Introduction

Prior to the time of European contact, most of the major islands in what is now known as the Philippines had a rich political landscape consisting of polities[1] known as chiefdoms of different economic scale and hierarchical complexity. These societies are said to be integrated into a regional network through local-based trading and raiding activities. The chief, who plays a central role in the political and economic well-being of the polity, controlled and mobilized the goods to create alliance among and between polities.[2]

Early polities in the Philippines put primacy on alliance networking rather than territorial conquest in expanding their political power. These networks derived their legitimacy in three ways: circulation of prestige goods (such as porcelain, celadon, jewellery), marriage, and ritual feasting. First, distribution of prestige goods were used to unify rulers to elite members of the society.[3] Second, chiefs strategically contracted marriage with daughters and sisters of the political elite and influential commoners. Third, chiefs sponsored feasts attended by allies and subordinates to negotiate social status relations within their network.[4]

Scholars agree that there existed a settlement called Manila dated prior to the arrival of the Spaniards in 1570. The toponym (place name) of Manila are explained by two contesting theories. First, it comes from may nilad, which means a place with mangrove shrubs / trees bearing white flowers[5] (Ixora manila). From this, we can infer that the general geographic condition of Manila was swampy and coastal[6]. Second, it comes from may nila which referred to the dye extracted from the same plant.[7]

This appreciation of the origin of the place name Manila is only one of the many significant accounts, historical and archaeological, that can shape our collective memory and understanding of the heritage of the Manila we know today. The succeeding sections will chronicle the story of Manila from being one of the earliest recorded settlement in the Philippines during the 11th century to the Spanish conquest of the Raja Sulayman-ruled Manila in 1570.

Pre-colonial polities and settlement in Manila

Today when we think of historic Manila, the Spanish fortified city of Intramuros comes to mind. But in 1000 A.D., or 500 years prior to the arrival of Spaniards in Manila,[8] a settlement (along the banks of the present day Pasig River) termed Sapa by Leandro and Cecilia Locsin[9] already existed in the present day Santa Ana, Manila. Its archaeology is considered one of the earliest evidence of a continuous occupation in the area of Manila for at least a thousand years prior to the Spanish settlement.[10] In the Santa Ana Church, archaeologists found a midden deposit (garbage mound) of Chinese ceramics, shells, and bones of pig, deer, and water buffalo alongside human burials[11].

These human burials numbered at least 300 graves from different locations in the Santa Ana area. [13] The earliest finds were recorded by Otley H. Beyer and Sofronic G. Calderon’s collaborative excavation in 1926. The site yielded graves that are dated prior to 1570. They were described to be “in the old native pagan style in which glazed porcelains, jewellery, and other objects are buried with the dead.” There were also pieces of bones identified to be that of deer and interpreted as sacrifices for the graves. Huge bones that may be that of rhinoceros [14] and elephants [14] were also found. The glazed celadons found in site are dated to be Ming ceramics, circa 1368 – 1644. [14]

Specifically, in the churchyard, 202 of the burials were accompanied by tradeware ceramics from the Sung and Yuan/ early Ming dynasties (late 11th to 14th centuries). These prestige goods were understood to be an indicator of status of the deceased. Other grave goods discovered were decorated pots, glass and stone beads, metal, iron, and bronze implements, and eleventh- century Chinese coins. In addition, a large amount of metal slugs were uncovered which indicated that the settlement was possibly engaged in metal crafting.[15]

While there may have evidence of early settlement, metal crafting and early Chinese trade in Santa, Ana as early as the 11th century, Victor J. Paz, an archaeologist and former director of the UP- Archaeological Studies Program, contends that Santa Ana might not have been a politically major settlement during that time. The reason being that it was not mentioned in the polities enumerated in the Laguna Copper Plate (LCI) dated to 922 CE (10th century). [17] The copper plate is considered the oldest document found in the Philippines [18] that can shed light on Philippine political structure in terms of political hierarchy and networks, and debt and slavery [19] , which are impossible to infer from the Santa Ana site.

What the discovery of the Laguna Copper Plate Inscription informed us is that in the 10th century, Tondo was already an established polity[20]. Spanish accounts mentioned that it was a thriving settlement located upstream at the northern bank of the Pasig River ruled by Rajah Lakandula (Lakan Dula), with complex political hierarchy and established alliances.[21] [22] [23]. It was even an entrepot of goods from China, Japan, Borneo, Siam, and the Malay peninsula before the Spanish move their trade center in Manila. The Rajah, according to Spanish accounts, was a Bruneian noble who was sent to be a port supervisor in Tondo to oversaw the flow of trade into and out of Pasig.[24] He was also related by blood to the rulers of Manila, Raja Ladyang Matanda or Ache and his nephew and heir, Raja Sulayman (Suleyman or Soliman).[25]

Laguna Copper plate Translation by Antoon Postma[26][27]Hail! In the Saka-year 822; the month of March-April; according to the astronomer: the 4th day of the dark half of the moon; on Monday. At that time, Lady Angkatan together with her relative, Bukah by name, the child of His Honor Namwran, was given, as a special favor, a document of full acquittal, by the Chief and Commander of Tundun,the former Leader of Pailah, Jayadewah. To the effect that His Honor Namwran, through the Honorable Scribe was totally cleared of a debt to the amount of 1 kati and 8 suwarna (weight of gold), in the presence of His Honor the Leader of Puliran, Kasumuran; His Honor the Leader of Pailah, namely: Ganasakti; (and) His Honor the Leader of Binwangan, namely: Bisruta. And (His Honor Namwran) with his whole family, on orders by the Chief of Dewata, representing the Chief of Mdang, because of his loyalty as a subject (slave?) of the Chief, therefore all the descendants of His Honor Namwran have been cleared of the whole debt that His Honor owed the Chief of Dewata. This (document) is (issued) in case there is someone, whosoever, some time in the future, who will state that the debt is not yet acquitted of His Honor…

The Laguna Copper Plate is the first document that can shed light on the nature of the political hierarchy by portraying slavery in early Philippine society. The copper plate was a certificate acquitting the debt incurred by a person named Namwran, together with his family, relatives and descendants to the chief of Dewata (in present day Mt. Diwata, near Butuan[28]). Namwran was understood to be a man of status but due to his debt, he has become a “debt slave or servant”. His relatives were seeking release from the obligation through the chief of Tondo, Jayadewa. Jayadewa, the chief and commander of Tundun (the present day Tondo, Manila) in return commanded the chiefs of Puliran, Pailah, and Binwangan to witness the acquittal of Namwran of his debt amounting to 865 grams of gold[29].

Furthermore, the document also illustrates network and political link between the 10th century polities. Pailah, Puliran, and Binwangan were theorized by Postma to be in the present day Bulacan: Paila in Norzagaray, the Pulilan municipality, and Binuangan in Obando.[30] Other source contests Pailah to be the town of Pila while Puliran is understood to be a place located somewhere in present day Laguna.[31] Other place names such as Mdang referred to a temple complex in Java, whose chief is called Mataram.[32]

Despite the lack of archaeological records similar to Santa Ana, it can be inferred that Tondo of the 10th century has a well-organized government based on customary law, ruled by the chief, Jayadewa, who exercised legal powers, as in the case of acquitting a debt from a slave. It can also be deduced that Tondo already had connections to the chiefs in Puliran, Pailah, and Binuangan and farther polities like Butuan[33]

Another complex polity parallel to the earlier maritime states in Island Southeast Asia is Manila.[34] Situated on the bank of the present day Pasig River[35], Manila was ruled by blood-related chiefs namely: Raja Ladyang Matanda or Ache, cousin of Raja Lakandula, and his nephew and heir Raja Sulayman (Suleyman or Soliman).[36] Like Raja Lakandula of Tondo, Raja Matanda was also of Bruneian descent having his maternal grandfather, Sultan Bulkeiah of Brunei the conqueror of Manila in the early sixteenth century. [37] [38] This suggests that Raja Sulayman was a third generation ruler of Bruneian descent in Manila*.

Spanish accounts described Raja Sulayman’s residence within a fortified settlement (the present day Fort Santiago[39]) as very large with valuables such as money, porcelain, copper, iron, wax, and other local and imported goods used for trade.[40] It was used as a location for meetings and ceremonies[41]. There was a reported structure just next to his house with stored iron, copper, and cannons which suggest that production is directly controlled by him.[42] The settlements were situated in the coasts or banks of the rivers and the houses were built on stilts[43].

The topography of Manila[44], according to the Relation of 1570, was described as having land around the bay that is “tilled and cultivated; having smooth slopes and of little herbage”. Manila was said to have a palisade made of coconut trunks defending the town along its front. Many warriors were guarding the palisade and the shore was mentioned to be crowded with people. Four Chinese ships were mentioned to be sighted close to the houses of the locals indicating trade and exchange[45].

In a letter of Miguel Lopez de Legazpi to the viceroy of Mexico, Manila was described to have direct access to the China trade.[46] The Chinese brought silk, cotton robes, earthenware jars, gilded porcelain, gold thread, benzoin and mask twice a year to Manila. In exchange, they would procure cinnamon, pepper, wax, iron, copper, bronze, steel, gold, and pearls locally.[47] Manila was considered to be one of the most important international trade port during that time.[48] Traders of Manila was said to conduct regular trips to Borneo to trade cinnamon, wax, and brass.[49] Locally, Manila has control over a large parts of southeastern Luzon and most of the coastal villages within the Calatagan Peninsula.[50]

The population at that time was estimated to be composed of at least 2, 000 people. The inhabitants were well- attired and that the chiefs wore more elegant clothing and wore anklets of gold around their arms. The wealthiest owned slaves that were both Muslims and non- Muslims. They also wore colorful head dresses with golden trinkets and other body ornaments.[51] Carmencita Aguilar, a professor of Social Sciences in the University of the Philippines, refers to the people as Muslim however Linda A. Newson in the book Conquest and Pestilence in Early Spanish Philippines, posits that:

There is no evidence that Islam had become a major religious and political force in the region. Indeed, in 1570 Father Herrera observed that Moros were found only in certain villages near the coast and were Muslim only in name and in their abstinence from eating pork; they did not possess mosques or religious leaders[52].

In Tagalog societies, there was a three- class social structure composed of Maginoo (Ruling Class), Timawa and Maharlika (The Freemen), and Alipin (Slaves) as shown in the infographic below.

CLASS DESCRIPTION Maginoo(Ruling class) Lakan, Rajah ● The Lakan or Rajah was the paramount Datu of a large town. Datu ● The Datu were maginoo with personal followings (dulohan or barangay). His responsibilities included governing his people, leading them in war, protecting them from enemies, and settling disputes.● Usually, four to ten datu lived with their dulohan in a town. Maginoo ● The Maginoo comprised the ruling class of the Tagalogs. Ginoo was an honorific for both men and women.● Panginoon (sometimes shorted to poon when addressing them directly) were maginoo who had many slaves and other valuable property like houses and boats. Timawa and maharlika(Freemen) Timawa ● The Timawa were non-slaves who could attach themselves to the datu of their choice. They could use and bequeath a portion of barangay land, and rendered services and agricultural labor to the datu.● Members included: illegitimate children of Maginoo and slaves, and former alipin who paid off their debts. Maharlika ● The Maharlika were similar to the Timawa, except they also rendered military services to the datu. Alipin(Slaves) Alipin namamahay ● Aliping namamahay lived in their own houses apart from their debtor. They were allowed to farm a portion of barangay land, but they were expected to turn over a portion of their harvest to their master.● Members included: those who inherited debts from namamahay parents, timawa who went into debt, and former male Alipin sa gigilid who married. Alipin sa gigilid ● Alipin sa gigilid lived in their debtor’s house and were entirely dependent on him for food and shelter.● Members included: children born in the debtor’s house (e.g. children of other alipin, or gintubo), and children of parents who were too poor to raise them.

Recent archeology in Fort Santiago do not show pre-colonial artifacts. As Beyer wrote in his summary of the archaeology of Manila[58]:

Results of exploration indicate downtown Manila was inhabited only from about 1480 or 1500 onwards. The really old part of the area lies up the river, and has been explored by our Santa Ana site.

However, in 2008, the National Museum uncovered an inscribed pot shard at the ruins of the San Ignacio Church which was inferred as evidence of an ancient writing[59] that Miguel Lopez de Legaspi noted when he described that the inhabitants of Manila wrote with their own alphabet[60].

Epilogue

In 1570, upon the arrival of the Spaniards in Manila, Spanish accounts narrated the compact of friendship made between Martin de Goiti, master-of-camp of the Spanish fleet, and the Raja Sulayman, the ruler of Manila. In this custom, de Goiti drew his blood along with Raja Sulayman; the chief drank the blood of de Goiti mixed with wine and the master-of-camp drank the blood of the chief in the same manner.[53]

This compact of friendship and peace broke down due to misunderstandings. Martin de Goiti, aboard his ship, misinterpreted the tapaques (merchant vessel) bearing traders as a hostile force being sent to attack the Spaniards. He sent a few of his ships to survey the situation and, understanding that this might be interpreted by the inhabitants as sign of aggression, called them back by firing a cannon towards the sea. This shot was interpreted by Sulayman and his men as an attack from the Spaniards, thus leading to the outbreak of conflict on May 24, 1570, known as the first Battle of Manila.[54]. The Spanish forces, having superior artillery, defeated Raja Sulayman, leaving the town of Manila in ashes. On June 6, 1570, upon the conquest of the Sulayman-ruled Manila, Martin de Goiti, with the presence of the chief notary of the Spanish government Hernando Riquel issued in Manila, the Act of Taking Possession of Luzon.[55]

Miguel Lopez de Legazpi, having known that Manila was conquered, travelled to Luzon reaching Manila in the middle of May 1571.[56] The Spanish captain-general made peace with the rulers of the pre-colonial Manila; Raja Sulayman, Raja Matanda and Lakandula, forgiving their act of hostility towards the Spanish troops. On the third of June, 1571, Legazpi conferred the title of city on the colony of Manila and on the 24th of the same month, the day of Saint John, he appointed two alcaldes in ordinary (translated in The Philippine Islands: Volume III by Blair and Robertson as “judges”); one alguacil-mayor (sheriff or chief constable) and twelve regidores (councilors) establishing the cabildo or the city council that laid the administrative foundation of the Spanish city of Manila.[57]

Conferring the title of city on the colony of Manila, involved a ritual of city foundation that was elaborate, as scholar and writer Jose Victor Torres recently mentioned in the online forum Manila Nostalgia:

Unknown to many present-day historians, the establishment of a city according to colonial customs involved an elaborate ceremony that was followed by the conquistadors during the Age of Conquest in the 16th century. “Witnessed by a group composed of Spaniards and natives, the commander of the colonizers selected a spot and had a hole dug deep enough for a tree trunk to be buried in and leave a protruding section around 1.4 to 1.8 meters high. The trunk was then lowered into the hole with the help of the natives. Then the commander will drive a knife into the trunk, turn to his audience and announce in a loud voice: “Gentlemen, soldiers and comrades and all others who witness this: Here I set gallows and sword, and found and place the city of ________, which may God keep long years: reserving the right to move it to any another site that might prove more convenient. And this city I cause to be in the name of the King, and in his name I will defend it and will maintain peace and justice with all the Spaniards, conquistadores, citizens, residents and strangers, with all the natives meting justice alike to the rich and to the poor, to the lowly and to the high, and protecting the widows and orphans.” The commander then draws his sword and made a wide clearing of the people around him as he shouted a challenge: “If there be any here who would challenge this, let him come forward and out with me to the open field where I will measure my sword with his. And this I swear, for I am intent to die defending this city, now or whenever, keeping it for the King my Lord and his Captain, servant and subject, and as a gentleman born…” This challenge is recited thrice and three times the Spaniards will respond: “The city is well founded. Long Live the King and Our Lord.” A translator was present so that the natives understood. After reciting the ritual, the commander then slashed at the surrounding plants saying that he is placing the city under the authority of the Audiencia or Governor and that he is making it the capital. A cross is then planted on the site of the planned church for the city and a Mass is said by a priest. The ceremony is then ended with a salvo from cannons and a celebration. And, thus, a City is made.

Miguel Lopez de Legazpi treated the Rajas and their relatives with deference and promised them privileges such as exemption to the tribute. However upon the death of Captain General Legazpi on August 20, 1572, Captain General Guido de Lavezaris (Captain General from 1572-1575) did not recognize the assurances of Legazpi, causing conflict with the former rulers of Manila. In 1574, Lakandula and Raja Sulayman launched an attack against the Spanish citadel in Manila. The conflict ended after Juan de Salcedo, grandson of Miguel Lopez de Legazpi, gave another assurance that Spanish promises would be kept. Still in 1587, Martin Panga and Agustin de Legazpi, descendants of Lakandula, planned a revolt against the Spanish rule in the Philippines. The were discovered by the Spanish government eventually leading to the capture and execution of the leaders.

Despite the execution, the blood compact as an agreement binding both Spaniards and Filipinos in mutual obligation persisted as an important theme.

This assurance of friendship was considered by the Filipino revolutionists of the late 19th century as an agreement violated by Spain through excessive abuse of power and unfair treatment of Filipinos. As Andres Bonifacio, President of the Katipunan, wrote in essay, “Ang dapat mabatid ng mga tagalog,” (c. March 1896):

Ngayon sa lahat ng ito’y ano ang sa mga guinawa nating paggugugol nakikitang kaguinhawahang ibinigay sa ating Bayan? Ano ang nakikita nating pagtupad sa kanilang kapangakuan na siang naging dahil ng ating pag gugugol! Wala kung di pawang kataksilan ang ganti sa ating mga pagpapala at mga pagtupad sa kanilang ipinangakung tayo’y lalung guiguisingin sa kagalingan ay bagkus tayong binulag, inihawa tayo sa kanilang hamak na asal, pinilit na sinira ang mahal at magandang ugali ng ating Bayan; Yminulat tayo sa isang maling pagsampalataya at isinadlak sa lubak ng kasamaan ang kapurihan ng ating Bayan; at kung tayo’y mangahas humingi ng kahit gabahid na lingap, ang naguiguing kasagutan ay ang tayo’y itapon at ilayo sa piling ng ating minamahal na anak, asawa at matandang magulang. Ang bawat isang himutok na pumulas sa ating dibdib ay itinuturing na isang malaking pagkakasala at karakarakang nilalapatan ng sa hayop na kabangisan

This historical precedent became the clause that legitimized the Philippine Revolution against Spain–enshrined in the words of June 12, 1898 Proclamation of Philippine Independence:

… he [Legazpi] went to Manila, the capital, winning likewise the friendship of its Chiefs Soliman and Lakandula, later taking possession of the city and the whole Archipelago in the name of Spain by virtue of an order of King Philip II, and with these historical precedents and because in international law the prescription established by law to legalize the vicious acquisition of private property is not recognized, the legitimacy of such revolution can not be put in doubt …

The final postscript, in a sense, to the conquest of Manila, would come from an American. Writing in Philippine Magazine on 1931, Luther Parker, recounted that:

I found Don Lucino Gatdula, one of the last of the Lakandola family which had been a Tondo family before the time of the conquest, living at No. 427 Calle Sande in a small nipa house, in uninviting surroundings, with tide water standing in pools to the west of the house, while on the east an unsavory Chinese garden polluted the atmosphere. Although only 56 years old at that time Don Lucino looked much older, but his faculties seemed unimpaired. He gave his father’s name as Santiago Gatdula who died July 24, 1873, at the age of 73 years. Although Don Lucino had had one son, the latter died without issue, leaving Don Lucino the last of his family except for a cousin, Maximo Gatdula, of Tondo, who also had no issue alive. Don Lucino had a very interesting bit of tradition regarding the pacto de sangre between Legaspi and Lakandola which he claimed was in written form and was later buried beneath the Magallanes monument with other papers. This story I was never able to verify in any way, though I worked on it for years.

The story cites the Magallanes Monument which was moved by the Americans to a site by the shore of the Pasig River. The Magallanes monument itself, as much symbol of Spanish hegemony on the Legazpi-Urdaneta Monument, would itself be obliterated in the Battle of Manila in 1945.

Bibliography

Abinales, Patricio N. and Donna J. Amoroso, State and Society in the Philippines. Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005.

Aguilar, Carmencita, “The Muslims in Manila Prior to Colonial Control”, Sojourn:

Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1987.

Bacus, Elisabeth A., “The Archaeology of the Philippine Archipelago”, Southeast

Asia: From Prehistory to History, Ian Glover ed. East Sussex: Psychology Press, 2004.

Bautista, Angel P. ,“The Archaeology of Maestranza SIte, Intramuros, Manila”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008. Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008.

Beyer, Otley H. “Recent Discoveries in Philippine Archaeology”, from Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008. Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008.

Blair, Emma, Robertson, James, The Philippine Islands: 1493 – 1803: Volume III

1569 – 1576. Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark, 1903.

Fox, Robert B. , “Pre-Spanish Manila Through Archaeology”, from Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008. Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008.

Junker, Laura Lee, “Integrating History and Archaeology in the Study of Contact Period Philippine Chiefdoms”, International Journal of Historical Archaeology, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1998.

Locsin, Leandro and Cecilia, “Ceramics Discovered in the Philippines”, from from Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008. Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008.

Newson, Linda A. Conquest and Pestilence in Early Spanish Philippines, Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 2009.

Pacis, Vicente Albano, et. al., Founders of Freedom. Manila: Capitol Publishing House, 1971.

Patanne, E.P.,The Philippines in the 6th to the 16th Centuries. Manila: LSA Press, 1996.

Peralta, Jesus T. and Lucila A. Salazar, “Pre-Spanish Manila: A Reconstruction of the Pre-History of Manila”, from Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008. Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008.

Philamlife Magazine, “Pre-Spanish Manila Through Archaeology”, accessed on June 17, 2015, link.

Santiago, Luciano P. , “The Houses of Lakandula, Matanda, and Soliman (1571 – 1898): Genealogy and Group Identity”, Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society, Vol. 18, No. 1, 1990.

Torres, Jose Victor, Ciudad Murada: A Walk Through Historic Intramuros,

Manila: Vibal Publication House, 2005.

Wicks, Robert S., Money, Market and Trade in Early Southeast Asia: The Development of Indigenous Monetary Systems to AD 1400. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Southeast Asia Program Publications, 1995.

Endnotes

[1] Archaeologist Colin Renfrew defines a polity as a political organization, a self- governing group of people, generally occupying a well-defined area. Laura Junker emphasizes that Philippine polities lack the scale, complexity, bureaucracies, institutionalization, and economy systems similar to Southeast Asian kingdoms and states”. Their structures are more consistent with the characteristics of a complex chiefdom or paramount chiefdom (from Laura Lee Junker, Raiding, Trading, and Feasting, (USA: UH Press, 1999), p. 67).

[2] Laura Lee Junker, “Integrating History and Archaeology in the Study of Contact Period Philippine Chiefdoms”, International Journal of Historical Archaeology, (Vol. 2, No. 4, 1998), p. 292.

[3] Laura Lee Junker, “Integrating History and Archaeology in the Study of Contact Period Philippine Chiefdoms”, International Journal of Historical Archaeology, (Vol. 2, No. 4, 1998), p. 309.

[4] Laura Lee Junker, “Integrating History and Archaeology in the Study of Contact Period Philippine Chiefdoms”, International Journal of Historical Archaeology, (Vol. 2, No. 4, 1998), p. 310.

[5] Blair, Emma, Robertson, James, The Philippine Islands: 1493 – 1803: Volume III 1569 – 1576, (Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark, 1903), p. 148.

[6] Jesus T. Peralta and Lucila A. Salazar, “Pre-Spanish Manila: A Reconstruction of the Pre-History of Manila”, from Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008, (Quezon City: Manila Studies Association, Inc., 2008), p. 5.

[7] Jose Victor Torres, Ciudad Murada: A Walk Through Historic Intramuros, (Manila: Vibal Publishing House, 2005), p. 1.

[8] Elisabeth A. Bacus, “The Archaeology of the Philippine Archipelago”, Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History, Ian Glover ed., (East Sussex: Psychology Press, 2004), p. 270.

[9] Leandro and Cecilia Locsin, “Ceramics Discovered in the Philippines”, from from Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008, (Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008), p. 33.

[10] Robert B. Fox, “Pre-Spanish Manila Through Archaeology”, from Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008, (Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008), p. 13.

[11] Elisabeth A. Bacus, “The Archaeology of the Philippine Archipelago”, Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History, Ian Glover ed., (East Sussex: Psychology Press, 2004), p. 270.

[12] Philam Life Magazine, “Pre-Spanish Manila Through Archaeology”, accessed on June 17, 2015, link.

[13] Elisabeth A. Bacus, “The Archaeology of the Philippine Archipelago”, Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History, Ian Glover ed., (East Sussex: Psychology Press, 2004), p. 270.

[14] Otley H. Beyer, “Recent Discoveries in Philippine Archaeology”, from Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008, (Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008), p. 12.

[15] Elisabeth A. Bacus, “The Archaeology of the Philippine Archipelago”, Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History, Ian Glover ed., (East Sussex: Psychology Press, 2004), p. 270.

[16] Philam Life Magazine, “Pre-Spanish Manila Through Archaeology”, accessed on June 17, 2015, link.

[17] Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008, (Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts., 2008), p. 13.

[18] P.N. Abinales and Donna J. Amoroso, State and Society in the Philippines, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), p. 37.

[19] P.N. Abinales and Donna J. Amoroso, State and Society in the Philippines, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), p. 37.

[20] Antoon Postma, “The Laguna Copper-plate Inscription: Text and Commentary”, Philippine Studies, (Vol. 40, No. 2, 1992), p.

[21] Carmencita Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior to Colonial Control”, Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, (Vol. 2, No. 1, 1987), p. 151.

[22] Carmencita Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior to Colonial Control”, Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, (Vol. 2, No. 1, 1987), p. 151.

[23] Luciano P. Santiago, “The Houses of Lakandula, Matanda, and Soliman (1571 – 1898): Genealogy and Group Identity”, Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society, (Vol. 18, No. 1, 1990), p. 44.

[24] E.P. Patanne, The Philippines in the 6th to the 16th Centuries, (Manila: LSA Press, 1996), p. 127.

[25] Laura Lee Junker, “Integrating History and Archaeology in the Study of Contact Period Philippine Chiefdoms”, International Journal of Historical Archaeology, (Vol. 2, No. 4, 1998), p. 307.

[26] Antoon Postma is an anthropologist who is best known for his work in the Laguna Copper Plate inscription

[27] Antoon Postma, “The Laguna Copper-plate Inscription: Text and Commentary”, Philippine Studies, (Vol. 40, No. 2, 1992), p. 187.

[28] P.N. Abinales and Donna J. Amoroso, State and Society in the Philippines, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), p. 38.

[29] Timothy James Vitales, “Archaeological Research in the Laguna de Bay area, Philippnes”, Hukay, Volume 18, p. 54 – 66.

[30] Timothy James Vitales, “Archaeological Research in the Laguna de Bay area, Philippnes”, Hukay, Volume 18, p. 54 – 81.

[31] Timothy James Vitales, “Archaeological Research in the Laguna de Bay area, Philippnes”, Hukay, Volume 18, p. 54 – 81.

[32] P.N. Abinales and Donna J. Amoroso, State and Society in the Philippines, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), p. 37.

[33] Patanne, E.P. , The Philippines in the 6th to the 16th Centuries, (Manila: LSA Press, 1996).

[34] Elisabeth A. Bacus, “The Archaeology of the Philippine Archipelago”, Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History, Ian Glover ed., (East Sussex: Psychology Press, 2004), p. 270.

[35] Carmencita Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior to Colonial Control”, Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, (Vol. 2, No. 1, 1987), p. 151.

[36] Laura Lee Junker, Raiding, Trading, and Feasting, (USA: UH Press, 1999), p. 104.

[37] Laura Lee Junker, Raiding, Trading, and Feasting, (USA: UH Press, 1999), p. 106.

*Patricio Abinales, a historian, further describes Manila was a trading center within the orbit of Brunei, a sultanate located at the north coast of Borneo.

[38] Luciano P. Santiago, “The Houses of Lakandula, Matanda, and Soliman (1571 – 1898): Genealogy and Group Identity”, Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society, (Vol. 18, No. 1, 1990), p. 42-43

[39] Angel P. Bautista, “The Archaeology of Maestranza SIte, Intramuros, Manila”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008, (Manila: National Commission for Culture and the Arts, 2008), p. 37.

[40] Blair, Emma, Robertson, James, The Philippine Islands: 1493 – 1803: Volume III 1569 – 1576, (Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark, 1903), p. 102

[41] Linda A. Newson, Conquest and Pestilence in Early Spanish Philippines, (Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 2009), p. 118.

[42] Elisabeth A. Bacus, “The Archaeology of the Philippine Archipelago”, Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History, Ian Glover ed., (East Sussex: Psychology Press, 2004), p. 270.

[43] Linda A. Newson, Conquest and Pestilence in Early Spanish Philippines, (Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 2009), p. 118.

[44] Blair, Emma, Robertson, James, The Philippine Islands: 1493 – 1803: Volume III 1569 – 1576, (Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark, 1903), p. 73 – 104

[45] Ambeth Ocampo, “Pre-Spanish Manila”, Inquirer, accessed on June 18, 2015, from link.

[46] Patricio N. Abinales and Donna J. Amoroso, State and Society in the Philippines, (Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), p. 50.

[47] Carmencita Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior to Colonial Control”, Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, (Vol. 2, No. 1, 1987), p. 151.

[48] Elisabeth A. Bacus, “The Archaeology of the Philippine Archipelago”, Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History, Ian Glover ed., (East Sussex: Psychology Press, 2004), p. 270.

[49] Carmencita Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior to Colonial Control”, Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, (Vol. 2, No. 1, 1987), p. 151.

[50] Laura Lee Junker, “Integrating History and Archaeology in the Study of Contact Period Philippine Chiefdoms”, International Journal of Historical Archaeology, (Vol. 2, No. 4, 1998), p. 307.

[51] Carmencita Aguilar, “The Muslims in Manila Prior to Colonial Control”, Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, (Vol. 2, No. 1, 1987), p. 151.

[52] Linda A. Newson, Conquest and Pestilence in Early Spanish Philippines, (Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 2009), p. 118.

[53] Blair, Emma, Robertson, James, The Philippine Islands: 1493 – 1803: Volume III 1569 – 1576, (Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark, 1903), p. 97

[54] Pacis, Vicente Albano, et. al., Founders of Freedom, (Manila: Capitol Publishing House, 1971), p. 12

[55] Blair, Emma, Robertson, James, The Philippine Islands: 1493 – 1803: Volume III 1569 – 1576, (Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark, 1903), p. 105

[56] Blair, Emma, Robertson, James, The Philippine Islands: 1493 – 1803: Volume III 1569 – 1576, (Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark, 1903), p. 153

[57] Blair, Emma, Robertson, James, The Philippine Islands: 1493 – 1803: Volume III 1569 – 1576, (Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark, 1903), p. 173

[58] Victor J. Paz, “Defining Manila Through Archaeology”, Manila: Selected Papers of the 17th Annual Manila Studies Conference August 13- 14, 2008, (Quezon City: Manila Studies Association, Inc., 2008), p. 5.

[59] The Southeast Asian Archaeology Newsblog, “Philippine pottery shard reveal early writing”, accessed on June 24, 205, link.

[60] Archaeology, Jessica E. Saraceni, “Monday, September 22”, accessed on June 24, 2015, link.