The following essays are taken from postings to the Kapampangan-L mailing list [info@home.ease.lsoft.com].
The observations of outsiders on the Malay character can
be valuable as they often immediately recognize traits that
they consider distinct. When several different cultures
recognize these same traits, then there likely is some truth
to these observations. Of course, sometimes the conclusions
drawn by even multiple observers are faulty due to a lack of
understanding of the culture involved.
However, studying the outside views can often throw some light
on stereotypes that Malays place upon each other. For example,
in saying Kapampangans are "mayabang," many Filipinos might
not realize that, in the Asian contest at least, the Malay as
a whole is considered such. It may be that the characteristic
of mayabang has something to do with the boldness the Malay
needed on the sea. Some scholars have postualated that the
Malay archipelago was once connected with the Asian mainland.
The region had one of the highest population densities anywhere.
At some time, thousands of years ago, the sea supposedly cut the
archipelago off from the mainland 'trapping' millions of people
on thousands of islands. Sometimes the smaller islands, like
those around the "sieve" between Mindanao and Borneo were too small
to sustain agriculture. So, the people often had to live by the
sea. If a typhoon destroyed a local reef, or if a volcano happened
to located on that island, the whole community might be forced
to migrate elsewhere.
Of course, there was not gurantee, in such an occurrence, that they
would be greeted hospitably in the new place they arrived. Often
they had to be ready to land and fight. And anyone familiar with
marine type invasions knows that this means fighting like hell once
you have disembarked from the ship. Some scholars have used the
necessity of maritime invasions, and on many occassions piracy, for
the survival of communities as a basis for the trait known as amok.
Thousands of years of having to take foreign beaches or ships
eventually worked its way into the regular culture according to this
theory.
A good example of this trait, even in fairly modern times, can be found
in this quote from General MacArthur concering Igorot units in WW II
who went howling atop tanks, completely exposed to enemy fire,
in a counter attack on a Japanese unit:
"Many desperate acts of courage and heroism have fallen under
my observation on many fields of batlle in many parts oft he
world. I have seen last-ditch stands and innumerable acts of
personal heroism that defy description, but for sheer
breathtaking and heart-stopping desperation, I have never known
the equal of those Igorots. Gentlemen, when you tell that story,
stand in tribute to these gallant Igorots."
In this case, when the Malay is serving the foreigner, the "desperate"
gallantry of the Malay is greatly admired. When the situation is
reversed, then the negative stereotype of the Malay as pirate and
ladrone emerges.
For example, in the infamous two-volume work, _Our Islands and Their
People_, the writer describes an attack by a single dimunitive Moro,
armed with a kris, on a group of marines. He manages to hack to death
half a dozen of them before being himself slain. The Marines were all
armed with rifles and bayonets, but the Moro seemed insensible to the
gunshot and stab wounds as he nearly completely severed some of the
bodies. The description of the Moro resembled that of a demon from
hell. However, if the scene is changed to WW II, and the marines become
Japanese soldiers, would not this same Moro have been lauded for his
awesome courage and will?
The requirement of boldness for survival may help explain why Malays
are mayabang, and why when some Filipinos describe Kapampangans as
mayabang they are simply taking jabs at characteristics they also
share. And they are traits that are there for good reasons,
specifically: the need to survive. Indeed, many of the same traits can
be found among the Turko-Mongol nomads who roam the sparse deserts and
plains to the north, and who have often been forced by natural
circumstances to raid settled communities to survive.
Another interesting stereotype that Filipinos use is that of assigning
Ilokanos with near-fanatical personality loyalty. I think their
support of Marcos had much to do with this stereotype. You hear said
over and over that Ilokanos will support other Ilokanos regardless
of whether they are doing good or bad. The strange thing about this
stereotype is that applies to some extent to all Filipinos. Thus,
it is similar to the idea of Kapampangans being mayabang.
Fanatical personal loyalty is borne out by some of the historical
writings on the Malay. From Chau Ju-kua, we have this notice
concerning the inhabitants of Sanfotsi:
"When the king dies the common people go into mourning by
shaving their heads; his personal followers choose, however,
voluntary death by leaping into the blazing pyre; this called
"living and dying together."
When the Spanish arrived, the practice of immolation was common, and
sometimes this was voluntary, with followers throwing themselves into
the water during the ship burial of chief, and sometimes involuntary,
when a captive enemy was killed to be the chief's servant in the
afterlife. Chinese also mention that on the island of Mait, or Mai as
it was also called, the wife and servants would often leap on to the
funeral pyre of their husband or chief respectively. Most scholars
believe Mait was the same as modern Mindoro. Indeed, some evidence
of fire burial have been found at Philippine archaeological sites.
The Portugese wrote that in some parts of Java, followers of a
king would sometimes prove their "love" by self-decapitating
themselves in front of a royal audience!
This loyalty extended not only to persons, but also to ideas and
institutions. So much, so that one event involving Kapampangans
astonished the Spanish. It was during a Dutch attack in the
1640's when Kapampangan veterans with much experience at Ternate
barricaded themselves in a church. The Spanish officials had
surrendered and tried to convince the Kapampangan troops to do
the same, but to no avail:
"The bravest and most prominent Pampangos defended themselves
gallantly, refusing to hear any talk of surrender to a
heretical prince, although the Dutch promised to spare their
lives if they would do so. But as their weapons were inferior
and their powder had been exhausted the Pampangos were finally
defeated; nearly two hundred were barbarously put to death;
and forty others..were taken prisoners." (Bl. & Rb. v. 35)
Here again, we see that the Malay loyalty is portrayed as positive,
because it is in connection with the culture of the writer.
Possibly, the views of the Dutch forces were quite different.
------------
In my last segment on this topic, the quality of
loyalty was discussed. In ancient times, the Malay
traveled migrated to and fro on their seafaring ships.
Some of these were known as barangay, or balangay,
having the same name as the basic communal unit in
Filipino society.
This was not coincidence. Aboard the ship, the datu
also often played the role of sea-captain, at least in
the original setup. As the lives of the whole community
were in his (or rarely, her) hands, he had to know his
stuff regarding navigation, the ship and the sea. the
people depended on the datu to have such competence.
OTOH, the datu, had to deal with the possibility of
marauding sea pirates, limited supplies, and at times,
the need to invade some foreign shore. Thus, he required
absolute loyalty and obedience from his people while
at sea. There was no time for roundtable discussions
when one's ship is being boarded by pirates! To an
extent, this loyalty was naturally carried over when the
barangay was on land.
However, if we judge from what we know of tribes like
the Igorots, Aetas, Manobo, etc., and from similar tribes
in Indonesia, the rule of the datu was not as harsh as the
Spanish missionaries made it out to be. It was not perfect,
of course, but neither was European culture of that time.
The Spanish priest had to make Christian civilization sound
as attractive as possible, not only to the native, but to
those reading back home. The idea of the "noble savage"
that popped up during the enlightenment did not exist yet.
The problem is, the Malay is still judged by the old
culture as described in those first contacts with the
Europeans. The fact is that we Filipinos, or other
Malays for that matter, go out head-hunting and pirating
about as much as modern Europeans go raiding Jewish
villages (Crusades) or stretching out heathen on the rack
(Inquisition).
These extremes are mostly gone, but some remnants
acceptable in modern society remain. For example,
concerning the Malay being brave, we Kapampangans
even are proud of this stereotype:
"King leun king tigri eku tatakut. Keka pa?"
(If they fear not the lion or the tiger, what else?)
And as far as being mayabang, Zoilo Hilario used to tell
his non-Kapampangan friends concerning our language:
Kalugu nang daramdaman!
(How beautiful it sounds!)
Getting back to datu rule, in many ways it possessed
aspects of democracy and federalism. The important element
of decentralization of power existed in our ancient land.
Pigafetta states: "there were many petty kings or chieftains
without any effective overlord." This resembles what
the Sui Annals of China say about Toupo, "more than ten
kings ruled that island."
The idea of a head chief existed, but as was the case
in Sanfotsi, the power of this chief came into being
only in times of war or legal disputes between barangays.
Loarca mentions that in the Bisayas this head datu was
known as "umalahocan." Whenever laws for a village
were to be enacted, the umalahocan assembled the other
datus to consult them first. And surprisingly, Loarca
also notes that in judgements for crimes, the head chief
and other datus decided the issue by "the vote of all."
We must remember that in Europe of those days, only
the very highest personages had voting rights. And the
the king or emperor had absolute power over all aspects
of life, and usually exercised this power over many
peoples. There is much evidence pointing out that datu
rule was, in fact, the rule of the head person in an
extended family group. In fact, early studies in latter
times of Malay tribes supported this contention to a
great extent. In such environment, rulers would be less
likely to oppress their subjects, who were also members
of their own family.
So, in comparison, the native society had much going for
it. In may well have been closer to a true "free" society,
than the its European counterparts of that time, no matter
what the friars (at least some of them) had to say.
------------------
When discussing national or ethnic characteristics, how do
we separate these from stereotypes? In my view, a stereotype
is a formula which states that since you belong to this group
you must have these characteristics. Usually these are negative
characteristics, but sometimes they can also be positive. For
example, I remember reading something from a black teacher in
Japan, who was often gawked at on the dance floor by curious
Japanese waiting for him to do back flips. Likewise, he was
often innocently asked whether he could do a reverse slam dunk.
He sensed that they meant no harm, but had only fell into
the stereotypes portrayed in the American media.
National or ethnic characteristics are traits which for reason
of culture, custom, history or whatever or easily noticed as
common among a particular group. For example, Kapampangans are
generally thought of a good cooks. Most of us would agree, I
think, that this is a true observation. However, one would
be guilty of stereotyping if one assumed that every Kapampangan
can cook.
I have tried to highlight some of the views on the Malay people
that existed before European contact, since most of us are
only familiar with the mostly negative Western stereotypes.
Not that the characteristics noticed by Westerners were not
also recognized by the Chinese, Muslim, Indian and other writers
that described the Malay previously.
For example, the idea of Malays being brave warriors was also
held before the time of the Europeans. Some writers like
Chau Ku-Jua and Ibn Fakih have already been quoted regarding
this, and here is another notice from the important geographical
encyclopedia of Ma Tuan-lin concering the inhabitants of
Sanfotsi (Zabag):
"They are all very brave; in fighting on land or water
they are superior to other nations. They have a sea port
at the point where commerce passes and they compel the
merchants to stop there. If some should attempt to pass
without recognizing them, they would immediately launch
a naval assault against them. All would be ready to
take them without fail, no matter how energetic the
resistance. The result of this is that the port
of Sanfotsi is the entrepot of the merchants of all
countries." (Author's translation of D'Harvey St.
Denis's French translation)
In this case, the boldness and fighting spirit of the Malays,
whether one believes they are from Luzon, Mindanao, Borneo,
Malaysia, Java, Sumatra, etc., was responsible for their
success in establishing themselves as an entrepot.
Among an already brave people, the Kapampangans were often
singled out for their courage by the Spanish. Colin calls
them "a brave people, very faithful and excellent Christians,
and they handle their weapons very skilfully." Notice that
at the same time, the Kapampangan was noted as a good soldier
and also a good Christian.
Friar Pedro de San Francisco de Asis states likewise: "Though
the Pampangan nation is so warlike yet at the same time its
individuals are the most reasonable in the Islands."
Indeed, among the Muslim writers many centuries before
Magellan, the king of Zabag was often used as an example
of wise judgement and leadership. One of the most well-known
stories in the Muslim literature was that told by al-Mas'udi,
a writer of the 10th century. He relates the story of the
king of al-Komar (Khmer kingdom) which Mas'udi states was
situated to the island kingdom of Zabag as the tip of South
India is to the island of Sri Lanka.
One day the king related to his vizier how he desired the
great wealth of Zabag and how he planned to invade that
country. Now, the vizier was a wise man who knew that
the islands were distant and that up to then they had very
good relations with Zabag. He also knew that the army
of al-Komar was mainly infantry suited for the mountainous
nature of the country and not for naval expeditions. He
tried to persuade the king not to invade but his pleas
were ignored.
The king went on blabbing the plans to his officers and
officials, so much so that the word eventually travelled
to the Maharaja of Zabag himself! This is how the
king reacted:
"The king ordered his vizier to observe secrecy of
what had passed between them, and to prepare a
thousand of the best ships, with full equipment,
to provide them with sarms necessary, and to man them
with a sufficient number of the best soldiers. He
pretended that these preparations were mant for an
excursion into his islands, who were under his sway,
and his subjects, that he ahd the intention to pay them
a visit, and to make an excursion to their islands.
This rumour spread, and the king of every island made
all possible preparation for the reception of the Maharaja.
When everything was ready and in order, he went on
board and sailed with the army to the kingdom of
al-Komar."
Catching the capital of al-Komar by surprise, the Maharaja easily
took it and sitting upon the throne of the king, he had the
Komar king brought to him. He stated to the king:
"If your desires to see my head before thee in a dish
had been joined with the intention to make yourself
master of my dominions and the throne, and to spread
destruction in any part of the the country, I should
do the same to you. But you have expressed your own
desire, and I will return the same upon you alone;
and I will return to my country without touching
anything in your empire either small or great. You shall
be an example for posterity, that none should dare
transgress the portion that Providence has given him."
With this the Maharaja had the king beheaded, and charged
the good vizier of al-Komar to find a suitable replacement.
He returned to his islands with the head of the king of al-
Komar which he had made into a vase. He then returned the
head to the present new king with a note stating that the
trophy did no glory to his kingdom has they had already
achieved their goals. Mas'udi then states:
"The news of this action reached the ears of the
kings of India and China, and the Maharaja rose
greatly in their estimation."
Now, if the Malay kings of old could impress the sovereigns
of their day with their wise and magnanimous judgement, what
prevents our leaders of today? Can we say that the corruption
of our leaders is something deeply ingrained in us? Or is
it something more superficial, something we believe to be a
part of us, but which really masks our true character?
--------------------
"May the sun split my body in two, and may I fall in
disgrace in the sight of my women and be abhorred by them,
should I ever become a friend of the Kastilas." (KHP)
So stated the Datu of Macabebe in the first declaration of resistance
to European colonialism recorded in the Philippines.
In a strange ironic twist, about three centuries later, the warriors
of Macabebe would themselves be branded traitors by fellow Filipinos
for their loyalty to the "Kastilas." This matter of contradiction
seemed to have played itself out before this time also. Generally,
the Kapampangan was seen as loyal and brave as this Spanish
proverb bears out (Sturtevant, _Popular Uprisings in the Philippines:
1840-1940, p. 90):
"One Spaniard and nine Pampanguenos are more than a match for ten
men from any nation."
However, such confidence was not without limits especially after the
"Pampanguenos" began to revolt. Bernardino Maldanado warns the king
in his report of this danger:
"They are a people of great boldness only needing a leader whom
they would recognize, and the are so many in number that it is a
matter that must be feared considerably, and one of which your
Majesty orders us to be fearful and watchful."
The Kapampangan was loyal, but the traits of "matapang," or boldness,
and "mayabang," never allowed complete complacency with being a subject
of foreigners. They were loyal soldiers, and had loyalty to the
church, but underneath the fires of the Datu of Macabebe still smouldered.
They joined Magat Salamat during his rebellion; instigated a rebellion
themselves together with those from Pangasinan and Ilokos; they
exchanged messengers with the Moros in the late 1700s in a planned
revolt that never materialized; and they were among the first to join
the Tagalog-inspired Revolution. They kept fighting against the Americans,
and Hapon, and finally against the upper class elites of their own
country.
But traits of matapang and mayabang are not the only ones connected
to the Kapampangan. As Randy pointed out, the Filipino, and
particularly the Kapampangan, is said to quite a lady's man. A
volume put out some time ago, describing the various peoples
had this to say:
"the male is regarded as a wordly dilletante, too macho for
his own good, not too good a provider, a sen~orito of sorts
and something of a rake."
Not too flattering, but in the last part of this characterization, we
find the lady's man reputation so popular among our countrymen.
-----------------------
In the last segment of this essay, mention was made
of the stereotype of Pampango male and his affinity
for having "girlfriends," on the side. Someone
commented earlier that there was a saying at his college
in Manila that one should "avoid a Kapampangan for a
husband, and an Illonga for a wife."
Generally speaking, all Filipino men, Bisayans, Ilokanos,
Tagalogs, etc., have their share of playboys, but for some
reason the Kapampangan male gets stuck with the stereotype.
Some of the best husbands and fathers I have seen were
Kapampangan, but then again I have seen a good share of the
womanizing types. Here is a true story I can relate:
A eldery matriarch in her 70's is at home with the family
during a big get-together. Suddenly, at the door are two
elderly female visitors. When they are greeted by one
of the grandchildren, they ask for the matriarch by name,
and they are led to her. When they meet her, they are
overjoyed and even go as far as kissing her, very rare
for strangers in the Philippines. Everyone in the house
is bewildered including the matriarch who has never seen
the women before. They begin to relate in broken Tagalog
how they have come all the way from Mindanao, their home,
to visit their sister they had heard was still living in Luzon!
It turns out that the matriarch's father, while stationed in
Mindanao to fight the Moros as a Philippine Scout, had a
secret second family. Has anyone heard this before?
Possibly, their may be a few more Kapampangans who fit this
mould, but only very few. Likewise, there may be a slightly
more Illongas who are "playgirls," than among other groups,
and maybe not. However, one of the most seemingly virtuous
and caring persons I've encountered was an Illonga sister
working in Jerusalem. She really lived the life of service.
Maybe because Pampango males are so mayabang and Illonga
females are so loud (ex. ManangL) that they get these added
stereotypes?
Strangely, the case with the Kapampangan female is totally the
opposite. Here is what is said of her in a Philippine publication:
"The popularly held belief among Filipinos is that
Pampangue�as make good wives. The term "good wife"
has to do of course with housekeeping and raising
children, now a reactionary view."
Obviously such a stereotype would inflame modern feminists (sorry
Ina). But even if there is a little truth to this and the beliefs
regarding our males, one certainly has to believe in the saying
"opposites attract." In India they have a perfect example of this
kind of attraction. There they believe in the the concept of the
divine couple -- the supreme God and supreme Goddess. Now, I'm not
trying to convert anyone to these views, only attempting to illustrate
a point. Parvati, the female principle, is the ideal of the chaste,
virtous wife and mother. OTOH, Siva, the husband, is a poor provider
who likes to gamble; he is a wandering, naked ascetic who likes to
dance around in graveyards and burning grounds with his army of goblin
followers. This causes continual friction between the two, yet
they are the divine, eternal couple loved and worshipped as the ideal
husband and wife by hundreds of millions in India. Possibly, it was
that some of our intrepid ancestors also went and settled in India? ^_^
The Filipino, more than most Malays, tends to have a reputation
for sensuality. This is sometimes said to be a result of the
influence of Spanish machismo, but even the Spaniards were somewhat
shocked by the behavior of the locals:
"The devil influenced them in other curious ways for the greater sensuality
and duration in their carnal acts, methods which are now
completely extinct." (Bl. & Rb., vl. 40, pg.365)
Regarding the two-timing of Filipino men:
"The first great offense comminted against our Lord, for many of
those native Indians of the Filipinas Islands who come as common
seamen are married in those said islands; and inasmuch as they
are unknown in Nueva Espana, they remarry here." (Bl. & Rb.,
vol. 18, pp.183-85)
Possibly, the open behavior discussed in the previous quote belonged to
our Malay-Polynesian heritage, because similar traits were reported
among the inhabitants of the Ladrones (Marianas), Hawai'i and Tahiti.
Finis
Sponsored by AsiaPacificUniverse.com
