contextualizing the sugidanon: providing a framework for inquiry

CONTEXTUALIZING THE SUGIDANON 1

Contextualizing the Sugidanon:

Providing A Framework for Inquiry

David Gowey

Northern Arizona University


Abstract The sugidanon is one of the most prolific epic chant traditions in the world, yet it is still largely

unknown even within the Philippines. In order to understand the continuing relevance of the

sugidanon tradition, it is important to also understand its origins and development. This paper

presents information about historical kingdoms in Southeast Asia in order to place the tradition

within this larger context of cultural diffusion. In addition, I will also propose a framework for

dating the sugidanon through analysis of linguistic, archaeological, and historical data.

Keywords: sugidanon, archaeology, Sanskrit, Hinduism, Indonesia


Contextualizing the Sugidanon: Providing a Framework for Inquiry At the time Magellan reached the Philippines, a friend of his was captain general to the sultan of Ternate, a Luzon businessman was governor of the Muslims in Portuguese Malacca, a sultan of Brunei’s soninlaw had a Makassarese slave who could speak Spanish, and the Butuanon ruler of Limasawa understood a Malayspeaking merchant from Ciampa…

—William Henry Scott (1995, p. 75)

Introduction

The field of sugidanon studies is still a relatively new one. As the quantity of scholarship

on the topic increases, so too does our ability to make connections between our understandings

of Panay Bukidnon culture and those of surrounding cultures and nations that existed before

European contact. This paper aims to put forward a holistic and theoretical framework for dating

the sugidanon through contextualization. Given that this entire effort would require time and

money which are currently unavailable to me, the focus of this paper will be on two aspects of

this proposed framework rather than all potential outlets for inquiry: linguistic and historical data

related to the spread of Indonesian folklore, and a hypothetical model for future archaeological

surveys of potential Panay Bukidnon sites.

First, an analysis of cultural and economic ties between the Philippines and two

Indianized kingdoms of Indonesia—the Srivijaya and Majapahit Empires —attempts to 1

demonstrate that Indian epic poetry could have informed the sugidanon’s style and themes, if not

necessarily its archaic Kinaraya lexicon. Second, by looking at 16th and 17th century sites from

Cebu and comparing this with what we know of Panay Bukidnon material culture, I will propose

a model for a hypothetical archaeological survey of Panay Bukidnon sites. Using this model, a

1 See Figures 1 and 2.


future research project could test the generally accepted hypothesis that the Panay Bukidnon

migrated inland over time and construct a chronology of this migration. The goal is to put

forward a likely historical period for the composition of the sugidanon in conjunction with

linguistic data and Hindu/Indonesian epic literature.

Inland Migration Models

There are several factors that affect our understanding of Panay Bukidnon settlement

patterns, past and present. First, it must be understood that inland migrations took place, though

the impetus and chronology for such are currently under debate. In his kinship study Sulod

Society, F. Landa Jocano noted individuals whose families had sold their kaingin along the river

valleys and coastlines before moving inland, which places at least some of these migration

events in the late 19th or early 20th centuries (Jocano, 1968, p. 20). The same author also

indicated that the Panay Bukidnon had already been identified by a student of H. Otley Beyer in

1912, Beyer himself in 1916, and Eugenio Ealdama between 1937 and 1938, where all three used

names that indicated that the group lived in the mountainous regions of Panay Island (p. 3).

These “montesses” were undoubtedly the Panay Bukidnon and not an Ati group, or else they

would have been identified as such.

On the other hand, Jose Bolante points to local mythology in Maasin and Lambunao as

well as the fact that the quality of kaingin soil deteriorates over time to suggest that Panay

Bukidnon ancestors have lived in the mountains since at least the Spanish period. While kaingin

are indeed depleted of nutrients over time—hence the need to clear more and more forest lands

for cultivation—the likely consequence of this would not necessarily be that these depleted lands


were not sold, as Bolante argues, but rather that any kaingin sold were sold for less than they

were worth. Certainly any model that sought to explain historical settlement patterns in terms of

migration would not require that every Panay Bukidnon household moved inland, but rather posit

that this migration was a trend with exceptions who decided not to sell their farms.

Alicia Magos’ hypothesis differs from both of these and postulates that the Panay

Bukidnon are descendants of Visayan sailors who followed Panay’s navigable rivers into the

interior (Magos, 2012, p. 4). This third hypothesis necessitates a maritime tradition which is

accounted for in historic and oral literature. With these hypotheses in mind, it is possible to

construct a holistic model for migration that incorporates elements of oral tradition, local

mythology, and historical understandings to satisfy the demands of each.

Composite Settlement Model

Given that Jocano’s examples represent individual families without contradicting the

other two hypotheses' main claims, it is probable that a combination of these three models

contributed to Panay Bukidnon settlement patterns. A possible scenario that incorporated aspects

of all three could begin with Visayan sailors of the preHispanic period, some of whom settled

along the coast near the Panay and Halawod River mouths while others pushed farther inland in

search of unoccupied farmland. As the soil of earliersettled kaingin fields near the coast

deteriorated, along with the added pressure from other raiding groups in the region, these farmers

would have to move deeper into the mountains to avoid conflict with established communities.

This is turn would result in a sort of stepwise migration phenomenon that potentially continued

into the period of American occupation. Constructing a chronology that could test these


hypotheses would require archaeological surveys similar to what will be discussed later.

Visayan Raiders and Traders

Visayan slavetrading and raiding are welldocumented by contemporary and later

sources. Additionally, the sugidanon’s cultural emphasis on sea raiding and sailing implies that 2

the epic’s composers were familiar with this worldview and its lexicon (Magos, n.d., p. 7).

Mangayaw was to go on raiding voyages along the coast for slaves, imported luxury goods, and

wives (Scott, 1995, p. 154155). Marriagebyabduction appears in many of the epics, like

“Humadapnon”, where the titular hero is convinced by his spirit friends Taghuy and Duwindi to

marry the beautiful daughter of Labaw Donggon and Matanayon (Huganan, 2000, p. 1011).

It is possible that Song Dynasty records also make note of this raiding culture. Some

historians identify the Pishoye who raided the southern coasts of China in the late 12th century

with Visayan warriors (Isorena, 2004, p. 12), which gives an indication of the tradition's

antiquity and range. Isorena concludes that these raiders were likely from the eastern Visayas

instead of Panayanon (p. 6). Whether these raiders were from the East or West Visayas, a

positive identification of the Pishoye as Visayans would lend more support to the idea that the

sugidanon and its composers emerged from the same cultural milieu of searaiding.

Sources of Linguistic Influence on the Sugidanon

Another important factor in dating the sugidanon is determining what shaped its

composition, and then to what degree its content reflects indigenous rather than Indonesian

values and vocabulary. or vice versa. While the Laguna Copperplate Inscription demonstrates

2 Specialized vocabulary that focuses on an important social concept, practice or reality (Ottenheimer, 2006, p. 266).


that contact between the Philippines and Indianized kingdoms of the Southeast Asian 3

archipelagos occurred by at least 900 CE (Postma, 1992, p. 185), it remains to be seen what

effects this colonial influence had on Visayan literature and philosophy specifically.

Narrowing Down Potential Influence

First, it is important to rule out two colonial powers in particular—Formosa and

Spain—in order to focus more fully on Indonesia. Many researchers now believe that all

Austronesian languages stretching from Madagascar to Polynesia can trace their roots to

Formosa. One effect of this can be seen in the use of Austronesian languages by various Negrito

groups in the Philippines, whose original languages must have been incredibly diverse and

unrelated to Austronesian at one point but eventually gave way to those of the Formosan

invaders beginning 40004500 years ago (Reid, 2007, p. 1013). However, the evidence relating

to known traditions of epic chanting does not point to the north but rather to the west.

Before dismissing Spanish colonial influence on the themes and composition of the

sugidanon, it is important to acknowledge that Spanish vocabulary is rare but evident in several

epics . For instance, one version of “Labaw Donggon” features a leon nga bulawan [golden lion] 4

as the carrier of Saragnayan’s heart and the reason Aso Mangga and Baranogon are initially

unable to defeat him in combat. Sugidanon chanter and Gawad ng Manlilikha ng Bayan awardee

Federico Caballero stated that the presence of the nonnative lion is clearly a postcolonial

interpolation by an individual chanter that was perpetuated in only one telling of the epic

(personal communication, November 15, 2013). Jocano’s transcription of Ulang Udig’s telling

3 Generally meaning a state whose governmental and religious structure were modeled on those of their Indian contemporaries (Day and Reynolds, 2000, p. 24). 4 See Table 1.


replaces the lion with the wild boar Tigmaula (Jocano, 1965, p. 67; Manuel, 1963, p. 27), which

indicates that the original concept of placing Saragnayan’s heart in an animal was indigenous and

likely extant before Spanish contact. Another telling point that would indicate potential Spanish

cultural influence on the sugidanon would be the presence of Christian themes, whereas the

themes present are much more Hindu in nature (Liby Limoso, personal communication,

November 23, 2014).

Focus on Indonesia

Indonesian literary traditions are based heavily on Sanskrit vocabulary and poetic meter,

borrowing themes from Hindu and Buddhist mythology and subsequently adapting them to local

environments. For example, the Rāmāyana and Māhabhārata proved influential as both source 5 6

material and inspiration for literature in Java and Bali, an indigenous adaptation of the former

epic being the oldest extant example of Javanese kakawin (Creese, 1999, p. 4546). Likewise,

Philippine languages incorporated Sanskrit loanwords as a result of transoceanic trade, some of

which represented objects and concepts which did not previously exist in indigenous worldviews

. Speaking on loanwords in Tagalog, de Tavera said the following: 7

Las palabras que los tagalog han adoptado son aquellas que significan actos intelectuales, operaciones morales, pasiones, supersticiones, nombres de deidades, de planetas, de

5 The role of the Rāmāyana in wayang kulit is welldocumented. Perhaps less known is the epic’s indigenization among the nominally Muslim Maranao, whose oral and written literature preserved the story as Maharadia Lawana after the demonking Rāvaṇa, Rama’s primary antagonist. Francisco estimates that the epic took on its present form between the mid17th and late 19th centuries, though some elements were likely present earlier (Francisco, 1969, p. 1012, 3134; 1994, p. 6577). 6 Textual and historical evidence points to the 8th and 9th centuries BCE as the likely range of composition, while the first written portions date from the 5th century BCE.Given that it began as a popular epic transmitted orally as opposed to a purely written document, it was subject to changes over the succeeding centuries. Van Buitenen places the final additions around 400 CE (1973, p. xxivxxv). As shown later, the epic found its way to Indonesia with Indian merchants and may have later influenced Visayan poetry forms. 7 Similar to the way some Spanish loanwords were adopted without significant changes (e.g. kabayo, kutsara, kotse, krus, pari, etc.) because they represented objects without equivalent indigenous terms.


numerales de una cifra elevada, de botánica, de guerra y los resultados y peripecias de ella, enfin de títulos y dignidades y algunos de animales, instrumentos para la industria y el nombre de la moneda… [L]a tagalog habia salido del rango de las lenguas que se hablan hoy en Polynesia y Madagascar y podia expresar conceptos más elevados, ideas abstractas sin emplear circunlocuciones, gracias á las palabras sanscritas que habia adoptado (1887, p. 9). 8

While his placing of Tagalog in an elevated position due to these Sanskrit loanwords is certainly

not in line with modern linguistic anthropological theories, a brief overview of some of these

terms demonstrates that de Tavera’s points about etymology and language shift by cultural

diffusion are ultimately accurate . 9

Based on this evidence, we can assume that the sugidanon drew on cultural familiarity

with raiding culture, though determining the presence of Indianized chant traditions and Sanskrit

vocabulary in the sugidanon’s archaic Kinaraya will undoubtedly be an ongoing project for

years to come. It is probable that given the lower frequency of Sanskrit words in the sugidanon to

what is apparent in Tagalog indicates that significant parts of the story were already in place

before contact with Indonesian traders brought Hinduism to the Philippines. Further textual

analysis of the sugidanon transcripts will likely reveal the degree to which this lexicon affected

the underlying Panay Bukidnon society. It is also possible that the epic chant was an independent

innovation in the Visayas that did not require Indonesian influence. However, this seems

unlikely due to their relative proximity to Indianized kingdoms with histories of both economic

8 “The Tagalog words which have been adopted are those which signify intellectual acts, moral operations, superstitions, passions, names for deities, of planets, of higherlevel numbers, of plants, of war and the results and events thereof, and finally of titles and dignitaries and some animals, instruments of industry and the name of currency… Tagalog had already left the range of the tongues which are spoken in Polynesia and Madagascar and can express more elevated concepts, abstract ideas without the use of circumlocutions, thanks to the Sanskrit words which have been adopted.” (Trans. by author). 9 See Table 2.


colonialism in the region and epic poetry forms.

Several historians have stated that “Visaya” is derived from “Srivijaya”, which Munoz

glosses as sri [fortunate, prosperous or happy] and vijaya [victorious or excellence] (2006, p.

117). This view is challenged by Francisco, who proposes—in agreement with John

Carroll—that the necessary phonemic shift from /dʑ/ to /s/ between the Sanskrit vijaya and the

Philippine visaya is not documented in regional languages, but rather that the latter could be a

cognate of a Sanskrit word meaning “sphere, dominion, territory, country, kingdom”. He also

connects this with Chinese forms of vijaya which appear to be cognates of pishoye, the name

given to the barbarian sea raiders who attacked the Fujian coast (1971, p. 1737). The author

notes that he lacked the records to show that visaya is a Filipinization of a Chinese form of vijaya

and thus discounts the idea that the word came from China. However, the hypothesized

connection between the aforementioned Pishoye raiders and this linguistic data should not be

overlooked.

INDIANIZED MILIEU

Addressing these connections also raises additional questions. For example, the 14th

century Javanese epic Nagarakretagama identifies Sulu as a possible Majapahit vassal state or 10

at least an economic partner (Pigeaud, 1960, p. 16; 1962, p. 32), while the Visayas region was

not mentioned at all. Could this be because the danger posed to merchant vessels by the same

Pishoye raiders harassing the southeast China coast dissuaded Indonesian merchants from

conducting direct trade with the Visayas? Linguistic data could offer a solution to this as well,

10 Though Solot is identified clearly with the Sulu Archipelago, the association of Saludung/Seludong with Manila is debatable (Ali, 2010, p. 152; Austin, 1986, p. 58).


since loanwords from Sanskrit are less common in Visayan languages than in those of Luzon. If

Chinese policing of Indian Ocean trade routes contained piracy to the archipelago in the 13th

century, then the Visayas would be especially dangerous to Indonesian merchants operating

outside these established trade routes. This would in turn limit the amount of direct contact

between Visayans and Javanese Hindu cultures but some transfer would be inevitable due to

proximity.

Of course, this assumes that Visayans did not trade directly with the Majapahit Empire in

its own ports, which Pigeaud noted were multicultural stopovers where merchants waited for the

change in monsoon winds to facilitate the return journey to their home nations (1962, p. 501).

This environment brought together sailors from China and various Indonesian and Malaysian

kingdoms, and would be an ideal place for Filipino traders to be introduced to Indonesian poetry

forms. That Filipinos had sufficient boatbuilding technology to reach Indonesia during this

timeframe is potentially supported by the discovery of the “mother boat” balangay in Butuan

City, Philippines, measuring at least 25 meters long with carbon14 dates between 1215 and

1250 CE (Dimacali, 2013). If it is indeed shown that Indonesian epic poetry played a formative

role in the composition of the sugidanon, determining whether this exposure came from

Indonesian immigrants or Visayan traders will require us to reevaluate our understandings of

how, when, and by whom the Philippine archipelago was populated.

Further investigation will need to reconcile the various models that attempt to explain the

origins of Philippine populations. F. Landa Jocano and Robert Fox asserted that Beyer’s “wave

theory” model relies too much on racial and technological generalities—namely the neat


delineations Beyer made between Negrito, Malay, Bornean, and eventually American

immigrants, all bringing with them increasing levels of technology—to sufficiently explain

Filipino cultural variation (Tan, 2008, p. 2931). However, the conclusion that these migration

events were more random than Beyer’s neatly delineated waves also raises more questions than it

answers, namely how this affects the current dating investigation. Placing the sugidanon’s

composition into one of these periods will require much more archaeological data than those

currently available in prehistoric Philippine regional sequences (Coutts and Wesson, 1978, p.

81).

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MODEL

In his review of Laura Junker’s Raiding, Trading, and Feasting: The Political Economy

of Philippine Chiefdoms, Peterson offers a thoroughgoing critique of Junker's team’s methods

while also suggesting how an adaptation of their model could be used more effectively in the

future. I propose that his insights would be valuable for dating the sugidanon because of the

similarities between Negros—the focus of Junker’s survey—and Panay Islands in terms of

archaeological data or lack thereof. At the time of his writing, a systematic process for discovery

and care of the Cebuan archaeological record was fairly recent (Peterson, 2003, p. 51).

Archaeology of Cebu and Negros

Junker followed up on previous teams who had most of their success along rivers. Using

systematic stratified surface surveys, Junker’s team found a number of multicomponent sites

dating from the prehistoric era to the Spanish occupation, which they grouped into four rough

categories ranging from “primary regional centers of from 3050 hectares in size” to sites “below


one hectare in size, including isolated lowland homesteads, lowland hunting/trading camps,

upland villages and homesteads, upland hunting/collecting camps, lithic production sites, and

‘other special activity sites’ with very small lowdensity artifact scatters’.” These sites were

ranked based on several factors, including evidence of elite burials, relative frequencies of Asian

export ceramics to local earthenware, and population density (p. 7274).

Complications of Visayan Archaeology

Several of the issues that Peterson points out about Junker’s research and Visayan

archaeology in general are also relevant to Panaybased archaeology. For instance, settlements

along the river were populous at times but shifted due to weather and raiding, and lacked what

the Spanish thought of as hierarchical architecture, namely temples, palaces, chiefly dwellings,

and megalithic structures. He also notes that “Visayans at contact with the Spanish appear to

have moved from place to place like nomadic desert Bedouins, and occupied a complex mosaic

environment that offered a diversity of resources, but there were few concentrations of

productivity that might have fueled urban centers (p. 5356).” While river mouths were best

suited to larger populations, settlements were still mostly scattered and mountain peoples in other

regions were known to have migrated down into the lowlands and become Christianized,

something that cannot be ruled out in investigating Panay Bukidnon settlement patterns (p. 63).

Peterson gives a much more thorough analysis of Junker’s findings than what can be

presented here. To summarize his conclusions, research methods that would be better suited to

preHispanic lifeways would include: increased role of excavation and underground surveying

methods like groundpenetrating radar; reevaluation of our understandings of Visayan social


structure and settlement patterns as affected by external variables; and consideration of climatic

variation and local geomorphology (8286). Among these external variables is the extent of

Hindu influence on the sugidanon and Panay Bukidnon culture as a whole. As with other areas of

the country, modeling past behaviors on the present requires us to look through the lenses of

Indonesian, Moro, Chinese, Spanish, American, and Japanese colonialism (p. 62). This

underscores the importance of the sugidanon, as the data presented above seems to indicate that

the epics predate all of these colonial powers with the possible exception of the first. Along with

other Philippine epic chant traditions, it offers a rare glimpse into past cultures through

exploration of ritual, language, cultural emphasis, and mythology.

Adapted PanayBased Model

Using Peterson’s model as a guide, we can make some assumptions for what a

hypothetical archaeological survey would find in searching for Panay Bukidnon settlements.

First, the sugidanon itself helps us narrow our survey areas to at least the Halawod and Panay

River mouths. The same complications which hindered archaeologists on Cebu—including

typhoons, crop failure, and enemy raiding parties—would affect the hypothetical team’s results

as well. One obstacle not mentioned specifically by Peterson is that Panay’s semitropical

climate is generally not conducive to the longterm preservation of bamboo artifacts which make

up a significant portion of Panay Bukidnon material culture. Still, the application of Peterson’s

critiques to this Panayanon model will allow us to avoid the pitfalls he noted in Junker’s

methods.

CONCLUSIONS


Based on the information presented here, it is reasonable to assume that the sugidanon

was composed sometime between the 9th and 15th centuries CE. Understandably, a range this

wide is problematic, and narrowing the range would require more data than I have at present.

Future sugidanon scholars will undoubtedly have more resources to draw upon for their own

research. Foremost among these resources is the ongoing publication of ten epics being prepared

by scholars from the University of the Philippines. Making these volumes available will

undoubtedly make critical contributions to Philippine studies and Southeast Asian history as a

whole.

Presenting the sugidanon of Panay Island as a product of indigenous themes and regional

influences does not lessen its importance or detract from the ingenuity of its composers. On the

contrary, it shows that preHispanic Panayanons were aware of contemporary poetic styles and

and mythologies, further demonstrating the interconnected nature of maritime Southeast Asia.

This knowledge in turn can be used to combat negative perceptions of precolonial Filipino

cultures and presentday Indigenous Peoples.


Figures

Figure 1. Approximate territory of the Srivijaya Empire. Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/45/Srivijaya_Empire.svg/1007pxSrivijaya_Empire.svg.png

Figure 2. Approximate territory of the Majapahit Empire based on Nagarakretagama. Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/71/Majapahit_Empire.svg/1280pxMajapahit_Empire.svg.png


Tables

Sugidanon Context English gloss Spanish equivalent English gloss

pinsar “...nagapabalibog ako ka pinsar…” (H 725)

n. mind, v. to think pensar v. to think

leon “leon nga bulawan” n. lion león n. lion

Duwindi “...si Taghuy pa Duwindi.” (H 35)

“...Taghuy and Duwindi.”

duende n. elf, goblin

ingkantu “...lakot don sa ingkantu…” (H 7337)

n. enchanted spirit encanto n. charm, spell

ingkantadu “...nga lakat kang ingkantadu…” (H 7334)

n. enchanted male encantado adj. enchanted

purta “Uydon kataat day purta…” (H 4636)

n. door puerta n. door

namasyar “Kambay ka man namasyar…” (H 6570)

v. to visit, pass by pasear v. to walk

bintana “...nga ginasukobay bintana…” (H 1318)

n. window ventana n. window

gitara “... gakuskus ka gitara.” (LD 118)

n. guitar guitara n. guitar

baryu “...aliali kuy baryu…” (LD 146)

n. barrio barrio n. neighborhood

batalya “Agyan ta gid kadya batalya.” (LD 796)

n. battle, combat batalia n. battle

ginpirisu “...nga ginpirisu na…” (LD 2022)

v. was imprisoned preso n. prisoner

Table 1. Examples of Spanish loanwords and borrowings in Humadapnon: Tarangban 1 and Labaw Donggon.


Sanskrit English gloss Filipinized equivalent 11 English gloss

gaja (p. 10) n. elephant Tag. and Bis. gadya Sulu gajah Ilk. gadia

n. elephant

mahārddhika (p. 17) n. rich, he who has great talent or knowledge

Tag. maharlíka n. a free man, noble, he who is not a slave

hari (p. 19) n. king, name of Indra, king of the celestials

Tag. and So. Mang. hári Ilk. Pam. Pang. ári

n. king

raja/maharaja (p. 19) n. king Sulu raja/maharaja n. various meanings from “king” to “subordinate chief”

bhāsā (p. 2930) n. speech, language, any of the prakritic (vernacular) languages or dialects

Sulu bhāsa Mag. basa Mar. bása Tag. Bik. Ilk. So. Mang. bása Igt. fása

n. speech, language v. to read 12

bhattāra (p. 31) n. noble lord, great lord Tag. and So. Mang. bathálà Mag. batara Bis. bahala/bathala Pamp. batala

n. supreme god n. god n. idol n. an omen bird

devatā (p. 32) n. divine beings, divinity Tag. diwátà Bis. diwáta Mar. diwáta

n. spirits, goddess, nymphs, fairy n. godhead n. water spirits

sampratyaya (p. 34) n. firm conviction, perfect trust, faith

Tag. sampalatáyà n. faith, trust, and belief in God

upavāsa (p.35) v. abiding in the state of abstinence, to fast

Bis. and Sulu puasa v. to fast

Table 2. Examples of Sanskrit loanwords and borrowings in various Philippine languages with English glosses (Francisco 1965).

11 Abbreviations are as follows: Tag. (Tagalog), Ilk. (Ilokano), Bis. (Bisaya), Pam. (Kapampangan), Pang. (Pangasinan), So. Mang. (South Mangyan), Mar. (Maranao), Bik. (Bikolano), Mag. (Maguindanao) and Igt. (Igorot). 12 Francisco gives examples from various Indonesian languages which show that this transformation from the noun “language” to the verb “to read” likely happened in the Philippines. It is possible that one stimulus for this shift was the introduction of Indic scripts like Kawi, after which the original Sanskrit bhāsā was indigenized and shifted from describing the act of speaking (for which these indigenous languages already had words) to describing the act of writtenlanguaging, which would have been a new phenomenon in the Philippines at that time.


References Ali, Ismail. (2010). Observation and Discussion of the History of Maritime Archipelago.

International Journal for Historical Studies, 1(2), 152. Retrieved from

http://tawarikhjournal.com/files/File/ismail.ali.ums.pdf

Austin, Robert F. (1986). A Historical Gazetteer of Southeast Asia. Institute of Mathematical

Geography, Monograph Series, Monograph #4, 58. Ann Arbor. Retrieved from

http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/58233

Coutts, P.J.F. and J.P. Wessen. (1978). Field Reconnaissance of Eastern Panay Island,

Philippines. Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society, 6(1), 81. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/29791579

Creese, Helen (1999). The Balinese Kakawin Tradition: A Preliminary Description and

Inventory. Bijdragen tot de Taal, Land en Volkenkunde, 155(1), 4546. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/27865492?origin=JSTORpdfrom

Day, Tony and Craig J. Reynolds. (2000). Cosmologies, Truth Regimes, and the State in

Southeast Asia. Modern Asian Studies, 34(1), 24. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/313111?origin=JSTORpdf

de Tavera, Trinidad Hermenegildo Pardo. (1887). El Sánscrito en la Lengua Tagalog, 9.

Imprimerie de la Faculté de Médecine, Paris. Retrieved from

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=JYdBAAAAYAAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&d

q=de+tavera+sanscrito&ots=XBpgtsWF3p&sig=VS8AFcNXla7V83yMAAIMlWiTBw#

v=onepage&q&f=true


Dimacali, Timothy J. (2013, August 9). Massive Balangay ‘Mother Boat’ Unearthed in Butuan.

GMA News. Retrieved from

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/321334/scitech/science/massivebalangaymoth

erboatunearthedinbutuan

Francisco, Juan R. (1965). Indian Influences in the Philippines with Special Reference to

Language and Literature, 1035. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Diliman.

_______________ (1969). Maharadia Lawana, 1012, 3134. Quezon City: Philippine Folklore

Society. Retrieved from

http://www.asj.upd.edu.ph/mediabox/archive/ASJ07021969/francisomaharadia%20la

wana.pdf

_______________ (1971). The Philippines and India: Essays in Cultural Relations, 1731.

Mandaluyong: Premium Printing Press.

_______________ (1994). From Ayodhya to Pulu Agama Niog: Rama’s Journey to the

Philippines, 6577. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Diliman.

Huganan. (2000) Hinilawod: Adventures of Humadapnon (Tarangban I), 1011. (F. Landa

Jocano,Trans.). Manila: Punlad Research House.

Isorena, Efren B. (2004). The Visayan Raiders of the China Coast. Philippine Quarterly of

Culture and Society, 32(3), 12. Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/4813411/THE_VISAYAN_RAIDERS_OF_THE_CHINA_C

OAST_11741190_AD

Magos, Alicia P. (2012). The Panay Bukidnon. The Traditional Arts of Panay Bukidnon. Balay


Patawili, Inc.

______________ (n.d.) Notes on the Sugidanon Among the Bukidnon of Central Panay,

Philippines. Philippine Epics and Ballads Archive, Ateneo de Manila University.

Retrieved from

http://epics.ateneo.edu/epics//archives/14/articles/The%20Sugidanon%20epics%20of%20

Central%20Panay.pdf

Manuel, E. Arsenio. (1963). A Survey of Philippine Folk Epics. Asian Folklore Studies, 22,

2728. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1177562

Munoz, Paul Michel. (2006). Early Kingdoms of the Indonesian Archipelago and the Malay

Peninsula, 117. Singapore: Editions Didier Millet.

Muyco, Maria Christine M. (2009). Ga Sibod Daia! [DVD].

Ottenheimer, H. J. (2006). The Anthropology of Language: An Introduction to Linguistic

Anthropology, 266. Belmont: Thompson Higher Education.

Peterson, John A. (2003). Cebuan Chiefdoms? Archaeology of Visayan and Colonial Landscapes

in the 16th and 17th Century Philippines, 51, 5356, 6263, 7274, 8286. Philippine

Quarterly of Culture and Society, 31(1). Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/29792516

Pigeaud, Theodore G. (1960). Java in the 14th Century: A Study in Cultural History,

Nāgarakĕrtāgama (Vol 3) 16. The Hague: The Netherlands Institute for International

Cultural Relations.

_________________ (1962). Java in the 14th Century: A Study in Cultural History,


Nāgarakĕrtāgama (Vol 4), 32, 501. The Hague: The Netherlands Institute for

International Cultural Relations.

Postma, Antoon. (1992). The Laguna CopperPlate Inscription. Philippine Studies, 40(2), 185.

Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/42633308?uid=3739552&uid=2485759023&uid=

2134&uid=2&uid=70&uid=3&uid=3739256&uid=60&sid=21104480286861

Reid, Lawrence A. (1997). Historical Linguistics and Philippine HunterGatherers, 1013.

Retrieved from

http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/handle/10125/33036/A70.2007.pdf?sequ

ence=1

Scott, William Henry. (1995). Barangay: SixteenthCentury Philippine Culture and Society, 75,

154155. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.

Van Buitenen, J.A.B. (1973). The Māhabhārata 1: The Book of the Beginning, xxivxxv.

Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

contextualizing the sugidanon: providing a framework for inquiry

Documents