana menor, dejando la mayor soltera, tambien paga lo que llaman lugso.  Si se tarda en efectuar el Casamiento, y buelben á pedir á la novia pagan otra cantidad, que llaman el Guinbalican.  El ajuar que deben dar para poner la Casa con pavellon, Cama, platos, y trastos de cocina es muy exesibo el importe que piden, y lo mismo, y lo mismo [sic] para los gastos de comida, y bebida.  Cuentan por bavin, que es el valor de diez reales de oro, aunque esto suena mucho, y suelen pagar poco; pues avaluan, paraque corra la fama de haber gasto mucho, lo que vale quarto, en veinte.  El servicio personal es irremissible, pues aunque sea rico y principal ha de server algun tiempo, pilando el arroz, llevando el agua á la Casa de los Padres de la novia, y trabajando en componerles la Casa.  Algunos abusos de estos han procurado cortar los Padres Ministros, y se ha correguido algo, especialmente entre los que viven reducidos á poblado, pero poco, ó nada en los dispersos.  Los Españoles, los mestizos de Español, y los de sangley nada pagan, aunque de casen con Yndia, y si solo la viven con mucha decensia, y dan de comer á los Parientes el dia de Casamiento segun alcansan sus fuerzas.

15.o  En todo este obispado no se halla ni un medico de profesion, y si solo curanderos, ó herbolarios que curan con hojas, con cortezas, de árboles, raizes, é yerbas, aplicandolas unas veces machacadas como emplastos, otras si son ojas, ó yerbas sobrepuestas; otras sacanda el Zumo, y dandole á beber: otras cociendolas, y dando con el agua cocida baños, ó labando la parte lesa, si son llagas: y si para esta enfermedad usan de raizes, ó cortozas las hacen polvos con la piel de pescado llamado raya, los mezclan con azeyte de castilla de coco, ó de ajonjoli, y untan el borde de la llaga, pero nunca la misma llaga.  Es menester muchos pliegos para explicar todas las especies de árboles, ó yerbas que usan para curar, pues apenas hay una que no tenga su uso, ya en una Provincia, ó ya en otra, ó ya en unos, ó otros curanderos.  Las mas usadas son, el sambon, que es nuestra salvia silvestre: la yerba de Santa Maria: el Lagundo, ó agnocasto: el  panyavan, ó macabuhay, que es el enrredadena muy amarga: la babamina: el alagao, ó sauco: el tangantangan, ó higuerilla del Ynfierno: las ojas del haum, que llaman tres puntas: la pepita y todo el arbol, y raizes de Mamungal todo muy amargo: la pepita de Cabalonga [sic]: el ojo de gato: la pepita que llaman Tuba: la abutra: el arbol calusiche, y la Gumamela.  Sangria usan los que han practicado con Españoles, y los que no usan de la punta de la asta de Carabao, ó boca, hacen una incision primero, y despues chupan la sangre en mayor, ó menor cantidad, es medicina muy eficaz.  En todo este obispado no hay termales, conocidas como tales.  El numero de los nacidos es con exeso mucho mayor de los que mueren, pues en esta Provincia de Zebú en 40 años se ha aumentado en un duplo el numero de Almas, y poco mas, ó menos en las demas, sin contar los muchos que cautiban los Moros, y los que se despatrian.

16.o  Las estaciones del año no son conocidas por estos naturales.  Los Ynfieles se goviernan por lunas como los Moros, y los Christianos reducidos de goviernan por nuestros Calendarios.  El dia lo dividen en tres partes: mañana, hasta las onze; medio dia, hasta las quarto; y tarde, hasta anochecer.  No suelen hacer mas que dos comidas, la primera por la mañana entre 8 y 9: y la segunda por la tarde entre 5 y 7.  Su trabajo suele comensar á las 8 del dia, y le concluyen á las cinco.  Si estan á sueldo comienzan á las 6: descanzan dos horas para comer, y sestear, y acaban al ponerse el sol.

17.o  Las comidas ya esta dicho, que si trabajan por si, suelen ser dos, y si a formal tres como los Españoles.  Su alimento regular es de arroz cocido, y añaden algun poco de pescado, tapa de baca, ó de Carabao, un pedaso de Puerco, y si no tienen esto, algunas hortalizas condimentalas con Manteca, ó con azeyte de coco fresco, ó con vinagre y sal.  En toda la Ysla de Zebú, la de Bohol, en las Yslas de Leyte, y Samar su alimento mas comun es de raizes de Camote, Palanan, Ube, Gabe, viga, y plantanos cocidos.  En las Provincias de la Ysla de Panay, en la Ysla de Negros, en Mindanao, es mas usado el arroz cocido: en las Yslas de Calamianes una raiz llamada corote, que es venenosa si no la benefician, perdiendola en muchos dias en agua.  La borona, que es como el mijo de España la usan en algunos Pueblos de la Provincia de Zebú, y tambien el maiz.  El Buri, que es arina sacada de una palma que se llama asi, se usa por pasto comun en algunos Pueblos de lo Ysla de Negros: y algunas veces en los demas Pueblos de los de mas Provincias, especialmente en tiempo de hambre.

18.o  Las bebidas, que acostrumbran á beber es la tuba sacada por insicion de una palma de una palma que llaman coco, y de otra que llaman nipa, y para que fermente la echan una cascara de un palo que llaman tungor, la que la hace tan fuerte, que les embriaga.  De esta misma alambicada, sale el aguardiente que con facilidad embriaga: y quando se aceda la tuba es un buen vinagre.  Tambien usan de otra bebida que llaman pangasi, que ese specie de mijo, el que fermentado, tambien les emborracha.  Estos brebages bebidos con exeso [sic] les causan emfermedades de hidropesia, de jujos de sangre, y algunos hasta deponen eticos.

19.o  No reconocen al sol, ni á la Luna por Dioses, y si solo lo que ya hemos advertido en el numero 12, de lo que aun hay bastante residuos de sus gentilicos ritos.

20.o  En el comer en el beber conservan sus costumbres primitivas; en sus bayles, y en los tratos de sus Casamientos siempre guardan las mismas ceremonias.  No discurren jamás de donde han venido á poblar estas tierras, y si solo sabemos por los historiadores primitivos, que los naturales primitivos eran negros, veniendo á conquistar los Malayos les hizieron retirarse de las playas á los bosques: Aunque se ven especialmente en la Ysla de Negros y en la gran Ysla de Mindanao, que algunos se mesclaron con ellos por casamientos, pues se ven bastantes mulatoes.

21.o  En sus entierros usan muchos de las Ceremonias que tenian de su antiguedad, sus llantos son ahallando, y refiniendo las virtudes, y hasañas de sus difuntos: hacen sus comvites si son algo pudientes, y estos terminan con embriaguez.

22.o  En los tratos se guarda bastante fidelidad entre los Ynfieles: pero muy poco entre los Cristianos, llevados del mal exemplo que les han dado los Chinos, los hijos de estos, y muchos Españoles, que comercian por las Provincias.

23.o  Son muy inclinados á la mentira, y con dificultad se halla entre ellos la verdad, y mas los mas ladinos.  No tienen mas opinions erroneas, que las que ya hemos dicho en sus Superticiones [sic] Numero 10.

24.o  Sus vicios dominantes son la desidia, el Juego, la embriaguez y la venganza.

25.o  Por lo regular nunca se prestan unos á otros sin una exorbitante usura.  Si es plata piden un real cada semana, y se va aumentando la usura al paso que se le tarda la paga, de modo que al cabo de un año ay vez que sube hasta diez pesos.  Si ponen tierras, ó árboles frutales por prenda en sus prestamos, el que los recibe viene á quedarse con la prenda, sin poder satisfacer al que ha dado prestado; pues nunca se descuentan los frutos que ha recebido, o producido las tierras, ó árboles frutales.  En quanto á utencilios, ó menajes de Casa, vestidos y cosas de poca monta se prestan de Buena fée unos á otros.  En quanto á las semillas siguen el mismo rumbo que con la plata.

26.o  La contrato que celebran para la labor de sus Sementeras, es el que los Españoles llaman á medias: el dueño de la tierra dá el animal para arar, y los instrumentos, dá la semilla, paga la mitad de los gastos para trasplantar el arroz, y lo mismo para segarlo, y despues parten la cosecha.  Si se les presta plata corren los mismos terminus que la usura, asi quando llegan á coger la cosecha, el que ha trabajado á medias viene á quedar sin nada, y solo lo comido por lo servido.  Si las tierras son de Españoles vienen á estar en fiteusys,[72] pagan un tanto segun el valor de las tierras, las mas pingues suelen pagar quarto fanegas por una de semilla, y otras un solo Caban, y si cumplen con las pagas nunca de les quita, y pasan por herencia de Padres á hijos.  Los que van á medias con los colonos, les prestan comida y vestido á precio muy caro á los trabajadores con la obligacion de pagar al coger la cosecha: por lo que se quedan sin nada .

27.o  La ira les domina de tal modo que los ciega, y por esto se han seguido muchas muertes, y castigos muy caneles y exesibos [sic].  El castigo que usan regularmente es el de azotes, desde el principal hasta el mas infimo [sic] hermano, con tal que sea de mayor edad: el mismo Castigo dán los Maridos á sus mugeres.  Por lo que el dicho comun que á donde nació el Yndio nació el bejuco, es language propio de los Yndios, mas que de los Españoles.

28.o  Hay muchos residuos de idolatria: encontrandose ofertas de comida en sus sementeras, y en la mar, ofreciendolas á sus nonos, ó antepasados para que les favoressan para coger buenas cosechas y lograr buena pesca.

29.o  Entre los Yndios salvages, pero Cristianos, se ha verificado muchas veces en estos tiempos, el ofrecer al sacrificio del Puerco, danzando alrededor de él, montando en él la babaylana, ó sacrificadora, cortandole la caveza estando en esta postura: comiendose todo el Cuerpo con borrascheras [sic], bayles deshonestos, tactos torpes y echando la Caveza en la Mar, ó si estan en tierra dentro, dejandola en un Madero, para desterrar, dizen, las enfermedades, las hambres, y la muerte.

30.o  Entre los Yndios hay muy pocos ricos, algunos mas acomodados, y en este obispado apenas de conoce un Español rico: y si muchos mestizos de sangley.  El modo de hacerse ricos á todas las clases expresadas, es el comercio por mar, y tierra.

31.o  La vida de los casiques Yndios principales, y Governadores pasados es, si tienen tierras el mandarlas labrar, ó labrarlas por si mismos.  El pescar, y hacer embarcaciones para el tráfico y comercio: pues en estas Provincias de Bisayas en acabando el govierno se les acaba el mando; pero mientras goviernan tienen muchos Yndios á sus disposicion, trabajandoles sus tierras, y mandandoles como Criados sin pagarles sueldo, y si solo eximiendoles ocultamente de los servicios y cargas concejiles: y los que no les sirven sacandoles plata por esta exempcion.

32.o  Esta pregunta esta respondida con lo expuesto en el antecedente, solo si que á las mugeres de les exȋme de estos servicios, y á los hijos de los Principales, y los que executan son los que llaman Cavezas de Barangay, y las Justicios de los Pueblos.

33.o  Son muy aficionados á la musica, usan del harpa, del violin, y de la guitarra.  Sus instrumentos antiguos solamente era una especie de Campana de bronze de Bornay, que llaman Agon, y la tocan con un palo ajorrado con trapos á manera de pelosa y este mismo instrumento lo usan aora en sus bayles, en sus peleas, y en sus ensayos para estas, y quando navegan en embarcaciones propias, para llevar compass los remeros.  Sus Canciones son pateticas, y algo melodiosas, son proprias de ellos el Orocay, el bayae y el comintan, que han tomado de los Tagalos.  Tambien les gustan las boleras, y todas las canciones que vienen de España.  En los templos vian de los canticos que les han enseñado los Padres Ministros, quales son la salve, y el alabado en su lengua, y estos mismos cantan al amanecer, y al anochecer en sus Casas, y en sus embarcaciones quando navegan, ó estando dados fondos.  No es facil el poner por punto sus tonadas, pues no hay en Bisayas inteligentes en la musica para poderlo hacer: pues aunque entienden alguno de punto, no tanto que puedan reducer á él sus tonos.

34.o  En todo este Obispado, recurriendo desde el principio de la Conquista, no se encuentra hombre alguno insigne, que se pueda llamar tal, ni en quanto á las armas, ni en quanto á las letras.  Es verdad que ha habido algunos valientes, y guerreros, pero no han dejado nombre: en quanto á las letras ha habido algunos medianamente Theologos, Filosopos, y canonistas pero no han salido de los terminos de una mediania.  Son inclinados á la poesia, que la facilita mucho su lengua.  En la pintura, y escultura han salido algunos, sin la mayor aplicacion, ni arte, bastante aventajados, pues en lo que entra por los ojos exeden á los Europeos; y asi se hallan entre ellos escultores, pintores, Calpinteros [sic], herreros, y de todos los oficios mecanicos, sin haber cursado con Maestros con la formalidad, que los Europeos.

35.o  Creen la immoralidad del alma, su eternidad, premio, y castigo, el Juicio final, la Gloria, Purgatorio, é Ynfierno, pero con ideas bastantes groseras, como se ve en la creencia que tienen muchose de ellos, y las almas de sus antepasados, habitan en los guecos [sic] de árboles, que desde alli los favorecen, ó castigan: pero los mas ladinos penetran estas verdades eternas como á los Europeos, estando cercanos á la muerte procuran cumplir con todas las obligaciones de Cristianos, y temen el morir sin sacramentos.

36.o  El vestido regular del Yndio és una Camisa suelta, un calezon ancho de bajo de la Camisa, un paño en la Caveza, y si son algo pudientes un calzado que llaman Chinelas, que es como unos Zapatos sin tener orejas ni talon por detras.  Las Yndias tambien visten camisa suelta, pero muy corta, pañuelo en la Caveza, sayas en la Provincias de Zebú, Samar, Leyte, Ysla de Negros; y en las Provincias de Yligan y Caraga en Mindanao.  En el govierno de Zamboanga, en toda la Ysla de Panay, y en Calamianes gastan uno que llaman tapis, que viene á ser como el manteo de las Charras de Salamanca.  En la Provincia de Capis ya han entrado muchas con la saya.  Para ir á Misa gastan de una Cobija larga negra, muchos ya van entrando con la Mantilla blanca: y en Samar, y Leyte todas la gustan, pero negras.  Las mestizas, é Yndias pudientes deponen pañuelo al cuello, y se procura trabajar en que todas lo gasten.  Los reducidos, solamente en sus sementeras andan con una especie de paño, que cubre sus partes, pero no quando se presentan ante gente decente.  Los mestizos ricos, y los Yndios pudientes gastan calzones de Seda bordados, y paños de la Costa del mismo modo.  Las Mugeres tambien tienen sus paños bordados.  Unos y otros gastan manenernas, ó botones de oro, cadenillas, y rosarios del mismo metal; y las mugeres brazaletes, ó manillas de lo mismo, y sus paynes de la misma materia.

         Zebú y Febrero 13 de 1815.

         (signed) fr. Joachim Obo de Zebu

                 1866 Report on the State of the Diocese of Cebu[73] 

The Bishop mentions (f. 60) that he had been weak for six years, even to the point of receiving all the Sacraments, due to an illness that he had contracted while visiting Samar and Leyte for the third time.

He also refers to remontados in the islands of Negros and Samar and how they have achieved a certain degree of autonomy in the interiors of those islands.[74]

1881 Letter by Bishop of Cebu regarding

1878-1879 Visita in Samar and Leyte[75]

         This two folio letter to the Franciscan Provincial has general statements only.  The Bishop refers to his visita to twenty-three parishes in Leyte and Samar in 1878 and 1879.  He mentions that he was not able to visit 19 parishes in the North, East, and South of Samar.  He also writes (I have left them in Spanish for ready use by other researchers):

“ni en el tiempo de nuestra permanencia en los parroquias visitados ni despues llegase a nuestra noticia, queja ni denuncia publica ni privado de los fieles contra sus parrocos” (f. 1)

“Esta numerosa poblacion se halla en general diseminada en extenso termino de su jurisdiccion y en diversos grupos o visitas de mayor o menor numero del vecinos, siendo muy pocos las parroquias logran tener reunida la mitad de sus feligreses a poca distancia de la iglesia.  … la escasez de faciles comunicaciones por tierra ni por agua en no poca partes … es indudablemente ocasionar motive de la poca concurrencia de muchos feligreses por desgracia a la Iglesia en los Domingos y dias de precepto y carecer por lo tanto de la instruccion y enseñanza de los parrocos.”  (f. 1)

1830 and 1832 Visita Eclesiastica, Nueva Caceres[76]

Tiaon           30 January 1830                                                      Comments: none of use

Saryaya         1 February 1830                                                    Comments: none of use

Tayabas         4 February 1830                                                    Comments: none of use

Pagbilao        6 February 1830                                                    Comments:  none of use

                                                         returned to Tayabas afterwards

Lucban                      8 February 1830    positive response to layout, water, and housing of pueblo[77]

Maoban       12 February 1830    reference to earthquakes of 18 and 25 January 1830 with

                                 damage to the rectory and to the church, including damage to the wall

                                 used as defense against Moro raids[78]

Atimonan    18 February 1830   

Gumaca       18 February 1830, then on by land and sea on 23 February for a quick trip to the

“Pueblositos” of Apat, Calauag, and Guinayangan, and then on to the port of Paracao on 26 February and then on to the Bishop’s palace by 5 in the afternoon of the same day

Tabuco and Naga, dates not given [April 1830]                             Comments: none of use

Quipayo      26 April 1830          Church & rectory had been destroyed by the earthquakes of

                                                                     1811 (5)

Calabangan 27 April 1830          Church & rectory also destroyed by the 1811 earthquakes

Manguirin    28 April 1830                                                          Comments: none of use

Tinambac     29 April 1830          refers to site having been moved due to highlander attack[79]

Goa             29 April 1830          Comments: none of use except that Salog is joined to it for

                                                                     administrative reasons

Lagonoy      30 April 1830          Church was destroyed by 1811 earthquakes, leaving only

                                                                     the tower standing (f. 6)

Patrocimo      1 May 1830           Comments: none of use

Tigaon           3 May 1830           Comments: none of use  

[Visita de] Sangay              n/a, probably 4 May                        Comments: none of use

Tibi              same day, date not given                                        Comments: none of use     

Malinao       5 May 1830             Church was destroyed by the 1811 earthquakes (f. 7v)

Tabaco         6 May 1830                                                             Comments: none of use

Malilpot       7 May 1830                                                             Comments: none of use

Bacacay       8 May 1830                                                             Comments: none of use

Libog           8 May, also                                                              Comments: none of use

Albay          9 May 1830             The parish has a temporary church since the other was

                                                                     destroyed in the volcanic eruption of 1814 (f. 8)

Manito         9 May, also                                                              Comments: none of use

Cagsaua       11 May 1830           The pueblo has a new church and rectory since the old

                                                                     ones, which were in a different location, were                                                                           destroyed in the 1814 volcanic eruption (f. 8v)

Camalig       12 May 1830           Church and rectory abandoned due to 1814 eruption (f. 9)

Guinobatan 14 May 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Ligao           15 May 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Oas              17 May 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Libon, after stops at visitas of Buga and Pantao    18 May 1830   Comments: none of use

Polangui      19 May 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Buhi            21 May 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Yriga [sic]   22 May 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Bato            24 May 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Nabua          24 May, also                                                            Comments: none of use

Baao            26 May 1830   Earthquake damage to the Church, especially from the 1811 one

Bula             27 May 1830   1811 earthquake damage to church, temporary one in use instead

Minalabag   27 May, also            Learned that after their visita both the church and the

                                                                     rectory burned down (f. 11v)

San Fernando  28 May 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Milaor          29 May 1830, then back to Naga, same day  

Observes that both the church and rectory were constructed of brick, both

suffered from the 1811 earthquakes, and that the tower of the church lost

all but its first section (de la torre no quedo sino el primer Cuerpo) (f.11v)

Canaman     21 June 1830, then back to Bishop’s “Palacio”     Comments: none of use

Camaligan   22 June 1830, [then back to Bishop’s “Palacio”]   Comments: none of use

Magarao      23 June 1830                                                           Comments: none of use

Bonbon       23 June, also            Church, built with brick, weakened due to earthquakes of

                                                                     “last January” (f. 12v)

13 September 1830, began trip to Manila for consecration of Bishop of Cebu and the Archbishop

of Manila, with plans to continue the visita coming and going from the capital[80]

Daet            15 September 1830                                     Comments: none of use

Talisay         16 September 1830                                     Comments: none of use

Indan           17 September 1830                                     Comments: none of use

Paracale       18 September 1830                                     Comments: none of use

Mambulao   21 September 1830                                     Comments: none of use

Capalongan 22 September 1830                                     Comments: none of use[81]

Gumaca       23 September 1830                                     Comments: none of use[82]

Maoban       27 September 1830

Comments: delayed by contrary winds although had left Gumaca 25 September.[83]

Passed by Casinti, Pagsanjan, Pasig, with arrival in Manila 7 October 1830.[84]

Left Manila 4 November 1830 via Santa Cruz, Nagcarlan, Lilio, and Majayjay, arrived

Lucban        19 November 1830                                     Comments: none of use[85]

Tayabas       22 November 1830                                     Comments: none of use

Calilayan       1 December 1830                                      Comments: none of use

Pitogo            [2 December]       Administrative pueblo for Calilayan and Macalelong

Macalelong    3 December                                               Comments: none of use

Hingono, and visita of Catanauan, and then on to Catananan       4 December 1830

                                                                                             Comments: none of use

Molanay [sic]    6 December 1830                                      Comments: none of use

Obuyon         7 December 1830                                      Comments: none of use

Ragay          12 December 1830                                      Comments: none of use

Lupi             13 December 1830                                      Comments: none of use

Sipocot        14 December 1830                                      Comments: none of use

Ligmanan    14 December, also   back to the Palacio Episcopal, 16 December 1830 (f. 17)

3 months and 3 days, by the Bishop’s calculation.

No visita in 1831.[86]

Visita of 1830 continued and completed in 1832:

24 April 1832, left the Bishop’s Palacio and went to both Pamplona and Pasacao on that day

                                                                                             Comments: none of use

Donsol         25 April 1832          Makes reference to relocation of Donsol and that Quipia is

                                                                     part of its administration[87]                                     

Balino[88]       29 April 1832          Ordered that the site of the parish church be changed[89]

Mobo           30 April 1832                                              Comments: none of use

San Jacinto    2 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Bulan             4 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Gate              6 May 1832, to the visita of Guinay and then on to Bulusan after a ten hour trek

Bulusan         6 May 1832, also   Comments: none of use except that the current church is

                                                                     next to foundations of former church and rectory[90]

On 8 May 1832, left Bulusan for Visita of Tagdon, then on to Gubat, which mentions wall around the church (a fortification also found in San Jacinto, Bulan, and Bulusan).[91]

Casiguran      9 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Juban           10 May 1832                       Comments: after visita returned to Casiguran

Sorsogon     11 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Bacon          12 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

to the Catanduanes 13 May and the pueblo of Calolbon   Comments: none of use

Birac            15 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Visita of Caingao and then on to Bato     17 May 1832 Comments: none of use

Visita of Guinobat and then on to Tagbac 18 May 1832  Comments: none of use[92]

Biga             19 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Pays             21 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Visita of Bagamanse and then on to Pandan  22 May        Comments: none of use

Caramoran   23 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Visita of Codon (Calolbon), 24 May 1832;  and then back to Caramoran, 25 May 1832                                                                                                         Comments: none of use

Sitio of Dutá   26 May 1832                                               Comments: none of use

Due to contrary currents (f. 23) the party had to bypass the Visitillas of Siroma and Tinambac and instead headed for Daet, landing at Cabusao 31 May 1832 and returned to the Palacio 31 May 1832, having completed the visitation to the parishes in the provinces of Camarines and Albay.  Only Polillo, Binangonan, Baler, Casiguran, and Palanan were not visited.[93]

Dated Nueva Cazeres, Palacio Episcopal, 13 October 1832

Obispado de Nueva Segovia.  Visita Diocesano, 1849-1850[94]

The report dates from 15 September 1850, written in Vigan.  The material is a summary report, not a report with details for each parish visited.  The Bishop noted that many, perhaps most, of the parishes had not been visited by a Bishop in twelve years.  There were 110 parishes in the diocese, encompassing seven provinces, with parishes administered by Secular clergy as well as some by Dominicans and Augustinians.  The Bishop was unable to visit the parishes in the Batanes due to adverse weather.  The itinerary he reports was as follows:

9 March 1849, left Manila for Pangasinan, spending 13 March to 1 May visiting the 25 pueblos there.

2 May, on to La Union and its 9 pueblos

Finsihing there he went on to the 13 pueblos in Ilocos Sur on May 20th. 

On the 26th of June he went on to Vigan and worked his way through the pueblos nearby and north of Vigan; and then to the Ilocos Norte parishes on 25 July, working there until 30 September with a rest and recuperation period in Sarrat. 

In January of 1850 he went to Vigan again and on to Abra; then to Nueva Vizcaya; and then to the 18 pueblos in Cagayan, finishing on the 30th of June 1850, returning by boat to Ilocos Norte on 3 July 1850.

Three specific points he made are worth noting.  First that the Dominican priest and the population of the  “Ysla de Babuyanes” was evacuated at some unspecified time to Cagayan, with some returning or not leaving providing an arena of life without Spanish supervision and taxation.[95]  Second, he had a brief reference to circumcision; and a longer comment on the practice of labor service before marriage of the groom-to-be to the family of the bride-to-be.  The Bishop commented both on how widespread the practice was and how he had ordered the priests to uproot the practice--and asked the government to help--to little effect.[96]

         Third, earlier when discussing the province of Nueva Vizcaya, he said that until three years ago there had been significant warfare between highlanders and lowlanders, leading to a Spanish-led military intervention, an imposed peace, and dispatch of Christian missionaries (Dominicans) to the affected highlanders.[97]

[1] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 240.  I have not seen the manuscript itself.  I am working entirely from Dr. Escoto’s article.

[2] My usage is anachronistic, imprecise, and ignores the Spanish use of the term in the first two hundred years or so of Spanish rule in the Philippines.  I use it as a convenient way to refer to non-Europeans in the Spanish-ruled areas of the archipelago.  Whenever possible I will be more specific—Ilocano, Samareño, Chinese, Armenian, Chinese mestizo, for instances—but otherwise I will use this general, imprecise term.  I presume no nationalistic resonance. 

[3] “Pueblos are best translated as municipalities or municipal districts rather than as towns.  In the Philippines, populations could be quite dispersed … so it is important to distinguish the area of the municipality from its core, the población, where the municipal  offices, church, parish house, jail, plaza, and houses of the principal citizens were usually located.  Around the poblaciones were residence areas known as visitas, barrios, rancherías, and sitios, generally ranging in size from the more settled and larger visitas (usually with a chapel for the use of a visiting priest) to two or three houses loosely clustered together called a sitio.”  (Bruce Cruikshank, Samar: 1768-1898 (Manila: Historical Conservation Society, 1985), p. 55n1).  In this essay I shall italicize visita when referring to the diocesan inspection trip and leave visita in plain type when referring to a settlement, with the exception of the quotation from Samar 1768-1898 just presented. 

[4] John R. W. Smail, “on the Possibility of an Autonomous History of Modern Southeast Asia,” Journal of Southeast Asian History, 2:2 (July 1961), 92.

[5][5] Sally Mann, Hold Still: A Memoir with Photograph (New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2015), 308.  Quotation used with copyright permission given 12 January 2017, from The Permissions Company,Inc., Rights Agency for the Hachette Book Group USA Inc.

[6] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 243.

[7] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 250.  There is a reference for yet another group, for the parish of Maragongdong, where Dr. Escoto reports: “Excluded in the census is another group of people of ‘different ethnicity’ (otra casta de gente) called Mardicas, who live along the sandbar outside the town and are exempted from paying tribute.  There are about 400 to 500 of them …  Their number has been dwindling due to malnutrition (lack of rice) and the almost yearly raids of  the Moros” (256).

[8] Marta María Manchado López, “La Visita de 1776 a las Parroquias Pampangas de Filipinas.”  Revista de Indias, 56, no. 206 (1996), 77-97; here, 85.

[9] Archivo Histórico Nacional (Madrid), Ultramar, Legajo 2854, Estados, Asuntos Eclesiásticos, paraphrasing from an 11 October 1773 letter (from Madrid) to the king of Spain from a P. Fr. Francisco de la Concepcion Villanueva la Serena, whose text reads in part: “El Señor Don Miguel Lino de Espeletta, ultimo Obispo de Cebu, no pudo visitor su Diocesis, por las continuas invasions de los Moros … los mismo sucedio a su antecessor, y asi se hallan las Islas [sic] de Samar, que administran Religiosos Agustinos Calzados, y los de la Provincia de San Gregorio, llenas de Anzianos, que nunca vieron a su propio Pastor.  Since the Franciscans and Augustinians had only been posted to Samar since 1768, the observation‘s significance is somewhat overstated.

[10] Philippine National Archives.  Patronato. Unclassified. [1830 and 1832 Visita Eclesiastica, by El Yllmo. y Rmo. Señor Don Fray Juan Antonio de Villo, Obispo, Nueva Caceres].  24 ff., Nueva Cazeres [sic], Palacio Episcopal, 13 October 1832.

[11] Archivo Histórico Nacional (Madrid), Ultramar, Legajo 2166, #13: Visita Diocesano del Obispado de Nueva Segovia.  5ff., 15 September 1850, from Vigan.

[12] Archivo Histórico Nacional, Ultramar, Legajo 2211.  El Obispo de Cebu informa sobre el estado general de aquella Diocesis rogando se dictasen algunas providencias necesaria para que prosperazen aquellas islas tan fertiles como bien situadas, f. 60.  Sent to Spain 1 March 1866, by “Fr. Romualdo Obispo.” 

[13] AFIO 96/49, P. Benito Romero [de Madridegos], Bishop, Diocese of Cebu.  Copia de la Comunicacion, manifestando al Provincial la satisfecho que ha quedado al hacer la Visita en Samar y Leyte.  Cebu, 30 December 1881.  2ff.

[14] I tend to use names and spellings as found in the essays or manuscripts used with no attempt to make them less archaic and more compatible with 2017 practices.  My usage is both for convenience and based on the recognition that labels used in our times may change in the future--but those used in the manuscripts are frozen. 

[15] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 244.

[16] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 250.

[17] Pilar Elordi Cortés, “Una visita pastoral del arzobispo Manuel Antonio Rojo a la diócesis de Manila [1760],” Missionalia Hispánica,  38:114 (September-December 1981), 319-391; here, 359, admonishing the parish priest: … no perdone trabajo alguno para desarraigar el detestable abuso que llaman Servicio Personal ….

[18] Pilar Elordi Cortés, “Una visita pastoral del arzobispo Manuel Antonio Rojo a la diócesis de Manila [1760],” Missionalia Hispánica,  38:114 (September-December 1981), 319-391; here, 373: “que se extermine el detestable abuso del que llaman servicio personal ….”

[19] Pilar Elordi Cortés, “Una visita pastoral del arzobispo Manuel Antonio Rojo a la diócesis de Manila [1760],” Missionalia Hispánica,  38:114 (September-December 1981), 319-391; here, 359: … mandamus que de ningún modo permita en los festejos para celebrar sus matrimonios los Feligreses el uso de Vino, o bebida que hasta ahora han usado, embriagándose en desacato del Sacramento, y en perjuicio de sus conciencia, y para evitarlo tome todas las medidas, y medios oportunos, y convenientes de suerte que del todo se evite la embriaguez con que le encargamos la conciencia, y le cominamos nuestra indignación, y que procederemos contra él de ser omiso y negligente en este punto de tanta importancia.

[20] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 245.  In his report regarding the 1776 visita to the Pampangan parishes, as presented in Marta María Manchado López, “La Visita de 1776 a las Parroquias Pampangas de Filipinas.”  Revista de Indias, 56, no. 206 (1996), 77-97, we learn (87) that “The reports of the parish priests make no reference to the use of Spanish nor the attitude of [their parishioners] regarding this matter” [“Los informes de los párrocos no hacen referencia alguna al uso del castellano, ni a la actitud de los naturales en esta materia”].  Manchado López adds that the actuality in Pampanga was probably no different than elsewhere in the islands, that is the spread of the Spanish language had been exceedingly sparse [“Efectivamente, existe constancia de que en 1772, la situación del castellano en la Pampanga no difería mucho de la situación en el resto del archipiélago, es decir, que su diffusion era escasisima”] (87).  While Guagua had more persons who knew Spanish than other Pampangan parishes, still the majority even there did not know the language (88).  Indeed, Manchado López adds on page 94 of her essay that the parish priests were admonished by the Archbishop in 1776 to alternate their homilies, speaking in Spanish and then in the local language—indicating little knowledge of Spanish in the populations [“Finalmente, resulta muy significativo el que recordara a los párrocos que en las homilías debían alternar la explicación de la doctrina Cristiana en castellano y en la lengua del país.  Esto deja ver claramente que el castellano no era, ni mucho menos, conocido de la mayor parte de la población, como en otro documento afirmaba el arzobispo”].   Manchado López suggests (88n21) that those interested in this topic see her essay “Notas para el studio de la diffusion del castellano en Filipinas. La situación de la provincial de la Pampanga en la segunda mitad del siglo XVIII” in Homenaje a Lourdes Díaz-Trechuelo (Córdoba: Publicaciones del Monte de Piedad y Caja de Ahorros, 1991), 61-75.

[21] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 253.

[22] Pilar Elordi Cortés, “Una visita pastoral del arzobispo Manuel Antonio Rojo a la diócesis de Manila [1760],” Missionalia Hispánica,  38:114 (September-December 1981), 319-391; here, 372: “Y porque tenemos noticia que parte de ella, que habita en Muntin Lupa, es bastantemente desarreglada, bulliciosa, y tenaz en reducirse para las obligaciones cristianas, le intimamos que esfuerce con tesón, y constancia las diligencias de instruirlos, y dirigirlos, y que nos dé cuenta de los medios eficaces para conseguirlo.”

[23] Pilar Elordi Cortés, “Una visita pastoral del arzobispo Manuel Antonio Rojo a la diócesis de Manila [1760],” Missionalia Hispánica,  38:114 (September-December 1981), 319-391; here, 353-354:  “Manda a dichos Curas que hagan todo esfuerzo a que sus feligreses vivan reducidos a poblado, y cuando no se pueda conseguir, hará, que en los Nayones, o Barrios vivan reducidos, exhortándoles a que no estén disperses para lo que procurará tener Buenos Matandas a Nayo para que excusen el que se abrigue en sus Barrios gente mala y viciosa, y procurarán los curas visitarlos a lo menos dos veces al año para con su persona animarlos, y consolarlos, enseñándoles la Doctrina Cristiana, y saber qué gente hay en ellos, qué muchachos no van a la escuela, qué Dalagas y Bagontaos no van a la Iglesia.”

[24] Pilar Elordi Cortés, “Una visita pastoral del arzobispo Manuel Antonio Rojo a la diócesis de Manila [1760],” Missionalia Hispánica,  38:114 (September-December 1981), 319-391; here, 369: “Atendida la grave necesidad de ponerse ayuda de Parroquia con un Teniente de Cura que administra a los Barrios que están distantes de esta cabecera, a que no puede ocurrir el solo Cura de ella como nos constra actualmente no solo del mucho concurso de fieles de esta Parroquia de Biñan [in the visita of Balibago], y sus inmediaciones, sino también la suma dificultad, y a veces imposibilidad para administrar en los sitios de mayor distancia; y aunque estos motivos de tanto peso y consideración precisaban desde luego a la division de este Curato, erigiendo esta parroquia en propio Párroco….”

[25] AFIO 96/49, P. Benito Romero [de Madridegos], Bishop, Diocese of Cebu.  Copia de la Comunicacion, manifestando al Provincial la satisfecho que ha quedado al hacer la Visita en Samar y Leyte.  Cebu, 30 December 1881.  2ff.

[26] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 256.  Church involvement in trade and agriculture for profit is of course well documented in the literature, from “friar estates” to investments in the Manila galleon.  We see as well in this source (p. 258) matter of fact references to the Chapel of Nuestra Señora de Soledad “located in Cavite Port,” which was “more richly furbished and endowed than all the churches in the entire province and has invested between P5,000 to P6,000 capital in business.” 

[27] Marta María Manchado López, “La Visita de 1776 a las Parroquias Pampangas de Filipinas.”  Revista de Indias, 56, no. 206 (1996), 77-97; here, 88: “También debian velar por erradicar la práctica, muy extendida, de comerciar los domingos y días de precepto.”

[28] Salvador P. Escoto, The Manila Archbishop ‘s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People.”  Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272; here, 250.  For the Parian, visited 19 March 1773, the summary reads “Usury and immoral cohabitations are the common public vices” (250).

[29] Marta María Manchado López, “La Visita de 1776 a las Parroquias Pampangas de Filipinas.”  Revista de Indias, 56, no. 206 (1996), 77-97; here, 85.

[30] ­­John A. Larkin, “The Place of Local History in Philippine Historiography,” Journal of Southeast Asian History, 8:2 (September 1967), 306-17; here, 307: the “singular concern with Manila and its environs and the highest echelons of society tends to distort the history of the Philippines as a whole.”

[31] Archivo General de Indias, Audiencia de Filipinas, Legajo 1069A, “Papeles por agregar.”  Contestación que dá el Obispo de Zebú Don Fray Joaquin Encaba de la Virgen de Sopetran Agustino Recoleto descalzo, al interrogario formado por la Governación de Ultramar en la Ciudad de Cadiz, en 6 de Diciembre de 1812, y recibido por el expresado Obispo en 22 de Noviembre de 1814.  Dated and signed by Father Joaquin in Cebu, 13 February 1815.

[32] Paragraph 3, La lengua Española la entienden bastantes en las Cavezeras, en los Puertos de tráfico y Comercio, y en las demas poblaciones la entienden algunos en corto numero.  And also Paragraph 8, La causa principal de este atraso es la falta de trato y comunicacion con Españoles, y el vivir dispersos y sin reduccion: pues de nota que en los Pueblos de Comercio, y en los que estan reducidos y pajo de Campana, se halla mas Yndios que saben español, que los que viven disperses.

[33] These comments and others by this ecclesiastic can be found in the copy I have transcribed in the appendices, below.

[34] AFIO 7/23, Informe de varios religiosos al Provincial y de este al Gobernador sobre juegos de naipes con la Real Cédula sobre lo mismo.  Ms., 1731, 18-18v.

[35] AFIO 7/24, op. cit., which reads in the original Spanish: El Martes Santo del año pasado de treinta, despues del sermon del patio, y habrirnos la puerta del Parian, por averse venido mi banca, me embarque con … [el] Guardian que era del Convento de Pandacan, y desenbarcandome en la casa del rio de Don Manuel de Tauregui que esta enfrente de dicho Pueblo de Pandacan, para venirme desde alli por tierra, encontre casualmente a mas de las nueve de la noche, ceca de este Pueblo de Sampaloc debajo de unas cañas el Juego de naypes con mucho concurso de gente, con su alcancia o Zepo y tan envelesados en el Juego, que estuve encima de ellos en pie viendolos jugar, sin que me sintiesen hasta que hable, y lo peor es y digno de toda compassion, que ni por ruegos, ni amenazas, los podia atraher a que se confesasen, y cumpliesen con la Yglesia, y por esta causa assi el año pasado como este, me han durado las confesiones para cumplir con la Yglesia, hasta la Pascua de Espiritu Santo y esto compeliendolos, que a no ser assi, que aun no se huvieran confesado y cumplido …. 

[36] Fedor Jagor, Travels in the Philippines (Manila: Filipiniana Book Guild, 1965).  276pp.  Félix de Huerta, O.F.M., Estado geográfico, topográfico, estadístico, histórico-religioso de la santa y apostólica Provincia de San Gregorio Magno, de religiosos Menores Descalzos de la Regular y más estrecha Observancia de N. S. P. S. Francisco en las islas Filipinas; comprende el número de religiosos, conventos, pueblos, situación de estos, años de su fundación, tributos, almas, producciones, industrias, casos especiales de su administración spiritual, en el archipiélago Filipino, desde su fundación en el año de 1577 hasta el de 1865  (2nd ed.  Binondo: M. Sánchez, 1865).  713pp.

[37] See, for instance, references from Huerta in my essay “Trade and Samar in the 18th and 19th Centuries, where I mention the October pilgrimage to Dapdap and malhechores in Santa Rita (page 19, notes xxviii and xxx); or card playing and banditry references in my “Tayabas in 1823.  An Appreciation of an Essay by Fr. Bartolomé Galan, O.F.M.,” pages 3 and 4.

[38] Without suggesting these are the only ones of quality and usefulness, I am thinking of Edilberto C. de Jesús, The Tobacco Monopoly in the Philippines: Bureaucratic Enterprise and Social Change, 1766-1890 ( Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1980); Daniel F. Doeppers, Feeding Manila in Peace and War, 1850-1945 (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 2016).  443pp.; and James F. Warren, The Sulu Zone, 1768-1898: the Dynamics of External Trade, Slavery and Ethnicity in the Transformation of a Southeast Asian Maritime State (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1981).  390pp.  John A. Larkin, The Pampangans: Colonial Society in a Philippine Province (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1972.  340pp.  Norman G. Owen, Prosperity without Progress. Manila Hemp and Material Life in the Colonial Philippines (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984).  311pp.

[39] Museo Naval, Ms. 136, Doc. 10: 12 April 1785, Manila.  Relación del viaje de D. José Basco y Vargas gobernador y capitán general de las Filipinas, a las provincias de Pangasinan e Ilocos.  Ff. 310-343; here, ff. 319v-320v.   The key section in Spanish reads: Desde el alzamiento de Pangasinan a instigazion de los Yngleses que havian tomado Manila en la guerra de 62 se mantenian levantadas las Horcas en que padecieron suplicio los culpados.  Los principales de Malasiqui sentidos de tener a la vista este Padrono, que publica siempre su infedelidad, suplicaron a su Senoria por un escrito se digna se mandar en obsequio de nuestro soberano, cuio cumple anos celebran, se derribasen la Horcas para borrar en lo succesivo la memoria de un delito de que los parientes de los reos vivian tan puanosos como avergonzados.  Su Senoria en celebridad de un dia tan plaucible no quiso frustrar la confianza conque venian los naturales de este Pueblo invocando el nombre de Nuestro soberano para pedir una gracia que devia gravarse en su memoria, y desde luego mando al Alcalde maior que hiciese derriban  las Horcas cuya providencia recibieron con repetidos vivas, que mortraban bien su gozo, y su agradecimiento. 

[40] Museo Naval, MS. 2237, Doc. 2: 6 April 1832-12 June 1832.  Cartas de D. José María Peñaranda a D. Pascual Enrile, en su viaje a las provincias: Contra costa, Subic, Tayabas, Camarines y Albay.  Copias.  Ff. 27-39v; here, f. 31.

[41] Museo Naval, Ms. 2237, Doc. 15: 2 June 1833.  Parte del Capitán D. José María Peñaranda referente a la batida que se llevó a Cabo contra los ladrones y contrabandistas que se abrigaban en los montes de San Cristóbal.  Copia.  Ff. 98-105; here, 98-102v.

[42] Manuel Antonio Rojo del Rio Lafuente y Veiyra † (19 Dec 1757 Appointed - 30 Jan 1764 Died)

[43] Basilio Tomás Sancho y Hernando (de Santas Justa y Rufina), Sch. P. † (14 Apr 1766 Appointed - 15 Dec 1787 Died)

[44] Again (still), Basilio Tomás Sancho y Hernando (de Santas Justa y Rufina), Sch. P. † (14 Apr 1766 Appointed - 15 Dec 1787 Died)

[45] Joaquín Encabo de la Virgen de Sopetrán, O.A.R. † (20 Aug 1804 Confirmed - 8 Nov 1818 Died)

[46] Romualdo Jimeno Ballesteros, O.P. † (19 Jan 1846 Confirmed - 17 Mar 1872 Died)

[47] Benito Romero, O.F.M. † (28 Jan 1876 Confirmed - 7 Oct 1885 Died)

[48] Juan Antonio Lillo, O.F.M. Disc. † (28 Feb 1831 Confirmed - 3 Dec 1840 Died)

[49] Vicente Barreiro y Pérez, O.E.S.A. † (14 Apr 1848 Confirmed - 17 May 1856 Died)

[50] Pilar Elordi Cortés, “Una visita pastoral del arzobispo Manuel Antonio Rojo a la diócesis de Manila [1760],” Missionalia Hispánica,  38:114 (September-December 1981), 319-391.

[51] “… el defecto en que ha incurrido el Alcalde Mayor de esta Provincia no pagando a los Maestros de la Escuela como era obligado según orden de S.M. lo que tendremos presente para que se repare y remedie por el superior gobierno, y lo mismo reclamaremos por la paga al Sacristán Portero, y cuatro cantores para su correspondiente paga ...” (364).

[52] “…su cortísimo estipendio, cuya paga se ha retenido por tres años por el Alcalde Mayor….” 

The report does refer positively to one Spanish governor, namely Don Ramón de Orendain, y con el auxilio del Alcalde Mayor tan Cristiano como el capitán D. Ramón de Orendain … (355); and again on page 357, y podrá ayudarse del buen ánimo, y cristiandad del Capitán D. Ramón de Orendain, Alcalde Mayor de esta provincial, cuyo empeño nos es tan notorio en el servicio del culto Divino y del Rey nuestro Señor.

[53] Mentioning as part of the concerns: “… abusos en creer cosas de sueños, y vanas observaciones como agüeros, papelillos, o cédulas que trayéndolas creen que no han de morir de repente: Curaciones supersticiosas ….”

[54] Nineteen paragraph digest of the ordinances previously issued and revised by the current Archbishop for easy reference and obedience by the priests in the archdiocese,dated 11 February 1760, Balayán.  For my purposes, the ones most useful are #s 7, 10, and 13, namely:

Atento a la costumnbre que se observa en los Ministerios bien reglados, y a las malas consecuencias que la experiencia ha dado a conocer de dejar a las preñadas de meses mayors en las sementeras, y Nayones, en que suelen morirse sin Sacramentos, y los infants sin Bautismo y abortos por riñas con sus maridos etc: obligará el cura a las preñadas en el septimo mes, y a sus maridos que ellas hasta salir del parto se reduzcan a vivir en el Pueblo.

Manda a dichos Curas que hagan todo esfuerzo a que sus feligreses vivan reducidos a poblado, y cuando no se pueda conseguir, hará, que en los Nayones, o Barrios vivan reducidos, exhortándoles a que no estén disperses para lo que procurará tener Buenos Matandas a Nayo para que excusen el que se abrigue en sus Barrios gente mala y viciosa, y procurarán los curas visitarlos a lo menos dos veces al año para con su persona animarlos, y consolarlos, enseñándoles la Doctrina Cristiana, y saber qué gente hay en ellos, qué muchachos no van a la escuela, qué Dalagas y Bagontaos no van a la Iglesia.

Porque con pretext de cuidar sus casas se quedan algunos, y se consienten en ella en los días de Domingo, y festivos sin oir Misa, no permitirá por motive alguno el Cura se queden las Dalagas sino acompañadas de sus Padres, y madres, por los malos éxitos que se han visto de quedarse solas, y acompañadas de otra gente.

[55] “La de Balayan [referring to the church] está formada en la pared de la ruina del incendio, y destrozo que hicieron los moros, y muy mal cubierta de paja.”

[56] Gap of pueblo visitas pp. 352-355 due to 19 paragraphs entitled ‘Ordenanzas’ Reformadas por S. S. I. para la Buena Adminisración de los Curas, which I mentioned earlier in this appendix.

[57] Brief reference (381) to ravages of the anay and to complaints of inquilinos: “y madera que se corten de sus montes, pero no las referidas tablas, porque no siendo éstas de molave se inundan en breve tiempo de Anay, y las puede dedicar al destino para que las tiene cortadas, ni menos le podemos admitir las dependencias, o débitos referidos de sus inquilinos, que siendo en tan crecida cantidad atraería mucha dificultad en su cobranza, y no menos confusion, y cuenta para su abono, a más de la desigualdad de los mismos trabajadores por deber unos, y otros, algunos mucho y otros poco, con que se les daba celosa en la paga, y motivos de disenciones reciprocas, y finalmente, no pocos para la desidía, y tibieza en poner en igualdad su trabajo, y como a éste están obligados, y no hay fondos para los otros precisos materiales, y maestro, con otras inexcusables adealas, meditamos que sin tanto gravamen nos favorecerá más, y con mayor bizarría, y de manera que veamos en poco tiempo la obra perfectamente acabada ….”

[58] Todo apuro para imposibilitarme a ver y hacer personalmente la visita en Lubán porque debiendo quedar el ultimo por aguardar la mason del tiempo, estaba ya tan entrado a mi vuelta y se acercaban, o estaba encima el que logran los Moros para sus hostilidades en todas estas islas y Lubán es una de las más expuestas teniendola asolada, distando de ésta Bahía como veinte leguas que se atraviesan por mar, y no había embarcación peltrechada, y como convenía para arriesgarme a esta navegación, haciéndome menos fuerza el costo e influyendo para imposibilitarme las muchas ocupaciones que a mi regreso a Manila se acumularon (329).

[59] En Lubán, con motive de la ruina que hicieron los moros no hay más que una reducida capilla formada de caña con su techo de paja muy débil, y dentro de la Fuerza (387).

[60] Salvador P. Escoto, “The Manila Archbishop’s Visitation of Parishes, 1773-1775: A Look into the Lives of the Common People,” Philippine Studies, 58: 1-2 [Festschrift in honor of Fr. John N. Schumacher, S.J.] (June 2010), 239-272.  Quotations are from Dr. Escoto’s essay.  I have not extracted all material in that essay and summary here.  I selected materials appropriate for my purposes.  The items which I most often omitted are the Archbishop’s comments on the priests and the population figures by tribute category, sex, and rough divisions by age group. 

[61] Dr. Escoto says (242) that “the information provided in the notes on this [and the second] phase of the visits are derived from the document entitled: ‘Testimonio en relato de la Iglesias … acontecidos en Manila,’ 5 April 1773, Archivo General de Indias (AGI).”

[62] “Details given in the reports in this section are found in ‘Testimonio en Relato en la Santa Visita de las Parroquias de Bulacan y dos de la Tondo administradas por los Religiosos Agostinos … en calidad de curas colados,’ 11 December 1775, Ultramar, legajo 691, AGI” (259).

[63] Dr. Escoto notes that material in this section was taken from “Expediente sobre la visita del arzobispo de Manila de los hospitals, beaterios, casas de recogimiento de esa ciudad y de sus extramuros, incluyendo el Colegio de Sta. Potenciana,” 29 December 1774, Filipinas, legajo 643, AGI” (264).

[64] The Royal Hospital had a large number of patients due “to the admission of ailing mariners of the recently arrived frigate, Juno, which had sailed directly from Spain” (266).

[65] “Santa Potenciana had a deposit box, which contained the girls’ dowries and monies for various intentions.  For security reasons it had three keys.  A royal official, the Dominican prior of the convent, and the school chaplain each held one.  Its contents were not mentioned, but it stated that the box was found empty after the British occupation of Manila in 1762-1764” (266).

[66] Marta María Manchado López, “La Visita de 1776 a las Parroquias Pampangas de Filipinas.”  Revista de Indias, 56, no. 206 (1996), 77-97.

[67] Page 79n3 gives the source of the information as AGI, Filipinas, 653, in two parts, one dated 20 December 1779 and the other 23 July 1776.  I have not seen these and am working entirely from the published Revista de Indias essay.

[68] “Los informes sobre los naturales de los distintos pueblos no son muy negativos, frecuentemente se les define como ‘quietos, dóciles, pacificos y humildes,’ dedicados al cultivo de la tierra, a la explotacion de la nipa y a la caza.”

[69] “Sin embargo, el párroco de Lubao asegura que sus feligreses son ‘inquietos y viciosos’ y el de Betis se lamenta de la inquietude que siembra entre sus parroquianos los enredos de un par de bachilleres.  El cura de Bacolor, por su parte, denuncia la costumbre de sus feligreses de enzarzarse en pleitos alimentados por chismes, y de enredar incluso al propio cura con el alcalde mayor de la provincia.”  Chismes are also mentioned on page 85 of this Manchado López essay.

[70] Archivo General de Indias, Audiencia de Filipinas, Legajo 1069A, “Papeles por agregar.”  Contestación que dá el Obispo de Zebú Don Fray Joaquin Encaba de la Virgen de Sopetran Agustino Recoleto descalzo, al interrogario formado por la Governación de Ultramar en la Ciudad de Cadiz, en 6 de Diciembre de 1812, y recibido por el expresado Obispo en 22 de Noviembre de 1814.  Dated and signed by Father Joaquin in Cebu, 13 February 1815.

[71] Notice the unconscious sexism, that the population of note is adult male and that the wives (and children) are adjuncts.

[72] Underlined in the original, suggesting that the term is neither Spanish nor common usage. 

[73] Archivo Histórico Nacional, Ultramar, Legajo 2211.  El Obispo de Cebu informa sobre el estado general de aquella Diocesis rogando se dictasen algunas providencias necesaria para que prosperazen aquellas islas tan fertiles como bien situadas.  Sent to Spain 1 March 1866, by “Fr. Romualdo Obispo.”  Unfortunately I do not have a copy of this and the notes I made in August 1973 were only made regarding Samar, which was my focus then.

[74]  “En las Yslas de Negros y Samar se encuentran tambien infieles descendientes de cristanos, que antiguamente se remontaron … los malhechores encuentran sus guaridas con los infieles.  …  Sobre los infieles que hay en Ysla de … Samar … los sitios donde estan se han convertido en guarida de malhechores de una forma escandalosa, de manera que cualquiera, que comete un crimen, y se retira á dichos puntos, se halla salvo de la autoridad.”

[75] AFIO 96/49, P. Benito Romero [de Madridegos], Bishop, Diocese of Cebu.  Copia de la Comunicacion, manifestando al Provincial la satisfecho que ha quedado al hacer la Visita en Samar y Leyte.  Cebu, 30 December 1881.  2ff.

[76] Philippine National Archives.  Patronato. Unclassified. [1830 and 1832 Visita Eclesiastica, by El Yllmo. y Rmo. Señor Don Fray Juan Antonio de Lillo, Obispo, Nueva Caceres].  24 ff., Nueva Cazeres [sic], Palacio Episcopal, 13 October 1832.  24 ff.  Not noted are any comments on roads, difficulties of travel, numbers of tribute payers, numbers of those confirmed, and information regarding parish clerics.  The report seems to have been penned by someone other than the Bishop himself.

[77] “El Pueblo, creo que sea el mas bien formado que hay en estas yslas: Sus calles á cordel con paletada y por ambas Orillas corre el agua en acueductos bien hechos, bien pobladas de Casas, las mas de table y con su techos de Cabo negro que suele durar hasta cien años y por el verdin que cria menos expueños al fuego que las de otros materiales que comunmente se usan, pero apesar de estas ventajas aprueba mal a los Europeos por la mucha humedad, y casi continuas llubias que en el dominan” (ff. 2v-3).

[78] After reference to the earthquake damage to the rectory and church, the Bishop observes “que en este lugar hicieron mas estragos que en otros pues ademas de lo dicho se cayo la Muralla o Cota de piedra que cercaba el Pueblo para defenza de los Moros y se abrieron grietas en algunas Calles” (f. 3).

[79] “Este Pueblocito Mision que actualmente esta en otro citio [sic] por haver quemado los cimarones el antiguo” (5v).  Visitas of Himoragat and Siroma are joined with it for administration.

[80] “se embarco S.S.Y. el Obispo mi Señor en la media Division del Estrecho de San Bernardino al mando de su 2o Comandante Don Ramon de Via de Monte para pasar a la Capital de Manila Consagrar a los Yllmos. y Rmos. Seõres … Obispo de Zebu y … Arzobispo Electo de Manila. Con esta Occasion determine S.S.Y. continuar Su Visita Diocesana a la ida por la Costa del Norte y Corregimiento Nuevo de Daet, y a la buelta por la Costa del Sur de la Provincia de Tayabas …  (f. 13-13v).

[81] “… embarcado [from Mambulao] en la dicha media Division y llego con bastante trabajo al Pueblo de Capalongan despues de diez horas de Navegacion, con viento contrario y turbonadas …  La Yglesia es de piedra tiene tapiada la puerta mayor y abiertas las dos colaterales para major defense dicen de los Moros …  El Pueblo esta situado junto a la playa como Paracale y Mambulao” (f. 14).

[82] “En este Pueblo que es ya Provincia de Tayabas no visito S.S.Y. por haverlo ya echo en este mismo año, pero Confirmo 63 personas” (f. 14v).

[83] “… y haviendose declarado mas fuerte colla de vendabal que parecia Baguio como a las once del dia, trato el Comandante de arribar, y no pudiendo coger a Atimonan arribo a una Ensenada que esta en la mediania de Gumaca y Atimonan, y alli hay un Castillejo de madera en donde moro S.S.Y. con su familia y el dicho Comandante hasta el Lunes 27 que se levó, y llegamos a Maoban a las doce del dia.  En este Pueblo de Maoban no visito S.S.Y. por haverlo hecho en este mismo año, pero confirm a 79 personas” (f. 14v).

[84] “Sucedio asi mismo que este mismo Pueblo [Maoban] con todos los siguientes de la Provincia de Tayabas y de la Laguna hasta Manila estaban apertados con un catarro pestilencial, que aunque no era de muerte era bastante mortificante el que acometio a S.S.Y. y a toda su familia” (f. 14v).

[85] “… Lucban que es el primero de este Obispado por este rumbo mas inmediato a Manila … aqui tampoco visito S.S.Y. por la misma razon dicha, pero Confirmo 322 personas” (f. 15).

[86] El año pasado de 1831 No visito S.S.Y. por falta de Buque por quanto se demoró la Lizencia del Exmo. Sor. Capn. General para que se le franquease la media Division, en razon de que la Embarcasion que la trahia tubo tan mal Viaje que tardo desde Manila hasta este Puerto de Paracao cerca de Cuatro meses, y quando llego ya no era tiempo oportuno para la Navegacion por estas partes (f. 17-17v).

[87] “from Pasacao “embarcado en la media Division dicha al mando de su 2o Comandante Don Benigno Tison y llego a Donsol dia 27 a la una del dia con calmas y Vientos contrarios.  …  En este Pueblo incluso su anexo de Quipia …  Donsol esta recien trasladado a la playa desde lo interior del rio en donde estaba antes, por lo que su anexo Quipia que distaba antes de la matris como dos horas, dista ahora como quarto … (ff. 17v-18).

[88] On the island of Masbate.

[89] … se le ordeno de que trate con el Pueblo el mudar el Camarin Yglesia al Sitio en donde esta la Poblacion hacienda en el lugar del Camarin antiguo un Castillejo que sirva de Defensa contra los Moros.  Este Pueblo que esta cerca de la playa del mar … [and has] tres Poblacioncitas que se estan fundando en la Magdalena, Rima Clorada, y Asid … (f. 18v).

[90] “La Casa Parroquial [of Bulusan] es de table y bastante distante de la Yglesia o aunque junto a esta existen paredes Viejas de la Casa Parroquial o Convento desde el tiempo en que administraron los Religiosos” (f. 19v).

[91] “Pueblo [Gubat] como San Jacinto, Bulan, y Bulusan tienen pared, o Cota de piedra alrededor de la yglesia.  En San Jacinto coje tambien la Casa Parroquial con sus Baluartes, y lo mismo esta la Visita de Tagdon y alguna otras de este transito” (ff. 19v-20.

[92] Does suggest that when not traveling by boat or ship, the Bishop was carried in a hammock at least once: “… despues subio el monte Altisimo de Tagbac con grande trabajo de los Jamaqueros y siguio hasta Biga adonde llego a las once de la mañana” (f. 21v).

[93] “… haviendo dado una buelta redonda a las dos Provincias de Camarines y Albay.  Con lo que S.I.Y. dio por concluida su Visita Diocesana de todo el Obispado que la ha verificado mas completamente que los Yllmos Señores sus Antecesores, yt solamente falta que visitor los cinco Pueblecillos del corregimiento de Nueva Exija que son Polillo, Binangonan, Baler, Casiguran y Palanan a los que tampoco ha llegado ningun Señor Obispo; pero S.I.Y. tiene firme intencion de Visitarlos luego que se proporcione ocasion oportuna …” (f. 23-23v).

[94] Archivo Histórico Nacional (Madrid), Ultramar, Legajo 2166, #13: Visita Diocesano del Obispado de Nueva Segovia.  5ff., 15 September 1850, from Vigan. By “Fr. Vicente Obispo.” 

[95] Al Norte poniente del Cabo Bojeador esta la Ysla de Babuyabnes, que pertenece á este Obispado, pequena y de corto bojeo, y distante 4 ó 5 leguas de la Costa, antiguamente estubo havitada, y tubo Ministro de la Religion de Santo Domingo, pero viendo lo trabajoso de la Ysla su soledad y poco fruto, interviniendo las dos Jurisdiciones se mando que el Ministro se retirarse á Cagayan y se llevase all toda la gente; lo que se executo, mas en el dia viven alli unas sesenta ó mas familias de gente mas silvestre, que racional, y huidos de las Provincias de Cagayan y Ylocos y aunque el Alcalde mayor de Cagayan, á cuya Jurisdicion pertenece envia todos los años un Cobrador á recaudar el Real tribute, con todo aunque recoge algo, en mucho mas se defrauda el Real Haber de V.M. a mas de vivir alli sin ninguna instruccion Cristiana, ni Civil; por lo que seria muy del agrado de Dios, y de V.M. se mandasen retirar dichas familias a las Provincias de Cagayan, y Ylocos no permitiendoles ir alla sino en ciertos y limitados tiempos para recoger la Cera, y Concha que alli se coge, y fuera del tiempo permitido sean severamente castigados, los que alli havien como Salvages, y no como verdaderos vasallos de V.M.

[96]  Se conservan aun entre estos naturales varias supersticiones, que traen su origen desde la Ynfidelidad, y que todo el zelo de los Ministros Evangelicos, y del Gobierno no ha podido desterrar del todo.  Entre estas se hacen mas notables, y se hallan mas arraygadas la circunciscion [sic] y el servicio personal, que hacen los Jobenes a los Padres de la Muger con quien pretenden Casarse. 

    Estas dos supersticiones se hallan muy estendidas y radicadas entre estos naturales, maxime en las Provincias de hacia al Sur, en este mi Obispado solo la Provincia de Pangasinan se halla comprehendida en estas supersticiones.

    Por diferentes Leyes de Yndias, y Ordenanzas de buen gobierno, esta muy encargado a los Gobernadores y Alcaldes mayors, que zelen mucho sobre esto, y castiguen a los culpados; pero todo ello no ha bastado.

    Seria muy grato á Dios si V.M. diese alguna providencia sobre esto, estrechando á vuestro Gobernador en estas Yslas para que por los medios que esten a su alcanze procure cortar de raiz este abuso.

[97]  Hasta hace tres años la Provincia de N.a Vizcaya estubo muy agoviada por los Ynfieles que bajaban a los llanos consumian los animals de los Cristianos, y mataban á estos quando podian llevandose las Cavezas, no podian pasar de un Pueblo á otro sin tropa, y aun asi huvo ocasiones en que algunos indibiduos de la tropa perecieron a manos de ellos; asi como un Religioso que pasaba de su Pueblo al collateral. A vista de esto se determine hacerle la Guerra en su propio Pais y al efecto subio el Gobernador de N.a Vizcaya con alguna tropa y les quemo las Casas y todo lo que tenian, esto les obligo á hacer paces con los Cristianos, y a pedir Misioneros para su propio Pais, y en vista de esto el año pasado se mandaron dos Padres Dominicos al Pais de los Mayayaos los que han sido muy bien recibidos y estan contentos por que ha principiado y a dar fruto la vina que han ido a cultibar.

    A invitacion de estos los Ynfieles del Pais del Quiangan han pedido tambien Misioneros, y hace poco ha informado para que se le concedan, y estan ya nombrados dos Religiosos segun me acaba de escribir el Provincial de Santo Domingo, siendo me acaba de escribir el Provincial de Santo Domingo, siendo regular que en todo este año suban al Pais del Quiangan, con lo que quedara aquella Provincia libre del azotes de los Ynfieles que entraban en los mismos Pueblos de los Cristianos á hacer dano.  El dia 30 de Junio proximo pasado conclui la visita por el ultimo Pueblo de Cagayan llamado Pamplona, y el 3 de Julio me embarque para la Provincia de Ylocos Norte ….