Demythologizing Aswang 2- Regionalism

Kuripot, Gastador, Tikalon, Damak, Maisug, Manug-Hiwit, Aswang

Philippine regionalism is one important factor to consider why Capicenos have been branded as aswangs, and in understanding why the myth has been perpetuated for over 100 years. Archipelagic Philippines has been populated by divided and competing tribes whose highest politico-economic achievement as a civilization have been the short-lived minor kingdoms in Pangasinan and Mindanao. Prior to Spanish colonialization, there was no sense of national identity, and much less appreciation about other ethic groups and cultures. The small, diverse and self-sufficient tribes have been scattered and isolated across thousands of islands. Having primitive maritime technology, they did not have active inter-island trade and much less opportunity for cultural exchange. It was only in the last 350 years, under the Spanish rule, that we evolved a concept of a nation. And even today, we are still struggling to accept it. Until the last century estrangjeros or pangayaos have been fiercely rejected by the tumandoks. Hence, whatever information we had about other regions could have just been trickles information. Bits and pieces of information are sewn together to make a derogatory collage of peoples of other regions.

Our diverse ethnicity is the foundation of our rigorous regionalism. We are a 7,000-island nation with over 100 ethnic groups. Overall, we are overwhelmingly Malayo-Polynesian under the broad Austronesian linguistic family. But underneath, we have more diverse ethnicity, subgroups, and sub-subgroups, hastily categorized into generic groupings of Ilocanos, Pangasinense, Kapampangan, Tagalog, Bicolano, Bisaya, Mindanao minorities, tribal groups, Chinese, Spanish, and Western and other minorities. Ilocanos are Ivatans and Ibanags, and their many variants; Pangasinense have the Cordilleranos (Igorots and their variants); Bisaya is classified under three main groups of Hiligaynon (Ilonggo), Cebuano and Waray. But under that, there are distinct sub-groups like the Aklanon, Karay-a, Romblomanon, Sibuyanon, Masbateno, Cuyonon. Each one of these has another layer of diverse ethnicity (e.g., Mambusaonon, Sapianon, Sijuiornon, etc.). Southern minorities include the Tausugs, Maranaos, Samals, Yakans, and the Lumads. The Lumads alone include the Manobos, Tasadays, Mamanwas, Mandayas, and Kalagans. And like our nomenclatures, they also have distinct diversity.

As indicated above, regionalism is not only a distinction due to geographic locale, rather, it is an ethnic divide highlighting cultural, social, economic and political differences - over 100 of it. In our attempt to make our region different from the others we highlight our dissimilarities. Such that, we never cease to find what is ridiculous in other cultures. We stockpile our arsenal of insults against them, so that, ultimately, we want them to be inferior to us. Sociologists point out that an individual ethnic group, united by a common language, invariably views the world from its own set of filters, experiences, beliefs, traditions, standards, biases and vantage points, a condition known as ethnocentrism. Ethnocentricism means judging other cultures as inferior based on your own culture’s superior cultural vantage point. Over time, an ethnocentrist world-view can hastily summarize a region into one common derogatory characterization. For instance, the Tagalogs have a crystallized world-view and common characterization of Bisaya as aswang, mangkukulam and katulong. The most degrading of which is aswang, and Capiz is said to have the worst concentration of aswangs.

Regional characterizations are not without bases, however. Ilocanos have been said to be frugal because their arid land does not allow large-scale cultivation of food and cash crops. Therefore, other regions dismiss them as kuripot. Tagalogs, living in the center of Philippine culture, politics and economy, having the first glimmer of electric lights and cooking gas, thought they are in the center of the universe. Anywhere outside their region had hitherto been a bundok. Hence, Americans going to the hinterlands was said to have gone to the boondocks. That literally landed into the English dictionary as a legitimate word - owing to the arrogant and ethnocentrict Tagalogs. The King of Spain gave generous encomiendas to conquestadores from northwestern Spain settling in Iloilo and Negros. In the heyday of sugar plantations, from the turn of the 20th Century to the roaring 60s, briefly disrupted by war but put to a final end by Marcos cronyism, sugar barons lived in Southern opulence and lavish lifestyles. The 3 percent Spanish sugars planter families, having their own sugar centrals, railways, piers, and shipping lines, have had every right to boast - guina pala, guina piko! But if the other 97 percent also brag, they are on their own. Hence, the Negrense and Ilonggos earned the tikalon moniker. Fierce resistance from attempts to Christianize the Mindanaonons earned them the savage, bloodthirsty reputation. Of course, regional attributions to Masbate, Siquijornons, and Samarenos as manug-hiwits could likewise be explainable. For instance, an MGB episode a few years ago featured an age-old modus operandi in one Samar hinterland about the locals secretly adding toxic herbal concoction into the beverage of strangers, only to be “healed” with an antidote for a fee. Although Bisayan and Tagalogs alphabets are almost exactly the same, our pronunciation did not highlight the different sound of paired vowels. Hence, enthocentrict Tagalogs’ criticisms against us. Remember the PLDT ad about a Bisayan katulong? “Sir, tumawag si GG.” for which the boss asked, “Si Gigi or si Jayjay?” The katulong answered, “Si GG, sir.” It would be a full time job to document all the insults, ridicules and mockeries that we hurl against each other.

But there have been tangible events that did earn a region an insulting reputation. If a province or one region was to be branded as aswang country, it should have been Samar-Leyte. There had been no single pre-Hispanic record about aswang anywhere in Philippine folktales and literature. Hence, the earliest written record about aswang in the whole 7,000 islands ever is by a Westerner, Miguel Lopez de Legazpi. On February 14, 1565, in Samar, he wrote about being warned by the natives about the existence of aswang and how terrified they had been listening to howling noise around his encampment one night. But Legazpi’s account did not come without motives or reason. He came from Medieval Europe, itself rife with burning accused witches at stake, predisposed to the Count Vlad story, and with a mission to introduce faith. This perfectly jibed with the situation of Samar tribe that, without an army, only hoped to drive away Spanish colonizers with horrific tales about aswang and by actually making terrifying nighttime noise around their encampment. The reason why this first aswang manuscript did not stick to Samar-Leyte region is probably because this account had not been reinforced by other socio-cultural factors in the region. Such that, Samarenos did not create and maintain an aswang out of themselves. We did.

In summary, regionalism is partly due to the absence of a sense of nationhood - each tiny ethnic group or tribe, isolated by mountains and seas, existed alone for centuries without contact with the others. When they finally have contact, their crystallized ethnocentrict world-views, predisposed Filipinos to ridicule and degrade people from other regions. Each region had been given a brand or moniker. It is unfortunate that Capiz had been branded as aswang. The continued Filipino regionalism, along with complex web of factors that we will discuss more, sustains our aswang brand. In order to minimize it, we need to respect and be sensitive to other regional cultures.

In the succeeding posts, we will examine the other factors and elements that created, strengthened and perpetuated the aswang brand to us.