461. The oaths which were and are most usual in these Indians are execratory. Since they lie so much, I do not know why they are not brought to confusion in the promissory notes that are always furnished with curses. In the oath of allegiance which the people of Manila and Tondo took to our Catholic monarchs in the year 1571, they confirmed that promise of their obedience in this manner: “May the sun split us through the middle; may we be devoured by crocodiles; may our women not show us favor or affection”—if they should fail to keep their oath. Sometimes they took the pasambahan, which was, to draw the figure of any wild and monstrous animal, and ask to be torn to pieces by that animal if they broke their contract or agreement. Sometimes they lit a candle, and declared that, just as the candle, so might they be melted, if they did not fulfil their promise. Now this is somewhat better, but not, their perjuries; for with great ease and frequency one catches them in false oaths in legal instruments. This is well known, and therefore should be well punished.
Chapter XLIV
Of the former government and social customs of these Indians
462. I have already said that our brother and venerable father Fray Juan de Plassencia wrote in the convent of Nagcarlàn and signed (October 24, 1589) a relation describing all the old customs of these Indians, in obedience to a request and charge of the superior government. That relation appeared to all a very truthful statement, as, in order to make it, his examination and vigilance were rigorous.
463. Of this relation I have already used what I thought ought to be set down in their fitting places. Now I shall say in substance what he tells when speaking of the social customs of the Indians and their old-time government, with some additions which serve for the better understanding of the matter.
464. These Indians were not so lacking in prudence in the olden time that they did not have their economic, military and political government, those being the branches derived from the stem of prudence. Even the political government was not so simple among all of them that they did not have their architectonic rule—not monarchic, for they did not have an absolute king; nor democratic, for those who governed a state or village were not many; but an aristocratic one, for there were many magnates (who are here called either maguinòos or datos), among whom the entire government was divided.
465. In the olden days, when, as most of them believe, the Malays came to conquer these islands, they called the boat or ship by the name of barangay, which is well known and much used in these times. In this boat came a whole family, consisting of parents, children, relatives, and slaves, under the government of one who was the leader, captain, or superior of all. In some districts, this man was called maguinòo, and in others dato. And in proportion as they continued to people this archipelago in this manner, it filled up with families and they appropriated their places of settlement, each of them seeking its own convenience for its maintenance and living. And there they lived governed by their own chiefs, not with a hard and fast rule, but all in friendly relations. By virtue of this friendship they were obliged to aid their chief, both in his wars and in the cultivation of his fields; and all to aid one another mutually. But no one was able to usurp the property which belonged to another, even though he were of the same barangay.
466. This barangay consisted of about one hundred persons, more or less, according to the number that they knew were sufficient for their territory. If perchance those of one barangay did any injury to another, cruel wars broke out between them, as broke out between the chiefs of Manila and Tondo when the Spaniards came in to plant with the faith the Catholic dominion, and with it the true peace, which now they enjoy with tranquillity. These chiefs or maguinóos, although some were so by inheritance, commonly did not get these offices by virtue of their blood, but by their merits; or because some one had more power, more wealth, more energy, or more moral virtue than any of the others. This method of government has always seemed so good to these Indians that it is the form followed in all the villages, and all the tributes are divided among various heads of barangays, in accordance with the enumeration of the villages; and those heads are the ones who look after the collection of the royal income, and see that the Indians live like Christians. They must also, by reason of their office, give account to the father minister and the alcalde-mayor of their province, in case there is any fault to find with their respective barangays.
467. No Indian could pass voluntarily from one barangay to another without the payment of a certain sum, which was established among them, and unless he made a great feast to all the barangay which he left. It was much more difficult if they were married. If a man of one barangay married a woman from another, the children had to be divided between the barangays, as was also done with the slaves.
468. The classes of people mentioned in that early age by our brother Plassencia (besides that of chief or dato) are three, as follows. One class is that of the nobles, whom they call mahadlìcas. This word signifies, according to the best vocabularies of the Tagálog language, those who are free, and who were never slaves. The second class are called pechèros; and the third are those who were slaves legitimately. Although I find in one vocabulary that mahadlìca is rendered as “freedman,” still I find that freedman is rendered by timava in most trustworthy vocabularies. And although in the common practice of the Tagálog speech, one now says minahadlìca aco nang panginoongco, that is, “My master freed me,” I do not believe that it is so; for mahadlìca properly signifies “to give freedom to the slave,” only because absolute liberty is its peculiar signification, and they make use of this term when it was given to a slave. Thus this term gives liberty, and the slave remains free from all slavery in the uttermost of its meaning. It is certain that the term timava is more correctly used to signify the freedman. Consequently, the Tagálog speech applies it and uses it, not only to express the liberty of the slave, but also for him who breaks the cord at the gallows and is freed from punishment; and for any fierce animal which makes sport of bonds. They only lengthen somewhat the accent of the last syllable in the latter sense, and say nagtitimavà .