The Project Gutenberg EBook of Doctrina Christiana, by Anonymous
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
Title: Doctrina Christiana
The first book printed in the Philippines, Manila, 1593.
A Facsimile of the copy in the Lessing J. Rosenwald
Collection, Library
Author: Anonymous
Editor: Edwin Wolf 2nd
Release Date: June 23, 2005 [EBook #16119]
Language: English
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DOCTRINA CHRISTIANA ***
Produced by Jeroen Hellingman, Tamiko I. Camacho, and the
PG Distributed Proofreaders Team
[Transcriber's note: The Old-Tagalog characters used in this book are
represented by capital letters.]
DOCTRINA CHRISTIANA
The First Book Printed in the Philippines.
Manila, 1593. A Facsimile of the Copy in
the Lessing J. Rosenwald Collection.
Library of Congress, Washington.
With an Introductory Essay
By Edwin Wolf 2nd
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I want here to express my thanks and appreciation to Mr. Lessing
J. Rosenwald, through whose kindness this unique Doctrina was
presented to the Library of Congress and with whom the idea of this
publication originated. His interest and enthusiasm made possible
my work, and his friendly advice and encouragement have been both
valuable and heart-warming.
I also wish to thank others who have given me great assistance. They
are Dr. A.S.W. Rosenbach to whom I continually turned for advice,
Dr. Lawrence C. Wroth of the John Carter Brown Library and Dr. Leslie
W. Dunlap of the Library of Congress who very kindly read over my
manuscript and gave me the benefit of their suggestions and criticisms,
Mr. David C. Mearns and Miss Elsie Rackstraw of the Library of Congress
and Mrs. Ruth Lapham Butler of the Ayer Collection of the Newberry
Library who so freely and generously made available to me the great
collections of works on the Philippines in their libraries, Dr. John
H. Powell of the Free Library of Philadelphia who helped me find
reference books of the utmost importance, and the many librarians
who courteously answered written queries about early Philippine
material. EDWIN WOLF 2ND.
DOCTRINA CHRISTIANA
The first book printed in the Philippines has been the object of a hunt
which has extended from Manila to Berlin, and from Italy to Chile,
for four hundred and fifty years. The patient research of scholars,
the scraps of evidence found in books and archives, the amazingly
accurate hypotheses of bibliographers who have sifted the material
so painstakingly gathered together, combine to make its history a
bookish detective story par excellence.
It is easy when a prisoner has been arrested and brought to the dock to
give details of his complexion, height, characteristics and identifying
marks, to fingerprint him and to photograph him, but how inadequate
was the description before his capture, how frequently did false scents
draw the pursuer off the right track! It is with this in mind that we
examine the subject of this investigation, remembering that it has not
been done before in detail. And, to complete the case, the book has
been photographed in its entirety and its facsimile herewith published.
In studying the Doctrina Christiana of 1593 there are four general
problems which we shall discuss. First, we shall give a physical
description of the book. Secondly, we shall trace chronologically the
bibliographical history of the Doctrina, that is, we shall record the
available evidence which shows that it was the first book printed in
the Philippines, and weigh the testimonies which state or imply to
the contrary. Thirdly, we shall try to establish the authorship of
the text, and lastly, we shall discuss the actual printing.
It hardly needs be told why so few of the incunabula of the Philippines
have survived. The paper on which they were printed was one of the most
destructible papers ever used in book production. The native worms and
insects thrived on it, and the heat and dampness took their slower but
equally certain toll. Add to these enemies the acts of providence of
which the Philippines have received more than their share--earthquake,
fire and flood--and the man-made devastations of war, combined with the
fact that there was no systematic attempt made in the Philippines to
preserve in archives and libraries the records of the past, and it
can well be understood why a scant handful of cradle-books have been
preserved. The two fires of 1603 alone, which burned the Dominican
convent in Manila to the ground and consumed the whole of Binondo just
outside the walls, must have played untold havoc upon the records of
the early missionaries. Perhaps the only copies of early Philippine
books which exist today, unchronided and forgotten, are those which
were sent to Europe in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, and may
now be lying uncatalogued in some library there.
One copy of this Doctrina was sent to Philip II by the Governor of
the Philippines in 1593; and in 1785 a Jesuit philologist, Hervas y
Panduro, printed Tagalog texts from a then extant copy. Yet, since
that time no example is recorded as having been seen by bibliographer
or historian. The provenance of the present one is but imperfectly
known. In the spring of 1946 William H. Schab, a New York dealer,
was in Paris, and heard through a friend of the existence of a 1593
Manila book. He expressed such incredulity at this information that his
friend, feeling his integrity impugned, telephoned the owner then and
there, and confirmed the unbelievable "1593." Delighted and enthused,
Schab arranged to meet him, found that he was a Paris bookseller and
collector who specialized in Pacific imprints and was fully aware of
the importance of the volume, and induced him to sell the precious
Doctrina. He brought it back with him to the United States and offered
it to Lessing J. Rosenwald, who promptly purchased it and presented it
to the Library of Congress. Where the book had been before it reached
Paris we do not know. Perhaps it is the very copy sent to Philip II,
perhaps the copy from which Hervas got his text. Indeed, it may
have been churned to the surface by the late Civil War in Spain,
and sent from there to France. In the course of years from similar
sources may come other books to throw more light upon the only too
poorly documented history of the establishment of printing in the
Philippine Islands.
THE PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
Let us first examine the book as it appears before us. The title-page
reads:
Doctrina Christiana, en
lengua española ytagala, cor
regida por los Religiosos de las
ordenes Impressa con licencia, en
S. gabriel. de la orden de. S. Domigo
En Manila. 1593
The book, printed in Gothic letters and Tagalog [1] characters on
paper made from the paper mulberry, now browned and brittle with age,
consists of thirty-eight leaves, comprising a title-page as above,
under a woodcut [2] of St. Dominic, with the verso originally blank,
but in this copy bearing the contemporary manuscript inscription,
_Tassada en dos rreales_, signed _Juan de Cuellar_; and seventy-four
pages of text in Spanish, Tagalog transliterated into roman letters,
and Tagalog in Tagalog characters. The size of the volume, which
is unbound, is 9 1/8 by 7 inches, although individual leaves vary
somewhat due to chipping. Some of the leaves have become separated
from their complements, but enough remain in the original stitching
to indicate that the book was originally made up in four gatherings,
the first of twelve leaves, the second of ten, the third of ten, and
the fourth of six. Although the book is of the size called quarto,
the method of printing must have been page by page, so it is doubtful
that each sheet was folded twice in the usual quarto manner, but
more probable that it was printed four pages to a sheet of paper
approximately 9 1/8 by 14 inches, which was folded once.
The volume is printed throughout by the xylographic method, that is to
say, each page of text is printed from one wood-block which was carved
by hand. Along the inner margins of some pages are vertical lines which
were made by the inked edge of the block, and the grain of the wood has
caused striations to appear in the printed portions throughout. The
unevenness of the impression indicates that the pages were printed
in some primitive manner without the help of a conventional press.
The paper, which is one of the distinctive features of most old
Oriental books, has been discussed at length by Pardo de Tavera in
his study of early Philippine printing, and we can do no better than
translate the relevant passage in full:
"I have said before that the material composition of our
books is inferior. The imprints before 1830 were made on a
paper called by some rice paper, by others silk paper, and
by still others China paper, according to their taste. It
is detestable, brittle, without consistency or resistance,
and was called rice paper because it was supposed to be
made from that grain. It was the only kind then used in the
Philippines, not only for printing, but for all manner of
writing, letters, etc., and it is even recorded that in 1874
when tobacco was a state monopoly, cigarettes were made with
this paper, and that the Indians and Chinese preferred it
(and perhaps they still do) to rag paper or other kinds,
because of the horrible taste it gives the tobacco.
"In China they commonly made paper of bamboo, but more
principally from cotton and a plant which travellers have cited
only by its common name, which they transcribe in various ways,
calling it _kochu_, _kotsu_, or _kotzu_. Today it is known
that this plant is an ulmacea (_Broussonetia papyrifera_)
from a mash of which they still make cloth in Japan. Cotton
paper is superior to it, and naturally more expensive; but
the paper of inferior quality which was received in Manila,
where nothing was imported regularly but common articles of low
price, was of _kotsu._ As all Chinese-made paper it was coated
with alum, the finer [the paper] the thicker [the coating],
for the purpose of whitening it and making the surface smooth,
a deplorable business, for it made the paper very moisture
absorbent, a condition fatal in such a humid climate as
in these islands. Moreover, as the alum used is impure and
contains a large proportion of iron salts, the humidity and
weather oxidize it which finally darkens the paper, so that
Philippine books present a coloration which runs the gamut
of tones from the color of bone to that of dark cinnamon." [3]
Because the Doctrina Christiana, which may well be translated "The
Teachings of Christianity," contains the basic elements of the religion
which the missionaries were trying to spread among the unbaptized
in the remote regions of the world, it was the most useful handbook
they had. A summary of the contents of the present edition shows the
fundamental character of the work. After a syllabary comes the Pater
Noster, the primary and most popular prayer of Christianity. Then
follow the Ave Maria, Credo, Salve Regina, Articles of Faith, Ten
Commandments, Commandments of the Holy Church, Sacraments of the Holy
Church, Seven Mortal Sins, Fourteen Works of Charity, Confession
and Catechism. Here in a small compass is presented the simplest,
most easily learned and most essential tenets of the Catholic Church.
So useful was the Doctrina considered as a guide for those who had
just been, or were about to be, converted that the missionary fathers
placed it in most cases foremost among the books necessary to have
in print in a strange land. It is generally accepted today, although
no extant copy is known, that the first book printed in Mexico [4]
in 1539 was a Doctrina in Mexican and Spanish. Recent research has
shown that the second book printed by the pioneer Jesuit press at Goa,
in India, in 1557 was St. Francis Xavier's _Doutrina Christão_ [5]
in the Malay language, of which also no copy has yet been located. But
there are copies of the first book to come from a South American press,
another Doctrina [6] printed in the native and Spanish languages at
Lima in 1584. So the choice of this book as the first to be printed
at Manila follows a widespread precedent.
We have then a book, the Doctrina Christiana, in Spanish and Tagalog,
corrected by priests of more than one order--and this is important
in tracing the authorship of the work--and printed by the xylographic
method with license at Manila at the Dominican Church of San Gabriel
in 1593. So much we get from the title, and in itself it is a fairly
complete story, but from the date of its issue until the present time
that very fundamental information has not been completely recorded.
THE BIBLIOGRAPHICAL HISTORY
In tracing our clues down through the years, we find at the very
beginning the most valuable evidence which has been uncovered, short
of the book itself. From Manila on June 20, 1593, the Governor of the
Philippines, Gomez Perez Dasmariñas, wrote a letter to Philip II of
Spain in which he said:
"Sire, in the name of Your Majesty, I have for this once,
because of the existing great need, granted a license for the
printing of the Doctrinas Christianas, herewith enclosed--one
in the Tagalog language, which is the native and best of these
islands, and the other in Chinese--from which I hope great
benefits will result in the conversion and instruction of the
peoples of both nations; and because the lands of the Indies
are on a larger scale in everything and things more expensive,
I have set the price of them at four reales a piece, until Your
Majesty is pleased to decree in full what is to be done." [7]
This states unequivocally that two books were printed at Manila some
time before June 20, 1593, one of which was the Doctrina in Tagalog,
and the other the same work in Chinese. Although we are chiefly
concerned here with the former, the fact that they were produced at
about the same time and probably at the same place makes it necessary
to trace the history of both in order to reconstruct the circumstances
surrounding the production of the one. Of the Chinese Doctrina no
copy has yet come to light, and except for two 1593 references,
there are no records of its existence.
Another document [8] of 1593 verifies the information given in the
letter of Dasmariñas, differing from it only in one detail. In the
Archives of the Indies was found a manuscript account of 1593 listing
books written in the Philippines, which says:
"There have been printed primers and catechisms of the faith,
one in Spanish and Tagalog, which is the native language, and
the other in Chinese, which are being sent to Your Majesty,
the Tagalog priced at two reales and the Chinese at four,
which is hoped will be of great benefit."
The accounts of the printing of two Doctrinas contained in these
documents confirm some of the information of the title and add a bit
more. First, the letter says that the book was printed by permission
given by the Governor, which agrees with the "with license" of the
title, "for this once because of the existing great need." By a royal
cedula [9] of September 21, 1556, which was promulgated again on August
14, 1560, it had been ordered that Justices "not consent to or permit
to be printed or sold any book containing material concerning the
Indies without having special license sent by our Royal Council of the
Indies," and on May 8, 1584 this was implemented by the further order
"that when any grammar or dictionary of the language of the Indies be
made it shall not be published, or printed or used unless it has first
been examined by the Bishop and seen by the Royal Audiencia." This
latter portion was applied specifically to the Philippines in a letter
[10] from Philip II to the Audiencia of Manila, also dated May 8,
1584, to which further reference will be made. It can be gathered
from Dasmariñas' implied apology that he had never before given such
a license, and, since he had arrived in the Philippines in 1590, that
no books had been printed between that time and the licensing of the
Doctrinas. It is, moreover, likely that if any similar books had been
printed during the administrations of his predecessors he would have
mentioned the fact as a precedent for acting contrary to the cedulas.
According to Dasmariñas he had priced the books at four reales a
piece, which followed the regular Spanish procedure, under which
books were subject to price control. The Governor, it will be noted,
also apologized for the high price he was forced to set, giving
general high prices [11] as his excuse. Yet, while the appraisal of
four reales for this book was high compared to the prevailing scale
in Spain, it was not high compared to prices allowed in Mexico. On
June 6, 1542 the Emperor had given the Casa de Cromberger, the first
printing-house in Mexico, permission [12] to sell books printed there
at seventeen maravedís a sheet, or exactly one half a real. If we
assume that, although the Doctrina had been printed page by page,
it was quarto in size and so appraised on the basis of eight pages
to a sheet, we find that the price per sheet comes to about fourteen
maravedís, or less than half a real. However, a contradiction occurs
between the letter of Dasmariñas and this copy of the Doctrina,
supported by the other 1593 document. On the verso of the title, Juan
de Cuellar, [13] the Governor's secretary and the logical person to
sign the official valuation, gives the price as two reales, and the
1593 account, while agreeing with the letter as far as the Chinese
Doctrina is concerned, also lists the price of the Tagalog Doctrina
as two reales. It is impossible to say what caused the discrepancy;
perhaps it was a decision on Dasmariñas' part to lower the cost,
notwithstanding inflationary values, in order to make the book more
readily available for the natives who were not economically as well
off as the Chinese, or it could be that after the letter had been
written it was noticed that the Chinese volume was larger than the
Tagalog one, and some adjustment made. In any event, the price of this
Doctrina was finally set at two reales, making it less than half the
price allowed in Mexico fifty years before.
The evidence of the two 1593 documents would seem conclusive with
regard to printing in 1593, but witnesses were not long in appearing
who stated something quite different. The earliest of these was
Pedro Chirino, [14] a Jesuit priest, who came to the Philippines with
Dasmariñas in 1590. He went back to Europe in 1602, and while there
had a history of the Philippines printed at Rome in 1604. In 1606 he
returned to the islands, where he died in 1635. He left unpublished
the manuscript of another and more detailed history, dated 1610,
which contains a most significant passage, where, after speaking of
various early writers in native languages, he continues:
"Those who printed first were; P. Fr. Juan de Villanueva of
the Order of St. Augustine [who printed] certain little tracts,
and P. Fr. Francisco de San Joseph of the Order of St. Dominic
[who printed] larger things of more bulk." [15]
Concerning this Juan de Villanueva [16] very little indeed is
known. From what has been recorded it would seem that there were two
Augustinians of the same name who were in the Philippines before
1600. The first of these was a secular priest who came to Cebú
about 1566, may have taken the Augustinian habit some time after his
arrival, and died not long after 1569. The other Juan de Villanueva,
the date of whose arrival is unknown, was in Lubao in 1590, in Hagonoy
in 1593, and prior of Batangas from 1596 until his death in 1599. Of
the two there can be no doubt but that Chirino referred to the second
one. But, apart from Chirino's note, there is no record anywhere that
works by him existed, nor do the Augustinian chroniclers themselves,
except for the modern Santiago Vela who knew of Chirino's citation,
mention him as a linguist or a writer. The only possibility is that
between 1593 and 1599 Villanueva had printed some small xylographic
books no copies and no further record of which have appeared.
As for Francisco de San Joseph, or Blancas de San José as he is more
frequently called, there are other references to his part in the
establishment of printing in the islands. From information doubtless
obtained from Diego Aduarte, then in Spain, Alonso Fernandez wrote
in his ecclesiastical history, printed at Toledo in 1611:
"Father Fr. Francisco Blancas printed in the Tagalog language
and characters a book of Our Lady of the Rosary in the year
1602, which was the first book that was printed there of
that or any other material. After this he printed another of
the sacraments in the language of the Philippines, in both
characters, theirs and ours, from which the greatest results
have been achieved." [17]
Two years later the same author published at Madrid an account [18]
of the miracles performed by the Rosary of the Virgin, in which he
included a list of "Of some writers of the Order of St. Dominic who
were living in this year 1612," and gave the same information as above,
adding only that the printing took place in Bataan.
Diego Aduarte, [19] whose history of the Dominican province of the
Philippines is one of the best contemporary ones written, bears out
these statements of which he was most probably the source. Aduarte came
to the islands in company with his close friend Blancas de San José
in 1595, went back to Spain as procurator of his order in 1607, and
returned to Manila in 1628, staying in the Orient until his death in
1636. His history was continued and edited after his death by a fellow
Dominican, Domingo Gonçalez, who had it printed in 1640. Summarizing
the life and accomplishments of Blancas de San José, Aduarte wrote:
"So he was sent to Bataan, which is near there [Manila],
where he learned the language of the Indians, called Tagalog,
which is the most common in this country and is used among the
Indians for many leagues around the city. So rapid was his
study of the language that he began to preach in it within
three months, and could teach it to others in six.... And
believing that he was the instrument needed to bring the holy
gospel to the Indians, he spared no pains to investigate the
fitness of their words, the way to use them, and all the rest
so that he could succeed in mastering it.... He wrote many
books of devotion for them, and since there was no printing
in these islands, and no one who understood it or who was
a journeyman printer, he planned to have it done through a
Chinaman, a good Christian, who, seeing that the books of
P. Fr. Francisco were sure to be of great use, bestowed so
much care upon this undertaking that he finally succeeded,
aided by those who told him whatever they knew about it,
in learning everything necessary to do printing; and he
printed these books. . . . He [Blancas de San José] printed
a grammar to learn the Tagalog language, a memorial of the
Christian life, a book on the four last things, another on the
preparation for the communion, a confessionary, another on the
mysteries of the Rosary of Our Lady, and another to teach the
Tagalog Indians the Spanish language, and he left many very
pious and curious works in the language of these Indians." [20]
Blancas de San José, [21] as we have noted, came to the Philippines in
1595. He was at Abucay in Bataan from 1598 until 1602, and then spent
several years in and about Manila, preaching to the Indians and the
Chinese, whose language he also mastered. In 1614 he set out for Spain,
but died on the voyage before reaching Mexico. Of the books which he is
said to have had printed, only two are known to be extant, the _Arte
y Reglas de la Lengva Tagala_ [22] and the _Librong Pagaaralan nang
manga Tagalog nang uicang Castilla_ [23] (or _Libro en qve aprendan
los Tagalos, la lengua Castellana_), both printed at Bataan in 1610,
and until the discovery of the present Doctrina and the _Ordinationes_
of 1604 the earliest surviving Philippine imprints known.
We have not cited here in detail the account of Juan Lopez [24] in
the fifth part of his history of the Dominicans, because, although it
was printed nineteen years before the appearance of Aduarte's work,
the information therein contained regarding the Philippines was
acknowledgedly obtained from the unfinished manuscript which Aduarte
had with him in Spain. The pertinent passages add nothing to Aduarte's
information, and even the wording is reminiscent of his.
The first suggestion that early Philippine books may have been printed
from wood-blocks occurred in Quétif and Echard's bibliography of
Dominican writers printed at Paris in 1719. There, after listing
eight works by Blancas de San José, they add:
"He published all these in the Philippines with the help
of a Chinese Christian using Chinese blocks, for in his day
European typographers had not yet arrived in those islands,
nor did they have types for their language." [25]
This was an amazing suggestion, for as far as we know the
bibliographers who made it had not actually seen the books; nor is it
entirely true. The first two works listed are two books we know were
printed typographically in 1610. The sixth is _De los mysterios del
Rosario de nuestra Señora Tagalice_, the book referred to by Fernández
as having been printed in 1602, and generally accepted as being from
movable type, although no copy has been discovered to prove it. And
yet, it is not at all impossible that some time before 1602 Blancas de
San José had some of his writings printed from blocks. In any event,
the idea, later developed by Medina and Retana, that xylography was
used before a real printing-press was established, may have come from
this not wholly accurate note.
For almost a hundred and fifty years no historian or bibliographer
wrote anything to challenge the basic affirmations of Chirino,
Fernández and Aduarte. In the middle of the 18th century, Lorenzo
Hervas y Panduro, [26] a Jesuit, was forced by the expulsion of the
Jesuits from Spain to seek refuge in the Papal States, and took up
residence at Cesena. There he began work on a tremendous universal
history of the spiritual development of man, into which he wove the
results of his philosophical, social and linguistic studies. These
last were of particular importance, and Hervas is regarded as the true
founder of the science of linguistics and comparative philology. In
1785 he published the eighteenth volume of his massive work, the
_Origine, formazione, meccanismo, ed armonia degl' idiomi_, in which
he printed a Tagalog Ave Maria as written in 1593, with the note:
"The Ave Maria in the Tagalog of 1593 is to be read in the
Tagalog-Spanish Doctrina Christiana which was printed in
Tagalog and roman characters by the Dominican fathers in
their printing-house at Manila in the year 1593." [27]
In 1787 he finished his twenty-first volume, _Saggio pratico_, [28]
which was another philological study, including the Pater Noster
in over three hundred languages and dialects, among them Tagalog,
again from the 1593 Doctrina. Here, then, is ample proof that a copy
of this book was known to Hervas in 1785, and the only information
which his loose transcription of the title failed to give was that
the volume was "corrected by members of the orders," that it was
printed with license, and that it was printed at San Gabriel.
At the beginning of the following century two German scholars, familiar
with Hervas' writings, noted the 1593 Doctrina. Franz Carl Alter, [29]
in his monograph on the Tagalog language, printed the Ave Maria from
the text which had appeared in 1785, and Johann Christoph Adelung,
[30] in his _Mithridates_, a comprehensive study of languages,
included the Tagalog Pater Noster from the _Saggio pratico_ of
1787. The latter also listed in a short bibliography of the Tagalog
language the Doctrina of 1593, giving exactly the same information
about it that Hervas had. Neither of these men apparently saw a copy
of the book, limiting themselves to extracts from Hervas, but they
perpetuated an earlier reference of the utmost importance.
Shortly after the two Germans published their notices of the 1593
Doctrina an entry appeared of a book printed at Manila in 1581. José
Mariano Beristain y Sousa, a learned Mexican writer, issued in
1819-21 a bibliography of Spanish-American books, in which he listed
alphabetically the authors, giving a short biography of each and
adding a list of his works. Under Juan de Quiñones we find:
"'Arte y Vocabulario de la Lengua Tagala,' Imp. en Manila,
1581." [31]
No specific authority is given for this entry, but in his sketch of
the life of Quiñones Beristain cited as sources, Juan de Grijalva,
Nicolás Antonio, Gaspar de San Agustin, and José Sicardo. It would
seem logical that one of these must have mentioned such a work as
printed in Manila in 1581, but in tracing down the sources no such
precise notice is found.
Grijalva simply said that Quiñones "concerned himself with Tagalog and
made a vocabulary and grammar of it." [32] Antonio [33] referred to
Grijalva, and carried the matter no further. San Agustin, describing
the Franciscan chapter of 1578, wrote:
"It was determined moreover in this chapter that P. Fr. Juan
de Quiñones, prior of the Convent of Taal in Tagalos, and
Fr. Diego de Ochoa, prior of Bacolor in Pampanga, should
compose and fashion grammars, dictionaries, and confessionaries
in the two languages [respectively Tagalog and Pampanga] in
which they had ventured; which they executed very promptly
and well, and these were of great use to those who came to
these islands, for they had these by which they could study
the languages." [34]
Later, San Agustin, again mentioning Quiñones, referred to Grijalva,
and added as an additional source for his information Tómas de
Herrera. Sicardo [35] added nothing new. Herrera, not cited directly
by Beristain, may however have been the source from which the "Imp." of
his entry came. Herrera wrote:
"He [Quiñones] was the first to have learned the Tagalog
language of which he published a grammar and dictionary as
an aid to the ministers of the gospel."
If Beristain read this, he may have been misled by the Latin of
"published," [36] _in lucem edidit_, which may indeed mean printed
and published, but also means quite properly published in the sense
of written in manuscript and copied and circulated. We agree with
Schilling [37] that this latter meaning was the one intended. One
other statement that Quiñones' works were printed may derive from
the same misunderstanding. About the year 1801 Pedro Bello wrote an
account, still in manuscript and unpublished, of the writings of the
Augustinians. His remarks on Quiñones, first printed by Santiago Vela
[38], we believe are only an extension of Herrera's _in lucem edidit_.
This same confusion in terminology has been used [39] to support
Beristain's claim by introducing as evidence the letter of Philip II of
May 8, 1584. Salazar, the Bishop of Manila, probably shortly after the
Synod of 1582, had written the King a letter, now unfortunately lost,
in which he spoke of a decision to standardize linguistic works. In
answer to the Bishop, the following letter in the form of a royal
cedula was sent:
"To the President and Judges of my Royal Audiencia situated
in the city of Manila in the Philippine Islands.--It has been
told me on behalf of Don Fray Domingo de Salazar, Bishop of
that place, that it was agreed that no priest might make a
grammar or vocabulary, and that if it were made it might not
be published before being examined and approved by the said
Bishop, because otherwise there would result great differences
and disagreements in the doctrine; and this having been seen
by my Council of the Indies, it was agreed that I should
order this my cedula which decrees that when any grammar or
vocabulary be made it shall not be published or used unless
it has first been examined by the said Bishop and seen by
this Audencia." [40]
Here again the word _publicado_ is brought forth to prove that the
letter referred to printed works, but here again the term is equally
applicable to manuscript works in common use and generally available.
Further evidence that there was no printing as early as 1581 is to be
found in a letter [41] from Juan de Plasencia, a Tagalist of great
renown, to the King, dated from Manila, June 18, 1585, in which he
reported on the state of missionary work in China and Japan, and added
that he had written a grammar and a declaration of the whole Doctrina
in the most common language of the Philippines, and that he was then
making a dictionary, concluding by asking the King to send decrees
ordering those works to be printed in Mexico at the expense of the
Exchequer. Is it likely that Plasencia would have so written if an
_Arte y Vocabulario_ had been printed four years earlier? Furthermore,
San Antonio, recording the book on the customs and rites of the Indians
written by Plasencia at the request of the Governor Santiago de Vera,
and dated October 24, 1589, said that it was not printed "because
printing houses had not yet come to this country." [42]
We then conclude with regard to Beristain's entry, that although
there existed in manuscript an _Arte y Vocabuldrio Tagalo_ by Juan de
Quiñones, there is no evidence of the existence of any book printed
for him from wood-blocks or in type. Santiago de Vela [43] suggests
the possibility that there might have been a xylographic _Arte_ of
1581, but Schilling [44] questions this in the face of the complete
lack of reference to such a printed work by any 17th or 18th century
writer, and the tenuous notices of Bello and Beristain; yet to say
categorically that no such work was printed would be foolhardy in the
face of the scanty early records and the appearance of this Doctrina,
a single copy of which has just been discovered.
The first important work devoted solely to the early history of the
Philippine press was by T.H. Pardo de Tavera, who in 1893 published
his study of printing and engraving in the Philippines. He there
recorded a 1593 Doctrina, but adamantly refused to accept it on the
hearsay evidence of others. His account is valuable because it shows
that there may have been a copy of the Doctrina in Java in 1885,
and so we quote from it at some length:
"A learned Dutch orientalist, Dr. J. Brandes, wrote me in 1885
from Bali-Boeleleng (Java) telling me that in 1593 at Manila
there was printed a Doctrina Christiana in Spanish-Tagalog,
with the proper characters for the latter language. Other
orientalists, at the last Congress in London in 1891, gave
me the same information. Nonetheless, no one told me where
he had read such a thing, nor much less that he had managed
to see such a book, although inspecting a rare book which
I acquired in Paris (Alter, _Ueber die tagalische sprache_,
Vienna, 1803), I saw that the author cited such a Doctrina
Christiana and said that he knew of its existence through Abbé
Hervas. This is an error, and without doubt such a Doctrina was
in manuscript, because in 1591 [he should have said 1593] there
was no press in Manila nor in any part of the archipelago,
and today we know for certain and positively that the first
book issued there appeared in 1610." [45]
Pardo de Tavera was the first to call attention to Alter, and through
him to Hervas, and in all probability the orientalists at the London
Congress had seen the Doctrina cited by one of these or Adelung. But he
rejects that evidence in no uncertain terms. Mitigating somewhat his
assurance, he speaks following the above-quoted passage of printing
in China, and differentiates between xylographic and typographic
printing, and since he was obviously thinking in terms of printing
on a press with movable type his conclusions are not too extreme.
In 1896 appeared José Toribio Medina's _La Imprenta en Manila_, which
was up to then the best, most complete and most scholarly work on early
Philippine printing, and is today with its subsequent additions and
corrections the standard bibliography of the subject. There Medina
cited most of the authorities we have already quoted, the letter of
Dasmariñas, Fernández' _Historia eclesiastica_, Aduarte, Adelung,
Beristain and Pardo de Tavera. Then, basing his conclusions strongly
on the Dasmariñas letter and the note of Adelung, he listed [46]
as number one in his bibliography the Doctrina of 1593 in Spanish
and Tagalog, and as number two the Doctrina in Spanish and Chinese
of the same year. This is a verdict which has stood the test of
time, and one that is just now confirmed by the discovery of the
book itself. Two points, however, in his survey should be noted. In
his discussion of the printing and the authorship Medina does not
emphasize the Dominican origin of the book, although he does say that
"it does not appear bold to us to suppose that the imprint of these
Doctrinas ought to be the Hospital of San Gabriel in this village
[Binondo]," [47] and faithfully copies Adelung's imprint notice, "in
the Dominican printing-house," in his listing of the book. The other
point is that he says in his introduction and repeats in his entry
that the Doctrina had a Latin as well as Spanish and Tagalog texts,
an erroneous translation of Adelung's "mit lateinische und tagalische
Schrift." He was hesitant as are all bibliographers, who must perforce
record the probable existence of a book a copy of which they have
never seen, in committing himself as to whether it was printed from
blocks or from type or by a combination of the two methods.
More positive and more succinct than Medina was T.E. Retana whose
earlier researches [48] into the history of the Philippines Medina
acknowledgedly made use of, and who in 1897 published his _La Imprenta
en Filipinas, Adiciones y Observaciones a La Imprenta en Manila_. He
took the material of Medina, added the evidence of Chirino and
Plasencia, and resummarized the problem. The letter of Dasmariñas
showed conclusively that a Doctrina was printed in 1593. Chirino said
that the first two whose works were printed were Juan de Villanueva and
Blancas de San José. Fernández stated positively that the first book
printed in the Philippines was the book of Our Lady of the Rosary by
Blancas de San José printed at Bataan in 1602. Aduarte supported this
without mentioning a title, place or date of printing. If we are to
accept all these statements as incontrovertible, how can the apparent
contradictions be reconciled? The answer had already been hinted at,
but Retana solved the problem with amazing acumen, and arrived at
four conclusions, which are here printed in his own words:
"A--That the Doctrinas of 1593, though printed at Manila, were
not executed in type, but by the so-called xylographic method;
B--That the initiative for the establishment of _typography_
is owed to P. Fr. Francisco Blancas de San José;
C--That the first _typographer_ was the Chinese Christian
Juan de Vera at the instigation of the said Father San José;
D--That the first _typographical_ printing of this Dominican
author is of the year 1602." [49]
It is not difficult to say with the book itself in front of us,
that it is an example of xylographic printing, but it was a great
feat on the part of Retana, who had never seen a copy, to resolve
apparently irreconcilable differences of opinion on the part of
several unquestioned authorities by deducing that it was all a
matter of semantics--what did _printing_ mean? As for the sprite of
1581 introduced by Beristain, Retana dismissed it on the grounds of
insufficient evidence. In a word, he concluded that the first book
issued in the Philippines was a Doctrina printed from wood-blocks
in 1593.
All subsequent writers on the subject have derived their information
from the sources we have already mentioned, and to a great degree
have been influenced by the findings of Medina and Retana. The
Rev. Thomas Cooke Middleton [50] in 1900 confessed that he did not
know what the first book printed was. Pardo de Tavera maintained his
old intransigence, when in the introduction to his bibliography for
the Library of Congress in 1903 he wrote that Medina's affirmation
that printing took place in 1593 "loses all validity in the face of
the categorical statement of F. Alonso Fernández." [51] Medina did
not comment further in his _Adiciones y Ampliaciones_ [52] of 1904,
yet when the same year Pérez and Güemes [53] published their additions
to and continuation of Medina, bringing his bibliography down to
1850, they resurrected the 1581 _Arte_, but added no new evidence
to prove their case. Blair and Robertson, in their tremendous,
collective history of the Philippines, did not include a list of
Philippine imprints in their bibliography, [54] but referred readers
to Medina and Retana with whom they agreed. To celebrate the three
hundredth anniversary of typographical printing in the Philippines
Artigas y Cuerva [55] wrote a study which emphasized the part played
by Blancas de San José, but did not deny the existence of the 1593
Doctrina. Retana [56] in 1911 brought his work on the subject up to
date, but retained all his major conclusions. In Palau's standard
bibliography of Spanish books we find the Doctrinas called "the two
earliest books known to have been printed in Manila." [57] Finally, the
most thorough recent work on the subject is to be found in Schilling's
[58] survey of the early history of the Philippine press published in
1937. There is little that can be added to the evidence uncovered by
these modern writers, but the appearance of the book itself enables
us to say with certainty some things which they were able only to
surmise. However, as regards the authorship and the circumstances and
place of printing we are able, from the information given on the title,
to carry the investigation somewhat further.
THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE TEXT
The title tells us that the book was "corrected" by the priests of
more than one order, and since it was printed by the Dominicans,
we can assume that the ultimate responsibility for the preparation
of the text in consultation with friars of other orders also lay
in their hands. Our problem then is to discover what texts were
available to them in 1593 and who were the priests who formed the
editorial board. We have included in this study also the origins of
the Chinese text, for the two Doctrinas appeared at the same time,
and as we shall see the same Dominicans were probably responsible for
the production and preparation of both the Tagalog and the Chinese
texts. During the period under discussion there were priests of four
orders active in the islands, and so we shall speak in turn of the
Augustinian, Franciscan, Jesuit and Dominican fathers who might have
written or worked on the Doctrinas printed in 1593.
THE AUGUSTINIANS
The first priests to come to the Philippines were six Augustinians
who accompanied Legazpi on the expedition which in 1565 established
the first permanent European settlement in the islands. Among them
was Martin de Rada, who was one of the most important and influential
priests during the early days of the Spanish colony, and who was the
first linguist of note to work in the Philippines. The first language
he learned was Visayan, [59] native to the island of Cebú where the
Spaniards first landed, but he also learned Chinese. In May 1572 he
was elected provincial of his order, and in June 1575 he went with
Jerónimo Marín, as ambassador to China, being "the first Spaniard
who entered into that said kingdom." [60] In preparation for the
voyage, we are told by González de Mendoza, whose famous and popular
history of China first printed in 1585 derives in a great measure from
information brought back by Rada, that Rada "began with great care &
studie to learne that language [Chinese], the which he learned in
few daies: & did make thereof a dictionarie." [61] Rada was then not
only the first to write in Visayan, but also the first to compile a
Chinese dictionary, and more important still brought back with him
to Manila from China many books of which Mendoza gives a list. [62]
These books, printed in the usual Chinese method from wood-blocks,
could have provided models for the Spaniards in the Philippines who
lacked European facilities for printing, and they may have given
birth to the idea which resulted in the xylographic Doctrinas.
Within the first few years several more Augustinian fathers [63]
arrived whose linguistic accomplishments are briefly noted by the
historians, but while these men were certainly pioneers in the speaking
of Tagalog and Chinese, they are not recorded as having written in
the language. According to Cano, [64] the first Tagalog grammar was
written by Agustin de Alburquerque, and Retana [65] considered him
one of the possible authors of the present Doctrina. This friar
reached the Philippines in 1571, accompanied Rada on his second
expedition to China in 1576, was elected provincial in 1578, and died
in 1580. However, there is no early record saying that Alburquerque
wrote any linguistic work. The statement was not made until the 19th
century, and in contradiction Juan de Medina, who wrote in 1630,
said that Juan de Quiñones "made a grammar and lexicon of the Tagal
language, which was the first to make a start in the rules of its
mode of speech." [66] Furthermore, in the official acts [67] of the
Augustinian province we find that on August 20, 1578 Alburquerque
as provincial of the order commissioned Quiñones to write a grammar,
dictionary and confessionary in the Tagalog language. The conclusions
of Santiago de Vela [68] are that it is doubtful that Alburquerque
wrote any linguistic works, and if he did they were liable to have
been rough preliminary studies [69] upon which the texts of Quiñones
were based. In view of the lack of positive contemporary evidence
[70] we believe that Alburquerque may be eliminated except as the
instigator of such works, and we return again to Juan de Quiñones.
In so far as Quiñones [71] was the author of a grammar and dictionary
claimed to have been printed at Manila in 1581, we have shown what
various writers have said, and though we must conclude that the work
was probably not printed, it is certain that he wrote in the Tagalog
language. Agustin Maria de Castro [72] said, although no earlier
writers support it, that Quiñones actually presented a grammar,
dictionary and Doctrina in Tagalog at the Synod of 1582 for its
approval. Our total information about this Augustinian linguist boils
down to these essentials: that he did write a grammar and dictionary
of Tagalog about 1578-81, which may have been the earliest written
in the Philippines; that he may have presented these and a Doctrina
at the Synod of 1582 which approved Juan de Plasencia's works; that
there is no concrete evidence that any of these works were printed;
and that Quiñones' works which were extant in manuscript in 1593
might have been consulted in the preparation of the present Doctrina.
Another member of the Order of St. Augustine who might have been
able to participate in the editing of the 1593 Doctrinas was Diego
Muñoz. Muñoz came to the islands in 1578, and died in 1594. Of him
San Agustin writes:
"Moreover in this year [1581] the ministry for the Sangleys
was founded in the convent of Tondo, and P. Fr. Diego Muñoz
was named as its special minister. He devoted particular
zeal to the study of the Chinese language, and preached in
it with much elegance. And all the Sangleys who were going
to be baptized, and there were many, had recourse to this
ministry, and the teaching was continued with much vigilance
and care. And there never lacked a religious of our order
to apply himself to such holy work, from the time we came to
this land, as our original records of the province prove." [73]
To him is also attributed [74] a volume of manuscript panegyric sermons
in Tagalog, and because of this and his work at Tondo he may have
been consulted by the Dominicans. We also mention Lorenzo de León,
[75] who arrived in 1582, spent twelve years in the provinces, wrote
a book called the _Estrella del mar_ in Tagalog, and died in 1623,
and might also have helped.
THE FRANCISCANS
Although the first Franciscans did not arrive in the Philippines
until June 24, 1577, the writings of the linguists of that order
are more fully recorded. Among the earliest was Juan de Plasencia
who, the Franciscans claim, wrote the first Tagalog grammar. He was
fortunate in meeting soon after his arrival Miguel de Talavera, [76]
who had come with his parents on the expedition of Legazpi. Miguel,
then quite young, became in a manner of speaking the disciple of
Plasencia, and while the father taught him Latin, he in turn taught
Plasencia the elements of Tagalog which he had picked up. For two years
Plasencia ministered in the provinces of Tayabas, Laguna, and Bulacan
where he used and perfected his knowledge of the native language. On
May 20, 1579, when the provincial Pedro de Alfaro left for China,
he named Plasencia acting provincial during his absence. A reference
to the earliest linguistic writings of the Franciscans occurs in an
account by Santa Inés of the chapter meeting held in the Convent of
Los Angeles in July 1580, which was presided over by Plasencia:
"The third and last thing that was determined in this chapter
was that a grammar and dictionary of the Tagalog language
should be made and a translation of the Doctrina Christiana
completed. And since Fr. Juan de Plasencia, the president of
this same chapter, excelled all in the language, he was given
this responsibility, and he accepted it, and immediately set to
work. And then after great study, much lack of sleep and care,
together with fervent prayers and other spiritual duties,
of not little importance in the good profit of such work,
he reduced the language to a grammar, made a catechism,
a very full dictionary, and various translations." [77]
But the most important record of his writings is contained in
the description of the Synod called by Bishop Salazar in 1582. In
March, 1581, Domingo de Salazar, the first Bishop of Manila and the
Philippines, had arrived. The problems which faced him were manifold,
particularly those of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the treatment of the
natives by government administrators, and the means by which the gospel
could best be spread. A synod was called to resolve these points. One
matter of the utmost importance was the approval of standard Tagalog
texts, and Juan de la Concepcion gives the following account of what
transpired in this connection:
"His excellency presided at the meetings. At them the most
learned topics were discussed and the most learned persons
were present--the Dominican father Salvatierra, the most
outstanding scholars among the Augustinians and Franciscans,
the Jesuit fathers Sedeño and Sanchez, and the Licentiate
Don Diego Vasquez de Mercado as dean of the new cathedral. At
this convention or diocesan synod it was discussed whether the
Indians were to be ministered to in their native language, or
if they would be obliged to learn Spanish, and it was decided
to instruct them in their native tongue. The divine office,
the Doctrina Christiana, which Father Fr. Juan de Plasencia
had translated into the Tagalog language, was approved. His
work, the _Arte y Vocabuldrio Tagalo_, was judged most useful
because of the ease by which it permitted an understanding
and thorough knowledge of so foreign a language." [78]
The already quoted account of Santa Inés continues with a similar
description of the Synod, and says that when the problem of teaching
the natives was brought up only Plasencia could resolve it.
"Since, having seen his catechism and the translation which he
had made in Tagalog of the grammar and dictionary, those who
were at the Synod and understood anything of the language could
do nothing but admire the fitness of the terms, their efficacy
and strength. And they said that, without the particular
help of heaven, it seemed impossible that in so short a time
and with so few years in the country he could have done such
excellent work. And then, having approved them, they ordered
that various copies be made, particularly of the translation
of the Doctrina, so that with them and with no other would
the ministers teach the Indians, and so it was approved,
in order that there might be uniformity in all parts of the
Tagalog country. This translation is that which has come down
to this day, except that it is more polished." [79]
It must have been shortly after the handbooks of Plasencia received
the seal of ecclesiastical approval that Salazar wrote the King
speaking of the action taken, and got back in answer the cedula, quoted
before, giving the Bishop and Audiencia the right of censorship over
such works. The question of chronological precedence [80] between
Quiñones and Plasencia is not important, for the specific approval
of Plasencia's texts by the Synod, attended by Quiñones himself,
shows that Plasencia's books were accepted, and in conformity with
the ruling of the Synod would have been the only texts allowed to be
used generally in the Philippines.
Another reference to writers in the native tongues in an anonymous
manuscript of 1649 introduces the names of other linguists:
"The first missionaries left many writings in the Tagalog
and Bicol languages, the best of which are those left by
Fathers Fray Juan de Oliver, Fray Juan de Plasencia, Fray
Miguel de Talavera, Fray Diego de la Asuncion, and Fray
Gerónimo Monte. Mention is here made of the above fathers
because they were the first masters of the Tagalog language,
and since their writings are so common and so well received
by all the orders. They have not been printed, because they
are voluminous, and there are no arrangements in this kingdom
for printing so much." [81]
Miguel de Talavera we have spoken of before. That he helped Plasencia
in the compilation of his earliest works in Tagalog is clear, and
to him in part must be attributed the miracle of the production by
Plasencia of the texts "in so short a time and with so few years
in the country." Martínez says specifically that Talavera "was the
first interpreter among our priests, and greatly helped Fr. Juan
de Plasencia in the composition of the _Arte y Vocabulario_." [82]
Juan de Oliver was in somewhat the same relationship to Plasencia,
but instead of helping with the initial attempts, he carried on from
where Plasencia left off. Oliver came to the Philippines on the same
expedition which brought Bishop Salazar in 1581. According to Huerta
[83] he worked in various Tagalog villages, and mastered the Tagalog
and Bicol languages, in which he wrote twenty-two works, which Huerta
lists. Of these three are of particular interest to us. The first
entry says that he "corrected the Tagalog grammar written by Fr. Juan
de Plasencia, and added the adverbs and particles;" [84] the second
that "he perfected and augmented the Spanish-Tagalog dictionary,
written by the said Fr. Juan de Plasencia;" and the sixteenth lists
a _Catecismo de doctrina Cristiana esplicado_.
Several authors, attempting to establish the priority of Quiñones'
dictionary, question the existence of one by Plasencia at the Synod
of 1582 in the face of his own statement in 1585 that he "was then
making a dictionary." [85] To us there seems to be no inconsistency,
if Plasencia in 1585 was referring to a revision, unquestionably
made with his knowledge and help, by Juan de Oliver. In short, it
is reasonable to assume that Plasencia, burdened with administrative
duties from 1583 to 1586, during which time he was custodian of his
order, secured the aid of Oliver in reediting and continuing his
linguistic studies. Plasencia died in 1590.
The other two Franciscans listed by the anonymous historian of
1649 are elsewhere recorded as having written various works in
Tagalog. To both Diego de la Asuncion [86] and Gerónimo Montes y
Escamillo [87] were attributed grammars and dictionaries, and the
latter also wrote a _Devotional tagalog_, said to have been printed
at Manila in 1610. In speaking of these early linguistic texts, it is
not necessary to believe that each was a completely original work,
but rather that they were based upon a recognized model, which was
at first the Talavera-Plasencia-Oliver text, and that the individual
missionaries used their experience in the field to produce, as it
were, new editions. That this was the case is borne out by the notes
of Pablo Rojo to his bibliography of Plasencia where speaking of the
grammar and dictionary he says that "perfected by other missionaries,
they have been the base for such grammars and dictionaries of Tagalog
as have been written, but in the form in which they came from the
hands of their author, they have not come down to us." [88] More
important still is Rojo's statement [89] that he found a portion of
Plasencia's Doctrina which had been believed lost, and from which he
quotes the Pater Noster. Since he does not say where the manuscript
was or how it was known to be Plasencia's text, we cannot put too
much reliance on the statement, but the text as there printed, while
similar to that of the present Doctrina, is not identical.
THE JESUITS
Before passing on to the Dominicans we shall mention briefly the
linguists of the Society of Jesus. In the early days there were not
many Jesuits in the Philippines. However, there were some linguists
among them, chiefly of the Visayan tongue, in which they are said to
have printed a Doctrina [90] as early as 1610. Limiting ourselves to
a note of those who knew Chinese and Tagalog, we find that the first
mentioned by Chirino as an outstanding master of one of these was
Francisco Almerique, who arrived with Santiago de Vera in 1583. Shortly
thereafter he "began the study of the Chinese language in his zeal
to aid in the conversion of the many Chinese who came to Manila and
whom we in the Philippines call Sangleys." [91] And Colin says "his
principal occupation was with the Tagalog Indians, being the first of
the Company to learn their language." [92] Nothing further is said of
his accomplishments in these languages, but his knowledge would have
been available in 1593, for he was then still active in the islands.
Chirino himself landed at Manila in 1590 shortly after Dasmariñas,
and went almost immediately to Taytay where he learned Tagalog and
was joined in 1592 by Martin Henriquez. At the time Juan de Oliver
was preaching in that district, and it is exceedingly probable that
he helped the newcomers with the language, for Chirino speaks of him
in terms of highest praise. Henriquez "learned the language in three
months and in six wrote a catechism in it, a confessionary, and a
book of sermons for all the gospels of the year in the said idiom,"
[93] but he died on February 3, 1593 at Taytay. How thoroughly Chirino
himself had grasped the fundamentals of Tagalog is evident from his
three chapters [94] on the language and letters of the natives in
which he prints the Ave Maria in Tagalog and reproduces the Tagalog
alphabet--its first appearance in a European publication. But Chirino,
who remained in the provinces until 1595, would have mentioned his
participation and that of Henriquez in the Doctrina of 1593, so we
record them as possible but not probable consultants.
THE DOMINICANS
Had Aduarte written that the first books printed at Manila were two
Doctrinas issued by the Dominicans at San Gabriel in 1593, and given
some details of their production, we could conclude our study with
a quotation from him, but nowhere does he mention them. In fact,
his inference was that the first book was that printed for Blancas
de San José, and yet we know that this Doctrina preceded anything
that Blancas de San José could have written, since he did not come
to the Philippines until 1595. We can assume, as Retana did, that
by printing Aduarte meant printing from movable type, but this does
not explain away the fact that Aduarte, who recorded in detail events
of far less significance, did not speak of the Doctrinas at all. The
best--and it is a most unsatisfactory best--that we can do is ascribe
the omission to the frailty of man, and record that there is no notice
of the Dominican Doctrina of 1593 in the most complete contemporary
Dominican history of the Philippines.
The first members of the Order of St. Dominic [95] to land in the
Philippines were Bishop Salazar and his assistant, Christoval de
Salvatierra. But they were fully occupied with the administration of
the bishopric and could not devote themselves to regular missionary
work. It was not until July 25, 1587 that working Dominican
missionaries came. Then fifteen [96] under the leadership of Juan de
Castro arrived, and established the first Dominican province [97]
of the Philippines and China, thus consummating the hope expressed
as early as 1579. [98]
In consultation with the other orders it was decided that the
Dominicans should be given the ministry of the territories of
Pangasinan and Bataan, which had theretofore been spiritually
exploited by few priests. Almost immediately, on September 15, 1587,
the vicariate of Bataan was founded and settled. In speaking of it,
Aduarte stressed the importance of a knowledge of the language of the
natives, which there would have been Tagalog, to the success of the
mission. Domingo de Nieva, one of the four members of the mission,
learned it rapidly and well, and soon began to preach to the Indians
in their own tongue. His aptitude for languages and its usefulness to
the Dominicans must have been very great, for Aduarte in listing the
priests who originally volunteered in Spain makes few comments about
individuals, but of Nieva he remarks that he "was afterwards of great
importance because of the great ease and skill with which he learned
languages, whether Indian or Chinese." [99] Unfortunately Nieva was
only a deacon, and so could not hear confession, a fact which was
greatly deplored, because during that first year no other priest
mastered the language sufficiently well to do it, but in September
1588 he reached the requisite age and was ordained. About that time
the friars in Bataan--one had died and another was ailing--were joined
by Juan de la Cruz, "who, being young, succeeded very well with the
language," [100] and also succeeded in surviving the climate.
Early in 1588 Juan Cobo [101] arrived from Mexico. Shortly thereafter,
on June 12, 1588, the Dominican chapter held its first convocation. It
elected Juan de Castro the first provincial, adopted the general
ordinances [102] already made in Mexico, gave the convent at Manila
the title of priory, and designated as parts of the province four
vicariates. Of primary importance was the appointment then of Juan
Cobo to the mission for the Chinese.
From the very earliest days of the Spanish occupation of Manila,
the governors had had trouble with the Chinese and Sangleys. [103]
These people had long conducted a profitable trade between China
and the Philippines, and many had settled permanently near Manila,
while others stayed there regularly between trading voyages. The
Chinese merchants were in full control of the shops of the city, and
so monopolized retail trade that the early governors legislated [104]
against them to give the Spaniards a chance to establish themselves
in business. In 1588 there were as many as seven thousand of them in
and around Manila.
No one had objected to the Pangasinan and Bataan assignments, but when
it was suggested that the Dominicans also assume the responsibility for
the ministry over the Chinese and Sangleys in the suburbs of Manila,
the Augustinians vehemently resented what they considered an invasion
of their prior rights. Aduarte omits any account of a disagreement,
merely saying that since the Chinese had had no one to minister to
them the Dominicans assumed that responsibility, but in a letter [105]
from the Licentiate Gaspar de Ayala to Philip II, dated from Manila,
July 15, 1589, full details of the squabble are given. From this source
we learn that the Augustinians had a convent in the village of Tondo
in the Chinese district. There they had ministered to the natives in
their own language, but had rather neglected their Chinese-speaking
parishioners. Consequently after the arrival of the Dominicans the
Audiencia passed an ordinance requiring that the Bishop appoint
ministers of one order to administer to the Chinese in their own
language within thirty days. To meet the deadline the Augustinians
began to study Chinese at breakneck speed, but when the Bishop came
to Tondo to hear one of the friars, who was supposed to know the
language, preach in it, there was some trouble as a result of which
the Augustinian would not, or indeed could not, preach. Naturally,
when it was decided to award the territory to the Dominicans, the
Augustinians accused the Bishop of favoritism towards his own order.
The whole situation is best described in the report on the Chinese
made by Salazar to the King on June 24, 1590:
"When I arrived in this land, I found that in a village called
Tondo--which is not far from this city, there being a river
between--lived many Sangleys, of whom some were Christians,
but the larger part infidels. In this city were also some
shops kept by Sangleys, who lived here in order to sell the
goods which they kept here year by year. These Sangleys were
scattered among the Spaniards, with no specific place assigned
to them, until Don Gonzalo Ronquillo allotted them a place
to live in, and to be used as a silk-market (which is here
called _Parián_), of four large buildings. Here, many shops
were opened, commerce increased, and more Sangleys came to this
city.... When I came, all the Sangleys were almost forgotten,
and relegated to a corner. No thought was taken for their
conversion, because no one knew their language or undertook
to learn it on account of its great difficulty; and because
the religious who lived here were too busy with the natives of
these islands. Although the Augustinian religious had charge
of the Sangleys of Tondo, they did not minister to or instruct
them in their own language, but in that of the natives or this
land; thus the Sangley Christians living here, were Christians
only in name, knowing no more of Christianity than if they
had never accepted it.... Then I appealed to all religious
orders to appoint some one of their religious to learn the
language and take charge of the Sangleys. Although all of them
showed a desire to do so, and some even began to learn it,
yet no one succeeded; and the Sangleys found themselves with
no one to instruct them and take up their conversion with the
necessary earnestness, until, in the year eighty-seven, God
brought to these islands the religious of St. Dominic." [106]
So we find, as the Dominicans undertook their mission, a large
settlement of Chinese, including both a settled and a floating
population, concentrated in the Parián, across the Pasig river from
the main city of Manila.
The dominating figure of the Chinese mission from the time of his
arrival in the Philippines was Juan Cobo. In a letter, written by him
from the Parián of Manila, July 13, 1589, probably to ecclesiastical
authorities in Mexico, he gives an account of the early days of
the mission:
"The Order took a site next to this Parián, since there was
not a single house between Santo Domingo and the Parián. And
because of this opportunity the Order presently charged
itself with the Chinese, both Christians and infidels. And
upon P. Fr. Miguel de Benavides and P. Fr. Juan Maldonado was
imposed the responsibility for the care of the Chinese and for
learning their language. P. Fr. Miguel was less occupied with
other matters than Fr. Juan Maldonado, so that he progressed
in the language enough to begin to catechize in it. This was
the first year the Order was in Manila.
"Presently in the second year when I came, the Order moved
P. Fr. Miguel and myself into another separate house at the
other edge of the Parián. So that there stood between Santo
Domingo and San Gabriel, which is the name of this church
of the Chinese, the whole of the Parián of the Sangleys. And
there a poor little church was built under the protection of
San Gabriel, to whom it fell by lot, and a poor house where
we two lived. We entered into it at the beginning of September
1588. This was the first church for the Chinese built, and we
believe that there is today not another parish church [for
the Chinese] but that.... And P. Fr. Miguel catechized them
and preached to them in their Chinese language, and taught
the doctrine in it. I myself did not yet know the language,
but the Lord has been served, so that in a short time I
progressed in it." [107]
The account of Aduarte is not so accurate in some details, but
it supplies others not mentioned by Cobo. The first mission which
Benavides and Maldonado (or de San Pedro Martyr as he was later known)
built was near the village of Tondo, in a new settlement specially
founded for Christian Chinese, called Baybay, and it was named for Our
Lady of the Purification. The second mission which was established
by Benavides and Cobo was at first a palm-leaf hut. The name of San
Gabriel was decided upon by making lots with the names of various
saints on them and then drawing. San Gabriel came out three times in
a row, and "all were persuaded that the Lord was pleased to have the
patronage belong to this holy archangel." Soon, because of the good
works of the fathers who established a hospital there for the care
of the sick and poor, the demands upon the hut became so great that
a larger building was planned. At first it was to have been erected
on the site of the hut, but the inhabitants protested that a stone
building so near native houses might do them great damage in the
event of an earthquake, so the friars went to the other side of the
river, and there built a temporary building of wood which was later
completed in stone. It was here then that the Doctrina was printed,
in the Church of San Gabriel, near the Parián of Manila, at the edge
of the Chinese settlement.
Under the care of Benavides and Cobo the mission flourished,
and the two fathers became increasingly proficient in the Chinese
language. When the provincial Juan de Castro began making preparations
for an inspection tour of his Chinese vicariate in 1590, he chose as
his companion Miguel de Benavides. The account of the events leading
up to this expedition is given in the already quoted letter of Salazar
on the Chinese:
"Of the Dominican religious who came to these islands, four
are engaged in ministering to the Sangleys. Two of these
four officiate in the Church of San Gabriel, which, together
with the house where the religious live, stands close to the
Parián. Another church with its house is on the promontory
of Baybay, near Tondo--which a river divides, separating it
from Manila. Two of the four have learned the language of
the Sangleys so well, and one of these two how to write also
(which is the most difficult part of the language), that the
Sangleys wonder at their knowledge.... After due consideration
of the matter, the Dominican fathers and myself decided that
it was necessary to go to China.... Thus we decided upon the
departure, sending at present no more than two religious: Fray
Miguel de Benavides, who was the first to learn the language
of the Sangleys; and Father Juan de Castro, who came as vicar
of the religious and who was made provincial here. We preferred
these two, as one is well acquainted with the language, and the
other is much loved and esteemed by the Sangleys on account of
his venerable gray locks and blessed old age; and we know that
in that land old people are much respected and revered." [108]
They sailed on May 22, 1590, but Juan de Castro before he left
appointed Cobo acting superior of the province with full authority
during his absence, and in the latter's place as head of the Chinese
mission sent Juan de San Pedro Martyr.
There is no doubt but that at this time Benavides and Cobo were
the two outstanding Chinese linguists among the Spaniards in
the Philippines. To Benavides has been attributed [109] a Chinese
dictionary, and Schilling [110] uses the already quoted letter of Cobo
to prove that he also wrote a Doctrina in Chinese, but, granting that
such works were written by him, there is no evidence that they were
written in Chinese characters, and not in Chinese transliterated into
roman letters. The available evidence points to the fact that Cobo
was the only one who could then write in Chinese characters. Salazar
in his above quoted letter had said that "one of these two [have
learned] how to write also," and in the same letter he continued,
"Fray Juan Cobo, the Dominican religious--who, as I have said before,
knows the language of the Sangleys and their writing, and who is most
esteemed by them--is sending to Your Majesty a book, one of a number
brought to him from China." [111] Further witness to Cobo's amazing
knowledge of Chinese writing is given by Aduarte:
"He knew three thousand Chinese characters, each different
from all the rest, for the Chinese have no definite number
of letters nor alphabet.... He translated a number [of
Chinese books]; for like those of Seneca, though they are
the work of heathens, they contain many profound sayings
like ours. He taught astrology to some of them whom he found
capable of learning; and to bring them by all means to their
salvation also taught them some trades that are necessary
among Spaniards, but which, not being used by the Chinese,
they did not know--such as painting images, binding books,
cutting and sewing clothes, and such things--doing all to
win men to God." [112]
Finally, as a more definite proof that Cobo could have been the
author of the Chinese Doctrina of 1593, we have the record [113] of a
_Catecismo de la Doctrina Cristiana en Lengua China_ written by him,
as well as many other works in Chinese.
In May 1590, then, the most accomplished Sinologist yet to work in
the Philippines was in charge of the Dominican province. "His first
act," wrote Aduarte, "was to strengthen the ministry to the Chinese by
appointing to it Father Domingo de Nieva, a priest of great virtue and
very able--which was tremendously important there--and one who best
mastered that language, as well as that of the Indians in which he
had had experience; and he worked in both of them, and wrote much
to the great advantage of those who came after him." [114] It is
surprising that no previous writer has emphasized the presence of
Domingo de Nieva, whose proficiency in Tagalog we have already noted,
at San Gabriel during the years when the printing of the Doctrinas
must have been planned and executed. His works are cited by Fernández,
[115] and after giving a summary of his career, Aduarte added:
"He wrote much in the language of the Indians and other things
in the language of the Chinese for whom he had printed in
their language and characters a memorial upon the Christian
life, with other brief tracts of prayer and meditation, in
preparation for the holy sacraments, of confession and the
sacred communion. He was an enemy of sloth, and so worked
much in Chinese, in which he wrote a practically new grammar
of the Chinese language, a vocabulary, a manual of confession
and many sermons, in order that those who had to learn this
language might find it less difficult." [116]
Medina [117] records these various works as Manila imprints of unknown
date, and to this indefinite information about them we can add nothing
positive. However, it is apparent that some time before 1606, when
Nieva died on his way to Mexico, he had had books printed, and since
they were in Chinese they must have been printed from wood-blocks,
for at that early date it would have been impossible to have cast the
number of characters necessary to print in Chinese with movable type.
With Nieva was Maldonado, or San Pedro Martyr. He had been one of the
first associates of Benavides in the first Chinese mission at Baybay,
but after the arrival of Cobo he had been sent by order of the first
chapter to Pangasinan. When Cobo was appointed acting provincial
San Pedro Martyr was again assigned to the Chinese ministry. He had
learned Tagalog, and after his return to the Parián "he learned more
words of the Chinese language than any other member of the order,
though he was not successful with the pronunciation." [118]
On May 31, 1592, the Governor received a letter from the Emperor of
Japan demanding that an ambassador be sent to offer him the fealty
of the Philippines. Juan Cobo, as the best speaker of Chinese, was
chosen to represent the Spaniards, and he left Manila on July 29,
1592. After successfully convincing the Japanese Emperor of the amity
of the Spaniards, he left to come back to Manila, but his ship was
wrecked in November on the coast of Formosa, and there Cobo was killed
by hostile natives. Meanwhile Benavides had gone back to Spain with
Bishop Salazar in 1591, and did not return to the Philippines until
after his appointment as Bishop of Nueva Segovia in 1595.
That left as the only two remaining experts in the Chinese language,
Domingo de Nieva and Juan de San Pedro Martyr, both of whom were at
San Gabriel in 1592. _Moreover, both of them knew Chinese and Tagalog._
A text in Tagalog was available, based on the Talavera-Plasencia-Oliver
model, which had circulated freely, and this, we believe, was further
edited--hence the "corrected by the religious of the orders"--by these
two Dominicans. In their editorial work they may have been helped
by Juan de la Cruz, who, we have noted, was sent to Bataan in 1588,
there learned Tagalog, and "succeeded so perfectly with it that Father
Fr. Francisco San Joseph, who was afterwards the best linguist there,
profited by the papers and labors of P. Fr. Juan de la Cruz." [119]
Juan de Oliver, the pioneer Franciscan Tagalist was still living and
available for consultation, and the polylingual Jesuit, Francisco
Almerique, also was in Manila at the time. A Chinese text had been
written by Juan Cobo, and both Nieva and San Pedro Martyr were capable
of preparing this for publication, again possibly aided by Almerique,
and also Diego Muñoz, if as an Augustinian he had been willing to
cooperate with the Dominicans. Nothing remained to be done but have
the blocks cut and the impressions pulled.
THE PRINTING OF THE BOOKS
The stage was set for the production of the Doctrinas. That there
were Chinese xylographic models upon which the books could be based
is evidenced by the account of Mendoza of the considerable number of
Chinese books brought to Manila by Martin de Rada as early as 1575. A
more likely model was a bilingual text in Spanish and Chinese which
Cobo describes in his letter of July 13, 1589, where speaking of the
Jesuits in China he says:
"Moreover the Father of the Company who was in China wrote and
printed in Chinese letters a whole book of the unity of God,
the creation of the world, and the commandments explained;
and in this book has gotten as far as the incarnation of
the Son of God. Concerning this I am not speaking of things
heard, for I have it, and am thus certain of it, as of all
the things that happened. How far I have progressed with the
Chinese letters I shall say later. This book was printed in
China in 1584. It circulates freely in China whence we have
our copy, and because of the writing, contrary to what others
have misleadingly said about the Chinese, they have done him
no ill: from which it may be inferred that the lion is not
so wild as they paint him." [120]
There is no direct evidence to support our belief that it was during
the brief period after Castro returned, probably late in 1590, and
relieved Cobo of his executive responsibilities, and June 1592 when he
left for Japan, that Cobo began intensive plans for the production of
bilingual texts. His recorded interest in such books, his influence
with the Chinese, his energy and his own linguistic aptitude would
naturally have stimulated him to undertake the task. Whether he
actually began work on the blocks from which the books were printed,
or merely suggested the feasibility of the idea, we do not know,
but we feel sure that Juan Cobo was the father of the production of
books in the Philippines.
There is no need here to go into the history of printing in China;
the method used there and its antiquity have been fully described
by others. [121] That there were Chinese in Manila who understood
this age-old process would seem obvious from the reports of skilled
craftsmen whose presence was noted by all the writers of the period. We
have already quoted a reference to Juan Cobo's teaching them European
trades, and Salazar in his already cited letter speaks of them further:
"They are so skillful and clever, that, as soon as they see
any object made by a Spanish workman, they reproduce it with
exactness. What arouses my wonder most is, that when I arrived
no Sangley knew how to paint anything; but now they have
so perfected themselves in this art that they have produced
marvelous works with both the brush and the chisel.... What has
pleased all of us here has been the arrival of a bookbinder
from Mexico. He brought books with him, set up a bindery,
and hired a Sangley who had offered his services to him. The
Sangley secretly, and without his master noticing it, watched
how the latter bound books, and lo, in less than [lacuna in
MS.] he left the house, saying that he wished to serve him
no longer, and set up a similar shop." [122]
To turn over a manuscript copy of a book to a Chinaman who had already
some familiarity with the production of books in China, or who with a
given text could carve the blocks according to tradition, was then not
a matter of great difficulty. There were Chinese books which showed
what the result would be; there were Spanish books, definitely some
from Mexico, which provided samples of European characters and format.
Who cut the blocks--that is exactly what Chinaman--we do not know,
nor do we know who handled the presswork, but it is logical to assume
that the whole process took place under the supervision of the fathers
of San Gabriel, Juan Cobo if work had begun before 1592, and certainly
Nieva and San Pedro Martyr. One further aide may have been the lay
brother, Pedro Rodriguez, who had been sent to San Gabriel with Nieva,
and who was a handyman or skilled mechanic, for Aduarte credits him
with rebuilding and restoring the hospital.
In speaking of the book printed for Blancas de San José, Aduarte said
that the printing had been done by "a Chinaman, a good Christian,"
[123] but in this particular account he does not give the Chinaman's
name. Yet, where he describes the founding of a second church of San
Gabriel in Binondo, sometime after March 28, 1594 [124] and before
June 15, 1596 when it was admitted to the chapter, he tells in some
detail of printing done by Juan de Vera. [125]
"There have been in this town [Binondo, then called Minondoc]
many Chinese of very exemplary lives. Juan de Vera was
not only a very devout man, and one much given to prayer,
but a man who caused all his household to be the same. He
always heard mass, and was very regular in his attendance at
church. He adorned the church most handsomely with hangings
and paintings, because he understood this art. He also,
thinking only of the great results to be attained by means
of holy and devout books, gave himself to the great labor
necessary to establish printing in this country, where there
was no journeyman who could show him the way, or give him an
account of the manner of printing in Europe, which is very
different from the manner of printing followed in his own
country of China. The Lord aided his pious intentions, and
he gave to this undertaking not only continued and excessive
labor, but all the forces of his mind, which were great. In
spite of the difficulties, he attained that which he desired,
and was the first printer in these islands; and this not from
avarice--for he gained much more in his business as a merchant,
and readily gave up his profit--but merely to do service to
the Lord and this good to the souls of the natives." [126]
It is interesting to note that this narrative, which is in substance
similar to that about the books of Blancas de San José, nowhere
mentions the name of the priest in connection with Vera. It is probable
that Juan de Vera was, as Retana believed, the first typographer, and
it may be that he also printed the Doctrinas of 1593. It is impossible
to say with certainty, but it is not too fanciful to suppose that
Juan de Vera tried xylographic printing under the supervision of
Nieva and San Pedro Martyr, and after some experimenting achieved
typography in the time of Blancas de San José.
Since we have here dealt with a volume printed entirely from
wood-blocks it does not seem necessary to discuss in detail the
subsequent typographical books. However, just as this goes to press,
a copy of the _Ordinationes Generales prouintiae Sanctissimi Rosarij
Philippinarum_, [127] printed at Binondo by Juan de Vera in 1604,
has been discovered, and also presented by Mr. Rosenwald to the
Library of Congress. This is the volume described by Remesal [128]
as being printed "in as fine characters and as correctly as if in
Rome or Lyon." No copy of the book had been described since his day,
although Medina [129] and Retana [130] both listed it from references
which probably derived from Remesal. Its discovery--almost unbelievable
coming so close on the heels of that of the Doctrina--helps to close
the gap between the latter and the two Bataan imprints [131] of 1610,
the _Arte y Reglas de la Lengva Tagala_ and the _Librong Pagaaralan
nang manga Tagalog nang uicang Castilla_.
The full story of the early typographical products of the Philippines
must wait upon another occasion, for the questions posed by the scanty
records and the handful of surviving books are extremely knotty. Where
did the type come from? Medina suggested it was imported from Macao;
Retana believed it to have been cut in the Philippines. Fernández
said that the first works of Blancas de San José were printed at
Bataan and the two 1610 books have that place of printing, yet in
1604 the _Ordinationes_ issued from Binondo. Remesal wrote that this
book was printed by Francisco de Vera, and the book itself bears the
name of Juan. Indeed, the history of the early typographers and the
output of their presses, as it has so far been written, presents many
problems, but they are problems which we feel are outside the scope
of this study.
To summarize what we have learned of the earliest printing in the
Philippines: we have the possibility, but not a likely one, that
an _Arte_ by Juan de Quiñones was printed xylographically in 1581;
we know that in the first half of the year 1593 two Doctrinas were
printed xylographically--although we have no way of telling which
came first--one in Tagalog from the Talavera-Plasencia-Oliver text,
and one in Chinese written by Juan Cobo, both edited and printed under
the supervision of Domingo de Nieva and Juan de San Pedro Martyr;
we surmise that between 1593 and 1602 other works were also printed
xylographically, such as the small tracts of Juan de Villanueva and
some of the books of Blancas de San José, Nieva and others; and in
1602 was printed by Juan de Vera, in all likelihood from movable
type, the book of Our Lady of the Rosary by Blancas de San José. The
known facts are not many, and we can only hope that time and further
research will discover new ones to make the history of the earliest
Philippine imprints more complete and more satisfactory.
Philadelphia, January 20, 1947 EDWIN WOLF 2ND.
The most frequently cited authorities will be referred to as follows:
ADUARTE--Diego Aduarte, _Historia de la Provincia del Sancto Rosario de
la Orden de Predicadores en Philippinas, Iapon, y China_, Manila, 1640.
B. & R.--Emma Helen Blair and James Alexander Robertson, _The
Philippine Islands 1493-1898_, Cleveland, 1903-09.
CANO--Gaspar Cano, _Catalogo de los Religiosos de N.P.S. Agustin de
la Provincia del Smo. Nombre de Jesus de Filipinas_, Manila, 1864.
CHIRINO--Pedro Chirino, _Relacion de las Islas Filipinas_, Rome, 1604.
COLÍN--Francisco Colín, _Labor Evangélica, Ministerios Apostólicos
de los Obreros de la Compañia de Jesus, Fundacion, y Progressos de
su Provincia en las Islas Filipinas_ (ed. Pablo Pastells), Barcelona,
1900-02.
HUERTA--Felix de Huerta, _Estado Geográfico, Topográfico, Estadístico,
Histórico-Religioso, de la Santa y Apostólica Provincia de S. Gregorio
Magno ... de N.S.P.S. Francisco, en las Islas Filipinas_, Binondo,
1865.
MEDINA--José Toribio Medina, _La Imprenta en Manila desde sus Orígenes
hasta 1810_, Santiago de Chile, 1896.
MEDINA (Juan de)--Juan de Medina, _Historia de los Sucesos de la
Orden de N. Gran P. S. Agustin de estas Islas Filipinas_, Manila, 1893.
P. & G.--Angel Pérez and Cecilio Güemes, _Adiciones y Continuacion de
"La Imprenta en Manila" de D.J.T. Medina_, Manila, 1904.
PÉREZ--Elviro Jorde Pérez, _Catálogo Biobibliográfico de los Religiosos
Agustinos de la Provincia del Santísimo Nombre de Jesús de las Islas
Filipinas_, Manila, 1901.
REMESAL--Antonio de Remesal, _Historia de la provincia de S. Vincente
de Chyapa y Guatemala de la orden de nro glorioso padre Sancto
Domingo_, Madrid, 1619.
RETANA--Wenceslao Emilio Retana y Gamboa, _La Imprenta en Filipinas
Adiciones y Observaciones á La Imprenta en Manila de D.J.T. Medina_,
Madrid, 1897.
SAN AGUSTIN--Gaspar de San Agustin, _Conquistas de las Islas
Philipinas_, Madrid, 1698.
SAN ANTONIO--Juan Francisco de San Antonio, _Chronicas de la Apostolica
Provincia de S. Gregorio de Religiosos Descalzos de N.S.P. Francisco
en las Islas Philipinas_, Manila, 1738-44.
SANTA INÉS--Francisco de Santa Inés, _Crónica de la Provincia de San
Gregorio Magno de Religiosos descalzos de N.P. San Francisco en islas
Filipinas, China, Japón, etc. escrita ... en 1676_, Manila, 1892.
SANTIAGO VELA--Gregorio de Santiago Vela, _Ensayo de una Biblioteca
Ibero-Americana de la Orden de San Agustin_, Madrid, 1913-31.
SCHILLING--Dorotheus Schilling, _Vorgeschichte des Typendrucks auf
den Philippen_, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch, 1937, pp. 202-16.
TORRES--Pedro Torres y Lanza, _Catálogo de los documentos relativos
á las Islas Filipinas existentes en el Archivo de Indias de Seville_,
Barcelona, 1925-34.
VIÑAZA--Cipriano Muñoz y Manzano, Conde de la Viñaza, _Escritos de
los Portugueses y Castellanos referentes á las lenguas de China y el
Japón_, Lisbon, 1892.
This facsimile of the Doctrina Christiana printed at Manila in 1593
was printed by Edward Stern & Company, Inc., Philadelphia, in an
edition of twenty-five hundred copies, and published by the Library
of Congress, February 1947. The type used on the title page and for
headings is Forum, and that in the text Italian Old Style.
Doctrina Christiana, en
lengua española ytagala, cor
regida por los Religiosos de las
ordenes Impressa con licencia, en
S. gabriel. de la orden de. S. Domigo
En Manila. 1593
Tassada endos rreales
Juandecuellaz
A. a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. ij. l. m. n. o.
p. q. rr. s. s. t. u. v. x. y. z. z.
vocales. a. e. i. o. u.
Ba. be. bi bo bu. Ça çe çi. ço. çu.
Da. de di do du. Fa fe fi fo fu.
Gua gue gui guo gu. Ha he hi.
ho hu. Ja je ji jo ju. La le li.
lo lu. Ma me mi mo mu. Na.
ne ni no nu. Pa pe pi po pu.
Qua que qui quo qu. Ra re.
ri ro ru. Sa se si so su. Ta te ti.
to tu. Ua ue ui uo uu. Xa xe xi.
xo xu. Ya ye yi yo yu. Za ze zi.
zo zu.
Ban ben bin bon bun. Çan çen
çin çon çun. Dan den din don.
dun. Fan fen fin fon fun. Guan
guen guin guon gun. Han hen
hin hon hun. Jan jen jin jon jun.
Lan len lin lon lun. Man me
min mon mun. Nan nen nin non.
nun. Pan pen pin pon pun. Quã
quen quin quon qun. Ran ren
rin ron run. San sen sin son su.
Tan ten tin ton tun. Uan uen.
uin uon. uun. Xan xen xin xon
xun. Yan yen yin yon yun. Zan
zen zin zon zun.
Bã be bi bõ bu. Çã çe çi çõ çu.
Dã de di dõ du. Fã fe fi fõ fu.
Guan guen guin guon gun. Hã.
he hi hõ hu. Jã je ji jõ ju. Lã le.
li lõ lu. Mã me mi mõ mu. Nã.
ne ni nõ nu. Pã pe pi põ pu. Quã.
que qui quõ qu. Rã re ri rõ ru. Sã.
se si sõ su. Xã xe xi xõ xu. Yã ye.
yi yõ yu. Zã ze zi zõ zu.
¶El abc. en legua tagala.
A O E HA PA KA SA LA TA NA BA MA GA DA YA
NGA WA.
¶El paternoster.
PADRE nuestro que estas en
Los cielos, sanctificado sea el tu
nombre. Venga anos el tu reyno.
hagase tu voluntad, asi en la tierra
como en el cielo. El pan nuestro
de cada dia da noslo oy. Y per
donanos nuestras duedas. asi como
nosotros las perdonamos á
nuestros deudores. Y no nos de
xes caer en la tentacion. Das
libranos de mal. Amen.
Ang ama namin.
Ama namin nasa langit ca
y pasamba mo ang ngalã
mo, mouisa amin ang pagcahari
mo. Y pasonor mo ang loob mo.
dito sa lupa parã sa langit, bigyã
mo cami ngaion nang amin caca
nin. para nang sa araoarao. at pa
caualin mo ang amin casalanã,
yaing uinaualan bahala nami
sa loob ang casalanan nang
nagcasasala sa amin. Houag
mo caming ceuan nang di cami
matalo nang tocso. Datapo
uat ya dia mo cami sa dilan ma
sama. Amen Jesus.
A MA NA MI. NA SA LA NGI KA. I PA SA BA
MO. A NGA LA MO. MO WI SA A MI. A
PE KA HA RI MO. I PE SO NO MO. A LO O MO.
DI TO SA LU PA. PA RA SA LA NGI. BI YA MO KA MI.
NGA O. NA A MI KA KA NI. PA RA NA SA A RA A RA.
A PA KA WA I MO. A A MI KA SA LA NA. YA YA
WI NA WA LA BA HA LA NA MI SA LO O. A KA SA LA NA.
NA NA KA SA SA LA SA A MI. HO WA MO KA MI E WA. NA
DI KA MI MA TA LO NA TO SO. DA TA PO WA. I A
YA MO KA MI. SA DI LA MA SA MA. A ME SE SO.
El aue Maria.
Dios te salue Maria. lle
na degracia. El senõr es
contigo. bendita tu, estretodas
las mugeres. Y bendito el fructo.
deus vientre Jesus. Santa Ma
ria uirgen y madre de Dios rue
ga por nosotros peccadores. aora
y en la ora denuestra muerte
amen. Jesus.
Ang aba guinoo Ma
Aba guinoo Maria ma
toua cana, napopono ca
nang graçia. ang panginoon di
os, ce, nasayyo. Bucor cang pinag
pala sa babaying lahat. Pinag
pala naman ang yyong anac si
Jesus. Santa Maria yna nang,
dios, ypanalangin mo camima
çasalanan ngaion at cun mama
tai cami. Amen Jesus.
A BA GI NO O MA RI YA. MA TO WA KA NA. NA PO
PO NO KA NA GA RA SI YA. A PA NGI NO O DI
YO NA SA I YO. BO KO KA PI NA PA LA. SA BA BA YI.
LA HA. PI NA PA LA NA MA. A I YO A NA SE SE SO.
SA TA MA RI YA. I NA NA DI YO. I PA NA LA NGI MO
KA MI. MA KA SA LA NA. NGA O. A KU MA MA TA KA MI.
A ME SE SO.
El credo en Romãce
Creo en dios padre, todo
poderoso. Criador del çie
lo y dela tierra. Y en Jesuchristo,
su unico hijo senõr nro. Que fue
conçebido del elpiritusancto. Y
Y naçio de la uirgen sancta Ma
ria. Padesçio so el poder depõcio
Pilato. Fue crucificado, muer
to, y sepultado, descendio alos
infiernos, y alterçero dia resuscito,
dentre, los muertos. Subio a los cie
los, y esta asentado ala diestra de
dios padre todo poderoso, dende
uerna ajuzgar alos uiuos y alos
muertos. Creo en el espiritusãto.
y la sancta yglesia catholica, la
comuniõ de los sanctos. La remi
sion de los peccados. La refuree
çion de la carne. La uida perdu
rable, que nunca seacaba. Ame.
Ang sumãgpalataia
Sumasangpalataia aco sa di
os ama, macagagaua sa lahat,
mangagaua nang langit at nang lu,
pa. Sumasangpalataia aco naman
cai Jesuchristo yysang anac nang
dios panginoon natin lahat. Nag
catauan tauo siya salang nang es
piritusancto. Ypinanganac ni Sã
cta Maria uirgen totoo. Nasactã
otos ni poncio Pilato. Ypinaco
sa cruz. Namatai, ybinaon, nana
og sa manga infierno, nang ma
ycatlong arao nabuhai na naguli.
naquiat sa langit nalolocloc sa ca
nan nang dios ama, macagagaua
sa lahat. Sa caparito hohocom sa
nabubuhai, at sa nanga matai na
tauo. Sumasangpalataia aco na
man sa dios Espiritusancto. At
mei sancta yglesia catholica, at
mei casamahan ang manga sãtos.
At mei ycauauala nang casala
nan. At mabubuhai na maguli
ang na nga matai na tauo. At
mei buhai na di mauala mag pa
rating saan. Amen Jesus.
SU MA SA PA LA TA YA A AKO. SA DI YO A MA.
MA KA GA GA WA SA LA HA. MA GA GA WA NA LA NGI.
A NA LU PA. SU MA SA PA LA TA YA A KO NA MA. KA SE SO.
KI RI TO. I I SA A NA NA DI YO. PA NGI NO O NA TI
LA HA. NA KA TA A TA WO SI YA. LA LA NA E PI RI TO SA TO.
I PI NA NGA NA. NI SA TA MA RI YA. BI SE TO TO O. NA SA
TA O TO NI PO SI YO. PE LA TO. I PI NA KO SA KU RU.
NA MA TA. I BI NA O. NA NA O SA MA NGA I PE NO. NA MA
I KA LO A RA. NA BU HA NA NA O LI. NA YA SA LA NGI.
NA LO LO LO SA KA NA. NA DI YO A MA. MA KA GA GA WA SA
LA HA. SA KA PA RI TO. HO HO KO. SA NA BU BU HA. A SA
NA NGA MA TA NA TA WO. SU MA SA PA LA TA YA A KO NA
MA SA DI YO E PI RI TU SA TO. A MA SA TA I LE SI
YA KA TO LI KA. A MA KA SA MA HA. A MA NGA SA TO.
A MA I KA WA WA LA. NA KA SA LA NA. A MA BU BU HA
NA MA U LI. A NA NGA MA TA NA TA WO. A MA BU HA
NA DI NA MA WA LA. MA PA RA TI SA A. A ME SE SO.
La salue Regina
Salue te dios reyna y ma
dre demisericordia, uida
dulçura y esperança nra. Dios
te salue atillamamos los deste
ruados hijos de Gua. Atisuspi
ramos gimiendo yllorando en
aqueste ualle de lagrimas. Ga
pues abogada nuestra, buelue
anostros ellos tus misericor
diosos ojos. Y despues dea.
queste destierro muestra nos aje
sus bendito fruto de tu ueintre. O
clemente. O piadosa. O dulce uir
gen Maria. Ruega por nos sãta
madre de dios quescamos dig
nos de las promisiones de Chris
to Amen.
Ang aba po.
Aba po sancta. Mariang ha
ri yna nang aua. Ycao ang
yquinabubuhai namin, at ang pi
nananaligan. Aba ycao nga ang
tinatauag namin pinapapanao
na tauo anac ni Gua. ycao din
ang ypinagbubuntun hininga na
min nang amin pagtangis dini sa
lupã baian cahapishapis. Ay
aba pintacasi namin, ylingo mo
sa amin ang mata mong maauai.
At saca cun matapos yering pag
papanao sa amin. ypaquita mo
sa amin ang yyong anac si Jesus.
Ay Sancta Maria maauain, ma
alam, uirgen naman totoo, yna
nang Dios. Cami ypanalangin
mo, nang mapatoloi sa amin
ang panga ngaco ni Jesuchristo.
Amen Jesus.
A BA PO SA TA MA RI YA HA RI. I NA NA A WA
I KA A I KI NA BU BU HA NA MI. A A PI
NA NA NA LI GA. A BA I KA NGA. A TI NA TA WA NA MI. PI
NA PA PA NA NA TA WO. A NA NI E BA. I KA DI. A I PI
NA BU BU TU HI NI NGA NA MI. NA A MI PA TA NGI. DI NI
SA LU PA. BA YA KA HA PI HA PI. A A BA. PI TA KA
SI NA MI. I LI NGO MO SA A MI. A MA TA MO MA A WA
I. SA KA KU MA TA PO. YA RI PA PA PA NA SA A MI.
I PA KI TA MO SA A MI. A I YO A NA SI SE SO. SA TA
MA RI YA. MA A WA I. MA A LA. BI SE NA MA TO TO O.
I NA NA DI YO. KA MI I PA NA LA NGI MO. NA MA PA
TO LO SA A MI. A PA NGA NGA KO. NI SE SO KI TO.
A ME SE SO.
Los Articulos dela fee,
son catorze. Los siete pertenesçe
ata diuinidad, ylos otros siete
a la humanidad denrõ senõr Je
suchristo Dios y hombre uerda
dero. ylos siete que pertenesçen
ala diuinidad son estos.
El primero, creer en un so
lo dios todo poderoso.
El segundo creer que es dios pa
dre. El tercero, creer qes dios hi
jo. El quarto, creer que es Dios
Espiritusancto. El quinto, creer
que es criador. El sexto, creer
qes satuador. El septimo, creer
que es glorificador.
Los que pertenesçenatasa
ta humanidad. Son estos.
El Primero, creer que nues
tro senõr Jesuchristo, en quãto
hombre fue conçebido del sptri
tu sancto. El segundo, que nasçro
del uientre uirginal de la uirgen
sancta Maria, siendo ella uirge
antes del parto, yenelparto, y des
pues del parto. El terçero, que
rescibio muerte y pasion porsal
uar anosotros peccadores. El quar
to: que desçendio alos infiernos,
ysacolas animas de los sanctos
padres que asta estauan esperan
do su sancto aduenimiento. El
quinto, que resuscito alterçero
dia. El sexto, creer que subio
alos cielos, yseassento ala dies
tra de dios padre todo poderoso.
El septimo, que uerna ajuzgar
alos uinos y alos muertos. Con
uiene asaber, alos buenos paradar
la gloria, porq guardaron susmã
damientos: yalos malos pena
percurable porque nolos guar
daron. Amen:
Ang pono nang sinasangpa
lataianan nang manga chris
tiano labin apat na bagai. Ang
pitong naona ang sabi ang Dios
ang pagcadios niya. Ang pitõg
naholi ang sabi,a, ang atin pangi
noon Jesuchristo ang pagcatauo
niya. Ang pitong naona ang sa
bi, ce ang Dios ang pagca dios ni
ya ay yceri.
Ang naona sumangpalataia
sa ysang Dios totoo. Ang ycalua,
sumangpalataia, ycering dios si
yang ama. Ang ycatlo, Sumãpalataia.
ycering dios siyang anac. Ang
ycapat sumangpalataia, ycering
dios siyang spiritusancto. Ang
ycalima, sumangpalataia, ycerig
dios siyang mangagaua nang la
hat. Ang ycanim, sumangpala
taia ycering dios siyang naca
uauala nang casalanan. Ang
ycapito sumangpalataia ycering
dios siyang nacalulualhati.
Ang pitong naholi ang
sabi ce ang ating pãgninoon
Jesuchristo ang pagcatauo ni
ya ay yari.
Ang naona sumangpala
taia ang atin pagninoon
Jesuchristo, ypinaglehe ni San
cta Maria lalang nang spiritu
sancto. Ang ycalua sumang
palataia, ang atin pagninoon
Jesuchristo y pinanganac ni
sancta maria uirgen totoo, nã
dipa nanganac, nang macapa
nganac na uirgen din totoo.
Ang ycatlo sumangpalataia,
ang atin panginoon Jesuchris
to nasactan, ypinaco sa cruz.
namatai sacop nang atin casa
lanan. Ang ycapat sumang
palataia, ang atin panginoon Je
suchristo nanaog sa manga in
fierno, at hinango doon ang ca
loloua nang manga sanctos nag
hihintai nang pagdating niya.
Ang ycalima sumangpalataia
ang atin panginoon Jesuchristo,
nang magycatlong arao nabu
hai nanaguli. Ang ycanim su
mangpalataia ang atin pangino
on Jesuchristo nacyat sa langit
nalolocloc sa canan nang dios
ama macagagaua sa lahat. Ang
ycapito sumangpalataia ang a
tin panginoon Jesuchristo saca
parito hohocom sa nabubuhai at
sa nangamatai na tauo. Ang ba
nal na tauo gagantihin niya nãg
caloualhatian nang langit, ang
nacasonor silla nang caniyang
otos. Ang di banal pacasasamin
sa infierno ang di silla sumonor
nang otos niya. Ame. Jesus.
A PO NO NA SI NA SA PA LA TA YA NA. NA
MA NGA KI NI TI YA NO. LA BI A PA NA
BA GA. A PI TO NA O NA. A SA BI I A DI YO. A
PA KA DI YO NI YA. A PI TO NA HO LI. A SA BI I.
A A TI PA NGI NO O SE SO KI TO. A PA KA TA WO NI YA.
A PI TA NA O NA. A SA BI A DI YO. A PA KA DI YO
NI YA. A PA DI.
A NA O NA. SU MA PA LA TA YA SA I SA DI
YO TO TO O. A I KA WA. SU MA PA LA TA YA. YA RI DI
YO. SI YA A MA. A I KA LO. SU MA PA LA TA YA.
YA RI DI TO. SI YA A NA. A I KA PA. SU MA PA LA
TA YA. YA RI DI YO. S YA E PI DI TO SA TO A I
KA LI MA. SU MA PA LA TA YA. YA RI DI TO. SI YA MA GA
GA WA NA LA HA. A I KA NI. SU MA PA LA TA YA. YA RI
DI TO. SI YA NA KA WA WA LA NA KA SA LA NA. A I KA PI
TO. SU MA PA LA TA YA. YA RI DI YO. SI YA NA KA LU
LU WA HA TI.
A PI TO NA HU LI. A SA BI I A A TI PA NGI
NO O SE SO KI TO. A PA KA TA WA NI YA. A YA RI.
A NA O NA. SU MA PA LA TA YA. A A TI PA
NGI NO O SE SO KI TO. I PI NA LE HE. NI SA TA MA RI
YA. LA LA NA E PI RI TO SA TO. A I KA WA. SU MA
PA LA TA YA. A A TI PA NGI NO O SE SO KI TO. I PI
NA NGA NA. NI SA TO MA RI YA. BI SE TO TO O. NA DI PA
NA NGA NA. NA MA KA PA NGA NA NA. BI SE DI TO TO O.
A I KA LO. SU MA PA LA TA YA. A A TI PA NGI
NO O SE SO KI TO. NA SA TA. I PI NA KO SA KU RU. SA
KO NA A TI KA SA LA NA. A I KA PA. SU MA PA LA TA YA.
A A TI PA NGI NO O SE SO KI TO. NA NA O. SA MA NGO
I PE NO. A HI NA NGO DO O. A KA LO LO WA NA MA
NGA SA TO. NA HI HI TA. NA PA RA TI NI YA. A I KA
LI MA. SU MA PA LA TA YA. A A TI PA NGI NO O. SE SO
KI TO. NA MA I KA LO A RA. NA BU HA NA NA U LI.
A I KA NI. SU MA SA PA LA TA YA. A A TI PA NGI NO
O SE SO KI TO. NA YA SA LA NGI. NA LO LO LO SA KA
NA. NA DI YO A MA. MA KA GA GA WA SA LA HA. A I KA PI TO.
SU MA PA LA TA YA. A A TI PA NGI NO O SE SO KI TO.
SA KA PA RI TO. HO HO KO. SA NA BU BU HA. A SA NA NGA
MA TA NA TA WO. A BA NA NA TA WO. GA GA TI HI NI YA.
NA KA LU WA HA TI A NA LA NGI. A NA KA SO NO SI LA
NA KA NI YA O TO. A DI BA NA PA KA SA SA I. SA I
PE NO. A DI SI LA SO MO NO. NA O TO NI YA. A ME.
SE SO.
Los mandamientos de la
lei de dios son diez. Los tres
pertenesçen alhonor de Dios.
ylos otros siete al prouecho del
proximo.
El primero, amarasa dios
sobre todas las cosas. El
segundo, no jurarasu sancto nom
bre en uano. El terçero, sanctisi
caras las siestas. El quarto, hon
rraras atu padre y madre. El
quinto, no mataras. El sexto
nofornicaras. El septimo, no hur
taras. El octauo, noscuantarafal*
so testimonio. El noueno, no
dessearas la muger de suproxi
mo. El dezeno, nocobdiçiaras,
los bienes agenos. Estos diez
mandamientos se ençierran e
dos, amarasa dios sobre todas
las cosas. y atu proximo como
ati mesmo.
Ang otos nang Dios,ce,
sangpouo.
Ang naona, ybigin mo ang
dios lalo sa lahat. Ang y
calua, houag mo sacsihin ang
dios cundi totoo. Ang ycatlo
mangilin ca cun domingo at cu
siesta. Ang ycapat, ygalang mo
ang yyong ama, at ang yyong
yna. Ang ycalima houag mõg
patayin ãg capoua mo tauo. ãg yca
nim, houag cãg maquiapir sa di mo
asaua. Ang ycapito houag cang mag
nacao, ãg ycaualo houag mõg paga
uãgauã nanguica ang capoua mo
tauo houag ca naman magsonõ
galing. Ang ycasiam houag cang
mag nasa sa di mo asaua. Ang y
capolo, houag mong pagnasa
ang di mo ari. Ytong sang
pouong Otos nang Dios da
laua ang inouian. Ang ysa
ybigin mo Ang Dios lalo
lalo sa lahat. Ang ycalua ybig
in mo naman ang capoua mo tauo
parang ang catauan mo. Amen.
Jesus.
A O TO NA DI YO. I SA PO WO
A NA O NA. I BI I MO A DI YO. LA LO SA LA
HA. A I KA WA. HO WA MO SA SE HI A DI YO
KU DI TO TO O. A I KA LO. MA NGI LI KA. KU DO MI GO.
A KU PI TA. A I KA PA. I GA LA MO. A I YO A MA.
A A I YO I NA. A I KA LI MA. HO WA MO PA TA
YI A KA PO WA MO TO WO. A I KA NI. HO WA KA MA KI
A PI SA DI MO A SA WA. A I KA PI TO. HO WA KA
MA NA KA. A I KA WA LO. HO WA MO PA GA A GA A NA
WI KA. A KA PO WA MO TA WO. HO WA KA NA MA MA SO.
NO NGA LI. A I KA SI YA. HO WA KA MA NA SA. SA
DI MO A SA WA. A I KA PO LO. HO WA MO PA NA SA HI
A DI MO A RI. I TO SA PO WO. O TO NA DI YO. DA WA
A I NO WI A. A I SA. I BI I MO A DI YO. LA
LO SA LA HA. A I KA WA. I BI I MO NA MA. A KA
PO WA MO TA WO. PA RA NA KA TA A MO. A ME SE SO.
Los mandamientos de las sã
cta madre yglesia, son cinco.
El primero. ourmissa ente
ra los domingos y siestas
de guardar. El segundo, con
fesar alomenos una vez en el
anõ. El tercero, comulgar de
necessidad por pascua florida.
El quarto, ayunar quando lo
manda la sancta madre ygtiã.
El quinto, pagar diezmos y
primiçias.
Ang otos nang sancta y
gtiã yna natin ceylima.
Ang naona, maqui~nig nãg
missa houag meilisan
cun domingo at sa siesta, pina
ngingilinan. Ang ycalua, mag
confesar miminsan man taon
taon, at cun mey hirap na yca
mamatai. Ang ycatlo, mag
comulgar cun pascua na yqui
nabuhai na naguli nang atin pa
nginoon Jesuchristo. Ang ycapat,
magayunar cun magotos ang sa
cta yglesia yna natin. Ang y
calima papamagohin ang Dios
nang dilan pananim, at ang scey
capoua yhayin sa dios. Amen.
A O TO NA SA TA I LE SI YA. I NA NA TI A
A LI MA.
A NA O NA. MA KI YI NA MI SA. HO WA MA LI SA.
KU DO MI GO. A SA PI TA. PI NA NGI
NGI LI NA. A I KA WA. MA KO PI SA. MI MI SA MA.
TA O TA O. A KU MA HI RA NA I KA MA MA TA. A I
KA LO. MA KO MU GA. KU PA KU WA. NA I KI NA BU HA
NA NA U LI. NA A TI PA NGI NO O. SE SO KI TO.
A I KA PA. MA A YU NA. KU MA O TO. A SA TA
I LE SI YA. I NA NA TI. A I KA LI MA. PA PA
MA GO HI A DI YO. A DI LA PA NA NI. A A
SA I KA PU WO. I HA YI MO SA DI YO. A ME.
Los sacramentos de la san
cta madre ygtiã son siete.
El primero baptismo. El segu
do confirmacion. El tercero Pe
nitencia. El quarto, comuniõ.
El quinto extrema uncion. El
septimo, orden de matrimonio.
Pito ang mahal natanda
ycauauala nang casalanan ang
ngalan sacramentos.
Ang naona ang baptismo. Ag
ycalua ang confirmar. Ang y
catlo ang confesar. Ang yca
pat ang comulgar. Ang ycali
ma ang extrema uncion. Ang
ycanim ang orden nang saçerdo
te. Ang ycapito ang pagcasal.
Itong daluan holi pinatotoobã
nang dios ang tauo piliin ang
balan ybig. Amen.
PI TO A MA HA NA TA DA. A KA WA WA LA NA KA SA
LA NA. A NGA LA SA KA RA ME TO.
A NA O NA. A BA TI MO. A I KA WA. A KU PI MA.
A I KA LO. A KO PI SA. A I KA PA. A KO MU GA.
A I KA LI MA. A E TE RE MA. U SI YO. A I
KA NI. A O DE NA SA SE DO TI. A I KA PI TO.
A PA KA SA. I TO DA WA HO LI. PI NA LO LO O BA.
NA DI YO A TA WO. PI LI I. A BA LA I BI.
Los peccados mortales
son siete.
El primero soberuia. El se
gundo Euaricia. El tercero,
Luxuria. El quarto yra. El
quinto, Gula*. El sexto Embi
dia. El septimo Accidia.
Ang ponong casalanan, y
capapacasama nang caloloua
cey pito.
Ang capalaloan. Ang caramo
tan. Ang calibogan. Ang ca
galitan. Ang caiamoan sapag
caen at sapag inum. Ang capa
naghilian. Ang catamarã.
A PO NO KA SA LA NA. I KA PA PA KA SA
MA NA KA LO LO WA. A PI TO.
A KA PA LA LO A. A KA RA MO TA. A KA LI
BO GA. A KA GA LI TA. A KA YA MO A. SA PA KA
E. A SA PA I NU. A KA PA NA HI LI A.
A KA TA MA RA.
Las obras demisericordia,
que qualquier chistiano deue
cumplirson catorze. Las siete
spirituales, y las otras siete cor
porales. las siete corporales son
estas.
Ujsitar los enfermos. Dar de
comer al que hahãbre. Dar de
beuer al que hased. Recte
mir al que esta captiuo. Deltir
al desnudo, que lo hamenester.
Dar posada a los peregrinos.
Enterrar los muertos.
Las otras siete obras de
misericordia spirituales, son
estas. Ensenãs alos sim
ples queno saben. Dar consejo
al quelo hamenester. Castigar
al que hamenester castigo. Per
donar al que erro contrati. Su
friutas injurias de tu proximo
conpaciencia, al doliente, yatsa
nüdo. Consolar los tristes, y
desconsolados, Rogardios
por los uiuos y por los muertos.
Amen.
Ang cauaan gaua labin apat ãg
pitong naona paquinabang nãg
catauan, ang pitong naholi pa
quinabang nang caloloua. Ang
pitong naona paquinabang nã
catauan ay yari.
Dalauin ang mei hirap. Paca
nin ang nagogotom. Painumi
ang nauuhao. Paramtan ang ua
lan damit. Tubsin ang nabihag.
Patoloyin ang ualan totoloyã.
Ybaon ang namatai.
Ang pitong naholi paquina
bang nang caloloua
ay yari.
Aralan ang di nacaaalam. A
ralan ang napaaaral. Ang ta
bõ sala, ce, papagdalitain. Ual
in bahala sa loob ang casalanã
nang naccasasala sa iyo. Houag
ypalaman sa loob ang pagmo
mora nang tauo sa iyo. Aliuin
ang nalulumbai. Ipanalangin
sa dios ang nabubuhai at ang
nanga matai na christiano.
Amen Jesus.
A KA A WA A GA WA. LA BI A PA. A PI
TO NA O NA. PA KI NA BA NA KA TA A.
A PI TO NA HO LI. PA KI NA BA. NA KA LO LO
WA. A PI TO NA O NA. PA KI NA BA NA KA TA A.
A YA RI. DA LA WI A ME HI RA. PA KA NA.
A NA GO GO TO. PA I NO MI. A NA U U HA. PA
RA TA. A WA LA DA MI. TU SI A NA BI HA. PA
TO LO YI. A WA LA TO TO LO YA. I BA O. A
NA MA TA. A PI TO A HO LI. PA KI NA
BA NA KA LO LO WA. A YA RI.
A RA LA. A DI NA KA A A LA. A RA LA.
A NA PA A A RA. A TA WO SA LA. PA PA DA
LI TA I. WA I BA HA LA SA LO O. A KA SA LA
NA. NA NA KA SA SA LA. SA I YO. HO WA I PA
LA MA SA LO O. A PA MO MO RA. A TA WO SA
I YO. A LI WI. A NA LU LU BA. A PA NA LA
NGI SA DI YO. A NA BU BU HA. A A NA
NGA MA TA NA KI NI TI YA NO. A ME SE SO.
La confesion en Romançe
Jopeccador mucho herrado me
confieso adios yasancta Maria,
ya san Pedro ya san Pablo,
ya los bien aueuturados, san
Miguel harchangel, ya san
Juan baptista; ya todos los sanc
tos, yauos padre que peque mu
cho con el pensamientoi conla
palabra, y conta obra, por mi cul
pa por mi culpa, por mi guan cul
pa, por en de ruego a la bien aue
turada uirgen sancta Maria,
y alos bien auenturados apos
toles san Pedro y san Pablo,
y asanct Juan baptista, ya todos
los sanctos y sanctas querue
quen por mi anuestro senõr. Je
suchristo. Amen.
Acoy macasalanan nagcocõ
pesal aco sa atin panginoon di
os macagagaua sa lahat at cai
sancta Maria uirgen totoo
at cai sanct Miguel archangel,
cai sanct Juan baptista sa san
ctos apostoles cai sanct Pedro,
at cai sanct Pablo at sa lahat
na sanctos at sa iyo padre,
ang naccasala aco sa panidim,
sa pag uica at sa paggaua aco nga
ce, sala aco,i, mei casalanan, aco,
i, salan lubha siyang ypmagsisi
sico caiangaiata nananalan
ngin aco cai sancta Maria
uirgen totoo at cai, S. Miguel archã
gel, at cai, S.Juan baptista, at sa san
ctos apostoles, cai S. Pedro at cai, S.
Pablo at sa lahat na sanctos, nãg aco
ã. ypanalangin nila sa atin pangi
noõ dios ycao namã padre aco,i.
ypanalangin mo at haman caha
lili canang dios dito aco,i, ca
lagan mo sa casalanan co, at
parusahan mo aco. Amen, Jesu.
A KO MA KA SA LA NA. A KO NA KO KO PI SA
SA A TI PA NGI NO O DI YO. MA KA GA GA
WA SA LA HA. A KA SA TA MA RI YA. BI SE TO TO O.
KA SA MI GE. A KA SI. KA SA SU WA BA TI TA. SA SA
TO A PO TO LI. KA SA PE RO. A KA SA PA LO.
A SA LA HA NA SA TO. A SA I YO PA RE. A NA
KA SA LA A KO. SA PA NI RI. SA PA WI KA. A
SA PA GA WA. A KO NGA A SA LA. A KO MA KA
SA LA NA. A KO SA LA LO HA. SI YA I PI NA SI SI
SI KO. KA YA NGA YA TO. NA NA NA LA NGI A KO
KA SA TA MA DI YO. BI SE TO TO O. KA SA MI GO.
A KA SI. A SA SO WA BA TI TA. A SA SA TO A
PO TO LI. KA SA PI RO. A KA SA PE LA.
A SA LA HA NA SA TO. NA A KO I PA NA LA
NGI NI LA. SA A TI PA NGI NO O DI YO. I KA
NA MA PA RE. A KO I PA NA LA NGI MO. A HA
MA KA HA LI LI KA. NA DI YO DI TO. A KO KA LA
GA MO. SA KA SA LA NA KO. A PA RU SA HA MO
A KO. A ME SE SO.
Las preguntas en Romãce
P. Eres christiano? R. si porlami
sericordia de Dios. P.que cosa es
christiano? R. El hombre bapti
zado que cree lo que ensenã di
os, yla sancta yglesia madre nrã.
P. qua les la senãl del christiano
R. la sancta cruz. P. Aquien
adoran los christianos? R. a nrõ
senõr Dios. P. que cosa es dios?
R. la primera causa, el princi
pio de todas las cosas, El que hi
ço todas las cosas, y el no tiene
principio nifin. P. quantos dio
ses ay? R. un solo dios. P. quã
tas personas. R. tres P. como
se llama la primera? R. Dios
padre. P. como se llama la seu
da? R. Dios hijo. P. como se lla
ma la tercera? R. Dios spiritu
sancto. P. son por uenturatres
Dioses. R. no sontres dioses.
las personas son tres, ysolo ai
un dios. P. qual de las tres per
sonas se hizo hombre? R. la se
gunda persona que es el hijo.
P. como se hizo hombre? R. por
obra del spiritu sancto, en las
entranãs de sancta Maria uirge
antes del parto, ydespues del
parto. P. para q se hizo hombre?
R. para podermorir en rescate
de los peccados de todos los
hombres. P. qual es erantos
peccados de los hombres? R.
el peccado de nuestros prime
ros padres. Adan y Eva, del
qual todos participamos, y fue
ra de esto, los peccados actua
les conque ofenden a dios ca
da dia. P. como rescato a los hõ
bres? R. murio en la cruz y to
mo asucargo los peccados de
todos los hombres. P. despues
de muerto nrõ senõr Jesuchris
to que hizo su alma? R. baxo
a los infiernos junta con la diui
nidad, ysaco las animas de los
sanctos padres que estauan a
guardando su sancto adueni.
miento. P. El cuerpo de nuestro
senõr Jesuchristo fue sepultado?
R. si P. resuscito. R. si P.quã
do? R. al terçero dia, de su muer
te. P. que dose aca en la tierra nu
estro senõr Jesuchristo? R. no,
sino subro a los çielos, despues
de quarenta dias de su. R. esurreç
cion y esta asentado ala diestra
de dios padre todo poderoso.
P. que asiento tiene alla en el
cielo? R. El mas abentaxado
de todos. P. ay dia enque uedra
ajuzgar uinos y muertos. R. si,
P. quando? R. no se sabe. P.
El alma del hombre aca base
quando muere el hombre? R.
no muere con el cuerpo como
en los otros animales, si no so
to el cuerpo muere y el alma
uiue para siempre. P. ande uol
uer adinir todos los que muere
buenos y malos? R. ande uol
uer adinir y juntar se el cuerpo
con el alma para ser juzgados
de chirsto nuestro senõr. P.
despues de. R. esuscitados los
cuerpos de los hombres ande
uoluer amorir? R. no P.que
dara dios en premio a los bue
nos. R. la gloria del cielo al
la ueran adios y se alegraran
y regozi jaran para siempre ja
mas. P. que castigo dara dios
a los malos? R. echar los a en
el infierno allatendran torme
los y dolores para simpre ja
mas. P. que esta sancta ygle
sia. R. todos los hombres
christianos que creen en di
os, juntamente consu cabe
ça, Jesuschristo que esta en
el cielo, ysuuicauio en la tierra
que es el papa del Roma. P. En es
ta sancta yglesia y cosas que
quiten peccados? R. si P. que
cosas son? R. el baptisimo a
los no christianos, y la confe
sion a los ya christianos que
peccaron si searrepienten de
suspeccados de ueras ytiene
uoluntad de nunca mas boluer
apeccar. P. En esta sancta yglia
ay comunion de los sanctos? R.
si. P. que esta comunion de los
sanctos? R. la partiçipaçion
de los buenos christianos en las
buenas obras y sacramentos.
P. quando leuanta la ostia el pa
dre en la missa para quela ado
rentos christianos quien esta
asti? R. Jesuchristo nrõ senõr
dios y hombre uerdadero como
esta en el cielo. P. En el caliz
quien esta? R. la sangre uer
dadera de nrõ senõr Jesuchris
to como aquella que deruamo
en la cruz. P. que esta el chris
tiano obligado a hazer, para
saluarse? R. hazer y cumplir.
los diez mandamientos de dios
y los de la sancta madre yglesia.
Ang tanongan.
Tanongan. Christiano cana?
Sagot. Oo.t aua nang atin pã
nginoon dios. T. ano caia ang
christiano? S. ang binãgan su
masangpalataia sa aral nang
dios at nang sancta yglesia
yna natin. T. alin caia ang tan
da nang christiano? S. ang sãcta
cruz. T. sino caia ang sinasam
ba nang manga christiano? S.
ang atin panginoon dios. T.
ano caia ang dios? S. ang onãg
mola. ang caona onahan sa lahat,
ang mei gaua sa lahat, siya,e,
ualan pinagmolan ualan cahã
ganan. T. ylan ang dios? S. ysa
lamang. T. ylan ang personas?
S. tatlo. T. anong ngalang nang
naona? S. ang dios ama. T. anõg
ngalan nang ycalua? S. ang di
os anac. T. anong ngalan nãg
ycatlo? S. ang dios spiritusãcto.
T. tatlo caia ang dios? S. dile
tatlo ang dios, ang personas
siyang tatlo, ang dios ysa
lamang. T. alin sa tatlong per
sonas ang nagcatauan tauo?
S. ang ycaluang persona nang
sanctissima trinidad ang dios a
nac. T. anong pagcatauan tauo
niya? S. pinaglalangan siya nãg
dios spiritusancto satian ni sãcta
Maria uirgen totoo nang dipa
nanganac siya. nang macapanga
nac na virgen din totoo. T. ayat
nagcatauan tauo siya? S, nang mã
yari mamatai siya tubus sacasa
lanan nang lahat na tauo. T. atin
caia ang casalanan nang tauo?
S. ang casalanan nang atin magu
gulang si Adan at si Eva nagin
casalanan natin, naramai pala ta
yo sapagcacasala nila sa pangino
on dios. bucor naman doon ang sa
diling casalanan nang balan nang
tauo nagcasasala sa dios arao
arao. T. Anong pagtubus niya
sa tauo? S. nagpacamatai siya
sa cruz, at sinacop niya ang san
libotan bayan. T. nang namatai
na ang atin panginoon Jesuchris
to sa cruz, anong guinaua nang
caloloua niya? S, nanaog sama
nga infiernos pati nang pagca
dios niya, at hinango doon ãg
caloloua nang manga sanctos
padres naghihintai nãgpagda
ting niya. T. ang catauan ni
Jesuchristo ybinaon? S. oo. T.
nabuhai nanaguli? S. oo. T. ca
ylan? S. nang magycatlong
arao nangpagcamatai niya. T.
humabilin dito sa lupa ang atin
panginoon Jesuchristo? S. di
le humabilin dito sa lupa, nac
yat sa langit nang magycapat
napoung arao nang pagcabu
hai niyang naguli, at nalolocloc
sa canan nang dios ama maca
gagaua sa lahat. T. anong pagca
locloc niya doon sa langit? S.
pinalalo siya nang dios ama ni
ya sa lahat. T. mei arao na yhoho
com sa nangabubuhai, at sana
ngamatai natauo? S. oo T. cailã?
S. dile naaalaman. T. sino caia,
ang hocom? S. ang atin pangino
on Jesuchristo. T. ang caloloua
natin mamatai caia cun mama
tai ang catauan natin? S. dile ma
matai ang caloloua natin para
nang sa haiop, ang catauan la
mang mamatai, ang caloloua
mabubuhai magparating man
saan. T. mabubuhai caia mag
uli ang nangamatai natauo, ba
nal man, tampalasan man. S, oo
mabubuhai din maguli, at papa
soc na moli ang caloloua sa ca
tauan nang hocoman silang
dalua nang atin panginoon Je
suchristo. T. cun mabuhai na
maguli ang catauan nang ma
nga tauo mamatai pa caiang mo
li? S. dile. T. ano ygaganti
nang dios sa manga banal na
tauo. S. ang caluualhatian
sa langit doon maquiquita ni
la ang dios, at matotoua at ma
liligaia, at luluualhati magpa
rating man saan. T. ano ypa
rurusa niya sa manga tauõ tan
palasan? S, yhoholog niya sa
ynfierno doon maghihirap sila
at maccacasaquet magparatig
man saan. T. ano caia ang san
cta yglesia? S. ang lahat nata
uo christiano sumasangpala
taia sa dios pati nang pononi
la si Jesuchristo,e, nasa langit
dito sa lupa ang cahalili niya
ang sancto Papa sa Roma?
T. dito sa sancta yglesia mei
ycauauala nang casalanan?
S, oo, T, ano caia ang ycauaua
la nang casalanan? S, ang
pinagbinãg sa dipa christianos
at ang pagcoconfesal nang ma
nga christianos mei casalanã,
cun magsising masaquet at
mei loob na di moli maccasa
la sa dios magparating man
saan. T, dito sasancta yglesia
mei casamahan ang manga
sanctos? S, oo, T, ano caia
ang casamahan nang manga
sanctos? S, ang pagpapaquina
bang nang manga Christianos
banal na tauo, sa gauã maga
ling sangpon nang sasacra
mentos. T, Nang binubuhat
ang ostia nang padre sapagmi
misa sino caia ang naroon?
S, ang atin panginoon Jesu
Christo Dios totoo, at tauõg
totoo, para doon sa langit. T, sa
caliz sino caia ang naroon? S,
Ang dugong totoo nang atin
panginoon Jesuchristo, capara
niun nabohos sa cruz nang na
matai siya. T, ano caia ang ga
gauin nang manga Christiano
nang macaparoon sa langit? S,
Ang susundin nila ang sang
po, uong otos nang dios, pati
nang otos nang sancta yglesia
yna natin.
TA NO NGA.
KI NI TI YA NO KA NA. O O A WA NA A
TI PA NGI NO O DI YO. A NO KA YA
A KI NI TI YA NO. A BI YA GA NA TA WO. SU MA
SA PA LA TA YA. SA A RA NA DI YO. A NA SA
TA I LE SI YA. I NA NA TI. A LI KA YA
A TA DA NA KI NI TI YA NO. A SA TA KU RU.
SI NO KA YA. A SI NA SA BA. NA MA NGA KI NI
TI YA NO. A A TI PA NGI NO O DI YO. A
NO KA YA A DI YO. A O NA MO LA. A KA O
NA O NA HA SA LA HA. A MA GA WA SA LA HA.
SI YA WA LA PI NA MO A. WA LA KA HA GA NA.
I LA A DI YO. I I SA LA MA. I LA A
PE SO NA. TA LO. A NO NGA LA NA NA O NA. DI
YO A MA. ANO NGA LA NA I KA WA. DI YO A MA.
A NO NGA LA NA I KA LO. DI YO E PI RI TO
SA TO. TA LO KA YA A DI YO. DI LE TA LO A DI
YO. A PE SO NA SI YA TA LO. A DI YO I SA
LA MA. A LI SA TA LO PE SO NA. A NA KA TA A
TA WO. A I KA WA PE SO NA. NA SA TI SI MA TI
NI DA. NA DI YO A NA. A NO PA KA TA A TA WO
NI YA. PI NA LA LA NGA SI YA. NA DI YO E PI
RI TO SA TO. SA TI YA NI SA TO MA RI YA.
BI SE TO TO O. NA DI PA NA NGA NA. SI YA. NA MA
KA PA NGA NA NA. BI SE RI TO TO O. A A NA KA
TA A TA WO SI YA. NA MA YA RI MA MA TA SI YA.
TU BU SA KA SA LA NA. NA LA HA NA TA WO. A LI KA
YA A KA SA LA NA NI LA. A O NA KA SA LA NA.
NA MA GU GU LA NA TI. SI A DA. A SI E BA.
NA GI KA SA LA NA NA TI . NA RA MA PA LA TA YO.
SA PA KA KA O LA NI LA SA DI YO. BO KO NA MA DO
O. A SA DI LI A SA LA NA. NA BA LA NA TA WA.
NA KA SA SA LA SA DI YO. A RA A RA. TI NU
BU NI SE SO KI TO. A LA HA NA TA WO. O O. A NO
PA TU BU NI YA SA MA NGA TA WO. A PA KA MA TA
SI YA SA KU RU. A SI NA KO NI YA. A SA LI BU
TA BA YA. NA NA MA TA NA A A TI PA NGI NO O
SE SO KI TO SA KU RU. A NO GI NA WA NA KA LO LO WA
NI YA. NA NA O SA MA NGA I PE NO. PA TI NA
PA KA DI YO NI YA. A HI NA NGO DO O. A
KA LO LO WA NA MA NGA SA TO PA RE. NA HI NI TA
A PA RA TI NI YA. A KA TA A NI SE SO KI TO.
I BI NA O. O O. NA BU HA NA NA U LI. O O. KA I
LA. NA MA I KA LO A RA. A PA KA MA TA NI YA.
HU MA BI LI DI TO SA LU PA. A A TI PA NGI NO
O SE SO KI TO. DI LE HU MA BI LI DI TO SA LU PA.
NA YA SA LA NGI. NA MA I KA PA NA PO WO A
RA. A PA KA BU HA NI YA NA O LI. A NA LO
LO LO SA KA NA NA DI YO A MA. A KA GA GA WA
SA LA HA. A NO PA KA LO LO NI YA. DO O SA LA
NGI. PI NA LO LO SI YA NA DI YO A MA NI YA.
SA LA HA. MA A RA NA I HO HO. SA MA BU BU HA
A SA NA NGA MA TA NA TA WO. O O. KA I LA. DI LE
NA A A LA MA. SI NO KA YA A HO KO. A A
TI PA NGI NO O SE SO KI TO. A KA LO LO WA NA TI.
MA MA TA KA YA. KO MA MA TA A KA TA A NA TI.
DI LE MA MA TA A KA LO LO WA NA TI. PA RA NA SA I
BA HA YO. A KA TA A NA LA MA. A MA MA TA. A KA
LO LO WA MA BU BU HA. MA PA RA TI MA SA A
MA BU BU HA KA YA MA O LI. A NA NGA MA TA NA TO WO.
BA NA MA. TA PA LA SA MA. O O NA BU BU HA RI
MA U LI. A PA PA SO NA MO LI. A KA LO LO
WA SA KA TA A NI YA. NA HO KO MA SI LA DA WA.
NA A TI PA NGI NO O SE SO KI TO. KU MA BU HA
NA MA O LI. A KA TA A NA MA NGA TA WO. MA MA TA
PA KA YA MO LI. DI LE. ANO I GA GA TI NA DI YO
SA MA NGA BA NA NA TA WO. A KA LU WA HA TI A A SA LA
NGI. DO O MA KI KI TA NI LA A DI YO. A MA TO
TO WA. A MA LI LI GA YA. A LU LU WA HA TI. MA PA
RA TI MA SA A. A NO I PA RU RU SA NA DI YO
A MA NGA TA WO TA PA LA SA. I HO HO LO NI YA.
SA I PE NO. DO O MA HI HI RA SI YA. A MA KA
KA SA KI. MA PA RA TI MA SA A. A NO KA YA A
SA TA I LE SI YA. A LA HA NA TA WO KI NI TI YA NO.
SU MA SA PA LA TA YA SA DI YO. PA TI NA PO
PO NI LA SI SE SO KI TO. NA SA LA NGI. A DI
TO SA LU PA. A KA HA LI LI NI YA. A SA TO PA
PA. DI TO SA SA TA I LE SI YA. MA I KA WA WA LA
NA KA SA LA NA. A NO KA YA A I KA WA WA LA
NA KA SA LA NA. A PA BI YA SA DI PA KI NI TI
YA NO. A A PA KO KO PI SA. A MA NGA KA
NI TI YA NO. MA KA SA LA NA. KU MA SI SI MA SA KI.
A MA LO O. NA DI MO LI MA KA SA LA SA DI YO
MA PA RA TI MA SA A. DI TO SA SA TA I LE SI
YA. MA KA SA MA HA. A MA NGA SA TO. O O. A NO
KA YA A KA SA MA HA. NA MA NGA SA TO. A PA PA
PA KI NA BA. NA MA NGA KI NI TI YA NO. BA NA NA
TA WO. SA GA WA MA GA LI. SA PO NA SA SA KA RA ME TO.
NA BI NU BU HA A O TI YA NA PA RE. SA PA MI
MI SA. SI NO KA YA A NA RO O. A A TI PA
NGI NO O SE SO KI TO. DI YO TO TO O. A TA WO
TO TO O. PA RA DO O SA LA NGI. SA KA LI. SI NO
KA YA A NA DO O. A DU GO TO TO O. NA A TI PA
NGI NO O SE SO KI TO. KA PA RA NI U NA BO HO SA KU
RU. NA NA MA TA SI YA. ANO KA YA. A GA GA I
NA MA NGA KI NI TI YA NO. NA MA KA PA RO O SA
LA NGI. A SU SU DI NI YA. A SA PO WO O TO NA DI
YO. PA TI NA O TO NA SA TA I LE SI YA.
I NA NA TI.
Laus Deo
NOTES
[1] Tagalog characters are said to be similar to old Javanese, Ignacio
Villamot, _La Antigua Escritura Filipina_, Manila, 1922, p. 30. They
were replaced under the Spanish occupation by roman letters, and
are not now used. The best definitive grammar is Frank R. Blake's _A
Grammar of the Tagalog Language_, New Haven, 1925, where, p. 1, he
defines the language as follows: "Tagálog is the principal language
of Luzon, the largest island of the Philippine Archipelago. It is
spoken in Manila and in the middle region of Luzon. Tagálog, like
all the Philippine languages about which anything is known, belongs
to the Malayo-Polynesian family of speech, which embraces the idioms
spoken on the islands of Polynesia, Melanesia, and Malaysia, on the
Malay peninsula, and on the island of Madagascar."
[2] The woodcut, showing St. Dominic beneath a star holding a lily and
a book, the usual symbols of this saint, and clad in the white habit
and black cloak of his order, seems to be of oriental workmanship,
differing vastly from contemporary Spanish and Mexican cuts of the
same type. The clouds, for instance, are characteristically Chinese,
and the buildings in the background more reminiscent of eastern
temples than European churches.
[3] T.H. Pardo de Tavera, _Noticias sobre La Imprenta y el Grabado
en Filipinas_, Madrid, 1893, pp. 9-10. Dard Hunter in _Papermaking
through Eighteen Centuries_, New York, 1930, pp. 109-16, describes
papermaking in China, and mentions the use of "makaso" or "takaso,"
both species of the paper mulberry, as material for the making
of paper. The paper mulberry's scientific name is _Broussonetia
papyrifera_. Later, on p. 141, he speaks of the use by the Chinese
of gypsum, lichen, starch, rice flour and animal glue for sizing.
[4] The best short summaries in English of the beginnings of printing
in Mexico are Henry R. Wagner's introduction to the exhibition
catalogue of _Mexican Imprints 1544-1600 In the Huntington Library_,
San Marino, 1939, pp. 3-10; and Lawrence C. Wroth, _Some Reflections
on the Book Arts in Early Mexico_, Cambridge (Mass.), 1945.
[5] J.B. Primrose, _The First Press in India and Its Printers_,
The Library, 4th Series, 1939, XX, pp. 244-5.
[6] José Toribio Medina, _La Imprenta en Lima_, Santiago de Chile,
1904-17, no. 1, p. 3.
[7] A contemporary copy of this letter--the original is not known--lay
forgotten and unnoticed in the Archives of the Indies (1-1-3/25,
no. 52), Torres, III, no. 4151, p. 83, until discovered there by
Pascual de Gayangos, who called it to the attention of W.E. Retana,
who first printed it in _La Politica de Espana en Filipinas_, no. 97,
Oct. 23, 1894. It was later rediscovered independently by Medina who
also printed it in his _La Imprenta en Manila_, p. xix. Gómez Pérez
Dasmariñas, formerly corregidor of Murcia and Cartagena in Spain,
was appointed governor of the Philippines in 1589, landed at Manila
in May 1590, and remained in office until his death in October 1593.
[8] _Relacion de lo que se ha escrito y escribe en las Filipinas
fecho este año de 1593_, an apparently inedited MS. in the A. of I.,
Index 9, no. 81, from which the passage was quoted by Retana in his
edition of Antonio de Morga's _Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas_, Madrid,
1909, p. 425, and Manuel Artigas y Cuerva, _La Primera Imprenta en
Filipinas_, Manila, 1910, p. xi. This may be the MS. listed by Torres,
III, no. 4229, p. 91, as _Breve sumario y memorial de apuntamientos
de lo que se ha escrito y escribe en las Islas Filipinas_, undated
but probably 1593.
[9] _Recopilacion de las Leyes de los Reynos de las Indias_, Madrid,
1681, I, ff. 123v-124r, where they are Laws 1 and 3, Title XXIV,
Book I.
[10] Medina, p. xxviii, from. _Libro de provisiones reales_, Madrid,
1596, I, p. 231.
[11] Inflation in the Philippines was discussed in a report sent by
Bishop Salazar to the King in 1583, B. & R., V, pp. 210-11, translated
from Retana, _Archivo del bibliófilo filipino_, Madrid, 1895-97,
III. no 1.
[12] Henry R. Wagner, _The House of Cromberger_, in _To Doctor
R[osenbach]_, Philadelphia, 1946, pp. 234 & 238, where he gives
some interesting comparative figures: in 1542 the Casa de Cromberger
could charge 17 maravedís a sheet; in Spain in 1552 Lopez de Gómara's
_Historia de las Indias_ was appraised at 2 maravedís a sheet; and
in Mexico Vasco de Puga's _Provisiones_ of 1563 was permitted to sell
at the tremendous figure of one real or 34 maravedís a sheet.
[13] Juan de Cuellar was mentioned in the Letter of Instruction given
by Philip II to Gómez Pérez Dasmariñas on August 9, 1589, as among
those "who are men of worth and account" in the Philippines and who
should be provided for and rewarded accordingly, B. & R., VII, p. 151,
translated from the original MS. in the A. of I. (105-2-11), Torres,
III, no. 3567, p. 17. Cuellar received a commission from Dasmariñas
and signed various documents during his administration as secretary
and notary. Antonio de Morga, _Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas_, Mexico,
1609, f. 13v, reports that Cuellar was one of two survivors of the ship
on which Dasmariñas sailed in October 1593 as part of an expedition
to conquer the fort of Terrenate in Maluco. On the second day out,
while the ship was weather-bound at Punta del Acufre, the Chinese
rowers mutinied, and only Cuellar, there described as the governor's
secretary, and the Franciscan father, Francisco de Montilla, survived
the ensuing massacre. They were set ashore on the coast of Ylocos, and
made their way back to Manila. A similar account appears in Chapter XVI
of Leonardo de Argensola's, _Conqvista delas Islas Malvcas_, Madrid,
1609. We have been able to find no subsequent record of Cuellar.
[14] Colín, I, pp. 501, 507-14, 561-6.
[15] Pedro Chirino, _Primera parte de la Historia de la provincia
de Philipinas de la Compañia de Ihs_, unpublished MS. of 1610,
from which the present passage was quoted by Retana, col. 25. For an
account of the MS. see Santiago Vela, VI, p. 435n. Schilling, p. 214,
demonstrates that according to the original punctuation the meaning
is that the first printers were Villanueva and Blancas de San José,
but with the shifting of a semi-colon it could be read to mean that the
first printers were of the Order of St. Augustine. We can see no reason
to shift the semi-colon, and have retained it in its original place.
[16] Retana, col. 26, said that he was able to find no information
regarding Villanueva except for the listing of his name by Cano,
p. 43, as having arrived in the Philippines at an unknown date. The
destruction of the early records of the Augustinians when the English
sacked Manila in 1762 accounts for the paucity of information, but
there are a few references which throw some little light on the two
Villanuevas. San Agustin, p. 212, says that when Herrara sailed for
Mexico in 1569 he left in Cebú only "P. Fr. Martin de Rada and two
virtuous clerics, the one named Juan de Vivero, and the other Juan
de Villanueva, who had come with Felipe de Salcedo." Salcedo had
come back to Cebú in 1566. Francisco Moreno, _Historia de la Santa
Iglesia Metropolitana de Filipinas hasta 1650_, Manila, 1877, p. 226,
states that Villanueva came in 1566, and died shortly after 1569. San
Antonio, I, p. 173, writes, "Another cleric was the Licentiate Don
Juan de Villanueva, of whom the only thing known is that he was a
churchman and lived but a short time--and that after the erection of
the church." This refers to the foundation of the church in Manila in
1571. Of the other Villanueva our information comes from Perez, p. 63.
[17] Alonso Fernández, _Historia Eclesiastica de Nvestros Tiempos_,
Toledo, 1611, pp. 303-4. The book referred to here is called _De los
mysterios del Rosario de nuestra Señora_ by Jacques Quétif and Jacques
Echard, _Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum_, Paris, 1719, II, p. 390;
and _Devotion del Santisimo Rosario de la Bienaventurada Virgen_
by Vicente Maria Fontana, _Monvmenta Dominicana_, Rome, 1675, p. 586.
[18] Fernández, _Historia de los insignes Milagros qve la Magestad
Diuina ha obrado por el Rosario santissimo de la Virgen soberana, su
Madre_, Madrid, 1613, f. 216. I have been unable to locate a copy of
this book in the United States, but the passage is printed in Retana,
_Aparato Bibliográfico de la Historia General de Filipinas_, Madrid,
1906, I, pp. 64-5. It was first cited in modern times by Pedro Vindel,
_Catálogo_, Madrid, 1903, III, no. 2631.
[19] A sketch of the life of Aduarte was added to his history
by Gonçalez, II, pp. 376-81, and a notice also appears in Ramon
Martínez-Vigil, _La Orden de Predicadores ... seguidas del Ensayo de
una Bibliotheca de Dominicos Españoles_, Madrid, 1884, p. 229.
[20] Aduarte, II, pp. 15-18.
[21] Artigas, _op. cit._, pp. 3-22, stresses the part played by
him in establishing printing and gives much information regarding
this father. There, referring to the _Acta Capitulorum Provincialium
provinciae Sanctissimi Rosarii Philippinarum_, Manila, 1874-77, Artigas
traces the career of Blancas de San José as follows: in Abucay from
May 24, 1598 until April 27, 1602; at San Gabriel in Binondo from
April 27, 1602 until May 4, 1604; as Preacher-General of the order
at the Convent of Santo Domingo in Manila from 1604 to 1608; back
at Abucay from April 26, 1608 until May 8, 1610; and at San Gabriel
again from May 8, 1610 until May 4, 1614.
[22] Medina, no. 8, p. 7. A copy of this book and an unique copy of
the recently discovered _Ordinationes_ of 1604, see note 127, are
in the Library of Congress. Both books are entirely typographical,
and the Tagalog in the 1610 volume has been transliterated. These two
and the present Doctrina are, so far as I have been able to find out,
the only Philippine imprints before 1613 in the United States.
[23] Medina, no. 14, p. 11. The text was written by Thomas Pinpin,
who appears as the printer of the former book, and a confessionary
by Blancas de San José, who probably edited the volume, is included.
[24] Juan Lopez, _Quinta Parte de la Historia de San Domingo_,
Valladolid, 1621, ff. 246-51.
[25] Quétif and Echard, _op. cit._, II, p. 390. This same statement was
made in Antonio de León Pinelo, _Epitome de la Biblioteca Oriental y
Occidental, Nautica, y Geografica_ (ed. Antonio González de Barcia),
Madrid, 1737-38, col. 737, and was reprinted almost word for word
by José Mariano Beristain y Sousa, _Bibliotheca Hispano-Americana
Septentrional_, Mexico, 1883-97, I, p. 177.
[26] A fairly complete biography is given by Viñaza, pp. 112-7,
where he points out that several of the major Jesuit biographers have
erroneously stated that Hervas went to America some time before 1767.
[27] Lorenzo Hervas y Panduro, _Origine, formazione, meccanismo,
ed armonia degli' idiomi_, Cesena, 1785, p. 88.
[28] Hervas, _Saggio Pratico delle lingue, Con prolegomeni, e
una raccolta di orazioni Dominicali in più di trecento lingue,
e dialetti_, Cesena, 1787, pp. 128-9. Although Schilling, p. 208,
says that Hervas had a copy of the 1593 Doctrina before him, which
"had been lent or given" by Bernardo de la Fuente, Hervas merely says
that he took his information "from the best documents, which showed
the grammar; and the Tagalog and Visayan dictionary were given me by
Messrs. D. Antonio Tornos and D. Bernardo de la Fuente." There is no
doubt, however, but that Hervas had a copy of the Doctrina, or accurate
and extensive transcripts from a copy known to one of his friends.
[29] Franz Carl Alter, _Ueber die Tagalische Sprache_, Vienna,
1803, p. vii. Alter speaks of having had extensive correspondence
with Hervas.
[30] Johann Christoph Adelung, _Mithridates oder allgemeine
Sprachenkunde mit dem Vater Unser als Sprach probe in beynahe
fünfhundert Sprachen und Mundarten_, Berlin, 1806, I, pp. 608-9.
[31] Beristain, _op. cit._, II, p. 464. The first edition was published
in 1819-21, but we have used the second for our quotations.
[32] Juan de Grijalva, _Cronica de la orden de N.P.S. Augustin de
Nueva Espana_, Mexico, 1624, f. 199v.
[33] Nicolás Antonio, _Bibliotheca Hispana Nova_, Madrid, 1783, I,
p. 764. The first edition was Rome, 1672, but I could locate no copy
in this country.
[34] San Agustin, p. 352. On pp. 443-4 referring to Grijalva and
Herrera, he says merely that Quiñones "was very learned in the Tagalog
language, and wrote a grammar and dictionary of it."
[35] "He succeeded in learning that language with such perfection that
he composed a treatise, as a light and guide for the new missionaries,
and a vocabulary, with which in a short time they could instruct those
islanders in the mysteries of the faith," Medina, p. xxvii, assumed
that this referred to José Sicardo, _La Cristiandad del Japon_, Madrid,
1698, where he could find nothing about Quiñones, but Beristain cited
specifically his _Historias de Filipinas y Japon_, which Santiago Vela,
VI, p. 441, thinks must be his additions to Grijalva, including a life
of Quiñones, which San Agustin used and quoted from. The quotation
here is from San Agustin, p. 442, where Sicardo is given as the source.
[36] Tomas de Herrera, _Alphabetvm Avgvstinianvm_, Madrid, 1644, I,
p. 406, according to P. & G., p. xxiv.
[37] Schilling, p. 204.
[38] Pedro Bello, _Noticia de los escritores y sus obras impresas
y manuscritas en diferentes idiomas por los religiosos agustinos
calzados hasta 1801_, unpublished MS., from which the citation is
given by Santiago Vela, VI, p. 441.
[39] P. & G., pp. xxv-xxvi.
[40] Medina, p. xxviii, who gives as source the A. of I. and _Libro
de provisiones reales_, Madrid, 1596, I, p. 231. In his note Medina
says that this cedula was not in the _Recopilacion_, but referring
back to the note on p. xxiv, we find that he there prints a law of
the same content and date, cited as Law 3, Title XXIV, Book 1 of the
_Recopilacion_, where we have seen it, with the extremely significant
addition, "it shall not be published, _or printed_, or used." If
this phrase was not included in the original cedula sent to Manila,
but added when printed as applying to all the Indies, it is important
evidence that the King felt an admonition against printing unnecessary
where no facilities for printing existed.
[41] Retana, col. 10, cited from the original MS. in the A. of
I. (68-1-42), Torres, II, no. 3211, p. 150.
[42] San Antonio, II, p. 297. This work, treated at length by San
Antonio, is proof of the high esteem in which Plasencia was held as
a Tagalist. It was incorporated in a document of Governor Francisco
Tello, dated July 13, 1599, now in the A. of I. (67-6-18), and first
printed in the appendix to Santa Inés, II, pp. 592-603, and translated
in B. & R., VII, pp. 173-96.
[43] Santiago Vela, VI, pp. 442-3. His study of the questionable _Arte_
of 1581 is the most thorough and detailed yet written.
[44] Schilling, p. 205.
[45] Pardo de Tavera, _op. cit._, pp. 8-9. After quoting the latter
part of this passage, Medina, p. xviii, adds a quizzical note,
"I want to cite the opinion of so distinguished a student of
the Philippines because it shows how tangled and confused is the
information concerning the primitive Philippine press, even among
men best informed on the subject."
[46] Medina, nos. 1 and 2, p. [3].
[47] Medina, p. xix.
[48] Retana had published many of his findings in _La Politico de
España en Filipinas_, Madrid, 1891-98; in his edition of Joaquín
Martínez de Zuñiga, _Estadismo de las Islas Filipinas_, Madrid, 1893;
and in the _Archivo del Bibliófilo Filipino_, Madrid, 1895-97.
[49] Retana, cols. 7-8. We shall speak of Juan de Vera later.
[50] Thomas Cooke Middleton, _Some Notes on the Bibliography of the
Philippines_, Philadelphia, 1900, pp. 32-33.
[51] Pardo de Tavera, _Biblioteca Filipina_, Washington, 1903,
pp. 9-10.
[52] Medina, _La Imprenta en Manila desde sus Orígenes hasta 1810
Adiciones y Ampliacones_, Santiago de Chile, 1904.
[53] P. & G., pp. xxi-xxvi.
[54] B. & R., LIII, p. 11.
[55] Artigas, _op. cit._ He admitted that the celebration should have
been held in 1902.
[56] Retana, _Orígenes de la Imprenta Filipina_, Madrid, 1911. Retana
had also published between 1897 and 1911 several other books which
contained some information about the early Philippine press, the
_Aparato Bibliográfico_ in 1906 and his edition of Morga in 1909,
both of which have already been cited.
[57] Antonio Palau y Dulcet, _Manuel del Librero Hispano-Americano_,
Barcelona, 1923-37, III, p. 72.
[58] Schilling, _op. cit._
[59] Chirino, p. 3, writes that he was "the first who made converts
to Christianity in the Philippines, preaching to them of Jesus Christ
in their own tongue--of which he made the first vocabulary, which
I have seen and studied;" and Juan de Medina (who originally wrote
his history in 1630), p. 54, says that in visiting Cebú in 1612 he
"saw a lexicon there, compiled by Father Fray Martin de Rada, which
contained a great number of words." Grijalva, _op. cit._, f. 124V,
writes that Rada "by the force of his imaginative and excellent ability
learned the Visayan language, as he had learned the Otomi in this land
[Mexico], so that he could preach in it in five months."
[60] Pérez, p. 5.
[61] Juan González de Mendoza, _The Historie of the great and mightie
kingdom of China ... Translated out of Spanish by R. Parke_, London,
1588, p. 138. The original edition of 1585 said he made an "arte y
vocabulario." We must take the phrase "in few daies" in a comparative
sense, but that an Augustinian, probably Rada, knew some Chinese as
early as July 30, 1574 is shown by a letter from Governor Lavezaris
to the King from Manila, sending him "a map of the whole land of
China, with an explanation which I had some Chinese interpreters
make through the aid of an Augustinian religious who is acquainted
with the elements of the Chinese language," B. & R., III, p. 284,
from the original MS. in the A. of I. (67-6-6), Torres, II, no. 1868,
p. 10-11. Antonio de León Pinelo, _Epitome de la Biblioteca Oriental
i Occidental, Nautica i Geographica_, Madrid, 1629, p. 31, also
records Rada's Chinese grammar and dictionary. Santiago Vela, VI,
pp. 444-60, gives a full history of Rada and his writings. He went
to China a second time in May 1576, and in 1578 accompanied La Sande
on his expedition to Borneo, dying on the way back to Manila in June
of that year.
[62] González de Mendoza, _op. cit._, pp. 103-5.
[63] Diego Ordoñez Vivar came to the Philippines in 1570, filled
various ministries there, and according to Agustin Maria de Castro
was in Japan in 1597, where he witnessed the martyrdom of the
Franciscans; he died in 1603, Pérez, p. 10. Juan de Medina, p. 74,
says, "Father Diego de Ordoñez learned this language [Tagalog] very
quickly." Alonso Alvatado had been on the unsuccessful 1542 expedition
of Villalobos, and returned to the Philippines in 1571. Pérez, p. 11,
records that he became familiar with the Tagalog language, was the
first prior of Tondo, ministered to the Chinese there, and was the
first Spaniard to learn the Mandarin dialect. He was elected provincial
in 1575, and died at Manila the following year. Jéronimo Marín came
to the islands with Alvarado, acquired skill in the Visayan, Tagalog
and Chinese languages, accompanied Rada on his first expedition to
China, was in Tondo in 1578, and later returned to Spain to recruit
new missionaries for the province, dying in Mexico in 1606, Pérez,
pp. 11-12.
[64] Cano, p. 12. Santiago Vela, I, p. 85, expresses the opinion that
Cano's statement was an overenthusiasm, and is not valid.
[65] Retana, col. 9.
[66] Juan de Medina, p. 156.
[67] Santiago Vela, I, p. 85, where he cites the first book of the
_Gobierno_ of the Augustinian province.
[68] Santiago Vela, I, pp. 84-6 treats of the whole question in detail.
[69] A Doctrina in Tagalog, attributed to Alburquerque by Agustin
Maria de Castro in his unpublished _Osario_, is said by Santiago Vela,
I, p. 85, to have been arranged and perfected by Quiñones, and was
probably that presented by him to the Synod of 1582, if indeed he
did present such a work then. For an account of the MS. _Osario_,
see Schilling, p. 205n.
[70] Pérez, p. 20n, quotes Vicente Barrantes, _El teatro tagalo_,
Madrid, 1890, p. 170, as saying that "according to the Augustinian
writers" Alburquerque compiled an _Arte de la Lengua Tagala_ between
1570 and 1580, the manuscript of which disappeared when the English
sacked Manila in 1762. It may be that Barrantes referred to Cano
or possibly Castro, but it must be emphasized that no contemporary
historian, as far as has been discovered up to this time, has made
such a statement.
[71] Quiñones came to the Philippines in 1577 and spent his time in
missions in and about Manila. He was named prior of Manila in 1586,
and provincial vicar in 1587 in which year he died, Pérez, p. 19,
and Santiago Vela, VI, pp. 433-4.
[72] Again Castro, as cited by Santiago Vela, VI, p. 435, is the only
authority for this, although San Agustin, p. 391, lists Quiñones'
name among those present at the Synod.
[73] San Agustin, p. 381. It should be noted that this statement is
in direct contradiction to those we shall cite later in connection
with the controversy between the Augustinians and Dominicans over
the Chinese ministry. The convent at Tondo had been founded in 1571,
so San Agustin here must refer specifically to the Chinese mission.
[74] Pérez, p. 22.
[75] Pérez, p. 29.
[76] Huerta, pp. 443 & 500-01. In 1580, under the influence
of Plasencia, Talavera took the habit of the Franciscan order and
preached throughout the Philippines until his death in 1616. Huerta
lists six works in Tagalog by him, all of them devotionary tracts,
the last of which he notes was printed at Manila in 1617, and is
listed by Medina, no. 20, pp. 14-5. His works are also recorded by
Leon Pinelo, _op. cit._, 1737-38, II, f. 919r.
[77] Santa Inés (written originally in 1676), p. 211. Virtually the
same information is given by San Antonio, I, pp. 532-3 & 563.
[78] Juan de la Concepcion, _Historia general de Philipinas_, Manila,
1788-92, II, pp. 45-6. Schilling, p. 203n, maintains that the early
writers were mistaken in believing that the Synod was held in 1581. On
October 16, 1581 the Bishop called a meeting of ten priests at the
Convent of Tondo to discuss the execution of the decree about slaves,
Torres, II, pp. cxliv-v. No laymen were present and no other topic was
discussed. The decisions of this meeting were sent in a letter from
Salazar to the King, dated from Tondo, October 17, 1581, translated
in B. & R., XXXIV, pp. 325-31, from the original MS. in the A. of
I. (68-1-42), Torres, II, no. 2686, p. 95. The following year a real
Synod was held, this time including lay government officials as well
as priests, at which was discussed a variety of subjects. Robert
Streit, _Bibliotheca Missionum_, Aachen, 1928, IV, pp. 327-31, cites
a MS. account of it by the Jesuit father Sanchez who was present; and
Valentín Marín, _Ensayo de una Síntesis de los trabajos realizados
por las Corporaciones Religiosas Españoles de Filipinas_, Manila,
1901, I, pp. 192 et seqq., cites another MS., then in the Archives
of the Archiepiscopal Palace of Manila, _Memoria de una junta que
se hizo a manera de concilio el año de 1582, para dar asiento a las
cosas tocantes al aumento de la fe, y justificacíon de las conquistas
hechas y que adelante se hicieron por los espanoles_, from which he
quotes extensively. With reference to the Synod see further Lorenzo
Pérez, _Origen de las Misiones Franciscanas en el extremo oriente_,
in Archivo Ibero-Americano, 1915, III, pp. 386-400.
[79] Santa Inés, p. 212. Again similar accounts are to be found in
San Antonio, I, pp. 563-6, in far more detail and phrased in even
more laudatory terms, and the fullest early biography of Plasencia
is given by San Antonio, II, pp. 512-79. Modern surveys appear in
Marín, _op. cit._, II, pp. 573-82, and Lorenzo Pérez, _op. cit._,
pp. 378 et seqq.
[80] Chirino, _Primera parte_, quoted by Retana, col. 24, implied that
Quiñones and Plasencia wrote at about the same time: "The first who
wrote in these languages were, in Visayan, P. Fr. Martin de Rada, and
in Tagalog, Fr. Juan de Quiñones, both of the Order of St. Augustine,
and at the same time Fr. Juan de Oliver and Fr. Juan de Plasencia
of the Order of St. Francis, of whom the latter began first, but the
former [wrote] many more things and very useful ones." However, San
Antonio, I, p. 532, wrote perhaps with bias in favor of his own order,
"Although the Augustinian fathers had come earlier and did not lack
priests fluent in the idiom, the language had not yet been reduced to
a grammar, so that it could be learned by common grammatical rules,
nor was there a general vocabulary of speech; except that each one
had his own notes, to make himself understood, and everything was
unsystematized."
[81] _Entrada de la seraphica Religion de nuestro P. S. Francisco
en las Islas Philipinas_, MS. of 1649, first published in Retana,
_Archivo_, I, no. III, translated in B. & R., XXXV, p. 311.
[82] Medina, p. 15, quoting from Martínez whom we are unable to trace.
[83] Huerta, pp. 492-3. Oliver died in 1599. San Antonio, II, p. 531,
says that Plasencia was the first to write a catechism (called
in Tagalog "Tocsohan"), and Oliver was the first to translate the
explanation of the Doctrina. Oliver's works are noted by León Pinelo,
_op. cit._, 1737-38, II, col. 730, and Barrantes, _op. cit._, p. 187.
[84] Sebastian de Totanes, _Arte de la Lengua Tagala_, Manila, 1850,
p. v, (first edition printed in 1745) says of Oliver that "up to
the present day our province reveres him as the first master of
this idiom."
[85] See note 42.
[86] Huerta, p. 517. Nothing is known of Diego de la Asuncion
except that he wrote five works in Tagalog including an _Arte_ and
_Diccionario_. Huerta was unable to find any record of him in the
mission lists, the capitularies or the death records, but that he was
in the Philippines before 1649 we can be sure of from the notice of
him in the manuscript of that date.
[87] Huerta, p. 495. Montes y Escamilla came to the islands in 1583
and remained there until his death in 1610. Five works in Tagalog
are attributed to him, an _Arte_, _Diccionario_, _Confesionario_,
_Devocional tagalog_, and a _Guia de Pecadores_. The _Devocional_
is listed by Medina, no. 16, p. 12.
[88] Pablo Rojo, _Fr. Juan de Plasencia_, _Escritor_, Appendix 3 of
Santa Inés, II, p. 590. An early reference by Fernández, _Historia
Eclesiastica_, p. 300, speaking of the Franciscan missionary successes
among the natives, says, "They learned the Doctrina Christiana which
the priests translated into Tagalog."
[89] Rojo, in Santa Inés, II, pp. 590-1, says that the Doctrina
then being used among the Tagalogs was the same as that written by
Plasencia except for modernization in accordance with the changes
which had taken place in the language since his time.
[90] Medina, no. 15, p. 11.
[91] Chirino, p. 14.
[92] Colin, II, p. 325.
[93] Chirino, p. 27.
[94] Chirino, chaps. XV-XVII, pp. 34-41.
[95] On May 13, 1579, Philip II wrote to the Governor of the
Philippines, "Fray Domingo de Salazar, of the Dominican order, and
bishop of the said islands, has reported to us that he is going to
reside in these islands; and that he will take with him religious of
his order to found monasteries, and to take charge of the conversion
and instruction of the natives," B. & R., IV, p. 141, translated
from the original MS. in the Archivo-Historico Nacional, _Cedulario
indico_, t. 31, f. 132V, no. 135. Twelve of the twenty who set out
from Europe with Salazar died before reaching Mexico, and the others
were so sick that all but one remained there, so when Salazar landed
at Manila in March 1581 he was accompanied by twenty Augustinians,
eight Franciscans, and only one Dominican, Christoval de Salvatierra.
[96] For these and other general facts I have used Aduarte and
Remesal where they are supported by the other historians, Juan de
la Concepcion, San Antonio, San Agustin, Juan de Medina and Santa
Inés. It should be noted that Remesal acknowledged as his source for
much of the material on the Philippines the unpublished MS. history
of the Franciscan, Francisco de Montilla. The fifteen Dominicans were
Juan de Castro, Alonso Ximenez, Miguel de Benavides, Pedro Bolaños,
Bernardo Navarro, Diego de Soria, Juan de Castro the younger, Marcos
Soria de San Antonio, Juan de San Pedro Martyr (or Maldonado), Juan
Ormaza de Santo Tomás, Pedro de Soto, Juan de la Cruz, Gregorio de
Ochoa, Domingo de Nieva, and Pedro Rodriguez.
[97] By a bull of October 20, 1582 Pope Gregory XIII confirmed the
appointment already obtained from Pablo Constable de Ferrara, General
of the Dominican Order, making Juan Chrisóstomo vicar-general of the
Philippine Islands and China, and giving him authority to establish
a province there, B. & R., V, pp. 199--200, translated from Hernaez,
_Coleccion de bulas_, Brussels, 1879, I, p. 527, where it is printed
from the original MS. in the Vatican, Bular. Dom., t. 15, p. 412.
[98] In 1580 the Dominicans of Mexico had begun plans for
the establishment of a province in the Orient, and sent Juan
Chrisóstomo to Europe to obtain the necessary permission from lay
and ecclesiastical authorities. The Jesuit Alonso Sanchez, who had
been sent to Spain to explain the situation in the Philippines,
was at court, and told the King and Council of the Indies--quite
subverting his mission--that there was no need for more priests
and particularly no need for a new order there. Chrisóstomo was
discouraged, but the scheme was revivified by Juan de Castro who
finally secured a letter from Philip II on September 20, 1585 endorsing
the plan. Twenty-two volunteers sailed from Spain on July 17, 1586. In
Mexico the Dominicans again found Sanchez propagandizing against the
mission and also encountered the efforts of the Viceroy to persuade
the friars to remain there. Notwithstanding, twenty friars subscribed
to a set of ordinances at the Convent of Santo Domingo in Mexico on
December 17, 1586. Of the twenty, fifteen went to the Philippines,
three went directly to China, and Juan Chrisóstomo, who was ill and
weak, and Juan Cobo, who had business there, stayed behind in Mexico.
[99] Aduarte, I, p. 9.
[100] Aduarte, I, p. 70.
[101] Juan Cobo had stayed behind in Mexico on business, and during
his stay had been so moved by the scandals of the government there
that he preached publicly against them, as a result of which he
was banished by the Viceroy. He brought with him from Mexico a
fellow-reformer and exile, Luis Gandullo, and four other recruits
for the Philippine mission.
[102] These are printed in the _Ordinationes_ of 1604, see note 127,
and by Remesal, pp. 677--8, who says that "these ordinances were
printed in as fine characters and as correctly as if in Rome or Lyon,
by Francisco de Vera, a Chinese Christian, in the town of Binondo in
the year 1604 through the diligence of Fr. Miguel Martin."
[103] Sangley, a term used by the natives to designate Chinese,
was derived from the Cantonese _hiang_ (or _xiang_) and _ley_
meaning a "travelling merchant." It was adopted by the Spaniards
and in most instances used interchangeably with Chinese. If any
distinction existed it was that a Sangley was a permanent resident
of the Philippines--quite contrary to the derivation of the word--or
a Chinese of partially native blood. See San Agustin, p. 253.
[104] Particularly the Memorial to the Council of the Indies sent with
Sanchez, April 20, 1586, translated in B. & R., VI, pp. 167-8, from the
original MS. in the A. of I. (1-1-2/24), Torres, II, no. 3289, p. 159.
[105] B. & R., VII, pp. 130-1, translated from the original MS. in
the A. of I. (67-6-18), Torres, III, no. 3556, pp. 15-6. See the
statement of San Agustin quoted on p. 22, which gives the irreconciled
Augustinian view. Most of the contemporary witnesses, however, seem
to agree with the Dominicans.
[106] B. & R., VII, pp. 220-3, translated from Retana, _Archivo_,
III, pp. 47-80, and there printed from the original MS. in the A. of
I. (68-1-32), Torres, III, no. 3698, p. 32.
[107] Remesal, pp. 681-2.
[108] B. & R., VII, pp. 223-5, as in note 106.
[109] Martínez-Vigil, _op. cit._, p. 246, lists as written by
Benavides a _Vocabularium sinense facillimum_, and Vinaza, p. 17,
cites his entry.
[110] Schilling, p. 210, says that in his letter Cobo himself
recorded that "Benavides wrote the first Chinese catechism in the
Philippines." He does not however differentiate between writing in
Chinese characters and writing transliterated Chinese, and moreover
"hizo doctrina" may only mean that he taught the doctrine, not
necessarily that he wrote one.
[111] B. & R., VII, p. 238, as in note 106.
[112] Aduarte, I, p. 140.
[113] Aduarte, I, p. 140, says, before the previously quoted passage,
that Cobo "put the Doctrina Christiana in the Chinese language,"
and Viñaza, pp. 17-23, lists seven books by him, including the famous
translation of the Chinese classic, _Beng-Sim-Po-Cam_, the original
MS. of which, with an introductory epistle by Benavides, dated from
Madrid, December 23, 1595, is in the Biblioteca Nacional at Madrid; an
_Arte de las letras chinas_; _Vocabulario chino_; _Catecismo o doctrina
christiana en chino_; (cited from León Pinelo, _op. cit._, 1737-38, I,
col. 142); _Tratado de astronomia en chino_; _Linguae sinica ad certam
revocata methodum_ (called by Martinez-Vigil, _op. cit._, p. 263, "the
first works or work on the Chinese language"); and _Sententiae plures_,
excerpted from various Chinese books. See also Beristain, _op. cit._,
I, p. 316, and Quétif and Echard, _op. cit._, II, pp. 306-7.
[114] Aduarte, I, p. 122.
[115] Fernandez, _Historia Eclesiastica_, p. 304, "In the Chinese
language and letters, P. Fr. Domingo de Nieva, of San Pablo of
Valladolid, printed a memorial of the Christian life; and P. Fray
Tomas Mayor, of the province of Aragon, from the Convent and College
of Orihuela, the Symbol of Faith." In his _Historia de los Insignes
Milagros_, f. 217, Fernández states that both these works were printed
at Bataan. Since Mayor did not arrive in the islands until 1602 his
work is not pertinent to the present discussion. Mayor's book was seen
but inadequately described by Jose Rodriguez, _Biblioteca Valentina_,
1747, p. 406, from a copy then in the Library of the Dominican Convent
at Valencia, but now lost. Medina records it under the year 1607,
no. 6, p. 6. See also León Pinelo, _op. cit._, 1737--38, II, f. 919r,
and Antonio, _op. cit._, I, p. 330.
[116] Aduarte, I, p. 342.
[117] Medina, nos. 399-402, pp. 261-2.
[118] Aduarte, I, pp. 255-8. San Pedro Martyr moved back and forth a
good deal. The first year in the Philippines he was with Benavides at
Baybay; the second year he was in Pangasinan. In 1590 he was ordered
to the Chinese mission in Cobo's place by Castro before he left for
China. When Castro got back and Cobo could resume his old station,
San Pedro Martyr went to the vicariate of Bataan "the language of
which he learned very well," and when Cobo left for Japan in 1592,
San Pedro Martyr went back to San Gabriel.
[119] Aduarte, I, p. 323.
[120] Remesal, p. 683.
[121] See Hermann Hülle, _Über den alten chinesischen Typendruck und
seine Entzvicklung in den Ländern des Fernen Ostens_, N.P., 1923;
Thomas Francis Carter, _The Invention of Printing in China and its
Spread Westward_, New York, 1925; and Cyrus H. Peake, _The origin and
development of printing in China in the light of recent research_,
in the Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 1935, X, pp. 9-17.
[122] B. & R., VII, pp. 226, as in note 106.
[123] Aduarte, II, pp. 15-18.
[124] Medina, p. xix, supposed that the Doctrina was printed in
the Hospital of San Gabriel in Minondoc, but Aduarte, I, p. 107,
says that when the village of Baybay became overcrowded, it became
necessary to spread the Chinese Christian settlement to a new site
directly across the river, where land was given them by Don Luis
Pérez Dasmariñas, the son and successor of Gómez Pérez Dasmariñas,
and there a second church of San Gabriel was built. According to an
inscription on a painting of Don Luis, exhibited at the St. Louis
Fair of 1904 and illustrated in B. & R., XXX, p. 228, he bought the
land from Don Antonio Velada on March 28, 1594, so that San Gabriel
of Minondoc could not have been the place where the 1593 volumes were
printed. Marin, _op. cit._, II, p. 617, says that San Gabriel was
moved several years after its foundation to Binondo at the request
of the city, and was rebuilt twice. It is apparent that San Gabriel
in the Parian was abandoned after the church in Binondo was built.
[125] Juan de Vera was probably a comparatively common name at this
time, because upon baptism the natives and Chinese assumed any Spanish
name they pleased, and since Santiago de Vera was governor from 1584 to
1590, his last name would have been very popular. Aduarte, I, p. 86,
mentions an Indian chief, Don Juan de Vera, who helped the Dominicans
in Pangasinan, and Retana, col. 23, quotes from a document sent by
the Audiencia of the Philippines to the King, August 11, 1620, the
appointments as official interpreters of one Juan de Vera on June 15,
1598, and the same or another Juan de Vera on October 9, 1613.
[126] Aduarte, I, p. 108.
[127] The title-page of this unique book is as follows: [row of
type ornaments] / _Ordinationes Generales_ / prouinciæ Sanctissimi
Rosarij / [type ornament] Philippinarum. [type ornament] / Factæ per
admodum Reuerendum patrem fratrem / Ioanem de Castro, primum vicarium
generalem e- / iusdem prouintiæ. De consilio, & vnanimi con / sensu
omnium frattu, qui primit_9_ in pro / uintiam illam se contulerunt,
euan / gelizandi gratia./ Sunt que semper vsque in hodiernum diem in
om- / nibus eiusdem prouintiæ capitulis infalibiliter / acceptatæ,
inuiolabiliter ab omnibus / fratribus obseruandæ. / Binondoc, per
Ioannem de Vera china / Christianum. Cum licentia. 1604. / [row of
type ornaments]. The volume, an octavo bound in maroon levant morocco
by Sangorski and Sutcliffe, consists of eight leaves, as follows:
title-page as above, on the verso the permission signed at Manila,
June 24, 1604, by Fr. Miguel Martin de San Jacinto, prior provincial of
the Dominican Province of the Philippines; the text of the ordinances
in Latin on eleven pages, with the device of the Dominican order on
the verso of the last page; blank.
[128] See note 102.
[129] Medina, _Adiciones y Ampliacixones_, p. [5].
[130] Retana, cols. 77-8, where he gives as his source Hilario Ocio,
_Reseña biográfica de los religiosos de la provincia del Santisimo
Rosario de Filipinas_, Manila, 1891, I, p. 63. Ocio did not cite
Remesal as his source, but the information, including the printer's
name as Francisco de Vera, is the same.
[131] Both title-pages are reproduced in Francisco Vindel, _Manual
Gráphico-Descriptivo del Bibliófilo Hispano-Americano_, Madrid,
1930--34, IX, p. 22, and VII, p. 181 respectively.
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Doctrina Christiana, by Anonymous
*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DOCTRINA CHRISTIANA ***
***** This file should be named 16119-8.txt or 16119-8.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
https://www.gutenberg.org/1/6/1/1/16119/
Produced by Jeroen Hellingman, Tamiko I. Camacho, and the
PG Distributed Proofreaders Team
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.
Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.
*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
https://gutenberg.org/license).
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that
- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg-tm works.
- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
of receipt of the work.
- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
https://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
[email protected]. Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at https://pglaf.org
For additional contact information:
Dr. Gregory B. Newby
Chief Executive and Director
[email protected]
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit https://pglaf.org
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
https://www.gutenberg.org
This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
