GHist Module 1, Unit 2.2

COURSE LEARNING PACKETS TEMPLATE Document Code FM-STL-014
Saint Louis University Revision No. 01

School of Teacher Education and Liberal Arts Effectivity August 15, 2022
Page 1 of 9
Unit 2.2 Juan de Plasencia, Customs of the Tagalogs
Source: Blair, Emma Helen, ed. d.1911. The Philippine Islands, 1493-1803; explorations by
early navigators, descriptions of the islands and their peoples, their history and records of
the Catholic missions, as related in contemporaneous books and manuscripts, showing the
political, economic, commercial and religious conditions of those islands from their earliest
relations with European nations to the beginning of the nineteenth century; [Vol. 1, no. 7]
Blair, Emma Helen, ed. d.1911. pp. 173-196
16th century Tagalog royalty
Source: Boxer Codex -

http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/metsnav/common/navigate.do?pn=116&size=screen&oid=VAB8326,
Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=18056369
Property of and for the exclusive use of SLU. Reproduction, storing in a retrieval system, distributing, uploading or posting online, or transmitting in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise of any part of this document, without the prior written permission of SLU, is strictly prohibited. 1
Page 2 of 9
Engage
Customs are ever evolving. We do not expect that a certain way of life will be
constant, resistant to change. You may have heard stories from your elders how their life
ways were so different from what you are presently experiencing. Try to recall some of
those old rules, as old as you can get and write them below. Name one old rule for each
realm of human experience.
On Marriage:
On Debt:
On Inheritance:
Explore
The reading that follows is the first of the two part report by Juan de Plasencia and
this particular section was recognized as the first Civil Code of the Philippines. Originally
written in Spanish, this document was translated into English by Frederic w. Morrison.
Customs of the Tagalogs
(TWO RELATIONS BY JUAN DE PLASENCIA, O.S.F.)
After receiving your Lordship's letter, I wished to reply immediately; but I postponed my
answer in order that I might first thoroughly inform myself in regard to your request, and to
avoid discussing the conflicting reports of the Indians, who are wont to tell what suits their
purpose. Therefore, to this end, I collected Indians from different districts—old men, and
those of most capacity, all known to me; and from them I have obtained the simple truth,
after weeding out much foolishness, in regard to their government, administration of
justice, inheritances, slaves, and dowries. It is as follows:
CUSTOMS OF THE TAGALOGS
Page 3 of 9
This people always had chiefs, called by them datos, who governed them and were
captains in their wars, and whom they obeyed and reverenced. The subject who
committed any offense against them, or spoke but a word to their wives and children, was
severely punished.
These chiefs ruled over but few people; sometimes as many as a hundred houses,
sometimes even less than thirty. This tribal gathering is called in Tagalo a barangay. It was
inferred that the reason for giving themselves this name arose from the fact (as they are
classed, by their language, among the Malay nations) that when they came to this land,
the head of the barangay, which is a boat, thus called—as is discussed at length in the first
chapter of the first ten chapters—became a dato. And so, even at the present day, it is
ascertained that this barangay in its origin was a family of parents and children, relations
and slaves. There were many of these barangays in each town, or, at least, on account of
wars, they did not settle far from one another. They were not, however, subject to one
another, except in friendship and relationship. The chiefs, in their various wars, helped one
another with their respective barangays.
In addition to the chiefs, who corresponded to our knights, there were three castes: nobles,
commoners, and slaves. The nobles were the free-born whom they call maharlica. They
did not pay tax or tribute to the dato, but must accompany him in war, at their own
expense. The chief offered them beforehand a feast, and afterward they divided the
spoils. Moreover, when the dato went upon the water those whom he summoned rowed
for him. If he built a house, they helped him, and had to be fed for it. The same was true
when the whole barangay went to clear up his lands for tillage. The lands which they
inhabited were divided among the whole barangay, especially the irrigated portion, and
thus each one knew his own. No one belonging to another barangay would cultivate them
unless after purchase or inheritance. The lands on the tingues, or mountain-ridges, are not
divided, but owned in common by the barangay. Consequently, at the time of the rice
harvest, any individual of any particular barangay, although he may have come from
some other village, if he commences to clear any land may sow it, and no one can compel
him to abandon it. There are some villages (as, for example, Pila de la Laguna) in which
these nobles, or maharlicas, paid annually to the dato a hundred gantas of rice. The
reason of this was that, at the time of their settlement there, another chief occupied the
lands, which the new chief, upon his arrival, bought with his own gold; and therefore the
members of his barangay paid him for the arable land, and he divided it, among those
whom he saw fit to reward. But now, since the advent of the Spaniards, it is not so divided.
The chiefs in some villages had also fisheries, with established limits, and sections of the
rivers for markets. At these no one could fish, or trade in the markets, without paying for the
privilege, unless he belonged to the chief's barangay or village.
The commoners are called aliping namamahay. They are married, and serve their master,
whether he be a dato or not, with half of their cultivated lands, as was agreed upon in the
beginning. They accompanied him whenever he went beyond the island, and rowed for
him. They live in their own houses, and are lords of their property and gold. Their children
Page 4 of 9
inherit it, and enjoy their property and lands. The children, then, enjoy the rank of their
fathers, and they cannot be made slaves (sa guiguilir) nor can either parents or children
be sold. If they should fall by inheritance into the hands of a son of their master who was
going to dwell in another village, they could not be taken from their own village and
carried with him; but they would remain in their native village, doing service there and
cultivating the sowed lands.
The slaves are called aliping sa guiguilir. They serve their master in his house and on his
cultivated lands, and may be sold. The master grants them, should he see fit, and providing
that he has profited through their industry, a portion of their harvests, so that they may work
faithfully. For these reasons, servants who are born in the house of their master are rarely, if
ever, sold. That is the lot of captives in war, and of those brought up in the harvest fields.
Those to whom a debt was owed transferred the debt to another, thereby themselves
making a profit, and reducing the wretched debtors to a slavery which was not their
natural lot. If any person among those who were made slaves (sa guiguilir)—through war,
by the trade of goldsmith, or otherwise—happened to possess any gold beyond the sum
that he had to give his master, he ransomed himself, becoming thus a namamahay, or
what we call a commoner. The price of this ransom was never less than five taels, and from
that upwards; and if he gave ten or more taels, as they might agree, he became wholly
free. An amusing ceremony accompanied this custom. After having divided all the trinkets
which the slave possessed, if he maintained a house of his own, they divided even the pots
and jars, and if an odd one of these remained, they broke it; and if a piece of cloth were
left, they parted it in the middle.
The difference between the aliping namamahay and the aliping sa guiguilir, should be
noted; for, by a confusion of the two terms, many have been classed as slaves who really
are not. The Indians seeing that the alcaldes-mayor do not understand this, have adopted
the custom of taking away the children of the aliping namamahay, making use of them
as they would of the aliping sa guiguilir, as servants in their households, which is illegal, and
if the aliping namamahay should appeal to justice, it is proved that he is an aliping as well
as his father and mother before him and no reservation is made as to whether he is aliping
namamahay or atiping sa guiguilir. He is at once considered an alipin, without further
declaration. In this way he becomes a sa guiguilir, and is even sold. Consequently, the
alcaldes-mayor should be instructed to ascertain, when anyone asks for his alipin, to which
class he belongs, and to have the answer put in the document that they give him.
In these three classes, those who are maharlicas on both the father's and mother's side
continue to be so forever; and if it happens that they should become slaves, it is through
marriage, as I shall soon explain. If these maharlicas had children among their slaves, the
children and their mothers became free; if one of them had children by the slave-woman
of another, she was compelled, when pregnant, to give her master half of a gold tael,
because of her risk of death, and for her inability to labor during the pregnancy. In such a
case half of the child was free—namely, the half belonging to the father, who supplied the
child with food. If he did not do this, he showed that he did not recognize him as his child,
Page 5 of 9
in which case the latter was wholly a slave. If a free woman had children by a slave, they
were all free, provided he were not her husband.
If two persons married, of whom one was a maharlica and the other a slave,
whether namamahay or sa guiguilir, the children were divided: the first, whether male or
female, belonged to the father, as did the third and fifth; the second, the fourth, and the
sixth fell to the mother, and so on. In this manner, if the father were free, all those who
belonged to him were free; if he were a slave, all those who belonged to him were slaves;
and the same applied to the mother. If there should not be more than one child he was
half free and half slave. The only question here concerned the division, whether the child
were male or female. Those who became slaves fell under the category of servitude which
was their parent's, either namamahay or sa guiguilir. If there were an odd number of
children, the odd one was half free and half slave. I have not been able to ascertain with
any certainty when or at what age the division of children was made, for each one suited
himself in this respect. Of these two kinds of slaves the sa guiguilir could be sold, but not
the namamahay and their children, nor could they be transferred. However, they could
be transferred from the barangay by inheritance, provided they remained in the same
village.
The maharlicas could not, after marriage, move from one village to another, or from one
barangay to another, without paying a certain fine in gold, as arranged among them. This
fine was larger or smaller according to the inclination of the different villages, running from
one to three taels and a banquet to the entire barangay. Failure to pay the fine might
result in a war between the barangay which the person left and the one which he entered.
This applied equally to men and women, except that when one married a woman of
another village, the children were afterwards divided equally between the two barangays.
This arrangement kept them obedient to the dato, or chief, which is no longer the case—
because, if the dato is energetic and commands what the religious fathers enjoin him, they
soon leave him and go to other villages and other datos, who endure and protect them
and do not order them about. This is the kind of dato that they now prefer, not him who
has the spirit to command. There is a great need of reform in this, for the chiefs are spiritless
and faint-hearted.
Investigations made and sentences passed by the dato must take place in the presence
of those of his barangay. If any of the litigants felt himself aggrieved, an arbiter was
unanimously named from another village or barangay, whether he were a dato or not;
since they had for this purpose some persons, known as fair and just men, who were said
to give true judgment according to their customs. If the controversy lay between two
chiefs, when they wished to avoid war, they also convoked judges to act as arbiters; they
did the same if the disputants belonged to two different barangays. In this ceremony they
always had to drink, the plaintiff inviting the others.
They had laws by which they condemned to death a man of low birth who insulted the
daughter or wife of a chief; likewise witches, and others of the same class.
Page 6 of 9
They condemned no one to slavery, unless he merited the death-penalty. As for the
witches, they killed them, and their children and accomplices became slaves of the chief,
after he had made some recompense to the injured person. All other offenses were
punished by fines in gold, which, if not paid with promptness, exposed the culprit to serve,
until the payment should be made, the person aggrieved, to whom the money was to be
paid. This was done in the following way: Half the cultivated lands and all their produce
belonged to the master. The master provided the culprit with food and clothing, thus
enslaving the culprit and his children until such time as he might amass enough money to
pay the fine. If the father should by chance pay his debt, the master then claimed that he
had fed and clothed his children, and should be paid therefor. In this way he kept
possession of the children if the payment could not be met. This last was usually the case,
and they remained slaves. If the culprit had some relative or friend who paid for him, he
was obliged to render the latter half his service until he was paid—not, however, service
within the house as aliping sa guiguilir, but living independently, as aliping namamahay. If
the creditor were not served in this wise, the culprit had to pay the double of what was lent
him. In this way slaves were made by debt: either sa guiguilir, if they served the master to
whom the judgment applied; or aliping namamahay, if they served the person who lent
them wherewith to pay.
In what concerns loans, there was formerly, and is today, an excess of usury, which is a
great hindrance to baptism as well as to confession; for it turns out in the same way as I
have showed in the case of the one under judgment, who gives half of his cultivated lands
and profits until he pays the debt. The debtor is condemned to a life of toil; and thus
borrowers become slaves, and after the death of the father the children pay the debt.
Not doing so, double the amount must be paid. This system should and can be reformed.
As for inheritances, the legitimate children of a father and mother inherited equally, except
in the case where the father and mother showed a slight partiality by such gifts as two or
three gold taels, or perhaps a jewel.
When the parents gave a dowry to any son, and, when, in order to marry him to a chief's
daughter, the dowry was greater than the sum given the other sons, the excess was not
counted in the whole property to be divided. But any other thing that should have been
given to any son, though it might be for some necessity, was taken into consideration at
the time of the partition of the property, unless the parents should declare that such a
bestowal was made outside of the inheritance. If one had had children by two or more
legitimate wives, each child received the inheritance and dowry of his mother, with its
increase, and that share of his father's estate which fell to him out of the whole. If a man
had a child by one of his slaves, as well as legitimate children, the former had no share in
the inheritance; but the legitimate children were bound to free the mother, and to give
him something—a tael or a slave, if the father were a chief; or if, finally, anything else were
given it was by the unanimous consent of all. If besides his legitimate children, he had also
some son by a free unmarried woman, to whom a dowry was given but who was not
considered as a real wife, all these were classed as natural children, although the child by
the unmarried woman should have been begotten after his marriage. Such children did
Page 7 of 9
not inherit equally with the legitimate children, but only the third part. For example, if there
were two children, the legitimate one had two parts, and the one of the inaasava one
part. When there were no children by a legitimate wife, but only children by an unmarried
woman, or inaasava, the latter inherited all. If he had a child by a slave woman, that child
received his share as above stated. If there were no legitimate or natural child, or a child
by an inaasava, whether there was a son of a slave woman or not, the inheritance went
only to the father or grandparents, brothers, or nearest relatives of the deceased, who
gave to the slave-child as above stated.
In the case of a child by a free married woman, born while she was married, if the husband
punished the adulterer this was considered a dowry; and the child entered with the others
into partition in the inheritance. His share equaled the part left by the father, nothing more.
If there were no other sons than he, the children and the nearest relatives inherited equally
with him. But if the adulterer were not punished by the husband of the woman who had
the child, the latter was not considered as his child, nor did he inherit anything. It should be
noticed that the offender was not considered dishonored by the punishment inflicted, nor
did the husband leave the woman. By the punishment of the father the child was fittingly
made legitimate.
Adopted children, of whom there are many among them, inherit the double of what was
paid for their adoption. For example, if one gold tael was given that he might be adopted
when the first father died, the child was given [in inheritance] two taels. But if this child
should die first, his children do not inherit from the second father, for the arrangement stops
at that point.
This is the danger to which his money is exposed, as well as his being protected as a child.
On this account this manner of adoption common among them is considered lawful.
Dowries are given by the men to the women's parents. If the latter are living, they enjoy
the use of it. At their death, provided the dowry has not been consumed, it is divided like
the rest of the estate, equally among the children, except in case the father should care
to bestow something additional upon the daughter. If the wife, at the time of her marriage,
has neither father, mother, nor grandparents, she enjoys her dowry—which, in such a case,
belongs to no other relative or child. It should be noticed that unmarried women can own
no property, in land or dowry, for the result of all their labors accrues to their parents.
In the case of a divorce before the birth of children, if the wife left the husband for the
purpose of marrying another, all her dowry and an equal additional amount fell to the
husband; but if she left him, and did not marry another, the dowry was returned. When the
husband left his wife, he lost the half of the dowry, and the other half was returned to him.
If he possessed children at the time of his divorce, the whole dowry and the fine went to
the children, and was held for them by their grandparents or other responsible relatives.
I have also seen another practice in two villages. In one case, upon the death of the wife
who in a year's time had borne no children, the parents returned one-half the dowry to
Page 8 of 9
the husband whose wife had died. In the other case, upon the death of the husband, one-
half the dowry was returned to the relatives of the husband. I have ascertained that this is
not a general practice; for upon inquiry I learned that when this is done it is done through
piety, and that all do not do it.
In the matter of marriage dowries which fathers bestow upon their sons when they are
about to be married, and half of which is given immediately, even when they are only
children, there is a great deal more complexity. There is a fine stipulated in the contract,
that he who violates it shall pay a certain sum which varies according to the practice of
the village and the affluence of the individual. The fine was heaviest if, upon the death of
the parents, the son or daughter should be unwilling to marry because it had been
arranged by his or her parents. In this case the dowry which the parents had received was
returned and nothing more. But if the parents were living, they paid the fine, because it
was assumed that it had been their design to separate the children.
The above is what I have been able to ascertain clearly concerning customs observed
among these natives in all this Laguna and the tingues, and among the entire Tagalo race.
The old men say that a dato who did anything contrary to this would not be esteemed;
and, in relating tyrannies which they had committed, some condemned them and
adjudged them wicked.
Others, perchance, may offer a more extended narrative, but leaving aside irrelevant
matters concerning government and justice among them, a summary of the whole truth
is contained in the above. I am sending the account in this clear and concise form
because I had received no orders to pursue the work further. Whatever may be decided
upon, it is certainly important that it should be given to the alcal-des-mayor, accompanied
by an explanation; for the absurdities which are to be found in their opinions are indeed
pitiable.
May our Lord bestow upon your Lordship His grace and spirit, so that in every step good
fortune may be yours; and upon every occasion may your Lordship deign to consider me
your humble servant, to be which would be the greatest satisfaction and favor that I could
receive. Nagcarlán, October 21, 1589.
Explain
Juan de Plasencia (born in the 16th century in Spain) was a Franciscan Friar who was
known to be a defender of the natives. He was also credited for founding a number of
towns in the provinces of Bulacan, Laguna, and Rizal. In the document you read, he gave
a report of the Tagalog society he encountered during his mission work in the 1580s. This
report was given in October 1589 to Santiago de Vera, the chief justice of the Royal
Audiencia and 6th Spanish Governor General in an effort to know the life ways of the
natives so as to better settle disputes relating to the personal affairs of the natives. At that
time, one of the objectives of the colonial authorities was the conversion of the natives to
Christianity and figuring out how to best govern them hence the need for a
Page 9 of 9
documentation of sorts about their life ways. Fr. Plasencia died in 1590 at Liliw, Laguna. He
is also credited for writing Doctrina Cristiana, the first book ever printed in the Philippines.
Elaborate
Aside from being a civil code of sorts, the report of Juan de Plasencia also
articulated the social structure prevalent in the Tagalog area during that time. Below is a
an empty triangle which you can use to illustrate the social structure described by Fr.
Plasencia. You may draw and label the divisions the way you understand the social
structure.

GHist Module 1, Unit 2.2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GHist Module 1, Unit 2.2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GHist Module 1, Unit 2.2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COURSE LEARNING PACKETS TEMPLATE Document Code FM-STL-014

Saint Louis University Revision No. 01

Unit 2.2 Juan de Plasencia, Customs of the Tagalogs

16th century Tagalog royalty

Source: Boxer Codex -

Customs of the Tagalogs

(TWO RELATIONS BY JUAN DE PLASENCIA, O.S.F.)

CUSTOMS OF THE TAGALOGS

You might also like