Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 8th December 2008, 07:02 PM   #61
Andrew
Vikingsword Staff
 
Andrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,724
Default

Nice discussion.

To the "classics". http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3699
Andrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th December 2008, 08:12 PM   #62
fernando
Lead Moderator European Armoury
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 6,384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VANDOO
A BIT MORE SPECULATION
IN MANY PICTURES OF MORO DATAU YOU SEE ONE OR MORE SWORD BEARERS WHO HAVE A KAMPILIAN THEY ARE NEAR THE DATAU IN ALL THE PICTURES I HAVE SEEN. I SUSPECT THAT IN BATTLE THESE SWORDBEARERS WOULD BE RIGHT BESIDE AND AROUND THE DATU. IN THE PICTURES THERE IS USUALLY THE DATUS FAMILY OR OTHER DATU AND PEOPLE OF IMPORTANCE SO THE SWORDBEARER IS AT A LITTLE DISTANCE.
IN A BATTLE WITH VERY EXPERIENCED FIGHTING MEN WITH ARMOR AND LONG SWORDS SUCH AS MAGELLENS MEN IT WOULD BE SMARTER AND SAFER TO FIGHT THEM WITH SPEARS AND SHIELDS AND NOT TO GET IN TOO CLOSE. WHEN MAGELLAN WAS DOWN AND SEPARATED FROM HIS WARRIORS IT WAS SAFE TO APROACH AND FINISH HIM OFF.
PERHAPS LAPULAPU THEN CALLED HIS SWORDBEARER AND TOOK THE KAMPILIAN TO FINISH HIM OFF. IT MAY SHOW HONOR TO KILL A WORTHY FOE WITH THE KAMPILIAN RATHER THAN JUST TO STICK HIM FULL OF SPEARS OR IT MIGHT BE TO SHOW THE DATU'S POWER TO EXECUTE HIS ENEMY?. 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.?


Fair reasoning.
However it seems as the actual manner how Magalh„es was finally executed is not yet established. This particular, together with his birth date and place are still an uncertainty. This was still assumed by the most recent author of a supposedly thorough research book on Magalh„es biography and the circumnavigation saga, Michel Chandeigne, a French teacher who used to lecture in Lisbon.
Naturally there are versions of his beheading, here and there. For example, a martial arts Brazilian academy narrates that the ten Datus of Borneo, each with a force of a hundred men arrived at the island of Panay in the Visaya region, in the 13th century. Some historians beleive that this is when the old Philipino martial art Kali was born. It is said that Kali is the art of wide blades, an art that deeply influenced Philipino war traditions, being considered by some as the mother of all styles of stick and knife (sword) fighting. This source assumes that Magalh„es was decapitated by the Datu Lapu Lapu and that, according to historians, Magalh„es beheader was a Kali master.

Fernando
fernando is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2008, 05:47 AM   #63
Spunjer
Member
 
Spunjer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posts: 1,662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fernando
Fair reasoning.

Naturally there are versions of his beheading, here and there. For example, a martial arts Brazilian academy narrates that the ten Datus of Borneo, each with a force of a hundred men arrived at the island of Panay in the Visaya region, in the 13th century. Some historians beleive that this is when the old Philipino martial art Kali was born. It is said that Kali is the art of wide blades, an art that deeply influenced Philipino war traditions, being considered by some as the mother of all styles of stick and knife (sword) fighting. This source assumes that Magalh„es was decapitated by the Datu Lapu Lapu and that, according to historians, Magalh„es beheader was a Kali master.

Fernando


sorry fernando, but the legend of the ten datus was just that, a legend. although it has been disproven, it is sad to say that it's still in some of the history books.
here's a nice link regarding that, and the ever persistent art of "kali" (another made up word, lol).

http://cebueskrima.s5.com/index_2.html

from what pigafetta described, magellan was pretty much bum rushed, nothing fancy. i understand there's a lot of romanticism involved to give the art some sort of history, but truth is more important.
Spunjer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2008, 10:58 PM   #64
fernando
Lead Moderator European Armoury
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 6,384
Default

Hi Spunjer


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spunjer
sorry fernando,...

No need to be sorry Iam not a Kali fan ... didn't even know what it was, before having read about it in that website.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spunjer
... from what pigafetta described, magellan was pretty much bum rushed, nothing fancy. i understand there's a lot of romanticism involved to give the art some sort of history, ...

Romanticism is a spice found everywhere; Also Pigafetta didn't leave his credits with allien hands:
"fin che lo specchio, il lume, el conforto e la vera guida nostra ammazzarono".


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spunjer
... but truth is more important ...

Naturally; but who knows the truth ? There is only one version, that of Pigafetta, which may as well be a distorted one. How far was he from Magalh„es when they knocked him down; how was his mind clear and how much was he (or not) interested to golden the pill, when he later related what has happened ?
On the other hand, nothing could avoid that Magalh„es's agony, or virtual death, was followed by a triumphant decapitation, which was a current fashion. Was Pigafetta still close enough to see it, in case it has happened ?
As i said in my previous posting, even recent scholars who have been gathering all possible documentation, do not consider Magalh„es death cause as established; and certainly they are aware of Pigafetta's assumed relate.

Fernando

Last edited by fernando : 9th December 2008 at 11:15 PM. Reason: spell
fernando is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2008, 05:11 AM   #65
migueldiaz
Member
 
migueldiaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila, Phils.
Posts: 1,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fernando
This source assumes that Magalh„es was decapitated by the Datu Lapu Lapu and that ...

Hi Fernando.

One the one hand, that Magalh„es was decapitated is a possibility I think.

On the other hand, we also read from Pigafetta that when the Christian king [Humabon] sent word to the Mactan people that if they return the body of Magalh„es and the others they will be given as much merchandise as they might wish for, Lapulapu's people said 'no' --
"... but they answered that on no account would they ever give up that man, but they wished to preserve him as a monument of their triumph."

That Lapulapu's men were principled and not materialistic is sure fine by me But my point is that if the bodies were to be made as trophies (and we can see that Lapulapu did a lot of planning in that battle), then I think nobody was decapitated.

As an aside, I think Cebuanos in general go by the "work hard, play hard" rule. Earlier, Pigafetta noted one trait of the Cebuanos of old --
"When our people went on shore by day or by night, they always met with some one who invited them to eat and drink. They only half cook their victuals, and salt them very much, which makes them drink a great deal; and they drink much with reeds, sucking the wine from the vessels. Their repasts always last from five to six hours."

Going back to Magalh„es' body, I certainly hope that one day an excavation will yield bodies that will point to Magalh„es and company (including those of the 20+ others who were massacred in the delightful dinner).
migueldiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2008, 06:17 AM   #66
migueldiaz
Member
 
migueldiaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila, Phils.
Posts: 1,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fernando
Also Pigafetta didn't leave his credits with allien hands:
"fin che lo specchio, il lume, el conforto e la vera guida nostra ammazzarono".

"... until they killed our mirror, our light, our comfort, and our true guide."

Well, I still feel like squirming whenever I read that!

I mean how can Pigafetta be so corny or mushy?! On the other hand, that only means that Magalh„es was that good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fernando
... There is only one version, that of Pigafetta, which may as well be a distorted one.

Well actually, we do have the accounts of Oliveira, the Genoese pilot, et al., all eyewitnesses. I wonder what you meant by that?

But yes, Pigafetta has got the most details, and thus most useful.

On the errors that crept into the narration itself and then into the translations, I think for so long as we are aware of the biases, then we can always make our own adjustments.

For instance, Pigafetta estimated that Lapulapu's men must have numbered about 1,500. Now many have already written that Lapulapu could not have assembled that many a company.

But we can understand that he wouldn't want to put his boss in a bad light, thus the exaggeration.

But we can fry Pigafetta in his own fat to correct the error in his estimate. Like he mentioned that in Cebu the towns and their chiefs were --

Cingapola: the chiefs were Cilaton, Ciguibucan, Cimaninga, Cimaticat, and Cicanbul [and these chiefs must had been all the ones under Humabon?];
Mandani [Mandaue?]: chief was Aponoaan
Lalan: chief was Teten
Lalutan: chief was Japau
Lubucin: chief was Cilumai
Matan [Mactan]: one side was under Zula, then the other portion was under Cilapulapu [Lapulapu].

So let's say Cebu had 11 chiefs representing 11 towns.

Now the Philippines has 80 million people now, and about 2 million of those would be in Metro Cebu (i.e., 2.5% of the total).

The prehispanic Phil. population was about 800,000. So we can suppose that Humabon & company's Cebu would have a population of about 20,000.

Now divide 20,000 by 11 towns and you'll have 1,800 population per town. Half of those would be women. And of the remaining half, the kids and oldies would be say 30% -- so we are down to about 600 able-bodied men who can be the warriors.

You can adjust the assumptions but I think you'll never be able to reasonably come up with Pigafetta's "1,500".

So I guess that's it ... Pigafetta can say one thing, but we can always make our own adjustments!

Last edited by migueldiaz : 10th December 2008 at 10:20 AM.
migueldiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2008, 10:33 AM   #67
migueldiaz
Member
 
migueldiaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila, Phils.
Posts: 1,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VANDOO
... IN MANY PICTURES OF MORO DATAU YOU SEE ONE OR MORE SWORD BEARERS WHO HAVE A KAMPILIAN THEY ARE NEAR THE DATAU IN ALL THE PICTURES I HAVE SEEN ...

Just wanted to post the attached pic. But was that really a kampilan and an umbrella, or was it just an umbrella alone?

Quote:
Originally Posted by VANDOO
IT MAY SHOW HONOR TO KILL A WORTHY FOE WITH THE KAMPILIAN RATHER THAN JUST TO STICK HIM FULL OF SPEARS ...

Am not sure what the practice of the ethnic Visayans was.

But if beheading was the way to go, then Lapulapu being a man of principle must have done that to Magellan.

Like recently, the Indonesian Bali bombers were sentenced to death by firing squad. But being Muslims, they were requesting their govt that they be beheaded instead. The govt stuck though to firing squad.

But going back to Magellan and his encounter with the kampilan, I tend to think that the body was not decapitated, per my earlier post.
Attached Images
 
migueldiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2008, 12:41 PM   #68
migueldiaz
Member
 
migueldiaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila, Phils.
Posts: 1,042
Default

Still on the kampilan's probable origins, I've compiled Pigafetta's observations on the locals he encountered.

I was trying to see if there's anything he noted that will shed more light on the subject.


[1] At "Ladrone Islands" [Guam and Marianas Islands]

"These people have no arms, but use sticks ['baston'], which have a fishbone at the end."

[2] At "Zzamal & Humunu islands" [Samar Is. and Homonhon Is.]

"The lord of these people [in Homonhon Is.] was old, and had his face painted, and had gold rings suspended to his ears, which they names Schione, and the others had many bracelets and rings of gold in their arms, with a wrapper of linen round their head ...

"Near this isle is another where there are a kind of people who wear holes in their ears so large that they can pass their arms through them; these people are Caphre, that is to say, Gentiles, and they go naked, except that round their middles they wear cloth made of the bark of trees.

"But there are some of the more remarkable of them who wear cotton stuff, and at the end of it there is some work of silk done with a needle. These people are tawny, fat, and painted, and they anoint themselves with the oil of coco nuts and sesame, to preserve them from the sun and the wind. Their hair is very black and long, reaching to the waist, and they carry small daggers and knives, ornamented with gold, and many other things, such as darts ['fascines', 'faxina', 'foscine'], harpoons, and nets to fish, like our rizali, and their boats are like ours."

[3] At "Mazzavua" or "Massaua" or "Mazzava", which is either Limasawa Is. (southern Leyte), or Masaua (near Butuan City in northeastern Mindanao)

"... he [Rajah Calambu, the first Filipino king Magellan met] was the handsomest man that we saw among these nations. He had very black hair coming down to his shoulders, with a silk cloth on this head, and two large gold rings hanging down his ears, he had a cloth of cotton worked with silk, which covered him from the waist to the knees, at his side he wore a dagger, with a long handle which was all of gold, its sheath was of carved wood. Besides he carried upon him scents of storax and benzoin. He was tawny and painted all over. The island of this king is named Zuluan [Suluan, a tiny island near Homonhon] and Calagan [Caraga peninsula, which is part of Mindanao island] ...

"... the captain [Magellan] asked him [Rajah Calambu] if he had any enemies who made war upon him, and that if he had any he would go and defeat them with his men and ships, to put them under his obedience. The king thanked him, and answered that there were two islands the inhabitants of which were his enemies; however, that for the present it was not the time to attack them."

[4] At "Zzubu", also Cabu, Zabu, Subsuth, Subuth, Zubut, Cubo, Subo, or Zubo [all meaning Cebu]

From Oliveira: "As soon as he [Magellan's fleet] entered [Cebu port], he ordered some cannons to be fired, after which many people, armed with spears, shields and swords, came running to the shore. The king who was among them, ordered immediately to inquire from the captain who he was ..."

Back to Pigafetta: "When we came to the town we found the King of Zzubu at his palace, sitting on the ground on a mat made of palm, with many people about him. He was quite naked, except that he had a cloth round his middle, and a loose wrapper round his head, worked with silk by the needle. He had a very heavy chain round his neck, and two gold rings hung in his ears with precious stones. He was a small and fat man, and his face was painted with fire in different ways."

[5] At "Matan" or "Mautham" [Mactan]
Various accounts of the Battle of Mactan were already cited before in this thread.

I'd just like to add the probable reason why it is thought that Lapulapu must had been from Mindanao, and probably a Muslim:

"The captain before attacking wished to attempt gentle means, and sent on shore the Moorish merchant [instead of Enrique, the Malay slave of Magellan who was the interpreter earlier] to tell those islanders who were of the party of Cilapulapu [Lapulapu] ..."

I think though that Lapulapu was not a Muslim because: (a) Pigafetta being a detailed chronicler always indicated whether the people were Gentiles or Moors; (b) the only probable reason Magellan used the Moorish merchant in the pre-battle talks in Mactan was perhaps because earlier, it was the same Moor who convinced Raja Humabon to cooperate with Magellan; and (c) Pigafetta also noted that pigs among others were the common livestock of the islands (i.e., Cebu and elsewhere).

By the way, we also read from Transylvanus' account of the Battle of Mactan that: "... the enemy were more numerous, and used longer weapons, with which they did our men much damage ..."

[6] At "Bohol" Is. [Bohol] and "Panilongon" Is. [Panglao]
Here, the Concepcion was burned, given the lack of crew.

[7] At "Chippit" or "Gibesh" or "Gibeth" [Quipit, Zamboanga del Norte, Mindanao]
Magellan's crew was received well by the local king, Raja Calanao. Pigafetta didn't make note of the weapons he saw. Again, pigs were mentioned as part of the usual livestock (hence, still no local Muslims had been encountered so far since Magellan entered the Philippines).

[8] At "Cagayan" or "Caghain" or "Caghaiam" [Cagayan Sulu]

"... we touched at an almost uninhabited island, which afterwards we learned was named Cagayan. The few people there are Moors, who have been banished from an island called Burne [Borneo]. They go naked like the others, and carry blow-pipes with small quivers at their sides full of arrows, and a herb with which they poison them. They have daggers, with hilts adorned with gold and precious stones, lances, bucklers, and small cuirasses of buffaloes' hide."
This would be Pigafetta's first reference to them encountering Moors within the Philippine islands.

[9] At "Palaoan" [Palawan]

"In this island, which we learned was named Palaoan, we found pigs, goats, fowls, yams .... The people of Palaoan go naked like the other islanders ... they have blow-pipes, with thick arrows more than a span in length, with a point like that of a harpoon; some have a point made with a fish bone, and others are of reed, poisoned with a certain herb; the arrows are not trimmed with feathers, but with a soft light wood. At the foot of the blow-pipe they bind a piece of iron, by means of which, when they have no more arrows, they wield the blow-pipe like a lance. They like to adorn themselves with rings and chains of gimp and with little bells, but above all they are fond of brass wire, with which they bind their fish hooks."

[10] At "Burne" [Borneo]

"From the governor's house to that of the king, all the streets were full of men armed with swords, spears, and bucklers, the king having so commanded ... There [at the king's palace] were placed three hundred men of the king's guard with naked daggers in their hands, which they held on their thighs ... All the men who were in the palace had their middles covered with cloth of gold and silk, they carried in their hands daggers with gold hilts, adorned with pearls and precious stones, and they had many rings on their fingers."

"In front of the king's house there is a wall made of great bricks, with barbicans like forts, upon which were fifty-six bombards of metal, and six of iron ... The king to whom we presented ourselves is a Moor, and is named Raja Siripada ..."

[11] Passage through "Zolo" [Sulu] and "Taghima" [Basilan]
Pigafetta remarked: "The King of Burne [a Moor] married a daughter of the King of Zolo ..."

[12] At "Sarangani" [Sarangani]

"We were told that at a cape of this island [Mindanao] near to a river there are men who are rather hairy, great warriors, and good archers, armed with swords a span broad. When they make an enemy prisoner they eat his heart only, and they eat it raw with the juice or oranges or lemons. This cape is called Benaian."
WH Scott remarked in Barangay that Benaian must have been a corruption of the word bayani (hero). It is also speculated that Benaian can pertain to the ethnic Mindanao tribe, the B'laan?
As for that sword that is about a span or 9 inches wide ... ???

[13] At Timor

"... [after having been through many other places] we had found here a junk that had come from Lozon [Luzon], to trade in sandal wood ..."

To recap --

- looks to me that Lapulapu was not a Muslim, and just like the rest of the Cebuanos he and his people are animists, the religion of ethnic Filipinos

- it is possible however that Lapulapu was from Mindanao, given the circumstantial evidence of that Moor being used by Magellan to be the one to negotiate with Lapulapu

- as for the sword of Lapulapu and his men, it turns out that the Pigafetta's survey of ethnic Filipino weapons will not give us much

- and Pigafetta not hinting on Lapulapu being a Moor would therefore eliminate the possibility of Lapulapu having had used exotic blades

- thus perhaps the best source would still be WH Scott's Barangay, in which Scott categorically mentioned that there were only two basic prehispanic Visayan swords: the kris and the kampilan

- given that a kris is shorter and its wavy blades couldn't have missed the attention of Pigafetta, then it could have been none other than the kampilan which was used against Magellan.

As to the origin of the kampilan, after all that has been said and done, I think we are all still on a holding pattern
Attached Images
 
migueldiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2008, 06:55 PM   #69
VANDOO
(deceased)
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: OKLAHOMA, USA
Posts: 3,140
Default

I SUSPECT THAT THE PRESENCE OF PIGS IN AN AREA WOULD NOT ELIMINATE THE POSSIBLE PRESSENCE OF MOSLEMS. WHILE IT IS TRUE GOOD MOSLEMS WOULD NOT EAT OR HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH SWINE THEY WOULD PROBABLY ALLOW THOSE WHO WERE NOT MOSLEMS TO FOLLOW THEIR TRADITIONS AS FAR AS THE KEEPING AND EATING OF PIGS WAS CONCERENED. THRU OUT OCEANIC SOCIETYS PIGS PLAY AN IMPORTANT PART ESPECIALLY AT BIG FEASTS AND CEREMONIAL GATHERINGS.THEY ARE ALSO A SIGN OF WEALTH AND IMPORTANT ITEM OF TRADE AND DOWERY.
NOT BEING A MOSLEM I AM JUST GUESSING PERHAPS SOMEONE OF THAT FAITH CAN AFIRM OR DENY THIS IDEA.

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. IN SOME INSTANCES FEET AND HANDS WERE TAKEN BUT I AM NOT SURE OF THE REASONS FOR THAT. 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.
IN SOME POLYNESIAN SOCIETYS (ESP. HAWAII) THE KEEPING OF THE LONG LEG AND ARM BONES WAS PRACTICED AS IT WAS BELIEVED THE MANA (POWER) OF THE PERSON RESIDED THERE.
VANDOO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2008, 03:41 AM   #70
migueldiaz
Member
 
migueldiaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila, Phils.
Posts: 1,042
Default

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 (1558Ė1575), 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 ...
Attached Images
  
migueldiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2008, 03:31 AM   #71
migueldiaz
Member
 
migueldiaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila, Phils.
Posts: 1,042
Default

Of pigs and men ...

In speculating on the type of sword used against Magallanes, we said that it would help if we can establish whether Lapulapu was a Muslim as hypothesized by some and as claimed by Filipino Muslims.

Using the eyewitness accounts (Antonio Pigafetta's and Francisco Albo's respective accounts, and another account recorded by Fernando Oliveira), it appears that Lapulapu couldn't have been one.

At least that was the circumstantial evidence then.

The reasoning goes like this --

[1] First and foremost, Pigafetta and the other witnesses always made the distinction whether the peoples were "Moors" or "Gentiles".

They didn't give their readers room for speculation. In the various islands they'd been to, it was only in "Cagayan" [Cagayan Sulu, a Philippine isle near Borneo] and a town in Palawan where they noted that the people are Moors.

Pigafetta's account is replete with such notes on what the peoples' religions were. And even Francisco Albo in his navigational "log-book" couldn't resist making those side comments:
"... and [continuing sailing, we] fell in with the head of the island of Poluan [Palawan, in westernmost Philippines]. Then we went to N 1/4 NE, coasting along it until the town of Saocao, and there we made peace, and they were Moors; and we went to another town, which is of Cafres [Gentiles]; and there we bought much rice, and so we provisioned ourselves very well, and this coast runs NE SW ..."

Magellan's crew didn't mention making landfalls in Sulu, Basilan, and Tawitawi. But I'm sure that had they done so, they would remark about these peoples being Moors.

In the Visayan islands they'd been to earlier, they definitely did not identify any tribe as Moors.

[2] Now the presence or absence of pigs in Pigafetta's account being used to establish whether the people are Muslims or not come in as a secondary proof only.

In fact the survivors of the voyage were explicit enough in their accounts as mentioned, so no other proofs are really necessary.

Just the same, the pigs' absence provides good supporting evidence.

[3] Pigs are very repulsive to Muslims, at least in 16th century southeast Asia. Thus Pigafetta noted:
"The king [Sultan Manzor of Tadore (Tidore), Magellan's crew's host in the Moluccas] then asked for another favour -- that was, that we should kill all pigs we had on board, for which we would give an ample compensation in fowls and goats. We gave him satisfaction in this ... so that the Moors should not have occasion to see them, since if by accident they see any pig they covered their faces not to see it or perceive its smell."

[4] Throughout southeast Asia, Pigafetta's observations on livestock traded vis-a-vis what he stated as the tribe's religion matched perfectly.

Hence whenever he identified one group as Moors, you can read in other places that those people traded goats and fowls but not pigs. Conversely if Pigafetta identified a group as Gentiles, then at some point you read that pigs, goats, and fowls were the livestock being bartered.

[5] Cebu and the prior islands visited were explicitly recorded as inhabited by "Gentiles". It comes as no surprise therefore that in Cebu pigs were raised right underneath the houses:
"Their houses are made of wood and beams and canes, founded on piles, and are very high, and must be entered by means of ladders; their rooms are like ours, and underneath they keep cattle, such as pigs, goats, and fowls."

[6] How about in Mactan where Lapulapu and Zula co-reigned? Well, it looks like pigs are common in there as well. For we read from the translators' notes of Oliveira's book that:

"After the refusal of the other kings to obey the Christian king [Humabon] and pay the required tribute to Magellan consisting of three goats, three pigs, and three sacks of rice, the latter organizes a punitive expedition on 27 April 1521 (some authors say 28 April)."

It would certainly be absurd if not ridiculous if the Mactan people were Muslims and yet pigs were part of the tribute being required from them.

[7] Zula by the way sided with Humabon. Thus on 26 April, he sent his son to Magellan to give the latter two goats as tribute. The son explained that they were not able to come up with the rest of the requirement only because Lapulapu "would not in any way obey the King of Spain, and had prevented him from doing so."

In summary, given that Lapulapu and his men appear not to be Muslims, then the argument that they also used non-Visayan and/or Mindanao blades weakens.

Lapulapu would had carried thus the traditional Visayan swords, which were the kris and the kampilan (and not a panabas, nor a budiak, nor a pira, nor any other exotic Muslim Mindanao weapon).

And so it would still look like it was the kampilans that were used against Magellan during his last moments.

So there would be my thoughts on the subject, for whatever it's worth! And I reserve the right to modify it as new info comes in

PS - Given that Lapulapu and his men made the most impact upon Magellan's group, it would be logical for Pigafetta to have inquired whether there was anything else out of the ordinary about Lapulapu.

Looks like Pigafetta did not find any other special info about Lapulapu. It turned out that he's just a typical Visayan king, who wants to be left alone.

Were Lapulapu a Bajau (sea gypsy) as claimed by some, then when Pigafetta later saw Bajaus in Mindanao ["The inhabitants of this island (Monoripa, near Sulu) always live in their vessels, and have no houses on shore."], for sure Pigafetta would have made reference to Lapulapu. But he did not.
Attached Images
  
migueldiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 01:13 PM   #72
migueldiaz
Member
 
migueldiaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila, Phils.
Posts: 1,042
Default

Some more maps for reference, from Martin J. Noone's The Islands Saw It: The Discovery and Conquest of the Philippines, 1521-1581 (1982).

[Noone's dedication on the books says, "To the People of the Bisayas whom I loved".]

On the map showing the Muslim "penetration" in prehispanic Philippines, the Islam areas would be Manila, Mindoro, and the Sulu areas and the region around Lake Lanao and the land south of it.

Cebu would be the only major area not under Muslim rule. So it looks like urban centers-wise, prehispanic Philippines was pretty much a Muslim country.

Since the Islamization of the Philippines in the 14th century came from the south, it is curious why "Luzon" (i.e., Manila) was a Muslim kingdom, and yet the Visayas which is in between Mindanao and Luzon was not.

Just the same, the influence on the Visayas by its southern brethren [in Mindanao] was still very apparent -- the two major Visayan swords then were the kris and the kampilan (per WH Scott's Barangay: Sixteenth Century Philippine Culture and Society [1994]).

The other two maps show the more accurate path of Magellan's fleet inside the Philippines.
Attached Images
   
migueldiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th December 2008, 12:59 AM   #73
migueldiaz
Member
 
migueldiaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila, Phils.
Posts: 1,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by migueldiaz
... In summary, given that Lapulapu and his men appear not to be Muslims, then the argument that they also used non-Visayan and/or Mindanao blades weakens.

Lapulapu would had carried thus the traditional Visayan swords, which were the kris and the kampilan (and not a panabas, nor a budiak, nor a pira, nor any other exotic Muslim Mindanao weapon).

And so it would still look like it was the kampilans that were used against Magellan during his last moments.

So there would be my thoughts on the subject, for whatever it's worth! And I reserve the right to modify it as new info comes in

From Looking for the Prehistoric Filipino by the eminent historian WH Scott, we find these info that Muslims had also penetrated prehispanic Cebu and the Visayas, and even Mactan in particular!

"And if Magellan's survivors were correct in reporting the existence of a small Muslim settlement on Mactan called Bulaya, it was probably a Bornean outpost. At least, a Bornean who had married and settled in Cebu was an influential local figure in Legazpi's day." (p. 42)
"Political aggrandizement was effected by trading networks based on intermarriage, both between ruling families and between foreign merchants and their customers in trading posts. So the son of the ruler of Manila married the daughter of the Sultan of Brunei; Francisco Serrao raised a mestizo [a child of an intermarriage between races] family in Ternate [Spice Islands]; and Tupas [the Cebu harbor prince, at the time Legazpi arrived in Cebu in 1565] was able to make use of Si Damit, Kamotuan and Bapa Silaw -- all well-informed Malay-speaking Muslims settled in Cebu. So, too, Tupas sent his own daughter to Legazpi as a concubine, but Legazpi had her baptized and married off to a Greek caulker named Andreas Perez." (p. 53)

Hence, it might look after all that Lapulapu could had been a Muslim or must had been at least influenced by Muslims.

Now on headtaking as a war trophy as practiced by prehispanic Visayans, from the same book, we also see that at least there's one anectodal evidence --
"They [Miguel Lopez Legazpi's party, after landing in Cebu on 28 April 1565, 24 years after Magellan's Cebu landing] suffered no losses until May 23, when Pedro de Arana, one of the commander's personal company was killed just outside the fort and his head taken." (p. 40)
"The next week [around June already?] Pedro de Arana's head was carried off to Mactan. The Spaniards promptly burned a few settlements, discovered the bloodstained boat in which the head had been carried ..." (p. 50)

And then note that the decapitated head was carried off to Mactan, which tempts us to speculate even more!

Just updating this thread as we stumble upon more info ...
migueldiaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2010, 09:16 AM   #74
Maurice
Member
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Marsh
I have never seen a kampilan with Dayak designs.
To me this look like a dayak design (on the crosspiece).
It looks like some kind of face, which is uncommon to moro design..or am I mistaken?
This carving would be great when painted on the top/bottom section of a dayakshield.

(By the way I would be probably the last who is thinking here that the kampilan is from Borneo/Dayak origine, I just want to discuss this design as being dayak... ).

Maurice
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Maurice : 16th May 2010 at 09:28 AM.
Maurice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th May 2010, 06:43 PM   #75
Battara
EAAF Staff
 
Battara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 5,715
Default

I believe that this piece is actually Iranun, who also live and made raids on the Borneo coasts.

Also faces made from okir are not unheard of on Moro pieces.
Battara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th August 2011, 05:45 PM   #76
tom hyle
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 1,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nonoy Tan
Hi Michael,

The "bolo" you posted is used by people from the extreme east of Luzon (along the coast and the mountains near the coast). They call it "Katana" - probably a loan word.

Nonoy



It appears to be "machete filipiana" ("odd bolo with t grip and....") with a different handle and pommel. Same guard though; is the tip broken off the sheath? Have to go back and check photos.....
tom hyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd September 2015, 02:45 AM   #77
MaharlikaTimawa
Member
 
MaharlikaTimawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 26
Default Import

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nonoy Tan
The "T-shaped hilted bolo discussed in Bolo with wide blade and t-grip" in an earlier post is an Ilongot bolo.

In the "Origin of the Kalinga Axe" thread, we can see a Panabas - not from Southern Philippines, but Northern Luzon (i.e. Ilongot).

The Borneoan influence (directly or indirectly) on the Ilongot, I believe has been largely ignored by historians.

I will look into it and share my findings in this forum.






I'm pretty sure those weapons were imported and weren't really made locally, not to mention how very rare it was for them to use it. So the use of a panabas was probably not that significant enough for anthropologists to take much notice of the use of such weapons, or is it to considered that panabas isn't anything BUT a muslim weapon, like the kampilan.
MaharlikaTimawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd September 2015, 03:25 AM   #78
MaharlikaTimawa
Member
 
MaharlikaTimawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by migueldiaz
Hi Bill,

Most of us have probably read Antonio Pigafetta's account of the death of Magellan:
"Recognizing the captain [Magellan], so many turned upon him that they knocked his helmet off his head twice... A native hurled a bamboo spear into the captain's face, but the latter immediately killed him with his lance, which he left in the native's body. Then, trying to lay hand on sword, he could draw it out but halfway, because he had been wounded in the arm with a bamboo spear. When the natives saw that, they all hurled themselves upon him. One of them wounded him on the left leg with a large cutlass, which resembles a scimitar, only being larger. That caused the captain to fall face downward, when immediately they rushed upon him with iron and bamboo spears and with their cutlasses, until they killed our mirror, our light, our comfort, and our true guide."

I was just thinking, if it was a "cutlass", then what would it actually be, among the blades of the Visayans then?

I'm now reading William Henry Scott's Barangay -- Sixteenth-Century Philippine Culture & Society. This was written in the 1980s I think, and Scott is a leading historian on pre-hispanic Philippines.

So the book is all about how the Philippines was before the arrival of the Spaniards. In the section entitled "The Visayas" and under the "Weapons and War" subsection, we read this:
"There were two kinds of swords -- kris (Visayan kalis) and kampilan, both words of Malay origin. The kris was a long double-edged blade (modern specimens run to 60 to 70 centimeters), either straight or wavy but characterized by an asymmetrical hornlike flare at the hilt end, called kalaw-kalaw after the kalaw hornbill. The wavy kris was called kiwo-kiwo, and so was an astute, devious man whose movement cannot be predicted. Hilts were carved of any solid material -- hardwood, bone, antler, even shell -- and great datu warriors had them of solid gold or encrusted with precious stones. Blades were forged from layers of different grades of steel, which gave them a veined or mottled surface -- damascended or "watered." But even the best Visayan products were considered inferior to those from Mindanao or Sulu, and these in turn were less esteemed than imports from Makassar and Borneo. Alcina thought the best of them excelled Spanish blades.

"The word kampilan came into Spanish during the Moluccan campaigns of the sixteenth century as "a heavy, pointed cutlass [alfange]" -- inappropriately, however, since a cutlass had a curved blade weighted toward the tip for slashing blows, while the kampilan was straight. (Modern ones are two-handed weapons running to 90 centimeters.) It apparently was never manufactured by Visayan smiths but imported from parts of Mindanao, both Muslim and pagan, which had direct culture contact with the Moluccas. Like the kris, it was coated with poison before going into battle, and the fiction that the weapon itself has been rendered poisonous by some alchemy no doubt enhanced its market value. Fine ones were handed down from father to son, bore personal names known to the enemy, and could be recognized by the sound of little bells which formed part of their tasseled decoration."

So there.

The pre-hispanic Visayans (of whom Lapu Lapu was one) had only two basic swords: the kris and the kampilan.

To me thus, the "cutlass" that was used against Magellan in all probability would be a kampilan. If it were the kris, Pigafetta an eyewitness wouldn't have described it like he did: "a large cutlass, which resembles a scimitar, only being larger".

Traditionally in the Philippines, Lapu Lapu is depicted as armed with the kampilan.



I think may of misunderstood, the Kampilan is not a "basic" weapon of the visayans, since they rarely sport fighting long fighting swords nor did they manufacture it themselves. The tagalogs imported japanese katanas for the use of battle but I don't think that makes the katana a Filipino weapon.
It seems the the muslims of Mindinao still cater of holding longer more developed weapons for the use of fighting while the non-muslim blades are more tools for agriculture than fighting.
MaharlikaTimawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:13 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.