Sis licet ingenuus clarisque parentibus ortus;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Adde docus patriæ et claros tibi sume propinquos;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Sint tibi divitæ242sit larga et munda supellex;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Denique, quidquid eris, nisi sit prudentia tecum;Magna quidem dico, bestia semper eris.243101. May God our Lord preserve your Grace for the many years of my desire. Manila, June 8, onethousand seven hundred and twenty.244Your humble servant, who kisses your hand,Fray Gaspar de San Agustin[On a loose paper inserted in the copy of this letter owned by theMuseo-Biblioteca de Ultramar(which as stated above, is unsigned), which was formerly owned by the well known Spanish scholar Pascual de Gayangos, is the following: “According to paragraphs [of this letter] which Paterno inserted in his workLa antigua civilizacion de Filipinos(Madrid, 1887), p. 241, this letter must have been written by father Fray Gaspar de San Agustín; and according to Sinibaldo Mas, who inserts entire passages from this MS. in hisInforme sobre el estado de Filipinas en 1842, i, pp. 63–132, and attributes it to Father Gaspar.” Paterno has not had access to the document itself, but has used Mas.][Subjoined to the letter is the following, the origin of which we cannot account for, but which indicates the wide circulation that the letter must have had.]Questions of Father Pedro Murillo [Velarde]245of the Society of Jesus102. What is the Indian?Reply—The lowest degree of rational animal.Question—How many and what are his peculiarities?Reply—Twenty-one, as follows:PrideWithout honor.FriendWithout loyalty.A drunkardWithout satiety.CompassionateWithout mercy.ReservedWithout secrecy.Long-sufferingWithout patience.CowardlyWithout fear.BoldWithout resolution.ObedientWithout submissiveness.One who practices austeritiesWithout suffering.BashfulWithout sense of honor.VirtuousWithout mortification.CleverWithout capacity.CivilizedWithout politeness.AstuteWithout sagacity.MercifulWithout pity.ModestWithout shame.RevengefulWithout valor.PoorWithout corresponding [mode of life].RichWithout economy.LazyWithout negligence.Laus Deo.Résumé of the entire letter by the saidFather Murillo103. The Filipino Indian is the embryo of nature and the offspring of grossness. He does not feel an insult or show gratitude for a kindness. His continual habitation is the kitchen; and the smoke that harms all of us serves him as the most refreshingbreeze. If the Indian has morisqueta and salt, he gives himself no concern, though it rain thunder and lightning, and the sky fall. He is much given to lying, theft, and laziness. In the confessional he is a maze [embolismo] of contradictions, now denying proofs and now affirming impossible things. Now he plays the part of a devout pilgrim over rough roads and through the deepest rivers, in order to hear mass on a workday at a shrine ten or twelve leguas away; while it is necessary to use violence to get him to hear mass on Sunday in his parish church. They are impious in their necessities with the father, but liberal and charitable to their guests, even when they do not know them; and through that they are greatly disappointed. At the same time they are humble and proud; bold and atrocious, but cowardly and pusillanimous; compassionate and cruel; slothful and lazy, and diligent; careful and negligent in their own affairs; very dull and foolish for good things, but very clever and intelligent in rogueries. He who has most to do with them knows them least. Their greatest diversion is cock-fighting, and they love their cocks more than their wives and children. They are more ready to believe any of their old people than even an apostolic preacher. They resemblemellizas,246in their vices and opposite virtues. In lying alone, is no contradiction found in them; for one does not know when they are not lying, whether they are telling the truth by mistake. One Indian does not resemble another Indian, or even himself. If they are given one thing, they immediately ask for another.247They never fail to deceive, unless itcrosses their own interest. In their suits, they are like flies on the food, who never quit it, however much they be brushed away. Finally, there is no fixed rule by which to construe them; a new syntax is necessary for each one; and, as they are all anomalous, the most intelligent man would be distracted248if he tried to define them. Farewell.[Delgado has the following interesting chapter (pp. 297–302 of hisHistoria) on this letter, which it is judged advisable to present at this place.]Chapter VIISome considerations concerning the matter in Father Gaspar de San Agustín’s letterI confess that I read this letter, in which the reverend author criticises the customs and dispositions of the natives of Filipinas, some years ago. But I read it as I am wont to read other letters, for diversion and amusement, without thinking much about its artfulness, and I was delighted with its erudition. However, when I afterward considered its contents with some degree of thought, I saw that it brought forward, in its whole length, no solid proof of what it tries to make one believe; and it appeared to me a hyperbolical criticism from the very beginning. On that account I resolved to make a few brief commentaries on the matter in the letter, both for the consolation of those whom our Lord may call to these missions, and so that it may be understood that at times sadness and melancholy are accustomed to heighten things, making giants out of pygmies—all the more, if a relish for revery and grumbling be joined with a tendency to exaggeration and withfigures of speech corresponding thereto. Consequently, I am surprised that the reverend annalist or chronicler [i.e., San Antonio] of the seraphic province of San Gregorio praises this letter, saying that it is worth printing, since its author has penetrated as far as one may penetrate into the characters of the natives of these islands. And yet the author confesses that it is as difficult to define their nature as are the eight impossible things which are recounted there. That seems to me a fine hyperbole.From the above one can see that, as he commenced this letter by affirming a hyperbole with eight hyperboles, it is not surprising that I called it hyperbolical; and especially if all the hyperboles that it contains from its beginning to its end be enumerated. But ere I begin to express my opinion I would like to sum up two contradictory and opposite expressions that I find in these authors. The reverend father Fray Gaspar says of the Indians, in his letter, that the difficulty of knowing the Indians lies not in the individual but in the race, for, if one be known, all are known.Father Pedro Murillo says, in his approbation of theCronicas,249that “there is no fixed rule by whichto construe the Indians; for each one needs a new syntax, all being anomalous. With the Indians the argument does not conclude by induction, since no oneis like to himself; for, in the short circuit of a day, he changes into more colors than a chameleon, takes more shapes than a Proteus, and has more movementsthan a Euripus.250He who has most to do with them, knows them least. In short, they are an aggregate of contrarieties, and the best logician cannot reconcile them. They are an obscure and confused chaos, in which no species can be perceived and no points of exactness distinguished.” All these terms considered one by one, compose a very exaggerated hyperbole, in which this author showed his great erudition and little experience, for he only ministered in a few missions, and for a short time. For during most of the time while he lived in these islands he did not leave the professor’s chair, except for a short time; and all that he tells of his journey to and travels among the Visayas was learned in passing and hastily, in company with the provincial who visited those missions. There he obtained very little light on the character and temperament of the Indians, as he had no dealings with them as one settled among them. And, just as in this expression he opposes himself without much reason to the reverend father Fray Gaspar, who after forty years of ministry, affirms that the Indians are well designated by the Greek wordmonopantas—a term which was given to a certain people by a critic, as they were all similar and homogeneous—so also when he affirms that all are anomalous and heterogeneous because they cannot all be constructed in one and the same syntax, does he go beyond the credence that can be given to his ingenious hyperboles. The experience that the said Father Murillo could have is of the Indianswho go about in Manila and its environs, who are interpreters, servants in accounting-rooms and secretarial offices, who are accustomed to deal with Spaniards of all kinds, with creoles, mestizos, Sangleys, and other kinds of people who assemble there for trade. They have learned fraud and deceit, as well as the bad morals and propensities of all and every one of them. As is seen, one cannot judge of a whole nation—and much less of all the nations of the islands, who are diverse and distinct in genius and customs by the cases of these Indians who speak Spanish. And taking into account so great diversity, I affirm that it is impossible to find a definition that admits and includes all of them. For these persons whom I have mentioned, reared among so many classes, and among people so heterogeneous, and who are imbued with customs so diverse, cannot form rules by which to explain their own nation, much less by which to define the other nations.Now if the statements of authors in regard to physical or moral matters are so at variance that we can say that each author has a different opinion—as says the proverb,Quot capita, tot sententiæ—and if thus far no ground and certain point has been found at which the understanding may stop, how is it strange that they do not find, in order to describe Indians with customs so unusual and artificial as have those of Manila, a compound idea made up of all that they have learned from the Spaniard, both good and evil; all that they have learned from the Guachinango;251and what they have learned from the mestizo,the Sangley, the Moro, the Malabar, the Cafre, and all the other people with whom they have intercourse and with whom they trade? Granting this to be true, it appears that the definition of Father Murillo fits these Spanish-speaking Indians, but not the others, who have not had any intercourse with diverse classes of people. On this account it seems to me that father Fray Gaspar hit the definition exactly, when he said in his letter that the Asiatic Indians of Filipinas are almost the same as all the people of the nations of Eastern India, in what concerns their genius, disposition, and inclination; and are not distinguished one from another except in their rites, clothing, and languages. I add, in what regards their abilities and capacities—which are so good, and in general so well inclined—that I believe that if children, either boys or girls, were taken from Filipinas to Viscaya or to Castilla, the natives [of those countries] would not distinguish them from the Vizcainos, Castilians, or mountaineers. For their vices are not due so much to their nature, as to their bad rearing and education; and they are easily instructed both in the evil and in the good. And notwithstanding what father Fray Gaspar, Father Murillo, and Fray Juan [Francisco] de San Antonio have said, they would have been more successful had they not said, with exaggeration, thatit would be impossible to writeeverything that they have observed of the Indians, on all the paper that is found in China. That is a hyperbole that transcends all faith. Thus does he continue in all that he says; and he affirms, further, that it surpasses all that we can touch with the hands or see with the eyes. Hence from the beginning we can state those two rules of law:semelmalus, semper præsumitur malus; and the other,malum ex quocumque defectu.252...What mystery is there in the customs and genius of the Indians that should make them so deep and inscrutable that we cannot reach them, sound them, and explain them? since they are Indians like all the rest of the people of Asia, without there being more or less in them. Therefore, “these profundities, this intricate, confused chaos, this aggregate of contrarieties, this maze of contradictions, are a collection of rhetorical locutions or tropes invented in order to exaggerate and to use hyperboles in what of itself has no mystery—these definitions remaining purely in the manner of speech, or of the conception, of their authors; or perhaps in a mere misapprehension formed by a critical, melancholy, or affected genius.But since in this letter, the evil propensities of the Indians, both men and lads, who act as servants, are set down in detail, let us see on the other hand, somewhat of the good that the Indians possess. For one should not write and consider only the evil, and omit as fitting all the good, in order thereby to make the object more detestable. For, as says a mystical writer, we must not possess the nature of the dung-beetle, which goes always to the dungheap, but that of the bee, which always seeks out the sweet and pleasant. Let us see what Father Murillo says of the good: “They are most clever in any handiwork, not in inventing but in imitating what they see. They are most beautiful writers; and there are many tailors and barbers among them. They are excellent embroiderers, painters, goldsmiths, and engravers,whose burin has not the like in all the Indias (and I was even about to pass farther if shame did not restrain me), as is seen clearly in the many good engravings that they make daily. They are good sculptors, gilders, and carpenters. They make the water craft of these islands, the galleys, pataches, and ships of the Acapulco line. They act as sailors, artillery-men, and divers; for there is scarce an Indian who cannot swim excellently. They are the under-pilots of these seas. They are very expert in making bejuquillos,253which are gold chains of a very delicate and exquisite workmanship. They make hats,petatesor rugs, and mats, from palm-leaves, rattan, and nito,254which are very beautiful, and embroidered with various kinds of flowers and figures. They are remarkable mechanics and puppet-showmen, and they make complicated mechanisms which, by means of figures, go through various motions with propriety and accuracy. There are some jewelers. They make powder, and cast swivel-guns, cannon, and bells. I have seen them make guns as fine as those of Europa. There are three printing houses in Manila, and all have Indian workmen. They have great ability in music. There is no village however small, that has not its suitable band of musicians for the services of the Church. They have excellent voices—sopranos, contraltos, tenors, and basses. Almost all of them can play the harp, and there are manyviolinists, rebeck, oboe, and flute players. The most remarkable thing is, that not only do those whose trade it is make those instruments; but various Indians make guitars, flutes, harps, and violins, for pleasure, with their bolos and machetes. And by the mere seeing those instruments played, they learn them almost without any teaching; and the same thing occurs in other things. On this account it is said that the Indians have their understanding in their eyes, since they imitate whatever they see, by another like it.” This is what Father Murillo says; but he left the most important things in the inkhorn. I will add them here, as I have heard them affirmed many times by the Spaniards in Cavite, namely: Who are the men who convey and conduct the ships and galleons from Acapulco and other kingdoms? Is it the Spaniards? Ask that of the pilots, masters, and boatswains, and they will all affirm that this great and inestimable good is due to the Indian alone. (Here is indeed where a hyperbole will fit exactly.) Besides this, who are the people who support us in these lands and those who furnish us food? Perhaps the Spaniards dig, harvest, and plant throughout the islands? Of a surety, no; for when they arrive at Manila, they are all gentlemen. The Indians are the ones who plow the lands, who sow the rice, who keep it clear [of weeds], who tend it, who harvest it, who thrash it out with their feet—and not only the rice which is consumed in Manila, but that throughout the Filipinas—and there is no one in all the islands who can deny me that. Besides this, who cares for the cattle-ranches? The Spaniards? Certainly not. The Indians are the ones who care for, and manage and tend the sheep and cattle by whichthe Spaniards are supported. Who rears the swine? Is it not the same Indians? Who cultivates the fruits—the bananas, cacao, and all the other fruits of the earth? of which there is always abundance in the islands, unless unfavorable weather, locusts, or some other accident cause their loss? Who provide Manila and the Spaniards with oil? Is it not the poor Visayan Indians, who bring it in their vessels annually? Who furnishes so great profit to the Spaniards in Manila with the balate255and sigay; and who buys these products very cheaply from the wretched Indians, and resell them for double the sum to the pataches of the coast and to the Sangleys? Who guide and convey us to the villages and missions, and serve us as guides, sailors, and pilots? Perhaps it is the Spaniards? No, it is the Indians themselves, with their so exaggerated, magnified, and heightened laziness. Is this the thanks that we give them, when we are conquering them in their own lands, and have made ourselves masters in them, and are served by them almost as by slaves? We ought to give God our Lord many thanks, because He maintains us only through the affection and by the useful labors of the Indians in this land; and He would perhaps have already driven us hence if it were not for this usefulness of theirs, and for the salvation of the Indians.We also owe many thanks to the Indians, since God our Lord sustains us in their lands by their means; and because we would die of starvation if they did not sustain us, provide us with food, serve us, and conduct us through the islands with so much love and security that they would all first perish before the father in whatever perils arise.These and many other like things were overlooked by Father Murillo, who was enraptured by their music, engraving, and rugs. By the aforesaid, one will see with how little truth the statement is printed that the Indians are the greatest enemies that the father ministers have; for certainly all the above could not be reconciled with such a proposition. On the contrary, it must be said that the Indians are those who defend us from our enemies; for, in the presidios, who are the soldiers, who sail in the war fleets, who are in the vanguard in war? Could the Spaniards, perchance, maintain themselves alone in this country, if the Indians did not aid in everything? Little experience and less reflection would he have who should propose such a thing. Therefore, these two things do not harmonize well, that those who hate us should defend us, and that those who are our greatest enemies should be the ones to maintain and support us. Nor is it to be wondered at that there have been insurrections on several occasions; these, perhaps, have not arisen because the Indians were ill-disposed to the Spaniards; but, on the contrary, we know that many of them have been caused by the cruelty, wickedness, and tyranny of some alcalde-mayor and other Spaniards who, having been elevated from low beginnings, try to become gods and kings in the provinces, tyrannizing over the Indiansand their possessions. This is often the cause of the insurrections. Would that I could mention some especial cases in this matter. However, I do not care to dip my pen in blood, and write tragedies instead of history. For, although I could say more, the authority and arrogance that every Spaniard assumes upon his arrival in this country is incredible.
Sis licet ingenuus clarisque parentibus ortus;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Adde docus patriæ et claros tibi sume propinquos;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Sint tibi divitæ242sit larga et munda supellex;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Denique, quidquid eris, nisi sit prudentia tecum;Magna quidem dico, bestia semper eris.243101. May God our Lord preserve your Grace for the many years of my desire. Manila, June 8, onethousand seven hundred and twenty.244Your humble servant, who kisses your hand,Fray Gaspar de San Agustin[On a loose paper inserted in the copy of this letter owned by theMuseo-Biblioteca de Ultramar(which as stated above, is unsigned), which was formerly owned by the well known Spanish scholar Pascual de Gayangos, is the following: “According to paragraphs [of this letter] which Paterno inserted in his workLa antigua civilizacion de Filipinos(Madrid, 1887), p. 241, this letter must have been written by father Fray Gaspar de San Agustín; and according to Sinibaldo Mas, who inserts entire passages from this MS. in hisInforme sobre el estado de Filipinas en 1842, i, pp. 63–132, and attributes it to Father Gaspar.” Paterno has not had access to the document itself, but has used Mas.][Subjoined to the letter is the following, the origin of which we cannot account for, but which indicates the wide circulation that the letter must have had.]Questions of Father Pedro Murillo [Velarde]245of the Society of Jesus102. What is the Indian?Reply—The lowest degree of rational animal.Question—How many and what are his peculiarities?Reply—Twenty-one, as follows:PrideWithout honor.FriendWithout loyalty.A drunkardWithout satiety.CompassionateWithout mercy.ReservedWithout secrecy.Long-sufferingWithout patience.CowardlyWithout fear.BoldWithout resolution.ObedientWithout submissiveness.One who practices austeritiesWithout suffering.BashfulWithout sense of honor.VirtuousWithout mortification.CleverWithout capacity.CivilizedWithout politeness.AstuteWithout sagacity.MercifulWithout pity.ModestWithout shame.RevengefulWithout valor.PoorWithout corresponding [mode of life].RichWithout economy.LazyWithout negligence.Laus Deo.Résumé of the entire letter by the saidFather Murillo103. The Filipino Indian is the embryo of nature and the offspring of grossness. He does not feel an insult or show gratitude for a kindness. His continual habitation is the kitchen; and the smoke that harms all of us serves him as the most refreshingbreeze. If the Indian has morisqueta and salt, he gives himself no concern, though it rain thunder and lightning, and the sky fall. He is much given to lying, theft, and laziness. In the confessional he is a maze [embolismo] of contradictions, now denying proofs and now affirming impossible things. Now he plays the part of a devout pilgrim over rough roads and through the deepest rivers, in order to hear mass on a workday at a shrine ten or twelve leguas away; while it is necessary to use violence to get him to hear mass on Sunday in his parish church. They are impious in their necessities with the father, but liberal and charitable to their guests, even when they do not know them; and through that they are greatly disappointed. At the same time they are humble and proud; bold and atrocious, but cowardly and pusillanimous; compassionate and cruel; slothful and lazy, and diligent; careful and negligent in their own affairs; very dull and foolish for good things, but very clever and intelligent in rogueries. He who has most to do with them knows them least. Their greatest diversion is cock-fighting, and they love their cocks more than their wives and children. They are more ready to believe any of their old people than even an apostolic preacher. They resemblemellizas,246in their vices and opposite virtues. In lying alone, is no contradiction found in them; for one does not know when they are not lying, whether they are telling the truth by mistake. One Indian does not resemble another Indian, or even himself. If they are given one thing, they immediately ask for another.247They never fail to deceive, unless itcrosses their own interest. In their suits, they are like flies on the food, who never quit it, however much they be brushed away. Finally, there is no fixed rule by which to construe them; a new syntax is necessary for each one; and, as they are all anomalous, the most intelligent man would be distracted248if he tried to define them. Farewell.[Delgado has the following interesting chapter (pp. 297–302 of hisHistoria) on this letter, which it is judged advisable to present at this place.]Chapter VIISome considerations concerning the matter in Father Gaspar de San Agustín’s letterI confess that I read this letter, in which the reverend author criticises the customs and dispositions of the natives of Filipinas, some years ago. But I read it as I am wont to read other letters, for diversion and amusement, without thinking much about its artfulness, and I was delighted with its erudition. However, when I afterward considered its contents with some degree of thought, I saw that it brought forward, in its whole length, no solid proof of what it tries to make one believe; and it appeared to me a hyperbolical criticism from the very beginning. On that account I resolved to make a few brief commentaries on the matter in the letter, both for the consolation of those whom our Lord may call to these missions, and so that it may be understood that at times sadness and melancholy are accustomed to heighten things, making giants out of pygmies—all the more, if a relish for revery and grumbling be joined with a tendency to exaggeration and withfigures of speech corresponding thereto. Consequently, I am surprised that the reverend annalist or chronicler [i.e., San Antonio] of the seraphic province of San Gregorio praises this letter, saying that it is worth printing, since its author has penetrated as far as one may penetrate into the characters of the natives of these islands. And yet the author confesses that it is as difficult to define their nature as are the eight impossible things which are recounted there. That seems to me a fine hyperbole.From the above one can see that, as he commenced this letter by affirming a hyperbole with eight hyperboles, it is not surprising that I called it hyperbolical; and especially if all the hyperboles that it contains from its beginning to its end be enumerated. But ere I begin to express my opinion I would like to sum up two contradictory and opposite expressions that I find in these authors. The reverend father Fray Gaspar says of the Indians, in his letter, that the difficulty of knowing the Indians lies not in the individual but in the race, for, if one be known, all are known.Father Pedro Murillo says, in his approbation of theCronicas,249that “there is no fixed rule by whichto construe the Indians; for each one needs a new syntax, all being anomalous. With the Indians the argument does not conclude by induction, since no oneis like to himself; for, in the short circuit of a day, he changes into more colors than a chameleon, takes more shapes than a Proteus, and has more movementsthan a Euripus.250He who has most to do with them, knows them least. In short, they are an aggregate of contrarieties, and the best logician cannot reconcile them. They are an obscure and confused chaos, in which no species can be perceived and no points of exactness distinguished.” All these terms considered one by one, compose a very exaggerated hyperbole, in which this author showed his great erudition and little experience, for he only ministered in a few missions, and for a short time. For during most of the time while he lived in these islands he did not leave the professor’s chair, except for a short time; and all that he tells of his journey to and travels among the Visayas was learned in passing and hastily, in company with the provincial who visited those missions. There he obtained very little light on the character and temperament of the Indians, as he had no dealings with them as one settled among them. And, just as in this expression he opposes himself without much reason to the reverend father Fray Gaspar, who after forty years of ministry, affirms that the Indians are well designated by the Greek wordmonopantas—a term which was given to a certain people by a critic, as they were all similar and homogeneous—so also when he affirms that all are anomalous and heterogeneous because they cannot all be constructed in one and the same syntax, does he go beyond the credence that can be given to his ingenious hyperboles. The experience that the said Father Murillo could have is of the Indianswho go about in Manila and its environs, who are interpreters, servants in accounting-rooms and secretarial offices, who are accustomed to deal with Spaniards of all kinds, with creoles, mestizos, Sangleys, and other kinds of people who assemble there for trade. They have learned fraud and deceit, as well as the bad morals and propensities of all and every one of them. As is seen, one cannot judge of a whole nation—and much less of all the nations of the islands, who are diverse and distinct in genius and customs by the cases of these Indians who speak Spanish. And taking into account so great diversity, I affirm that it is impossible to find a definition that admits and includes all of them. For these persons whom I have mentioned, reared among so many classes, and among people so heterogeneous, and who are imbued with customs so diverse, cannot form rules by which to explain their own nation, much less by which to define the other nations.Now if the statements of authors in regard to physical or moral matters are so at variance that we can say that each author has a different opinion—as says the proverb,Quot capita, tot sententiæ—and if thus far no ground and certain point has been found at which the understanding may stop, how is it strange that they do not find, in order to describe Indians with customs so unusual and artificial as have those of Manila, a compound idea made up of all that they have learned from the Spaniard, both good and evil; all that they have learned from the Guachinango;251and what they have learned from the mestizo,the Sangley, the Moro, the Malabar, the Cafre, and all the other people with whom they have intercourse and with whom they trade? Granting this to be true, it appears that the definition of Father Murillo fits these Spanish-speaking Indians, but not the others, who have not had any intercourse with diverse classes of people. On this account it seems to me that father Fray Gaspar hit the definition exactly, when he said in his letter that the Asiatic Indians of Filipinas are almost the same as all the people of the nations of Eastern India, in what concerns their genius, disposition, and inclination; and are not distinguished one from another except in their rites, clothing, and languages. I add, in what regards their abilities and capacities—which are so good, and in general so well inclined—that I believe that if children, either boys or girls, were taken from Filipinas to Viscaya or to Castilla, the natives [of those countries] would not distinguish them from the Vizcainos, Castilians, or mountaineers. For their vices are not due so much to their nature, as to their bad rearing and education; and they are easily instructed both in the evil and in the good. And notwithstanding what father Fray Gaspar, Father Murillo, and Fray Juan [Francisco] de San Antonio have said, they would have been more successful had they not said, with exaggeration, thatit would be impossible to writeeverything that they have observed of the Indians, on all the paper that is found in China. That is a hyperbole that transcends all faith. Thus does he continue in all that he says; and he affirms, further, that it surpasses all that we can touch with the hands or see with the eyes. Hence from the beginning we can state those two rules of law:semelmalus, semper præsumitur malus; and the other,malum ex quocumque defectu.252...What mystery is there in the customs and genius of the Indians that should make them so deep and inscrutable that we cannot reach them, sound them, and explain them? since they are Indians like all the rest of the people of Asia, without there being more or less in them. Therefore, “these profundities, this intricate, confused chaos, this aggregate of contrarieties, this maze of contradictions, are a collection of rhetorical locutions or tropes invented in order to exaggerate and to use hyperboles in what of itself has no mystery—these definitions remaining purely in the manner of speech, or of the conception, of their authors; or perhaps in a mere misapprehension formed by a critical, melancholy, or affected genius.But since in this letter, the evil propensities of the Indians, both men and lads, who act as servants, are set down in detail, let us see on the other hand, somewhat of the good that the Indians possess. For one should not write and consider only the evil, and omit as fitting all the good, in order thereby to make the object more detestable. For, as says a mystical writer, we must not possess the nature of the dung-beetle, which goes always to the dungheap, but that of the bee, which always seeks out the sweet and pleasant. Let us see what Father Murillo says of the good: “They are most clever in any handiwork, not in inventing but in imitating what they see. They are most beautiful writers; and there are many tailors and barbers among them. They are excellent embroiderers, painters, goldsmiths, and engravers,whose burin has not the like in all the Indias (and I was even about to pass farther if shame did not restrain me), as is seen clearly in the many good engravings that they make daily. They are good sculptors, gilders, and carpenters. They make the water craft of these islands, the galleys, pataches, and ships of the Acapulco line. They act as sailors, artillery-men, and divers; for there is scarce an Indian who cannot swim excellently. They are the under-pilots of these seas. They are very expert in making bejuquillos,253which are gold chains of a very delicate and exquisite workmanship. They make hats,petatesor rugs, and mats, from palm-leaves, rattan, and nito,254which are very beautiful, and embroidered with various kinds of flowers and figures. They are remarkable mechanics and puppet-showmen, and they make complicated mechanisms which, by means of figures, go through various motions with propriety and accuracy. There are some jewelers. They make powder, and cast swivel-guns, cannon, and bells. I have seen them make guns as fine as those of Europa. There are three printing houses in Manila, and all have Indian workmen. They have great ability in music. There is no village however small, that has not its suitable band of musicians for the services of the Church. They have excellent voices—sopranos, contraltos, tenors, and basses. Almost all of them can play the harp, and there are manyviolinists, rebeck, oboe, and flute players. The most remarkable thing is, that not only do those whose trade it is make those instruments; but various Indians make guitars, flutes, harps, and violins, for pleasure, with their bolos and machetes. And by the mere seeing those instruments played, they learn them almost without any teaching; and the same thing occurs in other things. On this account it is said that the Indians have their understanding in their eyes, since they imitate whatever they see, by another like it.” This is what Father Murillo says; but he left the most important things in the inkhorn. I will add them here, as I have heard them affirmed many times by the Spaniards in Cavite, namely: Who are the men who convey and conduct the ships and galleons from Acapulco and other kingdoms? Is it the Spaniards? Ask that of the pilots, masters, and boatswains, and they will all affirm that this great and inestimable good is due to the Indian alone. (Here is indeed where a hyperbole will fit exactly.) Besides this, who are the people who support us in these lands and those who furnish us food? Perhaps the Spaniards dig, harvest, and plant throughout the islands? Of a surety, no; for when they arrive at Manila, they are all gentlemen. The Indians are the ones who plow the lands, who sow the rice, who keep it clear [of weeds], who tend it, who harvest it, who thrash it out with their feet—and not only the rice which is consumed in Manila, but that throughout the Filipinas—and there is no one in all the islands who can deny me that. Besides this, who cares for the cattle-ranches? The Spaniards? Certainly not. The Indians are the ones who care for, and manage and tend the sheep and cattle by whichthe Spaniards are supported. Who rears the swine? Is it not the same Indians? Who cultivates the fruits—the bananas, cacao, and all the other fruits of the earth? of which there is always abundance in the islands, unless unfavorable weather, locusts, or some other accident cause their loss? Who provide Manila and the Spaniards with oil? Is it not the poor Visayan Indians, who bring it in their vessels annually? Who furnishes so great profit to the Spaniards in Manila with the balate255and sigay; and who buys these products very cheaply from the wretched Indians, and resell them for double the sum to the pataches of the coast and to the Sangleys? Who guide and convey us to the villages and missions, and serve us as guides, sailors, and pilots? Perhaps it is the Spaniards? No, it is the Indians themselves, with their so exaggerated, magnified, and heightened laziness. Is this the thanks that we give them, when we are conquering them in their own lands, and have made ourselves masters in them, and are served by them almost as by slaves? We ought to give God our Lord many thanks, because He maintains us only through the affection and by the useful labors of the Indians in this land; and He would perhaps have already driven us hence if it were not for this usefulness of theirs, and for the salvation of the Indians.We also owe many thanks to the Indians, since God our Lord sustains us in their lands by their means; and because we would die of starvation if they did not sustain us, provide us with food, serve us, and conduct us through the islands with so much love and security that they would all first perish before the father in whatever perils arise.These and many other like things were overlooked by Father Murillo, who was enraptured by their music, engraving, and rugs. By the aforesaid, one will see with how little truth the statement is printed that the Indians are the greatest enemies that the father ministers have; for certainly all the above could not be reconciled with such a proposition. On the contrary, it must be said that the Indians are those who defend us from our enemies; for, in the presidios, who are the soldiers, who sail in the war fleets, who are in the vanguard in war? Could the Spaniards, perchance, maintain themselves alone in this country, if the Indians did not aid in everything? Little experience and less reflection would he have who should propose such a thing. Therefore, these two things do not harmonize well, that those who hate us should defend us, and that those who are our greatest enemies should be the ones to maintain and support us. Nor is it to be wondered at that there have been insurrections on several occasions; these, perhaps, have not arisen because the Indians were ill-disposed to the Spaniards; but, on the contrary, we know that many of them have been caused by the cruelty, wickedness, and tyranny of some alcalde-mayor and other Spaniards who, having been elevated from low beginnings, try to become gods and kings in the provinces, tyrannizing over the Indiansand their possessions. This is often the cause of the insurrections. Would that I could mention some especial cases in this matter. However, I do not care to dip my pen in blood, and write tragedies instead of history. For, although I could say more, the authority and arrogance that every Spaniard assumes upon his arrival in this country is incredible.
Sis licet ingenuus clarisque parentibus ortus;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Adde docus patriæ et claros tibi sume propinquos;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Sint tibi divitæ242sit larga et munda supellex;Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.Denique, quidquid eris, nisi sit prudentia tecum;Magna quidem dico, bestia semper eris.243
Sis licet ingenuus clarisque parentibus ortus;
Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.
Adde docus patriæ et claros tibi sume propinquos;
Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.
Sint tibi divitæ242sit larga et munda supellex;
Esse tamen vel sic bestia magna potes.
Denique, quidquid eris, nisi sit prudentia tecum;
Magna quidem dico, bestia semper eris.243
101. May God our Lord preserve your Grace for the many years of my desire. Manila, June 8, onethousand seven hundred and twenty.244Your humble servant, who kisses your hand,
Fray Gaspar de San Agustin
[On a loose paper inserted in the copy of this letter owned by theMuseo-Biblioteca de Ultramar(which as stated above, is unsigned), which was formerly owned by the well known Spanish scholar Pascual de Gayangos, is the following: “According to paragraphs [of this letter] which Paterno inserted in his workLa antigua civilizacion de Filipinos(Madrid, 1887), p. 241, this letter must have been written by father Fray Gaspar de San Agustín; and according to Sinibaldo Mas, who inserts entire passages from this MS. in hisInforme sobre el estado de Filipinas en 1842, i, pp. 63–132, and attributes it to Father Gaspar.” Paterno has not had access to the document itself, but has used Mas.]
[Subjoined to the letter is the following, the origin of which we cannot account for, but which indicates the wide circulation that the letter must have had.]
Questions of Father Pedro Murillo [Velarde]245of the Society of Jesus
102. What is the Indian?Reply—The lowest degree of rational animal.Question—How many and what are his peculiarities?Reply—Twenty-one, as follows:
PrideWithout honor.FriendWithout loyalty.A drunkardWithout satiety.CompassionateWithout mercy.ReservedWithout secrecy.Long-sufferingWithout patience.CowardlyWithout fear.BoldWithout resolution.ObedientWithout submissiveness.One who practices austeritiesWithout suffering.BashfulWithout sense of honor.VirtuousWithout mortification.CleverWithout capacity.CivilizedWithout politeness.AstuteWithout sagacity.MercifulWithout pity.ModestWithout shame.RevengefulWithout valor.PoorWithout corresponding [mode of life].RichWithout economy.LazyWithout negligence.Laus Deo.
Résumé of the entire letter by the saidFather Murillo
103. The Filipino Indian is the embryo of nature and the offspring of grossness. He does not feel an insult or show gratitude for a kindness. His continual habitation is the kitchen; and the smoke that harms all of us serves him as the most refreshingbreeze. If the Indian has morisqueta and salt, he gives himself no concern, though it rain thunder and lightning, and the sky fall. He is much given to lying, theft, and laziness. In the confessional he is a maze [embolismo] of contradictions, now denying proofs and now affirming impossible things. Now he plays the part of a devout pilgrim over rough roads and through the deepest rivers, in order to hear mass on a workday at a shrine ten or twelve leguas away; while it is necessary to use violence to get him to hear mass on Sunday in his parish church. They are impious in their necessities with the father, but liberal and charitable to their guests, even when they do not know them; and through that they are greatly disappointed. At the same time they are humble and proud; bold and atrocious, but cowardly and pusillanimous; compassionate and cruel; slothful and lazy, and diligent; careful and negligent in their own affairs; very dull and foolish for good things, but very clever and intelligent in rogueries. He who has most to do with them knows them least. Their greatest diversion is cock-fighting, and they love their cocks more than their wives and children. They are more ready to believe any of their old people than even an apostolic preacher. They resemblemellizas,246in their vices and opposite virtues. In lying alone, is no contradiction found in them; for one does not know when they are not lying, whether they are telling the truth by mistake. One Indian does not resemble another Indian, or even himself. If they are given one thing, they immediately ask for another.247They never fail to deceive, unless itcrosses their own interest. In their suits, they are like flies on the food, who never quit it, however much they be brushed away. Finally, there is no fixed rule by which to construe them; a new syntax is necessary for each one; and, as they are all anomalous, the most intelligent man would be distracted248if he tried to define them. Farewell.
[Delgado has the following interesting chapter (pp. 297–302 of hisHistoria) on this letter, which it is judged advisable to present at this place.]
Chapter VIISome considerations concerning the matter in Father Gaspar de San Agustín’s letterI confess that I read this letter, in which the reverend author criticises the customs and dispositions of the natives of Filipinas, some years ago. But I read it as I am wont to read other letters, for diversion and amusement, without thinking much about its artfulness, and I was delighted with its erudition. However, when I afterward considered its contents with some degree of thought, I saw that it brought forward, in its whole length, no solid proof of what it tries to make one believe; and it appeared to me a hyperbolical criticism from the very beginning. On that account I resolved to make a few brief commentaries on the matter in the letter, both for the consolation of those whom our Lord may call to these missions, and so that it may be understood that at times sadness and melancholy are accustomed to heighten things, making giants out of pygmies—all the more, if a relish for revery and grumbling be joined with a tendency to exaggeration and withfigures of speech corresponding thereto. Consequently, I am surprised that the reverend annalist or chronicler [i.e., San Antonio] of the seraphic province of San Gregorio praises this letter, saying that it is worth printing, since its author has penetrated as far as one may penetrate into the characters of the natives of these islands. And yet the author confesses that it is as difficult to define their nature as are the eight impossible things which are recounted there. That seems to me a fine hyperbole.From the above one can see that, as he commenced this letter by affirming a hyperbole with eight hyperboles, it is not surprising that I called it hyperbolical; and especially if all the hyperboles that it contains from its beginning to its end be enumerated. But ere I begin to express my opinion I would like to sum up two contradictory and opposite expressions that I find in these authors. The reverend father Fray Gaspar says of the Indians, in his letter, that the difficulty of knowing the Indians lies not in the individual but in the race, for, if one be known, all are known.Father Pedro Murillo says, in his approbation of theCronicas,249that “there is no fixed rule by whichto construe the Indians; for each one needs a new syntax, all being anomalous. With the Indians the argument does not conclude by induction, since no oneis like to himself; for, in the short circuit of a day, he changes into more colors than a chameleon, takes more shapes than a Proteus, and has more movementsthan a Euripus.250He who has most to do with them, knows them least. In short, they are an aggregate of contrarieties, and the best logician cannot reconcile them. They are an obscure and confused chaos, in which no species can be perceived and no points of exactness distinguished.” All these terms considered one by one, compose a very exaggerated hyperbole, in which this author showed his great erudition and little experience, for he only ministered in a few missions, and for a short time. For during most of the time while he lived in these islands he did not leave the professor’s chair, except for a short time; and all that he tells of his journey to and travels among the Visayas was learned in passing and hastily, in company with the provincial who visited those missions. There he obtained very little light on the character and temperament of the Indians, as he had no dealings with them as one settled among them. And, just as in this expression he opposes himself without much reason to the reverend father Fray Gaspar, who after forty years of ministry, affirms that the Indians are well designated by the Greek wordmonopantas—a term which was given to a certain people by a critic, as they were all similar and homogeneous—so also when he affirms that all are anomalous and heterogeneous because they cannot all be constructed in one and the same syntax, does he go beyond the credence that can be given to his ingenious hyperboles. The experience that the said Father Murillo could have is of the Indianswho go about in Manila and its environs, who are interpreters, servants in accounting-rooms and secretarial offices, who are accustomed to deal with Spaniards of all kinds, with creoles, mestizos, Sangleys, and other kinds of people who assemble there for trade. They have learned fraud and deceit, as well as the bad morals and propensities of all and every one of them. As is seen, one cannot judge of a whole nation—and much less of all the nations of the islands, who are diverse and distinct in genius and customs by the cases of these Indians who speak Spanish. And taking into account so great diversity, I affirm that it is impossible to find a definition that admits and includes all of them. For these persons whom I have mentioned, reared among so many classes, and among people so heterogeneous, and who are imbued with customs so diverse, cannot form rules by which to explain their own nation, much less by which to define the other nations.Now if the statements of authors in regard to physical or moral matters are so at variance that we can say that each author has a different opinion—as says the proverb,Quot capita, tot sententiæ—and if thus far no ground and certain point has been found at which the understanding may stop, how is it strange that they do not find, in order to describe Indians with customs so unusual and artificial as have those of Manila, a compound idea made up of all that they have learned from the Spaniard, both good and evil; all that they have learned from the Guachinango;251and what they have learned from the mestizo,the Sangley, the Moro, the Malabar, the Cafre, and all the other people with whom they have intercourse and with whom they trade? Granting this to be true, it appears that the definition of Father Murillo fits these Spanish-speaking Indians, but not the others, who have not had any intercourse with diverse classes of people. On this account it seems to me that father Fray Gaspar hit the definition exactly, when he said in his letter that the Asiatic Indians of Filipinas are almost the same as all the people of the nations of Eastern India, in what concerns their genius, disposition, and inclination; and are not distinguished one from another except in their rites, clothing, and languages. I add, in what regards their abilities and capacities—which are so good, and in general so well inclined—that I believe that if children, either boys or girls, were taken from Filipinas to Viscaya or to Castilla, the natives [of those countries] would not distinguish them from the Vizcainos, Castilians, or mountaineers. For their vices are not due so much to their nature, as to their bad rearing and education; and they are easily instructed both in the evil and in the good. And notwithstanding what father Fray Gaspar, Father Murillo, and Fray Juan [Francisco] de San Antonio have said, they would have been more successful had they not said, with exaggeration, thatit would be impossible to writeeverything that they have observed of the Indians, on all the paper that is found in China. That is a hyperbole that transcends all faith. Thus does he continue in all that he says; and he affirms, further, that it surpasses all that we can touch with the hands or see with the eyes. Hence from the beginning we can state those two rules of law:semelmalus, semper præsumitur malus; and the other,malum ex quocumque defectu.252...What mystery is there in the customs and genius of the Indians that should make them so deep and inscrutable that we cannot reach them, sound them, and explain them? since they are Indians like all the rest of the people of Asia, without there being more or less in them. Therefore, “these profundities, this intricate, confused chaos, this aggregate of contrarieties, this maze of contradictions, are a collection of rhetorical locutions or tropes invented in order to exaggerate and to use hyperboles in what of itself has no mystery—these definitions remaining purely in the manner of speech, or of the conception, of their authors; or perhaps in a mere misapprehension formed by a critical, melancholy, or affected genius.But since in this letter, the evil propensities of the Indians, both men and lads, who act as servants, are set down in detail, let us see on the other hand, somewhat of the good that the Indians possess. For one should not write and consider only the evil, and omit as fitting all the good, in order thereby to make the object more detestable. For, as says a mystical writer, we must not possess the nature of the dung-beetle, which goes always to the dungheap, but that of the bee, which always seeks out the sweet and pleasant. Let us see what Father Murillo says of the good: “They are most clever in any handiwork, not in inventing but in imitating what they see. They are most beautiful writers; and there are many tailors and barbers among them. They are excellent embroiderers, painters, goldsmiths, and engravers,whose burin has not the like in all the Indias (and I was even about to pass farther if shame did not restrain me), as is seen clearly in the many good engravings that they make daily. They are good sculptors, gilders, and carpenters. They make the water craft of these islands, the galleys, pataches, and ships of the Acapulco line. They act as sailors, artillery-men, and divers; for there is scarce an Indian who cannot swim excellently. They are the under-pilots of these seas. They are very expert in making bejuquillos,253which are gold chains of a very delicate and exquisite workmanship. They make hats,petatesor rugs, and mats, from palm-leaves, rattan, and nito,254which are very beautiful, and embroidered with various kinds of flowers and figures. They are remarkable mechanics and puppet-showmen, and they make complicated mechanisms which, by means of figures, go through various motions with propriety and accuracy. There are some jewelers. They make powder, and cast swivel-guns, cannon, and bells. I have seen them make guns as fine as those of Europa. There are three printing houses in Manila, and all have Indian workmen. They have great ability in music. There is no village however small, that has not its suitable band of musicians for the services of the Church. They have excellent voices—sopranos, contraltos, tenors, and basses. Almost all of them can play the harp, and there are manyviolinists, rebeck, oboe, and flute players. The most remarkable thing is, that not only do those whose trade it is make those instruments; but various Indians make guitars, flutes, harps, and violins, for pleasure, with their bolos and machetes. And by the mere seeing those instruments played, they learn them almost without any teaching; and the same thing occurs in other things. On this account it is said that the Indians have their understanding in their eyes, since they imitate whatever they see, by another like it.” This is what Father Murillo says; but he left the most important things in the inkhorn. I will add them here, as I have heard them affirmed many times by the Spaniards in Cavite, namely: Who are the men who convey and conduct the ships and galleons from Acapulco and other kingdoms? Is it the Spaniards? Ask that of the pilots, masters, and boatswains, and they will all affirm that this great and inestimable good is due to the Indian alone. (Here is indeed where a hyperbole will fit exactly.) Besides this, who are the people who support us in these lands and those who furnish us food? Perhaps the Spaniards dig, harvest, and plant throughout the islands? Of a surety, no; for when they arrive at Manila, they are all gentlemen. The Indians are the ones who plow the lands, who sow the rice, who keep it clear [of weeds], who tend it, who harvest it, who thrash it out with their feet—and not only the rice which is consumed in Manila, but that throughout the Filipinas—and there is no one in all the islands who can deny me that. Besides this, who cares for the cattle-ranches? The Spaniards? Certainly not. The Indians are the ones who care for, and manage and tend the sheep and cattle by whichthe Spaniards are supported. Who rears the swine? Is it not the same Indians? Who cultivates the fruits—the bananas, cacao, and all the other fruits of the earth? of which there is always abundance in the islands, unless unfavorable weather, locusts, or some other accident cause their loss? Who provide Manila and the Spaniards with oil? Is it not the poor Visayan Indians, who bring it in their vessels annually? Who furnishes so great profit to the Spaniards in Manila with the balate255and sigay; and who buys these products very cheaply from the wretched Indians, and resell them for double the sum to the pataches of the coast and to the Sangleys? Who guide and convey us to the villages and missions, and serve us as guides, sailors, and pilots? Perhaps it is the Spaniards? No, it is the Indians themselves, with their so exaggerated, magnified, and heightened laziness. Is this the thanks that we give them, when we are conquering them in their own lands, and have made ourselves masters in them, and are served by them almost as by slaves? We ought to give God our Lord many thanks, because He maintains us only through the affection and by the useful labors of the Indians in this land; and He would perhaps have already driven us hence if it were not for this usefulness of theirs, and for the salvation of the Indians.We also owe many thanks to the Indians, since God our Lord sustains us in their lands by their means; and because we would die of starvation if they did not sustain us, provide us with food, serve us, and conduct us through the islands with so much love and security that they would all first perish before the father in whatever perils arise.These and many other like things were overlooked by Father Murillo, who was enraptured by their music, engraving, and rugs. By the aforesaid, one will see with how little truth the statement is printed that the Indians are the greatest enemies that the father ministers have; for certainly all the above could not be reconciled with such a proposition. On the contrary, it must be said that the Indians are those who defend us from our enemies; for, in the presidios, who are the soldiers, who sail in the war fleets, who are in the vanguard in war? Could the Spaniards, perchance, maintain themselves alone in this country, if the Indians did not aid in everything? Little experience and less reflection would he have who should propose such a thing. Therefore, these two things do not harmonize well, that those who hate us should defend us, and that those who are our greatest enemies should be the ones to maintain and support us. Nor is it to be wondered at that there have been insurrections on several occasions; these, perhaps, have not arisen because the Indians were ill-disposed to the Spaniards; but, on the contrary, we know that many of them have been caused by the cruelty, wickedness, and tyranny of some alcalde-mayor and other Spaniards who, having been elevated from low beginnings, try to become gods and kings in the provinces, tyrannizing over the Indiansand their possessions. This is often the cause of the insurrections. Would that I could mention some especial cases in this matter. However, I do not care to dip my pen in blood, and write tragedies instead of history. For, although I could say more, the authority and arrogance that every Spaniard assumes upon his arrival in this country is incredible.
Some considerations concerning the matter in Father Gaspar de San Agustín’s letter
Some considerations concerning the matter in Father Gaspar de San Agustín’s letter
I confess that I read this letter, in which the reverend author criticises the customs and dispositions of the natives of Filipinas, some years ago. But I read it as I am wont to read other letters, for diversion and amusement, without thinking much about its artfulness, and I was delighted with its erudition. However, when I afterward considered its contents with some degree of thought, I saw that it brought forward, in its whole length, no solid proof of what it tries to make one believe; and it appeared to me a hyperbolical criticism from the very beginning. On that account I resolved to make a few brief commentaries on the matter in the letter, both for the consolation of those whom our Lord may call to these missions, and so that it may be understood that at times sadness and melancholy are accustomed to heighten things, making giants out of pygmies—all the more, if a relish for revery and grumbling be joined with a tendency to exaggeration and withfigures of speech corresponding thereto. Consequently, I am surprised that the reverend annalist or chronicler [i.e., San Antonio] of the seraphic province of San Gregorio praises this letter, saying that it is worth printing, since its author has penetrated as far as one may penetrate into the characters of the natives of these islands. And yet the author confesses that it is as difficult to define their nature as are the eight impossible things which are recounted there. That seems to me a fine hyperbole.
From the above one can see that, as he commenced this letter by affirming a hyperbole with eight hyperboles, it is not surprising that I called it hyperbolical; and especially if all the hyperboles that it contains from its beginning to its end be enumerated. But ere I begin to express my opinion I would like to sum up two contradictory and opposite expressions that I find in these authors. The reverend father Fray Gaspar says of the Indians, in his letter, that the difficulty of knowing the Indians lies not in the individual but in the race, for, if one be known, all are known.
Father Pedro Murillo says, in his approbation of theCronicas,249that “there is no fixed rule by whichto construe the Indians; for each one needs a new syntax, all being anomalous. With the Indians the argument does not conclude by induction, since no oneis like to himself; for, in the short circuit of a day, he changes into more colors than a chameleon, takes more shapes than a Proteus, and has more movementsthan a Euripus.250He who has most to do with them, knows them least. In short, they are an aggregate of contrarieties, and the best logician cannot reconcile them. They are an obscure and confused chaos, in which no species can be perceived and no points of exactness distinguished.” All these terms considered one by one, compose a very exaggerated hyperbole, in which this author showed his great erudition and little experience, for he only ministered in a few missions, and for a short time. For during most of the time while he lived in these islands he did not leave the professor’s chair, except for a short time; and all that he tells of his journey to and travels among the Visayas was learned in passing and hastily, in company with the provincial who visited those missions. There he obtained very little light on the character and temperament of the Indians, as he had no dealings with them as one settled among them. And, just as in this expression he opposes himself without much reason to the reverend father Fray Gaspar, who after forty years of ministry, affirms that the Indians are well designated by the Greek wordmonopantas—a term which was given to a certain people by a critic, as they were all similar and homogeneous—so also when he affirms that all are anomalous and heterogeneous because they cannot all be constructed in one and the same syntax, does he go beyond the credence that can be given to his ingenious hyperboles. The experience that the said Father Murillo could have is of the Indianswho go about in Manila and its environs, who are interpreters, servants in accounting-rooms and secretarial offices, who are accustomed to deal with Spaniards of all kinds, with creoles, mestizos, Sangleys, and other kinds of people who assemble there for trade. They have learned fraud and deceit, as well as the bad morals and propensities of all and every one of them. As is seen, one cannot judge of a whole nation—and much less of all the nations of the islands, who are diverse and distinct in genius and customs by the cases of these Indians who speak Spanish. And taking into account so great diversity, I affirm that it is impossible to find a definition that admits and includes all of them. For these persons whom I have mentioned, reared among so many classes, and among people so heterogeneous, and who are imbued with customs so diverse, cannot form rules by which to explain their own nation, much less by which to define the other nations.
Now if the statements of authors in regard to physical or moral matters are so at variance that we can say that each author has a different opinion—as says the proverb,Quot capita, tot sententiæ—and if thus far no ground and certain point has been found at which the understanding may stop, how is it strange that they do not find, in order to describe Indians with customs so unusual and artificial as have those of Manila, a compound idea made up of all that they have learned from the Spaniard, both good and evil; all that they have learned from the Guachinango;251and what they have learned from the mestizo,the Sangley, the Moro, the Malabar, the Cafre, and all the other people with whom they have intercourse and with whom they trade? Granting this to be true, it appears that the definition of Father Murillo fits these Spanish-speaking Indians, but not the others, who have not had any intercourse with diverse classes of people. On this account it seems to me that father Fray Gaspar hit the definition exactly, when he said in his letter that the Asiatic Indians of Filipinas are almost the same as all the people of the nations of Eastern India, in what concerns their genius, disposition, and inclination; and are not distinguished one from another except in their rites, clothing, and languages. I add, in what regards their abilities and capacities—which are so good, and in general so well inclined—that I believe that if children, either boys or girls, were taken from Filipinas to Viscaya or to Castilla, the natives [of those countries] would not distinguish them from the Vizcainos, Castilians, or mountaineers. For their vices are not due so much to their nature, as to their bad rearing and education; and they are easily instructed both in the evil and in the good. And notwithstanding what father Fray Gaspar, Father Murillo, and Fray Juan [Francisco] de San Antonio have said, they would have been more successful had they not said, with exaggeration, thatit would be impossible to writeeverything that they have observed of the Indians, on all the paper that is found in China. That is a hyperbole that transcends all faith. Thus does he continue in all that he says; and he affirms, further, that it surpasses all that we can touch with the hands or see with the eyes. Hence from the beginning we can state those two rules of law:semelmalus, semper præsumitur malus; and the other,malum ex quocumque defectu.252...
What mystery is there in the customs and genius of the Indians that should make them so deep and inscrutable that we cannot reach them, sound them, and explain them? since they are Indians like all the rest of the people of Asia, without there being more or less in them. Therefore, “these profundities, this intricate, confused chaos, this aggregate of contrarieties, this maze of contradictions, are a collection of rhetorical locutions or tropes invented in order to exaggerate and to use hyperboles in what of itself has no mystery—these definitions remaining purely in the manner of speech, or of the conception, of their authors; or perhaps in a mere misapprehension formed by a critical, melancholy, or affected genius.
But since in this letter, the evil propensities of the Indians, both men and lads, who act as servants, are set down in detail, let us see on the other hand, somewhat of the good that the Indians possess. For one should not write and consider only the evil, and omit as fitting all the good, in order thereby to make the object more detestable. For, as says a mystical writer, we must not possess the nature of the dung-beetle, which goes always to the dungheap, but that of the bee, which always seeks out the sweet and pleasant. Let us see what Father Murillo says of the good: “They are most clever in any handiwork, not in inventing but in imitating what they see. They are most beautiful writers; and there are many tailors and barbers among them. They are excellent embroiderers, painters, goldsmiths, and engravers,whose burin has not the like in all the Indias (and I was even about to pass farther if shame did not restrain me), as is seen clearly in the many good engravings that they make daily. They are good sculptors, gilders, and carpenters. They make the water craft of these islands, the galleys, pataches, and ships of the Acapulco line. They act as sailors, artillery-men, and divers; for there is scarce an Indian who cannot swim excellently. They are the under-pilots of these seas. They are very expert in making bejuquillos,253which are gold chains of a very delicate and exquisite workmanship. They make hats,petatesor rugs, and mats, from palm-leaves, rattan, and nito,254which are very beautiful, and embroidered with various kinds of flowers and figures. They are remarkable mechanics and puppet-showmen, and they make complicated mechanisms which, by means of figures, go through various motions with propriety and accuracy. There are some jewelers. They make powder, and cast swivel-guns, cannon, and bells. I have seen them make guns as fine as those of Europa. There are three printing houses in Manila, and all have Indian workmen. They have great ability in music. There is no village however small, that has not its suitable band of musicians for the services of the Church. They have excellent voices—sopranos, contraltos, tenors, and basses. Almost all of them can play the harp, and there are manyviolinists, rebeck, oboe, and flute players. The most remarkable thing is, that not only do those whose trade it is make those instruments; but various Indians make guitars, flutes, harps, and violins, for pleasure, with their bolos and machetes. And by the mere seeing those instruments played, they learn them almost without any teaching; and the same thing occurs in other things. On this account it is said that the Indians have their understanding in their eyes, since they imitate whatever they see, by another like it.” This is what Father Murillo says; but he left the most important things in the inkhorn. I will add them here, as I have heard them affirmed many times by the Spaniards in Cavite, namely: Who are the men who convey and conduct the ships and galleons from Acapulco and other kingdoms? Is it the Spaniards? Ask that of the pilots, masters, and boatswains, and they will all affirm that this great and inestimable good is due to the Indian alone. (Here is indeed where a hyperbole will fit exactly.) Besides this, who are the people who support us in these lands and those who furnish us food? Perhaps the Spaniards dig, harvest, and plant throughout the islands? Of a surety, no; for when they arrive at Manila, they are all gentlemen. The Indians are the ones who plow the lands, who sow the rice, who keep it clear [of weeds], who tend it, who harvest it, who thrash it out with their feet—and not only the rice which is consumed in Manila, but that throughout the Filipinas—and there is no one in all the islands who can deny me that. Besides this, who cares for the cattle-ranches? The Spaniards? Certainly not. The Indians are the ones who care for, and manage and tend the sheep and cattle by whichthe Spaniards are supported. Who rears the swine? Is it not the same Indians? Who cultivates the fruits—the bananas, cacao, and all the other fruits of the earth? of which there is always abundance in the islands, unless unfavorable weather, locusts, or some other accident cause their loss? Who provide Manila and the Spaniards with oil? Is it not the poor Visayan Indians, who bring it in their vessels annually? Who furnishes so great profit to the Spaniards in Manila with the balate255and sigay; and who buys these products very cheaply from the wretched Indians, and resell them for double the sum to the pataches of the coast and to the Sangleys? Who guide and convey us to the villages and missions, and serve us as guides, sailors, and pilots? Perhaps it is the Spaniards? No, it is the Indians themselves, with their so exaggerated, magnified, and heightened laziness. Is this the thanks that we give them, when we are conquering them in their own lands, and have made ourselves masters in them, and are served by them almost as by slaves? We ought to give God our Lord many thanks, because He maintains us only through the affection and by the useful labors of the Indians in this land; and He would perhaps have already driven us hence if it were not for this usefulness of theirs, and for the salvation of the Indians.We also owe many thanks to the Indians, since God our Lord sustains us in their lands by their means; and because we would die of starvation if they did not sustain us, provide us with food, serve us, and conduct us through the islands with so much love and security that they would all first perish before the father in whatever perils arise.
These and many other like things were overlooked by Father Murillo, who was enraptured by their music, engraving, and rugs. By the aforesaid, one will see with how little truth the statement is printed that the Indians are the greatest enemies that the father ministers have; for certainly all the above could not be reconciled with such a proposition. On the contrary, it must be said that the Indians are those who defend us from our enemies; for, in the presidios, who are the soldiers, who sail in the war fleets, who are in the vanguard in war? Could the Spaniards, perchance, maintain themselves alone in this country, if the Indians did not aid in everything? Little experience and less reflection would he have who should propose such a thing. Therefore, these two things do not harmonize well, that those who hate us should defend us, and that those who are our greatest enemies should be the ones to maintain and support us. Nor is it to be wondered at that there have been insurrections on several occasions; these, perhaps, have not arisen because the Indians were ill-disposed to the Spaniards; but, on the contrary, we know that many of them have been caused by the cruelty, wickedness, and tyranny of some alcalde-mayor and other Spaniards who, having been elevated from low beginnings, try to become gods and kings in the provinces, tyrannizing over the Indiansand their possessions. This is often the cause of the insurrections. Would that I could mention some especial cases in this matter. However, I do not care to dip my pen in blood, and write tragedies instead of history. For, although I could say more, the authority and arrogance that every Spaniard assumes upon his arrival in this country is incredible.