Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:37:55.439Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Culture Change and the Conduct of Conflicts among Filipino Tribesmen1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Christoph Vonfürer-Haimendorf
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology and Sociology, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, London, W.C.I

Extract

The Position of the tribal minorities in the Philippines is fundamentally different from that of comparable populations in other parts of Asia. The manner in which they have been enabled to run their own affairs and retain many features of their traditional culture while simultaneously acquiring Western education and familiarity with certain modern technological achievements is indicative of an approach to minority problems which distinguishes the Philippines from most other Asian countries. Whereas in the former colonial territories of Britain, France and the Netherlands a centrally controlled service of professional administrators endeavoured to impose on all populations, advanced as well as backward, a minimum respect for law and order as seen by the colonial power, in the Philippines neither the Spanish rulers nor the American authorities set up a type of district administration such as existed, for instance, in British India. When in 1898 the Americans replaced the Spanish régime, they did not give high priority to establishing throughout the islands an administration capable of dealing effectively with problems of law and order. In the lowlands they could build on a political system set up by the Spanish, but in the mountains of Northern Luzon, the area with which I am here concerned, they found not even the skeleton of a colonial administration. The entire hill-region was inhabited by warring tribes, torn by feuds and passionately addicted to the practice of head-hunting. Faced with a similar situation in such areas as the Naga Hills on the Assam—Burma border, the British had set about pacifying the tribes, stage by stage, and area by area, establishing outposts of military police and creating administrative units in charge of high-powered and specially selected members of the Indian Civil Service. Village elders were made responsible to these district officers, who administered summary justice in their capacity of magistrates, and this paternalistic system worked well as long as British rule lasted, but was hardly intended to prepare the ground for a system of representative democracy.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Barton, R. F., The Kalingas. Their Institutions and Custom Law, Chicago, 1949.Google Scholar

3 Jenks, Albert E., The Bontoc Igorot, Manila, 1905.Google Scholar

4 Keesing, F. M. and Keesing, Maria, Taming Philippine Headhunters, London, 1934.Google Scholar

5 Dozier, Edward P., Mountain Arbiters. The Changing Life of a Philippine Hill People, Tucson, Arizona, 1966.Google Scholar

6 Bacdayan, A. S., ‘The Peace Pact System of the Kalingas in the Modern World’. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, 1967.Google Scholar

7 von Fürer-Haimendorf, Christoph, Morals and Merit. A Study of Values and Social Controls in South Asian Societies, London and Chicago, 1967.Google Scholar