By Rudan Alberto Matig-a
If there were anomalies involved maybe it was on the part committed by Datu Sikatuna? I believe it was Datu Sikatuna who sold us for 30 pieces of silver to the Spaniards. The years from 1563 to 1565 when the name of Datu Sikatuna is active in Philippine history I tag him as the conspirator in putting down the Vijayans. Datu Sikatuna was not a Vijayan but a vassal of a Hindu king from the Majapahit Empire. The Spaniards called us “indios†because the Majapahit and Vijayans are of the same stock of people, coming from the south of India and Sri Lanka. While they may be the same people they don’t have the same cultural and religious background. Sikatuna is Hindu while Humabon of Cebu, Datu Dalisdisan and Pagbuaya are Buddhist. Tribal wars among the people living in Bohol at that time were caused primarily by religion.
Mr. Matig-a,
As a member of Phi Alpha Theta, a prestigious Historical Society, and one who has attended many Imperial Spanish Forums during my college days, and doing collaborative research on Imperial Hispanidad with my professors, as well as teaching History Classes in college, I cannot allow you to proliferate extremely erred information.
You provide absolutely no valid historical source to even support your claims, especially the ones that I underlined specifically.
The truth to the matter, Mr. Matig-a, on the Spaniards' referring to the indigenous Filipinos as 'Indios' is because of a pre-established order of categorizing races from one another. When Cristobal Columbu (Christopher Columbus) discovered the new world in 1492 for the Royal Spanish Crown, he thought he landed in the spice islands of India, when in actuality, he actually landed in the island of Hispanola (in the Caribbean sea).
The historical context for this is because Columbu was hired by the Royal Spanish Crown to find a new navigational route to the Orient, especially new trade routes to the land of India, its spice islands and even to Cathay. It is the reason why the Spanish Delegation on board of the three notable ships, La Nina, La Pinta y La Santa Maria set sail towards the Western Hemisphere to find a new route to Asia/India.
Technically, they would have landed on the very shores of India or the Orient had there been no North or South America that stood in their way. And when the Spanish delegation led by Christobal Columbo (Christopher Columbus) arrived in Hispanola, he was met by indigenous people and immediately declared the new territory a property of the Royal Crown.
Columbus, thinking that he arrived in the new world, referred and documented the indigenous people as 'Indios'. Hence its use in Spanish vernacular in referring to indigenous people in the new lands it chartered under the Royal Crown.
Years afterwards, of course, after it was cleared that Columbus didn't actually land on India, but found the location of the two continents; North America and South America. The cartography and the illustration of the land masses was made note by the great cartogropher Amerigo Vespucci, who, too, was employed by the Royal Spanish Crown. And when Spain sent a military mission to the new world under the command of Don Senor Hernando Cortez, eventually conquered the Aztec civilization. Francisco Pizarro, too, was sent with a considerable military force and conquered the Incas of the south (present day coast of chile, peru, columbia).
And do you know what the Spaniards referred to the indigenous Meso-Americans as? They referred to them as 'Indios'. Not because they were related to the Indian civilizations of the Asian Subcontinent (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh), but because the term 'Indio' had already manifested a new meaning in the Spanish Language.
'Indio' now referred to the Indigenous Populations in Lands that were chartered and administered within the continuum of the Global Spanish Empire.
Please check some very nice historical journals and absorb the wealth of information that it provides in the subject matter that we are discussing.
http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-bin/justtop.cgi?act=justtop&url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/wm/61.3/martinez.htmlhttp://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/104.3/ah000814.html---
When the Spanish discovered the Philippines in 1521 and later in the 1560s, they still retained and called the indigenous people as 'Indios' as it was the terminology to identify the races. When Spain colonized and incorporated the Island of Guam in its empire, it also referred the indigenous Chamorro people of Guam as 'Indios' as well.
In order for you to understand the reasoning for this, Mr. Matig-a, one needs to know that during the Spanish Empire, there was an established racial order. It followed:
La Peninsulare: Spaniard Caucasian who was born and raised in Spain. Peninsulares usually took high and notable positions within the Imperial Bureaucracy.
La Creole: Spaniard Caucasian that was born in the new world, or territories of the Spanish Empire. Creoles took position of lesser administrators within the administratum, and or as officers of the Army, Navy, merchants etc.
Mestizo Espanol Mixed Spaniard with native Indio blood. The term reffered to half Spanish-Indians of the New World or half Spanish-Malay.
Indio Native Indigenous populations of North and South America, Philippines, and Guam.
Mulatto Mixed African and Indio
Negro African Blacks; imported slaves during the 16th to early 19th centuries.
----
So as you see, Mr. Matig-a, The Spaniards did not refer to the Philippines as 'Indio' because of a Hindu religion or Indian-Hindu culture. Nay, the Spaniards referred the the indigenous Malays of the Philippine Archipelago as 'Indios' because it was already a term that notes the racial category of the peoples. Established already starting in the late 15th century and early 16th century. Decades prior to the finding and landing of the Philippines.
Cheers and Happy Learning.
Absolutely Yours,
Bran Lorenzo
Linkback:
https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=11693.0
Topic: The blood compact was not a formal treaty of friendship? (Read 6357 times)