Themes: Population Diversity
Most missions seem to have been populated by a mixture of lowlanders and highlanders, with the highlanders divided further by “ethnic” group and language. In the mission area for Pantabangan, Carranglan, and Pungcan, P. Fr. Francisco José Pérez de los Cobos o de la Encarnación viewed many of the highlanders in this region as Ilongots:[1]
The Ylongotes in these mountains belong to the Dominican missions nearby
… Those [settlements] pertaining to the missions of Casignan and
Binatangan are the rancherias called Bonave, Yeguermay, Pasiguian, and
Onat. Those that belong to our mission of Carranglan are Biruc, Ytangar,
and Sinan … Those that correspond to our mission of Pantabangan are the
rancherias of Baca and Lubluó. Other Ylongotes are in the rancherias
called Emotlen and Aleve[c].
Language use was variable: Father Francisco says that in Pungcan the major language used was “Ysinay’ [Isinay today[2]]; for Carranglan, Pampango [Pampangan] with Ysinay second; and in Pantabangan, Tagalog with Pampango second. When we look at the origins of the residents of these three missions (Pérez Cobos Manifiesto, 1785, 4-7), the language issue (as the Franciscans saw it) becomes manifest:
Pungcan
Carranglan
Pantabangan
Zambales
1
9
Tagalog
3
3
25
Ylongot
7
75
Ylocos
9
Pampango
17
81
262
Valuga ó aeta
24
8
Ygolot
34
22
Ysinay
68
102
Pangasinan
187
97
15
Camarines
5
Cagayan
32
1
As shown in this table, Filipinos from many areas came to these three missions, fleeing problems or seeking opportunity elsewhere than the pueblos in which they were legally resident.
In discussing these language, Father Francisco emphasizes the difficulties for the priest with this variety of languages, particularly regarding confessions and other mission work (Pérez Cobos Manifiesto, 1785, 19-20). He says that in Pungcan the majority of the population had not been to confession for some years because the Franciscans lacked resident missionaries with the requisite language skills:
It is certain that these days we could consider all these Naturales as being
[in a state of extreme] spiritual need. In this mission of Pungcan it has already
been some years since most of them have made their confession, due to the
lack of a missionary here who understood their language. This variety of
idioms [found here] must be uprooted by the most prompt and equitable means.
If not we will see these Naturales in a continuing danger of eternal damnation.
Given the difficulties of language ability and choice in preaching the doctrine (Pérez Cobos Manifiesto, 1785, 20-21) and the need to preach before administering the sacraments (23), his recommendation was that one single language be imposed for all three missions (28). He recommended that it be Tagalog, largely based on its convenience for the Franciscans (35). He further suggested that there be punishments (including whippings) if any highlanders reverted to their natal language, if different from this common language (28-29).
Another Franciscan, writing also in the 1780s,[3] confirms many of the same points but differs in key particulars. He too observed the multiple languages in use in Carranglan—due he said to the “schemes of the Devil for the loss of many souls” by making the work of the missionary more difficult—and that until now there has been no missionary assigned there fluent in all of them. Indeed most Franciscan missionaries had only one of the Philippine languages (ff. 18-19). He recommended that to facilitate missionary work and governance the Governor General be asked to impose an edict mandating the use of Isinay in Carranglan by ousting all but Ilongots (ff. 20-21). He admitted that some might object against this attack on the natural right to select one’s own place of residence in order to pursue one’s own interests, but given the spiritual stakes at risk one must do so (f. 21). After all, there were other places with priests where they could relocate and Filipinos were notoriously mobile anyway … (f. 22). Pungcan would have the same restriction imposed as in Carranglan, but residence in Pantabangan would be restricted to those whose language use was Pampango, since that was the common language there (f. 23).
If the reason as stated for imposing linguistic uniformity in the missions was to facilitate dissemination and comprehension of the Christian doctrine using a language shared both by priest and highlander, why then punish or expel those who chose to speak other languages? Some sort of language test in the chosen church language to qualify for residence might have been a sensible strategy, but to punish (even whippings!) or oust someone for choosing to speak another language is inconsistent with the professed goal of facilitating conversion and indoctrination. This appears to be an absurd concatenation of points by both Pérez Cobos and the anonymous Franciscan. A common language could readily be found when the Filipinos there found it useful, either through commerce or through the majority choice. Filipinos today commonly speak a multiplicity of languages; why would this skill not have existed then? Why could not mission dwellers be presumed to develop the same polyglot of languages based on Filipino perceptions of advantage. Leave it to the Filipinos, without force, without exile from the mission Filipinos chose for their residence.
One wonders if inability to understand the languages spoken by the mission priest might have been a ploy to avoid or avert religious instruction and attendance to church sacraments. I speculate only—without the voice of the Filipinos, there is no evidence one way or another on this, but it is a pleasant conceit to think that mission dwellers not only had their own priorities and strategies but indeed might have been playing the missionaries. In any case, in 1792, in a pragmatic decision the Philippine Franciscan Province noted that
given the confusion of tongues in the missions of Pantabangan, Carranglan,
and Pungcan; and since missionaries who go there have Tagalog in common;
and since many of the inhabitants of said missions are Tagalogs, we decree
that with all possible meticulousness (esmero) that that language be introduced,
using in the interim their own language for correct administration of these
inhabitants in their confessions.[4]
Returning to the languages or language to be used in missions, we see a similar decision in the Baler area, also in 1792, where the question of a common language in the Baler area missions was addressed with an admonition that the missionary priests there “learn the Egongot language for the proper administration of those Yndios and for the spiritual conquest of the Infieles.” They also decreed that the three missionaries in that area get together and prepare a text explaining the Doctrina Christiana in Egongot and, after due approval, it be put into use.[5] Even with this, though, language issues for the Franciscans in and around Casiguran were notable, as described in 1747:[6]
In reference to languages, it is a Babylon here … since each rancho
of these Aetas has a distinct language, distinct tone and mode, but they all
understand the Tagalog language, that is for them the best means [for
communication]….
In 1736, the resident Franciscan in Baler/Palanan sites near Divilican received help from another priest taking confessions during the Easter season because he did not know the language there.[7]
The diversity of groups in the mission areas could be striking. The Baler region seems to have the greatest diversity of groups among the highlanders, though as we saw the Nueva Ecija missions had perhaps the greatest diversity of lowlanders resident in those missions. Dispersion of settlement in and around or away from the missions is also a notable theme, which we can see with some detail in a report from the Franciscan P. Fr. Vicente Inglés based on his trip to the Baler/Palanan missions around 1718.[8] To get there he travelled through Laguna and Bikol to Binangonan de Lampon and then up to the missions on the Pacific coast. After leaving Binangonan, well before his arrival at the missions, he noted diversity and dispersion (BN ms., Vicente Inglés, 1720, f. 615v):
… In the vicinity of this pueblo of Binangonan one finds people yet to
congregate. The first of these is in the port of Lampon where one finds some
Dumagas,[9] people who have their lodging on the sea and do not use the land
for a house except at most for a hut made from leaves at the foot of a tree. If
they perceive people [approaching], they retire to their boats and flee. This
is a docile folk. When they convert to our Holy Faith they thereafter attend
scrupulously to the obligations of a Christian. Nonetheless, it is impossible
to make them live in pueblos and in houses. All attempts to make them live
[in this manner] have been frustrated and without result, no matter what means
were used or whatever pressure was exerted by the missionary priests.
Father Vicente carried on with his report by describing another two sitios and their varied population, described by origin, level of active Christianity, and (apparently) by cultural group (BN ms., Vicente Inglés, 1720, ff. 615v-616):
The second sitio is called Tangohin, is on the Daraetan river, and
is about three leguas away from the pueblo of Binangonan. In this place
along the tributaries of the river live cimarrones, apostates, Aetas, and Balugas.
These are so called since they are the offspring of a cimarrón Yndio and an
Aeta. Here there are congregated about seventy almas, and there has been
a hermitage [Hermita] founded here dedicated to San Pedro de Alcántara.
When a missionary priest comes here to say Mass and administer the
sacraments, he has a place to congregate [the faithful] and pray.
The third sitio is called Humirei and is about a day’s navigation by
sea from that pueblo of Binangonan. Here there has been founded a hermitage
dedicated to Nuestra Señora de la Candelaria. In this sitio one finds about
nine families, but many cimarrones from other pueblos of this contracosta
as well as Aetas and Dumagas [are nearby]. These cannot be made to live
in the pueblo nor attend to the obligations of being a Christian … Along
the beaches of the sea one can see and inspect many huts of the Dumagas
and of the Aetas. These however … somehow can always tell when boats
are approaching, and apparently sensing danger they choose [to flee] toward
greater security and freedom of conscience without missionary priests or any
other person being able to have commerce with them.
Father Vicente continued by saying that this last site had looked promising for locating a resident missionary priest, but since his earlier visit there he discovered now that few Filipinos still lived there. In fact, “most of the residents had” gone to the hills; or died “because of … the pestilence [peste] that took hold in the pueblo of Binangonan and then penetrated the interior [ranges[ of the mountains in 1718 and 1719. It is for this reason that there are so few converted and congregated people under the care of the zealous missionary priest stationed in the pueblo of Binangonan” (BN ms., Vicente Inglés, 1720, f. 616).
I need to interrupt Father Vicente’s report here for two brief digressions. One has to do with the comments Franciscans made occasionally on how they perceived or classified Filipinos in the highlands. They did note differences in language, and I would assume that they were able to distinguish most Aetas, Ilongots, Dumagas and so forth by clothing, language, and perhaps hair styles, ornamentation, or scarification. In the padrones or rosters of those registered in the missions or sitios, one Franciscan said that “those with two names are Christian and those with only one are pagans” [… los que llevan dos nombres son Christianos y los que uno no mas son Infieles].[10] Sometimes the groups were not self-evident. In 1702 a Franciscan wrote of residents in or near the mission of Manguirin: “Many are mestizos, Indio and Negrito, some appearing more like an Indio and others more like a Negrito, in color as well as in hair, and it is very difficult to ascertain which is which….”[11] He continues regarding a group he is teaching the catechism, “None of them are Negrito because they are Indios with straight hair.”
The other digression is to amplify the comment about highlander movement from the missions, whether (in Father Vicente’s example) due to flight from disease or based on other choices and priorities from within the highlander community itself. Franciscans repeated noted highlander tendencies in the mission to decamp, either individually or as a family or larger group. Here, for instance, is a Franciscan Provincial commenting in May 1746, presumably about the missions in the Baler/Palanan region:[12]
In the mountains of these Islands we have six missions, collecting the fruit
as is possible given … the small stability in the lives of these naturales de
el monte, so quick are they to disappear. There is no permanence in what
we do but always we strive to attain a great deal.
A Franciscan in 1754 commented that Aetas in and around Casiguran were at home in the mountains, indeed “the mountains are their gardens and they feed them quite well” [todos los montes son sus Jardines y esto es que se mantienen, y gordos]. If they come to the mission at night to say their prayers, “by morning they have left to seek their life” [de noche se Junten a rezar, y por la mañana, marchar a buscar la vida].[13] In 1745 another Franciscan noted that halfway between Baler and Casiguran were two rancherias where they make their fields and have their little houses [Casillas]. They have no desire to move to the población for they are content to live where they are, with good fields, access to the mountains they love for items they ordinarily seek out.[14]
Sometimes the departures were so abrupt and involved so many that the Franciscans noted it in the manuscripts. For instance, in April of 1809 fifty-nine persons, “all of the Ilongot nation” and all formerly resident in the mission of Casignan, fled “to the mountain.”[15] The reasons for this and other Filipino residential choices are usually not given in the documents. In this case we know a bit more than usual. We are told the fifty-nine included both married and unmarried residents, though sexes and ages are not recorded. Soldiers were sent from Baler to investigate and while the gobernadorcillo [sic] of Casignan said that “he knew nothing” others were more forthcoming. Four former pueblo [sic] officials responded that “an Ilongot from the visita of Lublud came to Casignan with the news that soldiers were coming to draft guides to enter the mountain.” From fear of this compelled service and perhaps the excursion itself, they left the mission. Further questions on the motivations of those who fled elicited nothing more, perhaps because the soldiers were doing the asking and doing it through an interpreter.
Government demands, particularly the requirement to pay tribute, could also be irksome to highlanders and is reported to have led both to flight and to refusal to convert to Christianity. We see this in the case of a site called Limotan that Huerta (1865, 573) said “was prosperous until 1700. However, when at that time the government tried to impose the tribute taxes on them, they fled to the mountains and the mission was completely lost.” Another Franciscan, writing in 1754,[16] was of the opinion “that many pagan Yndios do not convert in order not to have to pay the tribute.” The common practice seems to have been that those who converted to Christianity would be spared tribute and impressment for labor “for a period of ten years; and for those Indios who were already Christian but had fled and apostatized our Holy Faith, they would be freed from those impositions for six months as well as pardoned for whatever crimes they had committed.”[17]
Highlanders may have stayed or departed for a variety of reasons. One Franciscan writing in the early eighteenth century thought that highlanders deserted the missions on any pretext whatsoever, mainly because of their love of “depraved liberty:” “Some of the reasons the Indios advance against being congregated into pueblos are true, others are false. All the reasons stem from their native repugnance against living like rational beings. They look with special aversion towards anything that contravenes their vicious liberty, using whatever injuries, feelings, and complaints in order to retain that which they love.”[18] The Franciscans were speculating, albeit based on first-hand exposure to some groups. Fundamentally, though, the root causes of highlander actions seem to have remained as obscure to the Franciscans as to us today. As a Franciscan commented in 1733, after providing for good settlement sites with adequate and good land for agriculture and good access to fish, “experience has taught us that whenever we work on this subject we find that [they once again] have absented themselves [from the mission site in preference] for the interior [ranges] of the mountains.”[19]
Sometimes populations fled due to unforeseen events. Raids by the Moros could be the reason, such as the one in 1818 against Baler and Casignan mentioned earlier in this essay. That seems to have been a singular event, but in the Bicol area Moro raids in the 1750s were said to have “scattered” the highlanders in and out of the missions in the Lupi region, particularly in a destructive set of raids in 1758.[20] In 1799, two Franciscans were taken by Moro raiders, one while serving as priest of Casiguran mission and the other while serving as parish priest of Palanan. Both were ransomed.[21] Filipinos of course would also be at risk and in most cases not able to raise the wherewithal for release. There is a note in passing that due to flight caused by smallpox and Moros, the Franciscan could not do a count for Manguirin in 1757.[22] Perhaps the most stunning and unusual event to hit any of our mission areas was what appears to have been a tsunami that hit Baler in the early morning hours of 27 December 1735, which completely destroyed the pueblo and killed many of its residents.[23] Afterwards only forty of the sixty households resettled there, with the others “scattered,” and the priest thought it doubtful that they would return to live in Baler again.[24]
Returning to Father Vicente’s 1720 report, the missions in the Baler/Palanan area had
remarkably low populations in total, with many choosing to live apart from the mission itself, in nearby visitas or sitios or rancherias. Here are his figures, which I have put into a summary form.[25] Father Vicente concluded with optimism, saying in part that while “the fruits have been so small,” through the abundance of the Divine and more work by the Franciscans, “we can hope to see a larger harvest in the future” ((BN ms., Vicente Inglés, 1720, f. 623):
In the jurisdiction of Binangonan
Tongohin sixty almas[26]
Humirei fifty Simmarrones Apostatas
In the jurisdiction of Casiguran, nación Ylongotes,
población de Comblan forty-three almas
en la punta de San Yldefonso thirty-eight Aetas,
unos y otras Apostatas
Baler, the four poblaciones de Yslaines, namely
Damag, Lavang, Tambaguen, & Bongobob 110 Apostatas[27]
En las dos poblaciones de
Dipaculao, y Ditale nación de Ylongotes fifty Apostatas
En el Rio de Dibilican, jurisdiction of the Pueblos
of Dicalayo and Dibimbinan, from August
1719 to October 1720 thirty familias de Simarrones Apostatas
Some of these figures may have been affected by death and flight from a smallpox epidemic that was reported to have occurred around Umirey in 1720, with ten deaths to Ilongotes in the area due to it.[28] Comblan, for instance, by 1742 had moved from the 43 noted here in 1720 to 320—198 or almost 62% were “pagans” and presumably were not permanent residents.[29] A visiting Franciscan reported that he had congregated 63 Aetas in the sites of Diyabobo and Disayao near the mission of Bongog in 1725, with one adult and 19 toddlers [párvulos] accepting baptism.[30]
A miscellany of other figures suggest that the pattern of low numbers of residents in most (but not all) missions or associated locations was a persistent one. Tinambac had 36 tributos in 1803 but only 30 in 1806.[31] Tigaon, in the Bicol region, had a list of 116 individuals listed as resident in the mission one year after its probable founding date. These individuals in their majority were “Negritos, a people so barbarous and hostile to congregation as is notorious in this land, that we cannot count them as converted.”[32] Almost fifty years later the count for Tigaon was about the same: around 1751, in Salog, Himoragat, and Tigaon there were only about 100 tributos listed, about 60 in Salog and about 30 in Tigaon. Counting four or five persons per tribute, there would have been a respectable 300 or so residents in Salog and possibly 40 or 50 in Himoragat.[33] By 1753, Tigaon only had about ten houses of residents—and only three of these were “settled” [poblados] with the others inhabited by Aetas or “descendants of Aetas.” This same source comments on the difficulties in getting Aetas to live a settled life in or near the mission—indeed with the threat of tribute payments and service obligations they as well as remontados from the lowlands prefer to live in the mountains.[34] Even those officially resident in the Tigaon mission might instead have been living in nearby settlements—a 1775 report mentions seven named “rancherias.”[35]
The region of Baler/Palanan also had missions with various numbers of inhabitants, some more or less permanent and some temporary or at least reluctant to convert to Christianity:
Visitas #Almas, Chicos y Grandes ca. 1753[36]
Dipaculao 123
San Joseph 313
San Juan y Damas 298—86 of whom were “pagans”
Humerey [Umirey], Misión de Baler: 5 tribute paying couples and 280 Aetas[37]
As late as the 1860s, Casignan only had 25 to 30 houses at the mission (Huerta, 286)—even with two families per residence the population would be only around 50, and according to Huerta they lived a “miserable life” due to low agricultural and hunting yields.
Even in terms of baptisms, the “harvest” could be small, as shown in these figures for two years’ worth of missionary work in the Baler/Palanan region:[38]
In the sites around Damag, of the nation Disalines, six toddlers
[parvulos] have been baptized since the 1st of June of 1719. In the sitio
of Tambaguen, of the Ilongot nation, six adults and seven toddlers were
baptized and all were congregated except one rebel [y se reduxeron todos
except uno por rebelde]. In the sitios of Dicapúao and Ditalis, of the Ilongot
nation, all were congregated and two adults and twenty-four toddlers were
baptized. While all of these pueblos [sic] or sitios were congregated formerly,
the lack of missionaries [meant that] they returned to their natural fierceness,
as shown in the innumerable murders that have occurred in these parts, so
cruel and far from Christian piety. … In the sitio of San Yldefonso, in the
mountains of Casiguran, twenty negrillos adultos and twelve toddlers were
congregated and baptized; [and] in the sitio of Umirey three Dumagat adults
and twenty-five toddlers were baptized.
One can view the variations and range of residents better if we take a look at three time periods, grouping mission populations when given and comparing the sizes with the lowest and highest two or three pueblos under Franciscan clerical administration at that time. Baler and Palanan are included among the missions even though officially they were pueblos. While gaps in data are numerous—Pantabangan, Carranglan, and Pungcan do not appear in the 1751 listing, for instance—it provides an overview that snippets of data do not:
Range of Population
1751[39]
1798[40]
Huerta, 1865, taken from the estado at end of volume
Zero to 499
Dibutarec and Divilican; Casiguran; Daraetan
Casiguran, Pungcan, Pantabangan, Casignan, Binatangan, Dibutarec, Manguirin
Pungcan, Dipaculao (60!), Casignan
500 to 749
San Antonio del Monte [Tanay region]; Baler (with 4 rancherias, including Dipaculao)
San Antonio [del Monte], Palanan, Daraetan, Carranglan
Lupi, Siruma
750 to 999
Manguirin (includes 4 other rancherias), Tigaon (with 2 rancherias), Ragay (with 1 rancheria)
Baler
Carranglan, Pili, Palanan
1,000 to 1,499
Salog (with 3 rancherias)
Pantabangan, Manguirin, Ragay, Mabatobato, Baler, Casiguran
1,500 to 1,749
Lupi with Ragay
Tinambac
1,750 to 1,999
Lupi (with 6 rancherias)
Goa with Tigaon
2,000 onwards
Sangay, Tigaon, Goa (5,409!)
Lowest two or three pueblos
Caboan (339), Pagbilao (724)
San Josef (Bulacan) (472), Bay (708), Macalelong (527)
Malibago (Leyte, 646), Caboan (708), Quinapundan (Samar, 1,183), San Pascual (1,224), Barás (1320)
Highest two or three pueblos
Polo (8547), Meycauayan (6116), Mahayhay (5103)
Lucban (7946), Mahayhay (7690), Catarman (Samar) (7090)
Tayabas (21,554), Oas (17,657), Camalig (17,184)
Range of Population
1751
1798
Huerta, 1865,
In 1751, six of the sixteen missions listed were comparable to the two lowest pueblo populations. By 1865, five of 18 missions were comparable to the two lowest pueblo populations. By 1865, most of the missions still in existence were doing well as significant centers of population, either in the mission proper or in nearby settlements. Only eight of the missions listed had less than 1,000 people in them; seven more had between 1,000 and 1,999; and three had more than 2,000 people listed, with Goa at a remarkable population of 5,409. Contrast this with 1751, albeit lacking the three Nueva Ecija missions: nine missions listed had less than 1,000 people; two were between 1,000 and 1,999; and none were listed as having 2,000 or more residents.
Filipinos by and large had turned the surviving mission settlements into thriving communities by the late nineteenth century. Missions that had originally been established provisionally had either disappeared, been given to other priests for spiritual administration, absorbed into nearby municipalities, or become reasonable populous nodes of settlement. Part of the success for those missions that did survive and grow in size would have been based on trade, the next theme to examine.
Themes: Trade
One of the major themes hinted at in the manuscripts are the contacts between lowlanders and mission residents or with highlanders living in independence away from the missions. The reported contacts in most cases seem to be trade related. Information for trade in missions in the other areas is sketchy at best. In 1801 a clumsily worded government decree regarding Nueva Ecija suggested a policy to force highlanders to at least come down to the pueblos for trade goods:[41]
… ultimately we will prohibit that none of the civilized ones [lowland Christians]
engage in commerce with the savages and mountain folk. This will mean that
when [those in the mountains] lack necessities they will be obligated to come
down [from the mountains] in order to get them, and this will facilitate the increase in the population of the settlements [reducciones].
I would not be surprised if this decree was neither enforced nor successful. After all, lowlanders wanted highland goods and enterprising traders from the lowlands would go to the highlands to get them, just as enterprising highlanders would travel to the lowlands to exchange goods. Exchange opportunities or restrictions on that exchange in no way needed to have led to highlander resettlement in the pueblos in the lowlands.
The fragmentary evidence we have in the documentary record for the missions under Franciscan administration strongly suggests widespread, significant trade contacts after the date of this decree. In the Nueva Ecija region and the missions of Carranglan, Pungcan, and Pantabangan, we learn that in 1832 Carranglan was situated near “eight rancherías of pagan Ibilaos” numbering about 700, with more further away. These used to trade with Pungcan regularly, though enmity with that mission around 1829 had an adverse effect of the interchange for a while. The Pungcan mission had a relationship with a ranchería of “negritos” [Aetas, I assume], trading their wax for lowland trade goods and helping out with the rice harvest. Pungcan also had trade relations with a ranchería of about 100 Igorots.[42]
In this same Nueva Ecija mission area but some forty years earlier, a report from the Malaspina expedition in 1792 mentioned that there were “Ygorrotes” living in the mountains near Pantabangan, and that they grew tobacco with which they traded for contraband with traders from Pangasinan.[43] Roughly at the same time a Franciscan noted that in the missions of Pungcan, Carranglan, and Pantabangan “each mission can produce annually about two hundred pesos from venison jerky … which is then sold in some of the pueblos of Pampanga, principally in those of Gapan and Bacolor. The mestizos there usually advance payments in cloth against expected jerky ….”[44] Unfortunately no more information is available
As we saw earlier in this essay regarding Manguirin mission in 1756, appetite for the complementary items from the two ecological zones was strong. It is worth re-visiting and quoting more fully from the quotation in this context:[45]
… the sitio that is called Santa Cruz of Manguirin … is where the priests suffer
from fevers the most, where there is no [adequate] drinking water, and to bathe
one has to half a legua from the sitio to the river Ynarihan. To continue with
the dreadful [qualities of the place, the inhabitants], except for those who have
no tools at all, have implements which barely allow them to make a piece of a
field, all of which means that in that sitio there are only a few houses. Most
people live [away], in rancherias. The consequence is attendance at Mass is low
… Only when they want, and how they want, then they come enthusiastically
[Sino solo quando quieren, y como quieren, a una cosa bienen todos gustosos].
Notwithstanding [the dispersion of population], every Wednesday there is a
market in the cabecera with markets as well in the sitios on Saturdays and
Sundays. In these markets one finds goods and sellers from Bicol, selling
meat, fish, tobacco, iron, and many other things, and the cimarrones trade
for them with what they have, namely wax, abaca, etc. … In reality they
do not want a priest but rather [only] a shadow of a priest. They [only] want
[a priest] who will attend to their needs, remove [los saque] their miseries.
When they arrive in the doorway the priest receives them with love and gives
them protection. Their [need, though,] only lasts as long as they are in the
doorway. When they can, they escape ….
This quotation speaks directly both to the existence of strong trade connections between highlanders and lowlanders. It also serves to remind us that these Filipinos had their own priorities and needs. Filipino preferences perhaps meant that the priorities of the priests and the governments were of secondary or tertiary significance.[46]
It is difficult to document Filipino aspirations and priorities directly, but the strength and persistence of trade opens a door for a glimpse of their existence. Usually, however, we merely get terse statements, such as this from 1776 by a Franciscan writing to the Franciscan Provincial about the Mount Isarog area:[47] “Filipinos from the parish of Lagonoy purchase from the Cimarrones that which they have [for sale] … such as wax, abaca, and a bit of their subsistence crops [y el poco Plantio, que tienen para su manutencion].”[48] Or this reference from an 1832 document regarding trade between Aetas in the mountains and Casiguran in the Baler/Palanan region: “… there are tame, pagan “negritos who come to the población [of Casiguran] to exchange wax for rice and clothing.”[49]
A manuscript from around 1720 describes another group of Aetas in the Baler/Palanan area, at the end of which trade connections are sketched:[50]
… on the slopes of the mountains, along their rivers and on the beaches are
the Aetas, but with such a strange way of life, without a fixed sitio or place
for their residence. They live where there are trees that give them fruit, their
usual and constant food. Their house is a half shack [choza], in which they
take refuge from storms. … Those on [this coast] live in great poverty and
are called Tologtog. Their commerce are of [forest and other products] that
they take to the pueblos and fields of the Christians, where they are exchanged
for the goods they value, namely rice and tobacco. Afterwards they return to
the mountains rich and happy. When they have exhausted the fruit in one area
they move to another ….
This same manuscript (f. 619-619v) spoke of a similar trade with mountain products for lowland goods, this time between the “Yrrayas” in the mountains near Palanan, which appear “to be of the same group as those called Yzalines and Ylongotes.” They brought goods to Dibinbinan in April and May, traded wax for salt, and returned directly to the mountains. They became irritated if one tried to speak of conversion or suggested that they visit with the missionary priest. Some from Debimbinan who had been to the Yrraya territory said that it is a difficult trek and for those carrying loads it took nine days (six without loads) to get to the first of their settlements.
It is striking in fact how distance and difficult terrain or tumultuous seas did little to prevent the movement of goods to and from Manila. Here is a description of Palanan from about 1832, which mentions how isolated it was from effective Spanish administrative oversight due to distance and adverse sailing conditions. Yet Palanan and its nearby areas produced significant amounts of wax, some rice (corn was more commonly consumed), and marine products. The forests produced such quality timber that it was taken to Manila even though its transport is “difficult and costly.” Tobacco was purchased from traders from Cagayan, who even sold it in Polillo, Binangonan, and into the provinces of Laguna and Tayabas (the province of Quezon today), albeit in small quantities.[51]
Also in the Baler/Palanan area, according to this manuscript from 1832, there was a well-established trade connection between Baler and the mission of Dipaculao, with implications that the mission folks had further contacts into the mountains; and that the trade goods provided by Baler traders came ultimately from other places, perhaps from Manila:[52]
The inhabitants of Baler purchase by way of the Christian Ilongots of
Dipaculao the wax and tobacco harvested from other rancherias in
exchange for clothing, rice, and bolos. [The goods from Dipaculao]
are then sold to Polillo and to Binangonan in return for vino de Nipa
and commodities.
Full coverage in the manuscripts for any of our four regions is lacking, though there is more explicit information regarding trade in the Baler coastal and highland region.[53] Clearly, though, what we do have in the manuscript records shows that trade connections between highlander and lowlander was an important theme, probably in all areas of the Islands and throughout Philippine history.
Themes: Intra-Filipino Conflict
Conflict in the highlands apparently was common. Some seemed to have occurred between groups without involving residents in the missions. In 1792, in the mission area with Pantabangan, Casiguran, and Pungcan, an observer noted that the “Ylongotes” in the area “are negative, capital enemies of the Aetas, who attack them whenever they encounter them.”[54] Seventy some years earlier, in the Baler/Palanan area, Ilongotes were said to have killed and beheaded an enemy from Cagayan two days before the priest arrived at the mission of Umirey. [55] A manuscript from 1785 talks about three groups in the Baler/Palanan region—Yzalines , Ylongotes, and Aetas--and the ongoing conflicts of the first two against the Aetas. The conflict was marked by such hatred and brutal enmity, we are told, that no quarter was given to the Aeta, with each day murders and beheadings.[56] Threats and persecution from Ilongots against Aetas in an unnamed mission near Baler led 52 Aetas to leave. A mission with 23 houses was reduced to three.[57] Conversely, a Franciscan manuscript from 1720 indicates that Aetas near Casiguran killed a Baguntavo from Casiguran and then threatened some Ilongots who wanted to settle near Aeta territory, forcing them to return to the Comblan area.[58] The writer adds (f. 2) that these same Aetas had killed four or five Christians over the years. A writer in 1785 said that during the two years he was in the highlands (Casignan and Pungcan) he knew of 103 deaths of Igorots at the hands of Ilongots; and in one year, he knew of 69 Ilongots killed by Igorots.[59]
Some of the conflict involved highlander attacks on those who had converted to Christianity and become residents in the missions. In 1754, for instance (unfortunately without who, when, where, and why information), we learn that “in some missions in the mountains here in the Philippines we are experiencing some insults from and deaths caused by the Infidels. Since they are naturally fearful, many of those already congregated have deserted the Missions and returned to the mountains.”[60] Leaving aside the condescension revealed in the phrase “they are naturally fearful,” it would seem that in this case the hostility was directed primarily at the mission itself—otherwise, why would mission residents think they would be safer by going away from the mission into the hills and mountains? Franciscans certainly thought that highlanders not living in the missions were not infrequently antagonistic specifically to those settled there, particularly those who had become Christian, with references in passing to “the hatred that they have towards the Christians”[61]
In a 1754 source we read of references to feuds between settlements in the Baler/Palanan mission territory and the desire for vengeance for murders perpetrated by residents of some of them, with particular animus directed against a settlement called Pugu. There is a reference to long-standing enmities with settlements going toward Cagayan from the Baler/Palanan Franciscan missions. This same source discussed (p. 9) the cultural imperatives of revenge two pages after telling of meeting a man near the Dipaculao River who wanted to revenge himself on a nearby settlement since the people there had killed his wife.[62] A 1751 report speaking of these same Baler/Palanan mission areas repeatedly speaks of revenge killing of those they hate.[63] Father Vicente Inglés mentions that on one of his 1718-1719 trips to the Baler/Palanan area he encountered Aetas who wanted to kill some of the “Indios” travelling with him in order to avenge the death of two of their band.[64] Revenge killings apparently were done regardless of whether the victims were in any way connected to the original assaults. Threats and attacks against priests also occurred.[65]
Two Franciscans were in fact assassinated, one in the Mount Isarog area and one in the Baler/Palanan region:
P. Fr. Juan Silva o de la Concepcion, assassinated, Tigaon, 8 September 1770.[66]
P. Fr. Juan Beltran, assassinated, Tabueyon, 1 October 1770.[67]
Huerta suggests that Father Juan Beltran had been particularly fervent in trying to stop headhunting practices in the area, perhaps provoking a ferocious response.[68] Subsequently, eight years after his murder, this mission was abandoned because its inhabitants had deserted it.[69]
Another brief and undetailed reference from 1832[70] refers to conflict in 1829 between those living in the mission of Pungcan and “Ibilaos”[71] from nearby, occasioned apparently (ff. 100-101) by “Ibilao pagans who rustled cattle that belonged to the assistant priest of San José,”[72] and “though some Ibilaos died things are peaceful now with communication with one another.” Referring to the Baler Isarog area, one source says that there used to be significant danger from attack by cimarrones” along with lots of cattle rustling near Salog/Goa, but by 1776 the Goa area was relatively peaceful with only a little animal theft.[73]
Most of the conflict seems to have been most acute and frequent in the Baler/Palanan region. In the 1720s or thereabouts we are told of a case when in an unnamed mission near Baler the Franciscan was told that the site was “surrounded by Ysalines and Ylongotes carrying emblem and signals of bloody war that they use in their battles” along with lances and other weapons. Through an interpreter the priest learned that residents in Baler had stolen rice and other items from one of their leaders. They planned to take revenge by killing the thief. The Christians in the mission said that in fact no such incident had occurred but the highlanders continued to make threats. The priest offered to make up what was allegedly stolen and the raiders eventually accepted his offer and withdrew “to the fallow thickets in the interior of the mountains.” Such events, the priest reports, were more common than not, with “a thousand insults and atrocities.”[74]
Random and individual attacks also occurred, and we have a partial explanation in a Franciscan source from 1747. The Franciscan writer, P. Fr. Bernardo de Santa Rosa, observed that among the Ilongots, especially in a place called Dinariauan on the way north towards Baler, their leaders were not infrequently priests. If the leader demanded a head for magical services, the individual would have to get one. If someone fell ill, a head would be necessary, and so forth. For these reasons the trip from Casiguran to Baler was dangerous.[75] One wishes we had more analysis such as this rather than mere recitals of threats, attacks, and enduring enmities. Unfortunately we do not, nor again do we have Filipinos presenting their views and explanations.
Conclusion
In January of 1866, the Bishop of Nueva Cáceres was asked to respond to a proposal to establish a new mission in the Bikol area, near Manguirin or Tigaon; and that the Franciscans be tasked to administer it and reach out to the 56 rancherias of pagans [rancherias de infieles] nearby. His reply aptly summarizes highlanders’ successful resistance over almost three hundred years to efforts to congregate, convert, and control them.[76]
The Bishop recognized the need for the mission but wanted to situate it not between Manguirin and Goa but rather between Mabatobato and Tigaon where there were more people, more cropland areas with potential for irrigation, and with greater utility to provide protection for travelers on that piece of road. However, the Franciscans simply could not spare a priest for such a project since they already they had vacant pueblo parishes they could not fill--forty vacancies throughout the islands, fifteen alone in his diocese. Even if they did fill the assignment for a new mission, given the nature of the job and consequent fatigue and illness, the Franciscans would have to rotate in new priests frequently. How could they do that, being shorthanded already? If they were to take priests from other assignments, they would be shorting parishes which were of “more importance, of greater population, with more resources,” already having “church, rectory, schools and other buildings,” in order to build a mission up from nothing (18).
He could not justify endorsing a proposal that entailed “a new and costly financial sacrifice” (19). The Bishop said that the circumference of Mount Isarog is between 15 to 20 leguas, “and in all of that periphery are some 60 [visitas] with perhaps 4,000 almas, remontados and monteses” (19):
Do you want the missionary to have to canvas all the slopes of the mountain
to try to convert all of these visitas? Aside from the disputes and unrest that
would occur with the jurisdiction and territories of the older missions, in
which the visitas [are located], the missionary would quickly succumb to the
effort and fatigue of the task, which could not be accomplished in less than a
year. Even then the missionary could not stir from the center of the mission
during the rainy season, and no one has the strength and health to accomplish
this type of life over the time necessary to accomplish the goals. (19v)[77]
The Bishop stated that he had studied the history of mission efforts in the colonial Philippines. As a result of his studies on the “many problems and lack of usefulness [inconvenientes y ninguna utilidad ]” of the missions, he could not endorse these attempts at “mission congregations which, after great cost and not a little fatigue end up leaving things as they were” (19v-20). He spoke of the “vicious circle” of a history of mission establishment, with records of sites and names; along with the reappearance of remontados and monteses living outside of the mission ready for the 100th time to be approached by dedicated missionaries. (20)
The Bishop also suggested that a policy instead of working from established mission sites to slowly force nearby remontados and monteses to settle down so that the population in a mission would grow, would be better. But even that possible plan carried with it the negative creation of new officials who only want to form new visitas so that the inhabitants would then be “in the shadow of their tyranny” (20v). He argued that until sitios were no longer established away from the church and the población, the officials would exploit those who have settled away from the supervision of the priest. Hence the temptation to return to the hills, to flee from the settlements assigned to them. If one could settle them in the old missions under the supervision of the Franciscans, one would avoid exploitation and reveal hidden tribute payers. Then too one would not have to create new missions and try to find extra Franciscan priests to work as missionaries. (21v) He says that the success of Goa, Tigaon, and Sangay proves his point with their growth of population. [78]
The Bishop has an interesting argument, especially with the suggestion that obligations imposed by Filipino officials on those away from the población might have directly contributed to flight to the hills. This would certainly speak to the creation of remontados, and it also allows more specificity in the persistent refusal to live in settled communities subject to king and church. However, when he described remontados and monteses as “usually the dross of the pueblos, lazy gamblers, thieves and even some murderers” [suelen ser la escoria de los pueblos, jugadores, holgazanes, ladrones y aun algunos asesinos] (20v), he severely undercut his argument. If one leaves a settlement because of abusive, petty tyranny, where and why do alleged laziness, gambling addiction, and violent criminal tendencies come in? The Bishop has combined a useful causal pattern with the older habit of ascribing life away from Spanish rule as a moral failure and those who went to the hills as moral reprobates and villains.
Indeed, it is difficult to move beyond the moral judgments and blanket characterizations in these missionary manuscripts of remontados, Aetas, Ilongots, and so forth, even in this novel approach from 1866. It is even more difficult, almost impossible in fact, to find clear statements or indications of what highlanders wanted from the missionaries. That motivations were complex is suggested in a document from 1720, where a Franciscan mentioned that in Debimbinan, among other sacramental work, he had baptized a family of 7, two of them who had been married “according to their custom” and lived as a couple for many years. The priest married them “with the solemnity that our Mother the Church mandates.” The couple had been afflicted by “a serious and mortal illness, and the two had been brought to the pueblo [sic] half dead but requesting with great anxiety Holy Baptism. I catechized them as best I could, instructed them in the principle Mysteries of our holy faith and baptized them. Then they died and I buried them with all solemnity. The internment was attended by many Aetas, who admired how we treated the bodies of their companions and for having baptized them before they died. Perhaps God by this pious demonstration will use it as a means to bring the other negritos Aetas to a knowledge of his Divine Majesty.”[79] Apparently there was something important about Christian baptism that some highlanders valued highly, but aside from numbers of baptisms and the occasional anecdote we lack substantive information on what was so valued.
What we find are accounts of conversion for some, along with what appears to have been a pronounced receptivity to baptism, but clearly too a persistent desire to live away from the priest and Spanish rule in their own dispersed settlements. Marriages by highlander usage were common, coming to light often years later due to desire for baptism before imminent death (as we just saw) or fortuitous contact with a priest or desire that the children of such unions be baptized. Here is a 1742 report regarding infant or child baptisms in Casiguran and thereabouts, where clearly intermarriage between Christian and non-Christian outside of the church was not a problem:[80]
Parents = “pagans”
Father = “pagan,” mother = Christian
Father = Christian, Mother = “pagan”
Both parents = Christians
Male child
Eleven
Two
Four
Five
Female child
Nine
One
One
Eleven
Some of the Franciscan reports on numbers baptized include references to children being baptized into the Christian faith and noting as an aside if the parents are married in the Christian way or according to highlander customs. The age of the children of the couple give one a sense of how infrequent contact or desire for Christian baptism might be. Here is an example from Lauang (Baler/Palanan region), whose parents are described as being “clandestinely married and it is not certain if they are baptized,” both 30 years old. One of their children would have been 9 but he died by drowning; the other child is 6 months old and he was the one baptized.[81] In this same manuscript, one finds reference to an adult male of 36 who was baptized due to “extreme necessity.” He was also “clandestinely married;” the wife is mentioned but no age was given. They had a daughter of 6 and sons of 5 and 2 ½. Another reference is to a couple, both around 32, who had “married clandestinely after the last time that I went to the mission.” Another couple, also “clandestinely married,” had a 3 month-old daughter.
Certain non-Christian customs such as marriages by highlander rules seem to have been deeply rooted no matter how hard the missionaries worked, but the phenomenon of initially marrying outside the church was not uncommon in the lowlands as well. Other customs, most notably perhaps headhunting and other acts of warfare or revenge killing, seem to have been particularly intractable and common in certain highlander regions. The prevalence and ferocity seem to have been particularly notable in the highlands in the Baler/Palanan region. One should note too that the Franciscans in fact had little authority to change customs, merely exhortation, example, and obligations of the faith that perhaps some of the highlanders had accepted. A brief reference in a letter from 1755 mentions that in the mission of Casiguran there was a man, a Capitán pasado, who was known to be living in evil relationship with three women. Even after many exhortations only one of the women expressed possible interest in exiting the arrangement.[82] Apparently the priest could do nothing more about behavior of which they disapproved. Again, of course, both sexual shenanigans as well as limits on the priest’s power to effect fidelity to Spanish custom were not uncommon in the lowlands as well.
One wishes there were more references to highlander practices. It is difficult to determine possible values and priorities amongst the highlanders. One Franciscan described Recollect missionary work in the Baler/Palanan area in the 17th century as characterized by a willingness to receive baptism if the highlanders received clothing in exchange while remaining unmotivated to exit from their “miserable state of pagan [life], being blinded by the Devil.”[83] I think that it would be simplistic to demean the possibility of sincere conversion/baptism on the one hand or paint the motives of those who approached the missionaries as simply materialistic on the other.
The documents too sometimes portray highlanders living outside of the missions as raiders, murderers, and frequent threats to the existence of the missions. Here also I wish we had more information since it seems unlikely that all or most highlanders were simply marauders and that threats against missions and populations there were either constant or completely without some sort of reason or provocation.
We see a glimpse of the complexity of highlander life and motivations in another example from this same manuscript. Around 1720 P. Fr. Vicente Inglés travelled into the highland territories of the Yzalines, accompanied by eight emissaries from that group, who had come to Baler in response to news of the priest’s intention to go into the mountains. He was taken to their settlements, and described them as pueblos (a significant word choice—see Appendix D, below) with well-proportioned and well-made houses, surrounded by extensive fields producing good yields. He eventually visited five settlements (the “pueblo” Bongabon along with the settlements of Damag, Lauang, Tambaguen, and Bongob), “all of the Yzaline nation.” The sites were inhabited not only by the pagan Yzalines but also by some 500 persons who said that they had been baptized but “now lived scattered in these territories.” The priest asked if they would welcome a resident missionary and he was told yes. Subsequently the Franciscans tried to staff these areas with one priest for the Yzalines and one for the Ylongotes, but shortages of clerical personnel short circuited that initiative.
What seems clear is that highlanders lived well and productively in the hills and mountains of the Baler/Palanan region. It is reasonable to suggest that such successful adaptation to the environment occurred elsewhere as well. We also can see that for some, perhaps many, of the highlanders exposure to Christianity and acceptance of baptism was attractive. Residence in and around the missions and Spanish pueblos apparently was not. We also saw that highland settlements were not isolated enclaves, with significant movement of individuals to and from, settlements, and fields under cultivation. Trade with the lowlands seems to have been common, suggesting that reports of constant danger and warfare from and among highlander groups were at the very least exaggerated. Just as with lowland Filipino history, the history of the uplands is complex and difficult to fully discern and appreciate. This essay suggests something of that complexity and obscurity as presented in Franciscan sources.
[1] P. Fr. Francisco José Pérez Cobos o de la Encarnación [name on the manuscript is Francisco, Pérez de los Cobos y Maestre de la Encarnación, O.F.M.], Manifiesto canónico-politico-moral en que se hace ver lo vil y precioso del presente estado de las tres missions de Puncan, Caranglan and Pantabangan y se proponen los medios que mas pueden conducer a sus mejoras en lo Cristiano y civil. Ms., 240 leaves, dated 14 September 1785, Puncan, copy provided through the courtesy of the Santa Barbara [California] Mission Archives. If referenced repeatedly in nearby portions of the text, I will use the parenthetical Pérez Cobos Manifiesto, 1785. Also see Thomas N. Headland, Why Foragers do not become Farmers: A Historical Study of a Changing Ecosystem and its effect on a Negrito Hunter-Gatherer Group in the Philippines, Ph.D. dissertation, Anthropology, University of Hawaii, May 1986, 16-17.
[2] Teodor A. Llamzon, Handbook of Philippine Language Groups (Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1978), 23-24.
[3] AFIO 89/70, Informe anónimo sobre las misiones de los Ilongotes y dirigido al P. Rosendo de la Transfiguracion y Provincia, Visitador en los Discretorios de 1780-83. Ms., sin fecha, 15ff. This could have been written by P. Fr. Francisco José Pérez Cobos o de la Encarnación as well, but since its observations and recommendations differ in key points I found it reasonable to assume it was by a different Franciscan.
[4] AFIO G/9, Tablas Capitulares, 1765-1814, ff. 117v-120, 26 May-1 June 1792. It is significant that force is not mentioned, just that Tagalog is to be energetically introduced by the mission priests.
[5] AFIO G/9, Tablas Capitulares, 1765-1814, ff. 117v-120, 26 May-1 June 1792. This seems remarkably late in the game to get around to composing such a text in Egongot. There undoubtedly were earlier scripts of key doctrinal texts. Thus we see from a letter of 20 February 1721 from Baler by P. Fr. Santiago de Jesús María, O.F.M.: “Se ha hecho doctrina y tocsohan [Tocsoan, catecismo a preguntas y respuestas] en lengua ylongot, ayudado de los sindicos de aqui y Casiguran, y un principal de ellos, que son los más capaces y peritos, así en ydioma tagálog, como en ylongot … y ay pocos aqui en Valer que simul entiendas bien las dos lenguas; pero haremos lo que pudiéramos, que servirá de báculo para otros.” [from Antolin Abad Pérez, O.F.M., and Lorenzo Pérez, O.F.M., “Los últimos de Filipinas: Tres heroes franciscanos,” Archivo Ibero-Americano, 16:63 (1956), 265-354; here, 280]. Also see p. 281 of “Los últimos” for a reference to another of his letters (14 February 1723): “porque no entienden palabra del tagálog, les hice doctrina y tocsohan, ayudado de los yndios más capazes en la lengua de Casiguran.”
[6] Antolin Abad Pérez, O.F.M., and Lorenzo Pérez, O.F.M., “Los últimos de Filipinas: Tres heroes franciscanos,” Archivo Ibero-Americano, 16:63 (1956), 265-354; here, pp. 281-282, citing a 1747 letter by P. Bernardo de Santa Rosa, O.F.M. I took some liberties with the translation and only used a small portion. The original reads “en quanto a la lengua, es una Babilonia o entremés que parece que unos descienden de Roma, otros de Ibernia, otros de Inglaterra, pues cada rancho de estos aetas tiene lengua distinta, distinto tonillo y modo, pero todos entienden la lengua tagala, que es para ellos como matriz en medio, y es precissíssimo el que aqui venga, la aprenda y tenga paciencia, como yo la é tenido en sacar bocabulario, arte, rezo, y sacar para casar y los confesionarios de nuestro charíssimo hermano y Padre Totanés todo lo á visto ya en Santa Ana (dicho Padre Totanés). Trabajoso es, pero no equivale al gozo que se tiene de que le entiendan, y es tal que puede las pláticas tagalas decirlas por el libro en lengua de Casiguran, no más que llevarlas primero y hacerse cargo de los términos y ir leyendo y traduciendo, como yo ago [sic] en las rancherías; pero esta es preciso aprenderlo, y quando no se biene el término, dexar caer el tagalog que allí estuviere y tapus.”
[7] 89/47. Padron de los que confesaron y comulgaron en la Cuaresma en los pueblos de Dibilican, Disiman y Dinar de Tan. Firma Fr. Felipe de San Ramon, o Torrejoncillo. 20 September 1737.
[8] P. Fr. Vicente Inglés, O.F.M., Informe sobre el progreso de la conversión de los indios de la provincia de Tarabas [sic]. Biblioteca Nacional (Madrid), Ms. 11,104, Papeles sobre las misiones en Filipinas s. XVII-XVIII, 700 hojas. Dated 6 July 1720. A copy. Noted in this section as BN ms., Vicente Inglés, 1720.
[9] I am not at all sure who these Dumagas were. Headland says that “The Agta are generally called ‘Dumagats’ by the lowland peoples in Aurora Province. This is a verbalized form of the Tagalog word dagat ‘ocean,’ and the term may have originally meant ‘people of the sea,’ since the Agta often live along the seacoast. The Agta have never been, however, a sea-oriented people.” Thomas N. Headland, Why Foragers do not become Farmers: A Historical Study of a Changing Ecosystem and its effect on a Negrito Hunter-Gatherer Group in the Philippines, Ph.D. dissertation, Anthropology, University of Hawaii, May 1986, 1-2. Headland is undoubtedly correct, but his Dumagats may be distinct from the Dumagas in the text, since the textual quotation speaks of residence on boats. Another source is by a Juan Roger, citing two very general sources, in his Estudio-Etnológico Comparativo de las Formas Religiosas Primitivas de las Tribus Salvajes de Filipinas (Trabajos del Instituto Bernardino de Sahagún de Antropología y Etnología, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas) (MadridL: Selecciones Gráficas, 1949), where he describes Dumagas as “Mestizas de Negritos que ocupan la costa oriental, desde Baler hacía el Norte” (42). I am inclined to follow Headland rather than Roger (and the text’s Dumagas are clearly both men and women (and children), not just Mestizas).
[10] AFIO 89/56. Lista de los Aetas y Negros, asi cristianos como catecumenos e infieles que viven en la mission de Casiguran. Fr. Bernardo de Santa Rosa. 3ff., ms., orig. 1742.
[11] AFIO 93/8, Relación del P. Matias de Valdesoto misionero en Lagonoy acerca de los infieles bautizados y visitas del Monte Ysarog. San Francisco de Naga, 20 April 1702. The Spanish text reads Muchos ay mestisos, de yndio y negrito, mas como tiran mas de yndio ya Negrito asi en el Color como en el pelo, y es dificultosso averiguar quales y quantos son estos ….
[12] AFIO 17/143. P. Juan Rino de Brozas, O.F.M. Minuta de carta al P. Juan de Fogueras. Santa Ana, 17 August 1745. Posdata, Paete, 23 May 1746 (which is where this quotation came from). I have taken some liberties with the translation. Here is the original text: En los Montes de estas Islas se mantienen nuestras seis Misiones, hacienda el fruto que se puede segun la posibilidad, y estado de estas gentes, y no se dexa de adelantar lo vastante, si bien por la poca estabilidad de estas naturales de el monte, tan presto parecen, quando ya se vuelven a desparecer, por que en nada tienen permanencia, pero siempre se logra mucho.”
[13] AFIO 89/61. Carta de Fr. Juan de Ocaña al Provincial P. Alejandro Ferrer, dandole cuenta del estado de las misiones. Baler, 6 March 1754. 1 fol., ms., orig.
[14] AFIO 89/60. Certificación de Fr. Bernardo de Santa Rosa de administración de sacramentos. Casiguran, 10 March 1745. 1 fol., ms., orig.
[15] AFIO 89/85, Casignan, Oficio a su matriz Baler, sobre la fuga de varios individuos de este pueblo a los montes. Mss., varios papeles sin firma, 2ff., 1809.
[16] AFIO 7/38. Informe al Rey sobre el descubrimiento de las nuevas misiones … en los montes de Baler. Ms., [no day given] July 1754, ff. 1-1v.
[17] AFIO 7/5. Informe al Rey sobre la conveniencia de la conversion de los infieles. Ms., 30 May 1680.
[18] AFIO 7/24. Informe al Gobernador sobre reducción de indios a poblado, escrito por Fr. Vicente Inglés. Ms., 21 February 1732, f. 3. My translation is a bit loose; the original text reads: “… Las Vejaciones que pretestan los Indios para no ser reducidos a sus Pueblos, unas son Verdaderas, y otros falsas; y todos nacen de la native repugnancia que tienen a Vivir como racionales; porque como miran con especial aversion quanto se opone de su Viciosa libertad, aglomeran daños, sentimientos, y quejas, deseosos de mantenerse en la possesión de los que gustan. ….”
[19] AFIO 93/9. Monte Ysarog. Petición del P. Fr. Baltasar de los Reyes, Procurador para que se nombro gobernadorcillo en Mangiring [sic] por tener ya 120 casas. Dirigido al Governador Francisco Valdes Tamón. Manila, 4 February 1733. Part of the original reads “pues la experiencia a dado a entender, que siempre que se les trata de esta material se han buelto ausentar a lo interior de el Monte.”
[20] AFIO 97/51. Expediente seguido por el P. Procurador sobre el estipendio de la mission de Lupi y Ragay de Camarines. Varios papeles. Son copias. 1767. 10ff. By the mid-1760s the Moro threat there seems to have abated.
[21] Eusebio Gómez Platero, O.F.M., Catálogo biográfico de los Religiosos Franciscanos de la Provincia de San Gregorio Magno de Filipinas desde 1577 en que llegaron los primeros a Manila hasta los de nuestros días (Manila: Colegio de Santo Tomás, 1880. 813pp.), 580-581 [P. Fr. Bartolomé Pichardo] and 603 [P. Fr. Agustin Cremades].
[22] AFIO 92/31, P. Fr. José Casañas, Misiones Comisario Provincial, Relación de las ordines dadas por el Alcalde Don Fermin de Zaldivar e informe de las misiones del Isarog, refiere sus progresos desde su fundación hasta dicho año. Isarog, 24 January 1775. Ms., 8ff.: 1757, no se hizo liquidacion por la peste, por los moros y por haberse ido todo de Himoragat….
[23] Huerta, 1865, 280-283; and AFIO 89/30, Padron de bautizos y adminisracion de sacramentos sacado de interrogatorio verbal por haberse quemado [sic] los libros de la parroquia. Por Fr. José de S. Rafael. Ms., original, 1736. Very fragile. Also see AFIO Also of some relevance are AFIO 89/34, 89/35, and AFIO 89/37; as is the Franciscan manuscript quoted in Antolín Abad [Pérez], O.F.M. and Lorenzo Pérez, O.F.M., “Los últimos de Filipinas: tres heroes franciscanos” (Archivo Ibero-Americano, 16:63 (1956), 265-354), 285-286.
[24] AFIO 89/31, Certificacion de Fr. Lucas de la Resurrecion de administracion de sacramentos en las misiones de Baler. Umirey, 8 September 1737. 1 folio, ms., original.
[25] Simarrones seems to mean remontados, lowlanders who had fled or moved to the mountains and missions there. Apostatas would be those who were baptized into Christianity but who subsequently no longer participated in church ceremonies and obligations.
[26] “… se han reducido a el gremio de la Yglesia, desde el año proximo pasado de [1709] … y queda Campo abierto para innumerables.”
[27] This is for the period September 1719 to January 1720.
[28] AFIO 89/33. Carta del P. Santiago de Jesus Maria, misionero de Baler dandole cuenta de los sacramentos administrados, y bautizados en Umirey. Baler, 22 August 1720. 1 fol., ms., orig. These Ilongotes were said to have killed and beheaded an enemy from Cagayan two days before the priest arrived. A quotation from a manuscript of 1 July 1721 and reprinted in Antolin Abad [Pérez], O.F.M. and Lorenzo Pérez, O.F.M., “Los últimos de Filipinas: Tres heroes franciscanos” (Archivo Ibero-Americano, 16:63 (1956), 265-354, here p. 281, reports that the smallpox was fairly widespread and “many” had fled from some of the Baler/Palanan mission sites to the mountains.
[29] AFIO 89/56. Lista de los Aetas y Negros, asi cristianos como catecumenos e infieles que viven en la mission de Casiguran. Fr. Bernardo de Santa Rosa. 3ff., ms., orig. 1742.
[30] Antolin Abad Pérez, O.F.M., and Lorenzo Pérez, O.F.M., “Los últimos de Filipinas: tres heroes franciscanos,” Archivo Ibero-Americano, 16:63 (1956), 265-354; here, p. 281.
[31] Philippine National Archive, Ereccion de Pueblos, Camarines Sur, 1791-1891. Exp. 2, ff. 25-50b: Expediente creado a presentacion del Provincial de San Francisco, paraque se erija en pueblo la Mision de Goa, situada en el Monte de Isarog. 1803-1807, f. 33 and f. 47, respectively.
[32] AFIO 93/8. Relación del P. Matias de Valdesoto misionero en Lagonoy acerca delos infieles bautizados y Visitas del Monte Ysarog. San Francisco de Naga, 20 April 1702, ff. 4v-5. Relación de Fr. Matias de Valdesoto acerca de los bautismos. The text refers to a hermano Berne de Jesus Religiosso Donado who has been doing the teaching of the Doctrina in Tigaon while the Franciscan worked in Manguirin. The relevant text reads “El herm[an]o Berne[sic] de Jesus Religiosso Donado, que en ausencia mia a estado aqui enseñandoles la Doctrina Christiana y Misterios de nra. Santa fe, desde el mes de diciembre proximo pasado, los pusso [sic] en lista. Cuya lista contiene dos cientos y diez y seis. Los mas de ellos son Negritos, gente tan Barbara y enemiga de poblado como en esta tierra es notorio, por cuya caussa [sic] no los puede aun contar por Convertidos.”
[33] AFIO 93/14. Informe al Alcalde mayor de Camarines sobre los indios fugitivos de Lagonoy. Salog, 17 October 1753. Orig., ms., 2ff. Dated in 1753 but the figures given are for 1751.
[34] AFIO 93/15. Informe de Fr. José Hervas, sobre los indios fugitivos de Lagonoy al Alcalde mayor de Camarines. Santa Clara de Isarog, 18 October 1753. Ms., 1 fol.
[35] AFIO 92/31. P. Fr. José Casañas, Misiones Comisario Provincial, Relación de las ordines dadas por el Alcalde Don Fermin de Zaldivar e informe de las misiones del Isarog, refiere sus progresos desde su fundación hasta dicho año. Isarog, 24 January 1775. Ms., 8ff. There is a copy of this. It numbers barely six folio pages. I worked with the copy.
[36] AFIO 89/39. Dipaculao, San José, Lauang, Umirey, Damas. Estado personal de las misiones citadas.
Por Fr. Juan de Ocaña. Firm Fr. Manuel de S. Agustin. Undated. The archivist P. Gil dated it as 1735
but there is a dated reference in the manuscript from 25 April 1753.
[37] Half of the 280 Aetas “more or less are pagans who reside on the seashores of Ybonau, Dingalan, and
other beaches … with many others hidden in the thickets in the mountains.”
[38] Quotation from a manuscript of 1 July 1721 and reprinted in Antolin Abad [Pérez], O.F.M. and Lorenzo
Pérez, O.F.M., “Los últimos de Filipinas: tres heroes franciscanos” (Archivo Ibero-Americano, 16:63 (1956),
265-354, here p. 281.
[39] Cayetano Sánchez Fuertes, O.F.m., “Estado de las Misiones Franciscanas en Filipinas, 1751.” Missionalia Hispanica, 42 (1985), 141-162—originally from ff. 79-114v of a manuscript with a report forwarded by the Governor General of the Philippines, Don José Obando, informing the King of Spain of the populations of the Islands: Testimonio autentico de los informes que dieron los Illmos. Sres. Obispos sufragáneos y prelados regulares sobre los curas y Ministerios de doctrina de estas Islas, pueblos y doctrinas de su cargo, sus situaciones y Naturales de sus habitantes. The Franciscan material was forwarded by the Provincial, P. Fr. Ysidro de la Santíssima Trinidad, with a cover letter to the Archbishop of Manila dated 2 May 1751.
[40] AFIO 101/9. Exposicion del Procurador P. Fr. Pedro Pascual al Cabildo de Manila sobre misiones de la Provincia. Sin fecha [1798], 6ff.
[41] AFIO 5/27. Decreto fijando los puntos que se han de observer para la Ereccion de la Provincia de Nueva Ecija. Balanga, 25 April 1801, ff. 6v-7.
[42] Museo Naval, Madrid, Spain. Ms. 2316, Doc. 10, 1832-noviembre-15-Bongaban. Descripción de la provincia de Nueva Ecija, en las islas Filipinas, por Dionisio Gómez. Copia literal de la copia de la Colección Enrile que en muy mal estado se conserva en el Ms. Fols. 92-108; here, ff. 100-101.
[43] Museo Naval, Ms. 135, Doc. 7: 1792. Diario de la expedición de Pineda desde Manila a la zona norte de Luzón. Descripción detallada de este region y sus habitantes, f. 397.
[44] P. Fr. Francisco José Pérez Cobos o de la Encarnación [name on the manuscript is Francisco, Pérez de los Cobos y Maestre de la Encarnación, O.F.M.], Manifiesto canónico-politico-moral en que se hace ver lo vil y precioso del presente estado de las tres missions de Puncan, Caranglan and Pantabangan y se proponen los medios que mas pueden conducer a sus mejoras en lo Cristiano y civil. Ms., 240 leaves, dated 14 September 1785, Puncan, copy provided through the courtesy of the Santa Barbara [California] Mission Archives. Ff. 97-100.
[45] AFIO 93/17. Carta del P. Fr. Alejandro Ferrer, Provincial, al alcalde mayor de Camarines sobre el Expediente de Manguirin.
Cambio a Himoragat efectuada por Fr. José Esteban Gascueña sin autorizaciones. Sapa, 23 February 1756. 2ff.
Informe sobre puntos principals acerca de la traslación de Manguirin a Himoragat. Ms., 1756.
Carta de Don Fernando Caraveo al Provincial P. Alejandro Ferrer, sobre cambio de Manguirin a Himoragat. Manila, 7 February 1756.
Carta del Provincial P. Alejandro Ferrer al P. Juan de Taracena sobre Lagonoy y Manguirin y su
cambio a Himoragat. Santa Ana de Sapa, 18 February 1756.
Carta del P. Juan de Taracena al Provincial P. Alejandro Ferrer sobre cambio de Manguirin a
Himoragat. Manila, February 1756. This is the manuscript primarily used in the text above.
[46] Trade in all goods from the lowlands might have occurred, even in firearms, as this 1792 Franciscan decree suggests, without unfortunately giving detail on who, when, where this exchange might have taken place:
“It is determined and decreed … that the missionaries are to dutifully impede, hinder and forbid in whatever way permissible Yndios from other pueblos selling offensive weapons to the pagans in order to forestall so many deaths and other damages that follow from [such access].” AFIO G/9, Tablas Capitulares, 1765-1814, ff. 117v-120, 26 May-1 June 1792.
[47] AFIO 93/20. Monte Ysarog, Informe de Fr. Manuel de los Santos sobre las misiones de Ysarog. Manguirin,
28 April 1776. Carta del Provincial José Casañes pidiendo el informe. Naga, 23 April 1776.
[48] AFIO 93/20. Informe sobre las misiones de Isarog. Manguirin, 28 April 1776. Acompaña carta del Comisario Provincial Fr. José Casañes pidiendole el informe. Naga, 23 April 1776. The writer suggests that there was resentment by highlanders in how they are treated and the prices they receive by the traders in Lagonoy, but unfortunately there is no more information on what might have been an important sub-theme: conflict and
friction between traders in the different ecological zones.
[49] Museo Naval, Madrid, Spain. Ms. 2316, Doc. 10, 1832-noviembre-15-Bongaban. Descripción de la provincia de Nueva Ecija, en las islas Filipinas, por Dionisio Gómez. Copia literal de la copia de la Colección Enrile que en muy mal estado se conserva en el Ms. (Fols. 92-108; here, f. 104.
[50] Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid. Ms. 11,014, ff. 614-623: Vincente Inglés, O.F.M., Informe sobre el progreso de la conversion de los indios de la isla de Tarabas [sic]. Manila, 6 July 1720. Ms., [11] ff. —listed as having 10 folios, but one of the numbers on the folios is duplicated, leading to the undercount – here, ff. 621v-622. The information based on first-hand recollections would have been based on his two trips to the area in 1718-1719 (ff. 621v-622).
[51] Museo Naval, Madrid, Spain. Ms. 2316, Doc. 10, 1832-noviembre-15-Bongaban. Descripción de la provincia de Nueva Ecija, en las islas Filipinas, por Dionisio Gómez. Copia literal de la copia de la Colección Enrile que en muy mal estado se conserva en el Ms. (Fols. 92-108; here, ff. 105-106.
[52] Museo Naval, Madrid, Spain. Ms. 2316, Doc. 10, 1832-noviembre-15-Bongaban. Descripción de la provincia de Nueva Ecija, en las islas Filipinas, por Dionisio Gómez. Copia literal de la copia de la Colección Enrile que en muy mal estado se conserva en el Ms. (Fols. 92-108; here, f. 104). The Spanish text reads: Los habitantes de Baler compran por medio de los ilongotes cristianos de Dipaculao la cera y tabaco que acopian las demás rancherias en cambio de ropas, palay y bolos cuyos articulos expenden a Polillo y Binangonan retornando vino de Nipa y géneros.
[53] One might also look at Thomas N. Headland, Why Foragers do not become Farmers: A Historical Study of a Changing Ecosystem and its effect on a Negrito Hunter-Gatherer Group in the Philippines, Ph.D. dissertation, Anthropology, University of Hawaii, May 1986, 9 and 172-225, where he explores the sketchy evidence for trade contacts between Agta and lowlanders in the Casiguran region. Also see Laura Lee Junker, Raiding, Trading, and Feastings. The Political Economy of Philippine Chiefdoms (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1999), 242-259.
[54] Museo Naval, Mdrid, Spain, Ms. 135, Doc. 7: 1792. Diario de la expedición de Pineda desde Manila a la zona norte de Luzón. Descripción detallada de este region y sus habitantes. Ff. 369-484; here, f. 397: “Son de Genio [these “Ylongotes”] muy negative enemigos capitals de los aetas a los quales destruyen quando los encuentran.”
[55] AFIO 89/33. Carta del P. Santiago de Jesus Maria, misionero de Baler dandole cuenta de los sacramentos administrados, y bautizados en Umirey. Baler, 22 August 1720. 1 fol., ms., orig.
[56] Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid. Ms. 11,014, ff. 614-623: Vincente Inglés, O.F.M., Informe sobre el progreso de la conversion de los indios de la isla de Tarabas [sic]. Manila, 6 July 1720. Ms., [11] ff.—listed as having 10 folios, but one of the numbers on the folios is duplicated, leading to the undercount—ff. 621v-622.
[57] AFIO 89/39. Dipaculao, San José, Lauang, Umirey, Damas. Estado personal de las misiones citadas. Por Fr. Juan de Ocaña. Firm Fr. Manuel de S. Agustin. Undated. The archivist P. Gil dated it as 1735 but this section has a dated reference from 25 April 1753.
[58] Museo Naval, Madrid, Spain. Ms. 2316, Doc. 10, 1832-noviembre-15-Bongaban. Descripción de la provincia de Nueva Ecija, en las islas Filipinas, por Dionisio Gómez. Copia literal de la copia de la Colección Enrile que en muy mal estado se conserva en el Ms. (Fols. 92-108; here, f. 1.
[59] P. Fr. Francisco José Pérez Cobos o de la Encarnación [name on the manuscript is Francisco, Pérez de los Cobos y Maestre de la Encarnación, O.F.M.], Manifiesto canónico-politico-moral en que se hace ver lo vil y precioso del presente estado de las tres missions de Puncan, Caranglan and Pantabangan y se proponen los medios que mas pueden conducer a sus mejoras en lo Cristiano y civil. Ms., 240 leaves, dated 14 September 1785, Puncan, copy provided through the courtesy of the Santa Barbara [California] Mission Archives, p. 165.
[60] AFIO 19/32. P. Fr. Alejandro Ferrer, Carta al Rdmo. De Nueva España. Manila, 12 July 1754, f. 1v. There is a brief reference as well to a 1758 rebellion [sublevación] by Ilongotes in Nueva Ecija [Pampanga alta] in Lorenzo Perez, O.F.M., Informe del P. Francisco Antonio Maceyra sobre varios puntos de los que convendría tratar en el Concilio provincial de Manila,” Archivo Ibero-Americano, 30 (1928), 375-397; here, 375. Details are not given.
[61] AFIO 89/57. Carta del P. José Jimenez al Provincial P. Alejandro Ferrer, dandole cuenta del estado de la mission. Casiguran, 14 July 1755. 2ff., ms., orig. (f. 1v).
[62] Archivo de la Provincia del Santo Rosario, University of Santo Tomas, Manila, Tomo 4, Doc. 18: Relación del Descubrimiento, y Entrado de los Religiosos de N. S. P. S. Francisco de la Apostólica Provincia de S. Gregorio de las islas Philipinas en los Pueblos, o Rancherias de los Montes altos de Baler, en la Contracosta de dichas islas. Printed, 17pp., June 1754. Based upon a report to the Franciscan Provincial by P. Fr. Manuel de Jesus María Fermoselle [P. Fr. Manuel Ramos de Jesús y Maria]. Pages 1-7 are made up of a letter to the Franciscan Provincial by P. Fr. Manuel de San Agustin, dated 25 February 1754, Baler; pp. 7-10 are a letter to the same person, dated 9 March 1754, written by P. Fr. Manuel de Jesus Maria, Fermoselle, and he has another pp. 10-11, dated 21 May 1754; and a third one, pp. 11-16, dated 25 May 1754 (which has the reference involving the settlement of Pugu). Also see AFIO 89/71, Relación del descubrimiento y entrada de los religiosos de N. P. S. Francisco … en los pueblos o Rancherias de los Montes altos de Baler, en la contra costa de la Isla de Luzon. Imp. En Orihuela, 1756. 30pp.
[63] AFIO 145/1, P. Fr. Casimiro Pitarque, [comp.], Resoluciones y conferencias morales propuestas por varios Presidentes, en diferentes conventos de la Provincia de San Gregorio. Ms., bound vol., 593pp., multiple items; for instance pp. 206 and 207, taken from pp. 205-215, 9 August 1751, “Ynforme, que sobre la Visita, que hize de las Missiones de los Montes, ofrezco a N. C. H. Provincial [P.] Fr. Juan Rino de Brozas, para que con facilidad pueda tener presente el estado actual de las dichas Missiones, y el que puede esperarse en adelante.”
[64] Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid. Ms. 11,014, ff. 614-623: Vincente Inglés, O.F.M., Informe sobre el progreso de la conversion de los indios de la isla de Tarabas [sic]. Manila, 6 July 1720. Ms., [11] ff.; here, f. 618v.
[65] From a manuscript that now appears to be lost there is a rather unspecific reference to attacks not only against “new Christians” but also against a Franciscan, the Father Juan Beltran mentioned immediately below in the text: “en los primeros años, al ver los misioneros la docilidad con que se les presentaban los habitantes del bosque, fueron contrarios a que se protegiesen las misiones con fuerza armada; pero bien proto la experiencia los demostró la necesidad de domeñar los instintos feroces de aquellas razas que, llevadas de sus antiguas enemistades y de sus costumbres paganas, con frecuencia hicieron victimas de sus instintos sanguineos a los que se habían acogido a la sombra de la cruz, por lo que, a ruegos de los mismos misioneros, el Gobernador del Archipiélago ordenó, en 14 de marzo de 1759, que el Cabo del presidio de Bahay protegiera a los misioneros Franciscanos siempre que pidiesen auxilio. En 26 de mayo de 1766 decretó la Provincia de San Gregorio, en vista de las continuas Matanzas que los infieles hacían entre los cristianos, con peligro de la vida de los mismos misioneros, pedir al Gobierno un destacamento de soldados para que protegiesen aquellas nuevas cristiandades; pero, por la escasez del element military, no pudo el Gobernador General complacer a los misioneros. En 2 de octubre de 1770 asesinaron los Ilongotes al misionero de Tabueyon, Fray Juan Beltrán, en la ranchería de Cabiganan, y en 21 de noviembre de 1775 ordenó la Provincia que, en atención a la poca seguridad que en el interior del Caraballo tenían los misioneros, y en vista de que los ilongotes, cansados de la vida tranquila de los pueblos, se retiraban a sus antiguas viviendas de los bosques, se replegaran los misioneros a Baler, Binatangan y San José de Casignan, encargándoles que desde estos pueblos hicieran periódicamente sus excursions a las misiones abandonadas.” Informe del estado de las Misiones de baler, por el Padre Juan Sardón, fechado en 1789. Ms. del AP. [former name of AFIO, when the archive was located at Pastrana, Spain], sig. 38-3. Published by Antolín Abad [Pérez], O.F.M.; and Lorenzo Pérez, O.F.M., “Los Últimos de Filipinas: tres heroes franciscanos,” Archivo Ibero-Americvano, 16:63 (1956), 283-284. There is also a mention of threats against P. Fr. Pablo Gimenez around 1720 in the Baler/Palanan region (Pérez Cobos Manifiesto, 1785, f. 620v.
[66] Eusebio Gómez Platero, O.F.M., Catálogo biográfico de los Religiosos Franciscanos de la Provincia de San Gregorio Magno de Filipinas desde 1577 en que llegaron los primeros a Manila hasta los de nuestros días ( Manila: Colegio de Santo Tomás, 1880), 475-476: … celebrada la primera misa en la mision de Tigaon y emprendiendo el viaje para la de Sangay para celebrar la segunda misa, á la mitad del camino le dispararon sus flechas unos infieles emboscados y cayó herido de muerte huyendo los agresores preciptadamente … y su cadáver fué sepultado en la iglesia de Tigaon, donde yacen sus restos venerables….”
[67] Gómez Platero, op. cit., 538: fué destinado a la mision de Casignan en 768, á la de Tabueyo en 769 trabajando con infatigable celo por la redencion y conversion de los infieles por espacio de once meses, al cabo de los cuales asaltaron una noche, 1 de Octubre de 1770, su casa de nipa y al amanecer del dia dos le asaetaron los infieles de la rancheria de Cabiganan; al sentirse herido saltó por ua ventana perdiendo un brazo al golpe de un campilan ó machete que le descargaron al caer, y arrastrandose y todo desangrado llegó, hasta la cruz del frente de la iglesia y arrodillado y pronunciando los dulcisimos nombres de Jesus y María espiró á los golpes que aun alli le dieron y cortandole la cabeza se la llevaron al monte con infernal algazara; los fieles de Tabueyon dieron sepultura al cadáver, pero á los cuatro dias volvieron los infieles y sacandole de la sepultura se ensañaron en él haciendole menudos trozos….”
[68] 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), 566-567.
[69] Ibid., 566-567: “… el dia 21 de Noviembre de 1775 fué preciso retirar al misionero por haberse marchado todos.”
[70] Museo Naval, Madrid, Spain. Ms. 2316, Doc. 10, 1832-noviembre-15-Bongaban. Descripción de la provincia de Nueva Ecija, en las islas Filipinas, por Dionisio Gómez. Copia literal de la copia de la Colección Enrile que en muy mal estado se conserva en el Ms. Fols. 92-108. He mentions as well (f. 105) that along the road from Baler to Casiguran there were Aetas who would kill Christians unless the Christians went in armed groups of fiftenn or twenty.
[71] “ ‘Ibilaos’ was a name that Christian peoples in the valleys (particularly Isinays) gave to Ilongots. It is not a self-designation and is taken by Ilongots as a slur.” Renato I. Rosaldo, “Viewed from the Valleys: Five names for Ilongots, 1645-1969,” Papers in Anthropology, 19: 1 (Spring 1978), 6. No offense intended.
[72] If this is San José del Monte, the coadjutor with have been non-Franciscan at this time since the Franciscan rosters list it was “Vacant” from 1811 through 1832, except when it was not listed at all (1825, 1831, 1832). Franciscans of course were not allowed to own cattle or similar property. Ownership of the rustled cattle does not of course necessarily mean that the cattle were stolen because a priest owned them, or even that the rustlers knew who owned them.
[73] AFIO 93/21, Informe del P. Fr. Gines Antonio Fernandez sobre las misiones de Ysarog. Goa, 14 May 1776, 4ff.; here, f. 1.
[74] Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid. Ms. 11,014, ff. 614-623: Vincente Inglés, O.F.M., Informe sobre el progreso de la conversion de los indios de la isla de Tarabas [sic]. Manila, 6 July 1720. Ms., [11] f. 617.
[75] Antolín Abad [Pérez], O.F.M.; and Lorenzo Pérez, O.F.M., “Los últimos de Filipinas: Tres heroes franciscanos.” Archivo Ibero-Americano, 16:63 (1956), 265-354; here p. 276. The longer, original Spanish (with the article’s authors’ editorial comments) reads: “En caunto a los dumagas que habitan desde este pueblo (Dinalongang) hasta Baler, es la más vil canalla que Dios a criado desde Mautan hasta Cagayan: pues yo he visto y hablado a quantos aetas a desde Vinangonan [sic] hasta Baler y desde este pueblo hasta Palanan; ellos salen a los indios y se alegran de ver a los Padres; pero éstos que ay habitan desde este pueblo hasta Baler, no pareze sino que el diablo tiene allí su silla, especialmente en una ensenadilla que se llama Dinariauan, pues éstos son matadors si los ay; ellos los capotes de los ylongotes grandes maganiteros [4. Maganiteros, partidarios de los idolos. Los tagalos llamaban maganito al escultor o pintor de idolos, y en algunas regions Filipinas se daba este nombre a los sacerdotes de los idolos.] y sobervios y banos; éstos, los que alborotan todo este contorno , ¿no lo an de alborotar?, pues piden ellos por dote una cabeza; si muere alguno, han de matar; si alguno cae malo, que les dieron veneno, etc., y por tales cosas es penosíssima esta travesía que ay desde Casiguran a Baler, pues es precis over el tiempo que no ayga si puede ser, detención en una noche y dos dias o al contrario.”
[76] PNA. Patronato. Unclassified—1864-1867, Sobre creación de una Misión en el pueblo de Goa provincia de Camarines Sur.
[77] My translation is a bit loose. Here is the original: ¿Se quierra que el Misionero recora todos los faldos del monte, é intente la conversion de los visitas citadas? Entonces fuera de los disgustos y perturbacion que acarrearia su inmistion en la jurisdiccion y territorio de las antiguas misiones, en que estan enclavadas las visitas, pronto sucumbiria al esceso y fatiga del trabajo, no podria recorrer esas visitas sino alguna ves al año; en los meses de grandes collas no podria salir del contro de la mission, y aun asi ni hay salud, ni robustez en Filipinas que baste para llevar ese genero de vida, si ha de durar el tiempo bastante para dar resultados positivos. ….
[78] Huerta (1865), passim, gives the number of almas for these 3 missions as 5,409 (Goa), 2,395 (Tigaon), and 2,148 (Sangay).
[79] AFIO 89/65. Carta de Fr. Pedro de la Cruz al Provincial dandole cuenta del estado de las misiones. Casiguran, 28 March 1721. Ms., 2ff.
[80] AFIO 89/55. Lista de los negritos cristianos que viven en Langotan y Casiguran. 1 fol., sin fecha, ni firma. 1742.
[81] 89/30. Padron de bautizos y administracion de sacramentos sacado de interrogatorio verbal por haberse quemado [no, destroyed by flood] los libros de la parroquia. Por Fr. José de S. Rafael. Ms., orig., 1736. Very fragile.
[82] AFIO 89/58. Carta del P. Francisco Remigio al Provincial P. Alejandro Ferrer. Casiguran, 23 August 1755. 1 fol., ms., orig. The most relevant part of the original Spanish text reads: …tuve noticia como un individuo de este Pueblo [sic] de Casiguran, y Capitan Pasado ha vivido y vive malamente por tener a su disposicion tres mugeres naturales de dicho pueblo: le llame, y las llame para hacerles cargo, y solo una se declara que fue tentado varias veces pero …. In fact he heard from a credible source that the man had threatened to poison the priest.
[83] Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid. Ms. 11,014, ff. 614-623: Vincente Inglés, O.F.M., Informe sobre el progreso de la conversion de los indios de la isla de Tarabas [sic]. Manila, 6 July 1720. Ms., [11] ff.; here, f. 617v.