Parte Natural of Alzina's Manuscript of 1668 a Source of Anthropological Data¥
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PARTE NATURAL OF ALZINA'S MANUSCRIPT OF 1668 A SOURCE OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL DATA¥ GERALD RIXHON OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE PHILIPPINES' PAST, THANKS TO the work of dedicated archeologists, is growing every day. With the analysis of the painstaking but rewarding finds of Palawan as well as those from Novaliches, Calatagan, Pangasinan, and Sta. Aria, Manila, many prehistoric and proto-historic gaps are slowly being fillecl. These are but the first scenes of a larger spectacle, the epic of a nation un- folding before our eyes. The anthropologist is not a collector of artifacts, nor is he a grave digger. His interest lies in people and their way of life. Even 'when he deals with material culture traits, he does so in order to uncover some of the technological and ritual aspects of a people's culture. Although, in this task, he is often unaided by written documents - as in the case of pre-hispanic Philippines - he will welcome them to supplement and hopefully corroborate those "unwritten" documents with which he works and through which the Philippines' prehistoric past so far has partly revealed itself. With the advent of the Spanish conquest, written documents ap- peared. Most of these early writings are reports from colonists to Spa- nish or ecclesiastical authorities. Though limited by their scope and ethnocentrism, they are the only remaining witnesses of a turning point in the history of the Philippines; as such they are essential to the under- l>tanding of the cultural changes brought about by Spain in this part of the world. For the anthropologist, these are precious documents which in due time should contribute to a "text-aided archeology" (Hawkes 1954: 158) and advance our understanding of the Philippines' history. Travelogues, missionary letters, and reports provide material for com- parison and serve to some extent, as a check on the development of theory and the elaboration of types so important to the archeologist. To Hawkes (wid.: 158), this comparison will not rest on its practitioner's own theory as in the "text-free" archeology. it rests on textual statements guaranteeing that there were such types, standardized and varying only in detail, in the historic cultures concerned. Moving to the sixteenth and later centuries, Philippine Archeology has to deal with the type of documents which, through their judicious * I am grateful to Mrs. Martha Woodhams for help in editing this article and to Miss Violeta Peralta for assistance in translating several Spanish texts. 183 184 ASIAN STUDIES use, should shed light on the ideological context of the .material culture uncovered and on some of the patterns of behavior the artifacts cannot possibly reveal even indirectly. Historical reconstructions, the domain of the archeologist, require that no stone be left unturned until a com- plete picture is obtained. This means a painstaking analysis of all avail- ble documents . When he studies the seventeenth cemury and the immediate pre- colonization period of the Visayas, the anthropologist cannot ignore one of the most complete records that exists, Alzina's manuscript of 1668, Historia de las islas e indios de Bisayas. The purpose of this article is to discuss the authenticity and validity of the manuscript's first part, Parte Natural, as a source of anthropological data, at least in the Munoz version made available by the Philippine Studies Program of the Uni- versity of Chicago.1 Mter touching • on the historiography of the docu- mi:mt, we shall investigate with the use of the text itself Alzina's com- petence as an observer of the Visayan scene. I. Historiography of the Alzina Manuscript Fortunately, a good deal of the document's historiography has been undertaken by two scholars connected with the Philippine Studies Pro- gram of the University of Chicago. Hester reviewed ( 1962) the biblio- graphical notes and references made to the three extant copies of the document, one found in the Munoz Collection, another referred to as the Lenox text, and the third called the Ateneo copy. Following Hester, Lietz related (1962) how he traced the location of the original and of the copies and their movements. The original of Part One "thus far .. has .not been located" (ibid.: 368). All we have of it is a copy Munoz carefully made in 1784. The two other copies that were made, the San Cugat or Ateneo copy and the Lenox copy apparently "a later and more careless copy" (ibid.) were not available for this study. Of the Munoz version, Lietz stated (ibid.: 375) that "there are grounds for confidence that this version is a true copy . There is meanwhile a continuing search tor further threads in this in- triguing web of evidence." This version is found in the Biblioteca de Palacio, Madrid, where a microfilm copy was made on which this ar- ticle is based. Part one alone interests us here since Part Two deals C:'xclusively with the preaching of the Gospel. With confidence that our text is an authentic copy of the 1668 manuscript, we may proceed to evaluate Alzina;s work as a contribution to an ethnography of the seventeenth century Visayas. Following some· biographical notes, a study of Alzina's methodology - in particular of his objectivity .in recording the data and the limitations inherent to his 1 At the 1ime this was written, Part Two of the manuscript, Parte Sobrenatural, was not available. ALZINA'S MANUSCRIPT OF 1668 185 station in life - will help to assess its potential usefulness for anthro- pologists. II. The Author and His Purpose In evaluating written work, a critic must place it in its proper context. Redfield offers the remark (1962: 150) that a written account of a community is something like the community itself: to understand it one needs to take the inside view of it. Of the published study, the inside view is the author's view. Getting this view requires a knowledge of the author,· the main events of his life, his attitudes towards the people, and his stated pur- pose in writing his observations. 1. Alzina Francisco Ignacio de Alzina was born in Spain "around the year 1609."2 He joined the Society of Jesus when he was fourteen. As a Jesuit priest, he was sent to the Philippines and reached Manila in 1632. Two years later, he was assigned to the Visayan Islands, where he took residence first in "Ybabao" as he calls Eastern Samar.3 There he imme- <liately "started studying the language of the place and succeeded in mastering it to such an extent that he thought he knew it better than six others he had used and spoken before."4 In the span of twenty four years, he relates, he had managed to draw up a list of about twenty thousand words of Visayan.5 His fluency m the language is manifested by his detailed knowledge of terms for such things as the· variations of the kasin game - for which he counted more than thirty different terms "which are not used for anything else;" it is on this occasion that he notes the "incomparable richness of the language" and "the assiduity needed to learn it well."6 He also care- fully took note whenever terms for the same denotatum differed from place to place.7 His knowledge, he candidly admitted, was consider- able and allowed him to preach freely and even write a Manual de De- vocion in Visayan.s 2 Lietz quotes (1962:869) a note that Munoz wrote on the copy he was making of Alzina's manuscript. s Alzina: 4,2, 17-18. The references are made to the transcription of the microfihn of the Spanish text, found in the Biblioteca de Palacio, Madrid, made by Victor Baltazar, Philippine Studies Program, Universities of Chicago. The first number refers to the book, the second to the chapter, and the third to the pages. 4 See footnote 2. · 5 Ibid.: -8, 1, 10. 6 Ibid.: 4, 9, 144: "la abundancia sin igual de esta lingua que para burlas i veras para juegos i cosas severas tienen nombres proprios i solos para esto; i en el juego que dijimos de los trompos que ellos llaman Casin, i de hai al corazon de hombres o animales porque es casi de aquella hechura llaman CasinCasin tienen mas de 80. palabras proprias i distantas de aquel juego que no sirven para otros, i lo mismo es de los otros, que cierto es cosa rara i que denota lo mucho que hai que aprender para saberla bien.' . 7 For example, ibid. 4, 12, 184-5 and· 4, 18, 210 and 214. 8 Ibid.: 8, l, 10. See also Lietz 1962:867, with the accompanying footnote 8. 186 ASIAN STUDIES His work, that of a missionary and later of a vice-provincial, took him through almost all the pueblos of the Visayas. 9 In a long letter written in 1660 he told one of his superiors in Rome " . we are al- ways on the move, carrying houses on our backs like the tortoise . ."10 This, nevertheless, did not deter him from making notes of his observa- tions: From the beginning he made use of whatever time his apostolate spared him, to study the natural. and moral history ( "historia natural i moral") of the place . Finding some rest in the midst of his worries, he set out to put in order his innumerable notes which he had been forever working on... (Lietz 1962:369)11 This resulted in the Ilistoria de las Islas e Indios de Bisayas ( 1668). A real mine of details on the fatma, flora, and the culture of the Visayas, its transcription by Baltazar covers 1,485 double-spaced typewritten pages.12 And this is just Part one, "Parte Natural." Father Alzina's concern went far beyond .that of a mere chronicler.