Datu

A pre-colonial couple belonging to the Datu or nobility as depicted in the Boxer Codex of the 16th century.

Datu is a title which denotes the rulers (variously described in historical accounts as chiefs, sovereign princes, and monarchs^{[Notes 1]}) of numerous indigenous peoples throughout the Philippine archipelago. The title is still used today, especially in Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan, ^{[Notes 2][Notes 3]} but it was used much more extensively in early Philippine history, particularly in the regions of Central and Southern Luzon,^[1][2][3] the Visayas^{[Notes 4]} and Mindanao.^{[Notes 5]}

In early Philippine history, Datus and a small group of their close relatives formed the "apex stratum" of the traditional three-tier social hierarchy of lowland Philippine societies.^[2] Only a member of this birthright aristocracy (called "maginoo", "nobleza", "maharlika", or "timagua" by various early chroniclers) could become a Datu; members of this elite could hope to become a datu by demonstrating prowess in war and/or exceptional leadership.^[2][3][1]

In large coastal polities such as those in Maynila, Tondo, Pangasinan, Cebu, Panay, Bohol, Butuan, Cotabato, Lanao, and Sulu,^[2] several datus brought their loyalty-groups, referred to as "barangays" or "dulohan", into compact settlements which allowed greater degrees of cooperation and economic specialization. In such cases, datus of these barangays would then select the most senior or most respected among them to serve as what scholars call a "paramount leader, or "paramount datu."^[3][1] The titles used by such paramount datu changed from case to case, but some of the most prominent examples were: Sultan in the most Islamized areas of Mindanao; Lakan among the Tagalog people; Thimuay among the Subanen people; Rajah in polities which traded extensively with Indonesia and Malaysia; or simply Datu in some areas of Mindanao and the Visayas.^[4]

Together with Lakan (Luzon), Apo in Central and Northern Luzon,^[5] Sultan and Rajah, they are titles used for native royalty. Depending upon the prestige of the sovereign royal family, the title of Datu could be roughly comparable to sovereign princes or European dukes.^[6]

Proofs of Filipino royalty and nobility (Dugóng Bugháw) can be demonstrated only by clear blood descent from ancient native royal blood,^[7][8] and in some cases adoption into a royal family.^{[clarification needed]}

Etymology and Variation across different early Philippine cultures[edit]

The word Datu, originally from Sanskrit Devata, via a cognate of the Malay terms Dato' or Datuk, which is one of many Malay styles and titles in Malaysia, and to the Fijian chiefly title of Ratu

Indigenous concepts, models and terminology concerning nobility and rulership among the peoples of the Philippine archipelago differed from one culture to the other, but lowland communities typically had a three-tier social structure aristocracy. In many of these societies, the word "Datu" meant the ruler of a particular social group, known as a Barangay, Dulohan, or Kedatuan.

Studies comparing social structures across different early Philippine cultures[edit]

Because of the difficulty of accessing and accurately interpreting the various available sources,^[9] relatively few integrative studies of pre-colonial social structures have been done - most studies focus on the specific context of a single settlement or ethnic group. There are only a handful of historiographers and anthropologists who have done integrative studies to examine the commonalities and differences between these polities.

One of the earliest such studies was conducted by Jesuit missionary Francisco Colin, who, in the middle of the seventeenth century,attempted an approximate comparison of the social stratification in Tagalog culture with that in the Visayan culture, which would become a reference for many later scholars.

In the contemporary era of critical scholarly analysis, the more prominent such works include the studies of anthropologist F. Landa Jocano^[3][4] and historian-historiographer William Henry Scott.^[1][4] More recently, anthropologist Laura Lee Junker^[4] conducted an updated comparative review of the social organization of early polities throughout the archipelago, alongside her study of inter and intra-regional trade among Philippine coastal polities.^[2]

Paramount Datus[edit]

The term Paramount Datu or Paramount ruler is a term applied by historians to describe the highest ranking political authorities in the largest lowland polities (see: Barangay state) or inter-polity alliance groups in early Philippine history,^[10] most notably those in Maynila, Tondo, Confederation of Madja-as in Panay, Pangasinan, Cebu, Bohol, Butuan, Cotabato, and Sulu.^[2][1]

Different cultures of the Philippine archipelago referred to the most senior datu or leader of the "Barangay state" or "Bayan"^[1] using different titles. In Muslim polities such as Sulu and Cotabato, the Paramount Ruler was called a Sultan.^[1] In Tagalog communities, the equivalent title was that of Lakan.^[1] In communities which historically had strong political or trade connections with Indianized polities in Indonesia and Malaysia,^[9] the Paramount Ruler was called a Rajah.^[9][1] Among the Subanon people of the Zamboanga Peninsula, the most senior Thimuay is referred to as the "Thimuay Labi,"^[11] or as Sulotan in more Islamized Subanon communities.^[12] In some other portions of the Visayas and Mindanao, there was no separate name for the most senior ruler, so the Paramount Ruler was simply called a Datu,^[9][1] although one Datu was identifiable as the most senior.^[3][13]

Confer also: Non-sovereign monarchy.

Nobility[edit]

The noble or aristocratic nature of Datus and their relatives is asserted in folk origin myths,^[14] was widely acknowledged by foreigners who visited the Philippine archipelago, and is upheld by modern scholarship.^[4] Succession to the position of datu was often (although not always) hereditary,^[4][3] and Datus derived their mandate to lead from their membership in an aristocratic class.^[1] Records of Chinese traders and Spanish colonizers^[9] describe Datus or Paramount Datus as sovereign princes and principals. Travellers who came to the Philippine archipelago from kingdoms or empires such as Song and Ming dynasty China, or 16th Century Spain, even initially referred to Datus or Paramount Datus as "kings," even though they later discovered that Datus did not exercise absolute sovereignty over the members of their Barangays.^[4][3]

Indigenous conceptions of nobility and aristocracy[edit]

Both now and in early Philippine history, Filipino worldview had a conception of the self or individual being deeply and holistically connected to a larger community, expressed in the Language of Filipino psychology as "kapwa." ^[15] This indigenous conception of self strongly defined the roles and obligations played by individuals within their society.^[16]

This differentiation of roles and obligations is also more broadly characteristic of Malayo-Polynesian ^[4] and Austronesian ^[17] cultures where, as Mulder^[16] explains:

"...Social life is rooted in the immediate experience of a hierarchically ordered social arrangement based on the essential inequality of individuals and their mutual obligations to each other."

This "essential inequality of individuals and their mutual obligations to each other" informed the reciprocal relationships (expressed in the Filipino value of "utang na loob") that defined the three-tiered social structure typical among early Philippine peoples.

These settlements were characterized by a three-tier social structure, which, while slightly different between different cultures and polities, generally included a slave class (alipin/oripun), a class of commoners (timawa), and at the apex, an aristocratic or "noble" class. The noble class was exclusive, and its members were not allowed to marry outside of the aristocracy. Only members of this cognatically defined social class could rise to the position of Datu.

In some cases, such as the more developed Sakop or Kinadatuan in the Visayas (e.g., Panay, Bohol and Cebu), origin myths and other folk narratives firmly placed the datu and the aristocratic class at the top of a divinely sanctioned and stable social order.^[18] These folk narratives portrayed the ancestors of Datus and other nobles as being created by an almighty deity, just like other human beings. But the behavior of these creations determined the social position of their descendants.^[19]

This conception of social organization even continues to shape Philippine society today despite the introduction of western, externally democratic structures.^[16] This has led some sociologists and political scientists to describe the Philippines' political structure as a cacique democracy.

Membership in the aristocratic class[edit]

The "authority, power, and influence" of the Datu emanated primarily from his recognized status within the noble class.^[3]

Noble birth was not the only factor that determined a datu's political legitimacy, however. Success as a datu was dependent on one's "personal charisma, prowess in war, and wealth."^[3]

Hereditary succession[edit]

The office of Datu was normally passed on through heredity,^[4] and even in cases where it was not passed on through direct descent, only a fellow member of the aristocratic class could ascend to the position.^[4] In large settlements (called Bayan among the Tagalogs) in which several datus and their barangays lived in close proximity, Paramount Datus were chosen by datus from amongst themselves in a more democratic way, but even this position as most senior among datus was often passed on through heredity.^[3]

Antonio de Morga, in his work Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, expounded on this succession through heredity, noting:

"These principalities and lordships were inherited in the male line and by succession of father and son and their descendants. If these were lacking, then their brothers and collateral relatives succeeded... When any of these chiefs was more courageous than others in war and upon other occasions, such a one enjoyed more followers and men; and the others were under his leadership, even if they were chiefs. These latter retained to themselves the lordship and particular government of their own following, which is called barangay among them. They had datos and other special leaders [mandadores] who attended to the interests of the barangay."^[20]

Foreign Recognition of Nobility[edit]

The Spanish colonizers who came in the 1500s acknowledged the nobility of the aristocratic class within early Philippine societies.^{[Notes 6]} Morga, for example, referred to them as "principalities."^{[Notes 7]}

Once the Spanish colonial government had been established, the Spanish continued to recognize the descendants of pre-colonial datus as nobles, assigning them positions such as Cabeza de Barangay.^{[Notes 8]} Spanish monarchs recognized their noble nature and origin.^{[Notes 9]}

Popular portrayal as "monarchs"[edit]

Early misidentifications of pre-colonial polities in Luzon[edit]

When travellers - whether traders or colonizers - came to the Philippines from cultures which were under a sovereign monarch, these travellers often initially referred to the rulers of Philippine polities as "monarchs," implying them to have powers as sovereigns.^[1]

Some early examples were the Song dynasty traders who came to the Philippines and referred to the ruler of Ma-i as a "Huang," meaning "King"^[9] - an appellation later adopted by the Ming Dynasty courts when dealing with the Philippine archipelago cultures of their own time, such as Botuan and Luzon.^[9]

Later, the Spanish expeditions of Magellan (in the 1520s) and Legaspi (in the 1570s) initially referred to Paramount Datus (Lakans, Rajahs, Sultans, etc.) as "Kings," although the Spanish stopped using this term when the Spanish under the command of Martin de Goiti first forayed out towards the polities in Bulacan and Pampanga in late 1571^[21] and realized that these Kapampanan Datus had a choice not to obey the wishes of the Paramount Datus of Tondo (Lakandula) and Maynila (Rajahs Matanda and Sulayman), leading Lakandula and Sulayman to explain that there was "no single king over these lands",^[21][1] and that the influence of Tondo and Maynila over the Kapampangan polities did not include either territorial claim or absolute command.^[1]

Junker and Scott note that this misconception was natural, because both the Chinese and the Spanish came from cultures which had autocratic and imperial political structures. It was a function of language, since their respective sinocentrc and hispanocentric vocabularies were organized around worldviews which asserted the divine right of monarchs. As a result, they tended to project their beliefs into the peoples they encountered during trade and conquest.^[4][1][22]

The concept of a sovereign monarchy was not unknown among the various early polities of the Philippine archipelago, since many of these settlements had rich maritime cultures and traditions, and travelled widely as sailors and traders. The Tagalogs, for example had the word "Hari" to describe a Monarch. As noted by Fray San Buenaventura (1613, as cited by Junker, 1990 and Scott, 1994), however, the Tagalogs only applied Hari (King) to foreign monarchs, such as those of the Javanese Madjapahit kingdoms, rather than to their own leaders. "Datu", "Rajah," "Lakan," etc., were distinct unique words to describe the powers and privilege of indigenous or local rulers and paramount rulers.^[1]

Confer also: Federal monarchy.

Reappropriation of "royalty" in popular literature[edit]

Although early Philippine Datus, Lakans, Rajahs, Sultans, etc., were not sovereign in the political or military sense, they later came to be referred to as such due to the introduction of European literature during the Spanish colonial period.^[23]

Because of the cultural and political discontinuities that came with colonization, playwrights of Spanish-era Philippine literature such as comedias and zarsuelas did not have precise terminologies to describe former Philippine rulership structures, and began appropriating European concepts, such as "king" or "queen" to describe them.^[23] Because most Filipinos, even during precolonial times, related with political power structures as outsiders,^[16] this new interpretation of "royalty" was accepted in the broadest sense, and the distinction between monarchy as a political structure vis a vis membership in a hereditary noble line or dynasty, was lost.^[23]

This much-broader popular conception of monarchy, built on Filipino experiences of "great men" being socially separate from ordinary people^[16] rather than the hierarchical technicalities of monarchies in the political sense, persists today. Common Filipino experience does not usually draw distinctions between aristocracy and nobility vis a vis sovereignty and monarchy. Datus, Lakans, Rajahs, Sultans, etc., are thus referred to as Kings or Monarchs in this non-technical sense, particularly in 20th century Philippine textbooks.^[4]

The technical distinction between these concepts have only recently been highlighted again, by ethnohistorians, hisotoriographers and anthropologists belonging to the critical scholarship tradition,^[4] since their concern is to capture indigenous meanings in the most accurate way possible.

Still this assessment of the nature of pre-colonial polities has to be viewed in the context of plurality of pre-colonial social structures existng in the Archipelago. It is obvious that those which existed in Luzon, vary from those that existed in the Visayas and Mindanao.

Also, the views of the various authors have to be assessed taking into consideration the background of social constructs, from which they assess the local pre-colonial polities. The historical, politico-cultural and chronological distance of these authors from actual events in the lives of the Filipino pre-colonials has to be taken into consideration. The view of an author living in the 20th century democratic country has a lot of difference from those who came from monarchic societies, who had actual contact with the pre-colonials, and who tried to qualify and approximate the conventions used in local heirarchical structures using the constructs of their time and context, in order to understand their actual experience of contact with what existed in the archipelago during the 16th Century.

Political Functions[edit]

Anthropologist Laura Lee Junker's^[4] comparative analysis of historical accounts from cultures throughout the archipelago, depicts Datus functioning as:

• primary political authorities,
• war leaders,
• legal adjudicators,
• the de facto owners of agricultural products and sea resources within a district,
• the primary supporters of attached craft specialists,
• the overseers of intra-district and external trade, and
• the pivotal centers of regional resource mobilization systems.

Political authority[edit]

Anthropologists like F. Landa Jocano^[3] and Laura Lee Junker^[4] and historians and historiographers like William Henry Scott^[1] make a careful distinction between the nobility and aristocratic nature of the datus vis a vis the exercise of sovereign political authority.

Although the Datus and Paramount Datus of early Philippine polities a "birthright aristocracy" and were widely recognized "aristocratic" or "noble," comparable to the nobles and royals of the Spanish colonizers, the nature of their relationship with the members of their Barangay was less asymmetrical than in a monarchic political systems in other parts of the world.^{[3][24][25][4]}

Their control over territory was a function of their leadership of the Barangay and, in some local pre-colonial societies (mostly in Luzon), the concept of ruling was not that of "divine right."^[4] Furthermore, their position was dependent on the common consent of the members of the Barangay's aristocratic (maginoo) class.^[3] Although the position of Datu could be inherited, the maginoo could decide to choose someone else to follow within their own class, if that other person proved a more capable war leader or political administrator.^[3]

Even "Paramount Datus" such as Lakans or Rajahs exercised only a limited degree of influence over the less-senior Datus they led, which did not include claims over the barangays and territories of these less-senior datus.^[3]

Antonio de Morga, in his work Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas, expounds on the degree to which early Philippine Datus could exercise their authority:

"There were no kings or lords throughout these islands who ruled over them as in the manner of our kingdoms and provinces; but in every island, and in each province of it, many chiefs were recognized by the natives themselves. Some were more powerful than others, and each one had his followers and subjects, by districts and families; and these obeyed and respected the chief. Some chiefs had friendship and communication with others, and at times wars and quarrels... When any of these chiefs was more courageous than others in war and upon other occasions, such a one enjoyed more followers and men; and the others were under his leadership, even if they were chiefs. These latter retained to themselves the lordship and particular government of their own following, which is called barangay among them. They had datos and other special leaders [mandadores] who attended to the interests of the barangay." ^[20]

Confer also: Elective monarchy, Power (social and political).

History[edit]

In pre-Islamic times, the political leadership office was vested in a Rajaship in Manila and a Datuship elsewhere in the Philippines.^[26]

Datu in Moro and Lumad societies in Mindanao[edit]

A Map of Mindanao c. 1900, made by the US Army in the Philippines, showing the different indigenous tribes of Mindanao, and their respective Ancestral Domains and traditional homeland.

In the later part of the 1500s, the Spaniards took possession of most of Luzon and the Visayas, converting the lowland population to Christianity from their local indigenous religion. But although Spain eventually established footholds in northern and eastern Mindanao and the Zamboanga Peninsula, its armies failed to colonise the rest of Mindanao. This area was populated by Islamised peoples ("Moros" to the Spaniards) and by many non-Muslim indigenous groups now known as Lumad peoples.^[27]

The Moro societies of Mindanao and Sulu[edit]

In the traditional structure of Moro societies, the sultans were the highest authority followed by the datus or rajah, with their rule being sanctioned by the Quran. The titles Datu and Rajah however, predates the coming of Islam. These titles were assimilated into the new structure under Islam. Datus were supported by their tribes. In return for tribute and labor, the datu provided aid in emergencies and advocacy in disputes with other communities and warfare through the Agama and Maratabat laws.

The Lumad societies of Mindanao[edit]

At the beginning of the 20th century, the Lumad peoples controlled an area that now covers 17 of Mindanao's 24 provinces—but by the 1980 census they constituted less than 6% of the population of Mindanao and Sulu. Heavy migration to Mindanao of Visayans, who have been settling in the Island for centuries, spurred by government-sponsored resettlement programmes, turned the Lumads into minorities. The Bukidnon province population grew from 63,470 in 1948 to 194,368 in 1960 and 414,762 in 1970, with the proportion of indigenous Bukidnons falling from 64% to 33% to 14%.^[27]

There are 18 Lumad ethnolinguistic groups: Ata people, Bagobo, Banwaon, B’laan, Bukidnon, Dibabawon, Higaonon, Mamanwa, Mandaya, Manguwangan, Manobo, Mansaka, Subanon, Tagakaolo, Tasaday, Tboli, Teduray and Ubo.^[27]

Lumad datus have involved themselves in protecting their homeland forests from illegal loggers during the past decades. Some have joined the New People's Army (NPA), a communist rebel group in the Country, for the cause of their people.^[28] Others have resisted joining the Moro and Communist separatist movements.

A datu is still basic to the smooth functioning of Lumad and Moro societies today. They have continued to act as the community leaders in their respective tribes among a variety of Indigenous peoples in Mindanao. Moros, Lumads and Visayans now share with new settlers a homeland in Mindanao.^[29]

Datu in pre-colonial principalities in the Visayas^[30][31][edit]

Visayan kadatuan (royal) couple as depicted in the Boxer Codex of the 16th century.

In more affluent and powerful territorial jurisdictions and principalities in Visayas, e.g., Panay,^[32] Cebu and Leyte ^[33][34](which were never conquered by Spain but were accomplished as vassals by means of pacts, peace treaties, and reciprocal alliances),^[35] the "Datu" Class was at the top of a divinely sanctioned and stable social order in a Sakop or Kinadatuan (Kadatuan in ancient Malay; Kedaton in Javanese; and Kedatuan in many parts of modern Southeast Asia), which is elsewhere commonly referred to also as barangay.^[36] This social order was divided into three classes. The Kadatuan (members of the Visayan Datu Class) were compared by the Boxer Codex to the titled Lords (Señores de titulo) in Spain.^[37] As Agalon or Amo (Lords),^[38] the Datus enjoyed an ascribed right to respect, obedience, and support from their "Oripun" (Commoner) or followers belonging to the Third Order. These Datus had acquired rights to the same advantages from their legal "Timawa" or vassals (Second Order), who bind themselves to the Datu as his seafaring warriors. "Timawas" paid no tribute, and rendered no agricultural labor. They had a portion of the Datu's blood in their veins. The above-mentioned Boxer Codex calls these "Timawas": Knights and Hidalgos. The Spanish conquistador, Miguel de Loarca, described them as "free men, neither chiefs nor slaves". In the late 1600s, the Spanish Jesuit priest Fr. Francisco Ignatio Alcina, classified them as the third rank of nobility (nobleza).^[14]

To maintain purity of bloodline, Datus marry only among their kind, often seeking high ranking brides in other Barangays, abducting them, or contracting brideprices in gold, slaves and jewelry. Meanwhile, the Datus keep their marriageable daughters secluded for protection and prestige.^[39] These well-guarded and protected highborn women were called "Binokot",^[40] the Datus of pure descent (four generations) were called "Potli nga Datu" or "Lubus nga Datu",^[41] while a woman of noble lineage (especially the elderly) are addressed by the inhabitants of Panay as "Uray" (meaning: pure as gold), e.g., Uray Hilway.^[42]

Datu in pre-colonial principalities in the Tagalog region[edit]

Tagalog royal couple in red, the distinctive colour of their class.

The different type of culture prevalent in Luzon gave a less stable and more complex social structure to the pre-colonial Tagalog barangays of Manila, Pampanga and Laguna. Enjoying a more extensive commerce than those in Visayas, having the influence of Bornean political contacts, and engaging in farming wet rice for a living, the Tagalogs were described by the Spanish Augustinian Friar Martin de Rada as more traders than warriors.^[43]

The more complex social structure of the Tagalogs was less stable during the arrival of the Spaniards because it was still in a process of differentiating. In this society, the term Datu or Lakan, or Apo refers to the chief, but the noble class (to which the Datu belonged, or could come from) was the Maginoo Class. One could be born a Maginoo, but could become a 'Datu by personal achievement.^[44]

Variation in social stratification[edit]

Kampilan - the common weapon of the pre-colonial warrior class.

In the middle of the seventeenth century, the Jesuit missionary Francisco Colin made an attempt to give an approximate comparison of the social stratification in Tagalog culture with that in the Visayan culture. While social mobility was possible in the former, in the Visayas, the Datu (if had the personality and economic means) could retain and restrain competing peers, relatives, and offspring from moving up the social ladder.^[44]

The term Timawa came into use in the Tagalog social structure within just twenty years after the coming of the Spaniards. The term, however, was being applied to former Alipin (Third Class) who have escaped bondage by payment, favor, or flight. The Tagalog Timawas did not have the military prominence of the Visayan Timawa. The warrior class in the Tagalog society was present only in Laguna, and they were called the Maharlika Class. At the early part of the Spanish regime, the number of their members who were coming to rent land from their Datus was increasing.^[44]

Unlike the Visayan Datus, the Lakans and Apos of Luzon could call all non-Maginoo subjects to work in the Datu’s fields or do all sorts of other personal labor. In the Visayas, only the Oripuns were obliged to do that, and to pay tribute besides. The Tagalog who works in the Datu’s field did not pay him tribute, and could transfer their allegiance to another Datu.^[44]

The Visayan Timawa neither paid tribute nor performed agricultural labor. In this sense, they were truly aristocrats. The Tagalog Maharlika did not only work in his Datu’s field, but could also be required to pay his own rent. Thus, all non-Maginoo in Luzon formed a common economic class in some sense, though this class had no designation.^[44]

In other parts of the Archipelago, even though the majority of these barangays were not large settlements, yet they had organized societies dominated by the same type of recognized aristocracy and Lordships (with birthright claim to allegiance from followers), as those found in more established, richer and more developed Principalities.^[45]

Material affluence[edit]

Since the culture of the Pre-colonial societies in the Visayas, Northern Mindanao, and Luzon were largely influenced by Hindu and Buddhist cultures, the Datus who ruled these Principalities (such as Butuan Calinan, Ranau Gandamatu, Maguindanao Polangi, Cebu, Bohol, Panay, Mindoro and Manila) also share the many customs of royalties and nobles in Southeast Asian territories (with Hindu and Buddhist cultures), especially in the way they used to dress and adorn themselves with gold and silk. The Boxer Codex bears testimony to this fact. The measure of the prince's possession of gold and slaves was proportionate to his greatness and nobility.^[46] The first Westerners, who came to the Archipelago, observed that there was hardly any "Indian" who did not possess chains and other articles of gold.^[47]

Datu during the Spanish period[edit]

The Datu Class (First Estate) of the four echelons of Filipino Society at the time of contact with the Europeans (as described by Fr. Juan de Plasencia- a pioneer Franciscan missionary in the Philippines), was referred to by the Spaniards as the Principalía. Loarca,^[48] and the Canon Lawyer Antonio de Morga, who classified the Society into three estates (ruler, ruled, slave), also affirmed the usage of this term and also spoke about the preeminence of the Principales.^[49] All members of this Datu class were Principales,^[50] whether they ruled or not.^[51] San Buenaventura's 1613 Dictionary of the Tagalog Language defines three terms that clarify the concept of this Principalía:^[49]

1. Poón or punò (chief, leader) - principal or head of a lineage.
2. Ginoó - a noble by lineage and parentage, family and descent.
3. Maginoo - principal in lineage or parentage.

The Spanish term seňor (lord) is equated with all these three terms, which are distinguished from the nouveau riche imitators scornfully called Maygintao (man with gold or Hidalgo by gold, and not by lineage).^[52]

Upon the Christianization of most parts of the Philippine Archipelago, the Datus retained their right to govern their territory under the Spanish Empire.^[53] King Philip II of Spain, in a law signed June 11, 1594,^[54] commanded the Spanish colonial officials in the Archipelago that these native royalties and nobilities be given the same respect, and privileges that they had enjoyed before their conversion. Their domains became self-ruled tributary barangays of the Spanish Empire.

Costume of a family belonging to Principalía during the 19th century. Picture taken from the exhibit in Villa Escudero Museum in San Pablo Laguna, Philippines.

The Filipino royals and nobles formed part of the exclusive, and elite ruling class, called the Principalía (Noble Class) of the Philippines. The Principalía was the class that constituted a birthright aristocracy with claims to respect, obedience, and support from those of subordinate status.^[52]

With the recognition of the Spanish monarchs came the privilege of being addressed as Don or Doña.^[55] - a mark of esteem and distinction in Europe reserved for a person of noble or royal status during the colonial period. Other honors and high regard were also accorded to the Christianized Datus by the Spanish Empire. For example, the Gobernadorcillos (elected leader of the Cabezas de Barangay or the Christianized Datus) and Filipino officials of justice received the greatest consideration from the Spanish Crown officials. The colonial officials were under obligation to show them the honor corresponding to their respective duties. They were allowed to sit in the houses of the Spanish Provincial Governors, and in any other places. They were not left to remain standing. It was not permitted for Spanish Parish Priests to treat these Filipino nobles with less consideration.^[56]

The Gobernadorcillos exercised the command of the towns. They were Port Captains in coastal towns.^[57] Their office corresponds to that of the alcaldes and municipal judges of the Iberian Peninsula. They performed at once the functions of judges and even of notaries with defined powers.^[58] They also had the rights and powers to elect assistants and several lieutenants and alguaciles, proportionate in number to the inhabitants of the town.^[58]

By the end of the 16th century, any claim to Filipino royalty, nobility, or hidalguía had disappeared into a homogenized, hispanized and Christianized nobility - the Principalía.^[59] This remnant of the pre-colonial royal and noble families continued to rule their traditional domain until the end of the Spanish Regime. However, there were cases when succession in leadership was also done through election of new leaders (Cabezas de Barangay), especially in provinces near the central colonial government in Manila where the ancient ruling families lost their prestige and role. Perhaps proximity to the central power diminished their significance. However, in distant territories, where the central authority had less control and where order could be maintained without using coercive measures, hereditary succession was still enforced until Spain lost the Archipelago to the Americans. These distant territories remained Patriarchal societies, where people retained great respect for the Principalía.^[60]

The Principalía was larger and more influential than the pre-conquest Indigenous nobility. It helped create and perpetuate an oligarchic system in the Spanish colony for more than three hundred years.^[61][62] The Spanish colonial government's prohibition for foreigners to own land in the Philippines contributed to the evolution of this form of oligarchy. In some provinces of the Philippines, many Spaniards and foreign merchants intermarried with the rich and landed Malayo-Polynesian local nobilities. From these unions, a new cultural group was formed, the Mestizo class.^[63] Their descendants emerged later to become an influential part of the government, and the Principalía. .^[64]

Honorary datus[edit]

The title of "Honorary Datu" has also been conferred to certain foreigners and non-tribe members by the heads of local tribes and Principalities of ancient origin. During the colonial period, some of these titles carried with them immense legal privileges. For example, on 22 January 1878, Sultan Jamalul A'Lam of Sulu appointed the Baron de Overbeck (an Austrian who was then the Austro-Hungarian Empire's Consul-General in Hong Kong) as Datu Bendahara and as Rajah of Sandakan, with the fullest power of life and death over all the inhabitants.^[65] On the other hand, in the Philippines, the Spaniards did not practice the granting of honorary titles. Instead, they created nobiliary titles over conquered territories in the Archipelago, in order to reward high Spanish colonial officials. These nobiiary titles are still used in Spain until now by the descendants of the original holders, e.g., Count of Jolo.^[66][67][68] At present, arrangements such as this can no longer carry similar legal bearing under the Philippine laws.

The various tribes and claimants to the royal titles of certain indigenous peoples in the Philippines have their own particular or personal customs in conferring local honorary titles, which correspond to the specific and traditional social structures of some indigenous peoples in the Country.^[69][70]

(N.B. In unhispanized, unchristianized and unislamized parts of the Philippines, there exist other structures of society, which do not have hierarchical classes.)^[31][71]

Present day datus[edit]

The present day claimants of the title and rank of datu are of three types. The two types are mostly found in Mindanao, and the third type are those that live in the predominatly Catholic mainstream Filipino society. They are:

1. The datus of the Muslim and Lumad indigenous tribal minorities, e.g., the datus of the Cuyunon Tribe of Palawan. Their rights are protected by a special law in the country, known as "The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997".^[72]
2. The datus and Sultan's of historical and influential pre-colonial polities that were not totally subjected to Spaniash rule, e.g., Sultanate of Jolo, Sultanate of Maguindnao, who still claim at least the titles of their ancestors.
3. The descendants of the Principalía, whose status and prerogatives as nobles were recognized and confirmed by the Spanish Empire.

Heirs to the rank of datu in the Catholic parts of the Philippines[edit]

In the mainstream Philippine society that is overwhelmingly Catholic, the descendants of the Principalía are the rightful claimants of the ancient sovereign royal and noble ranks of the pre-conquest kingdoms, principalities, and barangays of their ancestors. These descendants of the ancient ruling class are now among the landed aristocracy, intellectual elite, merchants, and politicians in the contemporary Filipino society. These people have had ancestors holding the titles of "Don" or "Doña" (which have also been used by Spanish royalties and nobilities) during the Spanish colonial period, as a compromise by the Spanish Crown to their previous indigenous titles.^[55][73]

Philippine Constitution and the Law on Indigenous Minorities[edit]

A 1926 photograph of Bagobo (Manobo) warriors in full war regalia. The Bagobo are one of several Lumad tribes in Mindanao.

Article VI, Section 31 of the 1987 Constitution explicitly forbids the creation, granting, and use of new royal or noble titles.^[74] Titles of "Honorary Datu" conferred by various ethnic groups to certain foreigners and non-tribe members by local chieftains are only forms of local award or appreciation for some goods or services done to a local tribe or to the person of the chieftain, and are not legally binding. Any contrary claim is otherwise unconstitutional under Philippine law.

However, through the Indigenous Peoples' Rights Act of 1997, the Republic also protects the peculiar situation of tribal minorities and their traditional indigenous social structures. This special law allows members of indigenous minority tribes to be conferred with traditional leadership titles, including the title Datu, in a manner specified under the Law's Implementing rules and guidelines (Administrative Order No. 1, Series of 1998, of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples specifically under Rule IV, Part I, Section 2, a-c), which read:

a) Right to Confer Leadership Titles. The ICCs/IPs concerned, in accordance with their customary laws and practices, shall have the sole right to vest titles of leadership such as, but not limited to, Bae, Datu, Baylan, Timuay, Likid and such other titles to their members.

b) Recognition of Leadership Titles. To forestall undue conferment of leadership titles and misrepresentations, the ICCs/IPs concerned, may, at their option, submit a list of their recognized traditional socio-political leaders with their corresponding titles to the NCIP. The NCIP through its field offices, shall conduct a field validation of said list and shall maintain a national directory thereof.

c) Issuance of Certificates of Tribal Membership. Only the recognized registered leaders are authorized to issue certificates of tribal membership to their members. Such certificates shall be confirmed by the NCIP based on its census and records and shall have effect only for the purpose for which it was issued.

Pre-colonial Polities and Fons honorum[edit]

The fons honorum (source of honour) in the modern Philippine state is the sovereign Filipino people, who are equal in dignity under a democratic form of government.^[74] The Philippine government grants state honours and decorations, and through the system of awards and decorations of its Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police. These honours do not grant or create titles of royalty or nobility, in accordance with the Constitution.

Deducing from the theory of Jean Bodin (1530–1596), a French jurist and political philosopher, it could be said that ancient Filipino royalties, who never relinquished their sovereign rights by voluntary means (according to opinions of some historians), of whom the sovereign powers over their territories (de facto sovereignty) passed on to the Spanish jura regalia through some disputed means, retain their "fons honorum" as part of their de jure sovereignty. Therefore, as long as the blood is alive in the veins of these royal houses, de jure sovereignty is alive as well—which means they can still bestow titles of nobility. However, the practical implications of this claim is unclear, e.g., in the case of usurpation of titles by other members of the bloodline.^[75]

Heads of Dynasties (even the deposed ones) belong to one of the three kinds of sovereignty that has been existing in human society. The other two are: Heads of States (of all forms of government, e. g., monarchy, republican, communist, etc.), and Traditional Heads of the Church (both Roman Catholic and Orthodox). The authority that emanates from this last type is transmitted through an authentic Apostolic Succession,^[76] i.e., direct lineage of ordination and succession of Office from the Apostles (from St. Peter, in case of the Supreme Pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church - the Pope).^[77][78]

These sovereign authorities exercise the following sovereign rights and powers: Ius Imperii (the right to command and rule a territory or a juridical entity); Ius Gladii (the right to impose obedience through command and also control armies); Ius Majestatis (the right to be honored and respected according to one's title); and Ius Honorum (the right to award titles, merits and rights). Considering the theory of Jean Bodin, that "Sovereignty is one and indivisible, it cannot be delegated, sovereignty us irrevocable, sovereignty is perpetual, sovereignty is a supreme power", one can argue about the rights of deposed dynasties, also as fons honorum. It can be said that their Ius Honorum depends on their rights as a family, and does not depend on the authority of the "de facto" government of a State. This is their de jure right. Even though it is not a de facto right, it is still a right. ^[76]

But again, in case of conflict of norms on fons honorum in actual situations, the legislations of the de facto sovereign authority have precedence. All others are abrogated, unless otherwise recognized under the terms of such de facto authority.^[79]

This is the view to reconsider when we study sovereignty based on the political impact of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines to the some polities that have been existing since the pre-colonial period, e.g., Sultanate of Sulu, Sultanate of Maguindanao.^[80]

See also[edit]

Footnotes[edit]

References[edit]

External links[edit]

• Impact of Spanish Colonialization in the Philippines
• Encyclopædia Britannica - Datu (Filipino chieftain)
• The official website of the Royal Sultanate of Sulu