Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VANDOO
IT IS ALSO LIKELY THEY TOOK HIS HEAD SO A KAMPILIAN WOULD ALSO SERVE WELL FOR THAT. IS THERE ANY MENTION OF THEM TAKEING HIS HEAD OR IF MAGELLANS ENTIRE BODY WAS RECOVERED.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VANDOO
THRU OUT MOST HEADHUNTING SOCIETYS THE TAKEING OF THE HEAD IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF A BATTLE AND THE ULTIMATE CONFIRMATION OF WHO WAS THE VICTOR. USUALLY THE HEAD WAS TAKEN BACK AND THE SKULL PRESERVED BUT IN SOME GROUPS IT WAS TAKEN AND THEN DISCARDED ... AS HEADHUNTING WAS VERY PREVELANT IN THAT AREA AT THAT TIME AND MOST ALL TRIBES PRACTICED IT; IT IS FAIR TO ASSUME WHAT HAPPENED TO MAGELLAN'S HEAD AS TO WHAT WAS DONE WITH THE BODY I HAVE NO IDEA (THEY WERE NOT CANNIBALS TO MY KNOWLEGE). SO IT WAS PROBABLY KEPT BECAUSE THE ENEMY WANTED IT BACK, SO IN KEEPING IT WOULD BE A FURTHER SHOW OF THEIR POWER AND AN INSULT TO THEIR ENEMYS.
|
Hi Vandoo,
Thanks for your comments.
And please allow me to compliment your speculation with my own speculation, with shreds of anecdotal evidence for flavor, taken from our author du jour, Antonio Pigafetta
With regard to the areas in the Philippines Pigafetta had been to (i.e., the Visayas, Mindanao mainland, and the Sulu island group), so far I've found no reference to decapitation.
But during Raja Calambu's (he ruled portion of northern Mindanao plus some Visayan islands) time with Pigafetta, Pigafetta saw three malefactors meted with capital punishment. They were hanging on a tree. Thus at least in Calambu's kingdom, capital punishment is not equal to decapitation.
But we are not talking of criminals here, but warriors in the battlefield.
In Luzon and especially in its northern part, it's established that head-taking in the battlefield was prevalent. We had an extensive discussion of that in
Origin of the Kalinga Axe.
But as far as central Philippines (the Visayas) and southern Philippines (Mindanao region) are concerned, I really don't know what the practice was.
But here comes Pigafetta again in the picture, with the severed head we are looking for!
"In one of those [junks] which we captured was a son of the king of the isle of Luzon, who was captain-general of the King of Burne [Borneo], and who was coming with the junks from the conquest of a great city named Laoe ... He had made this expedition and sacked that city because its inhabitants wished rather to obey the King of Java than the Moorish King of Burne. The Moorish king having heard of the ill-treatment by us of his junks, hastened to send to say ... that those vessels had not come to do any harm to us, but were going to make war against the Gentiles, in proof of which they showed us some of the heads of those they had slain ... [and] that captain [is known to be] exceedingly dreaded by the Gentiles who are most hostile to the Moorish king."
Since we know that the 16th century kings of Luzon were muslims (e.g., decades later, the Rajas Lakandula, Sulaiman, and Matanda), then it doesn't come as a surprise that the Luzon prince practiced beheading on his vanquished foes.
Attached are pics of the statue of Raja Sulaiman (1558–1575), located in front of Malate Church in Manila.
But all these proofs of head-taking pertain to Luzon and in Mindanao. As for what the practice was in the Visayas, I think we need to make further speculations
And I think those pigs often mentioned in the accounts will shed more light on the subject ...