by Bot Jocano
[ PEAK-L Home | Table of Contents ]
Rapid Journal Vol. 2, No. 4
4th Qtr 1997
Taichi Works Publications
458 Jaboneros St. Binondo, Manila 1006
Arnis: A Question of Origins
by Bot Jocano
The term arnis evokes a number
of reactions from people every time it is mentioned in a conversation.
Some people start fanning their hands in the air,
imitating the distinctive movements of the two-stick (doble baston)
training method. This image of arnis is one of the most popular to the
layman. A second reaction,
and quite as common as the first, is the question: "Saan ba talaga
galing ang arnis?" (Where did arnis really come from?) Alternatively, "Di
ba, sa atin
nanggaling ang arnis?” (Isn't it that arnis comes from us?) is a question
also heard. This article is an attempt to critically examine the roots
of one of the martial arts
of the Philippines, arnis. It must be noted that in no way does this
article claim to be the final say on the origins of arnis. It is actually
a preliminary look, a start if you
will, into re-examining carefully the origins of an art form.
Arnis, also known as kali, escrima,
baston, etc. is a complete martial art system, encompassing weapons training
and empty-hand self-defense. It includes
training in single stick techniques (solo baston), double stick techniques
(doble baston), stick and knife or dagger techniques (espada y daga) and
knife techniques
(daga). Some styles may include staff and spear (sibat) training in
their curriculum. Others will include the practice of medium to long bladed
weapons (bolo) in their
repertoire. Many styles have some form of empty hand combat, encompassing
striking, kicking, locking, throwing and even choking methods. These are
usually
taught when the practitioner has demonstrated a reasonable degree of
proficiency with the weapons of his style of arnis. Different arnis styles,
from different parts of
the country, may emphasize different areas of the training methods
noted above. The term arnis is believed to be a Tagalog corruption of the
Spanish term arnes, or
harness, a reference to the decorations worn by the early Filipinos.
Kali is another term used to refer to the same kind of martial arts. Different
provinces may have
different names for arnis, such as baston and kaliradman (Ilonggo,
Bisaya), pagkalikali (Ibanag) and kalirongan (Pangasinan). These are only
a few examples of
the terms already recorded in different sources.
With such a comprehensive system
of martial arts being taught and promoted in different areas of the country,
it is inevitable that people would ask, where
did such a complete martial art system come from?
One suggestion is that it originally
came from another martial art system, called tjakalele. This is actually
the name of a branch of the Indonesian martial art
system known as pentjak silat. Another suggestion is that it was brought
here from the Southeast Asian mainland, particularly during the Madjapahit
and
Shri-Visayan empires. Yet another suggestion is that it was propagated
by the so-called ten Bornean datus fleeing persecution from their homeland.
We shall
critically examine these assertions one at a time.
The idea that arnis evolved or
was derived from another martial art system, namely tjakalele silat, is
due to linguistics. The alternative name for arnis is kali.
It is widely held that this is the older term for arnis, and that kali
itself emphasizes bladed weaponry apart from practice with the stick. It
is not surprising that a
connection could be seen between the term kali and tjakalele. However,
linguistic similarity alone is not enough ground to assert that kali was
indeed derived from
tjakalele. There has to be documented proof that one came from the
other. What form should this proof take? Authenticated documents certainly
are one of the best
pieces of evidence - if such could be found, and proven to be genuine.
A close and thorough comparison of both styles would help, but it must
be remembered that
they would have changed over time, reflecting the different changes
that have happened in their cultures of origin. On the other hand, one
of the local terms for a
bladed weapon is kalis. It is also believed that kali is a derived
term from kalis. This assertion will require study before it can be validated.
Another oft-quoted idea is that
kali was brought here during the Shri-Vishayan (7th -14th centuries and
Madjapahit (13th -16th centuries) empires. This
reflects the notion that the Philippines then was somehow an integral
part of both empires. It must be noted that the archaeological evidence
for the role of the
Philippines in both empires is very meager. About the best that could
be said is that there was commercial contact, but whether such contact
also included the
spreading of martial arts is circumstantial at best.
A third idea regarding the spreading
and propagation of kali in the Philippines is that ten Bornean datus (sometimes
nine) fled here and settled in various
parts of the Philippines. They brought with them their fighting systems
and taught these along with other arts in the academies called the bothoan.
A key problem here is that much
of what we know about the ten datus is derived from the Maragtas of Pedro
Monteclaro, published in l1oilo in 1907.
Doubt has been cast on its usefulness as a historical document, especially
since it records folk or oral history. Scholars such as the late William
Henry Scott and F.
Landa Jocano, are clear on this point - the Maragtas is a document
recording folk or oral history, and not an actual eyewitness account of
the events stated therein.
As such, its historical value diminishes rapidly with each retelling
of the story .If the original story of the ten Bornean datus is folklore
and not authentic history, what
are we then to make of the story regarding the propagation of kali
in the bothoan? Folkloric history is useful in enabling people to identify
with the art of kali, but it
should not be taken as actual history.
If after having critically questioned
the sources of the origins of kali, or arnis as it is known today, and
through these critical analyses, have come to the
positions stated above, what can we then say about the origin of kali,
or arnis? Regardless of the name of the art or its sources, the fact that
the early Filipinos
practiced some form of combat was not lost on the Spaniards who first
arrived here. Pigafetta's description of the death of Magellan is graphic
in its description of
the weapons wielded by the natives. It is interesting to note that
Magellan died as he was rushed by the defenders armed with spears and bladed
weapons. In more
recent times, Scott's book Barangay includes a chapter on ancient Bisayan
weapons and warfare. This was derived from the accounts and dictionaries
of the early
Spanish friars, some of whom were witnesses to the use and practice
of weapons and warfare methods at the time.
To state therefore, that its origins
lie outside the Philippines is misleading, for it disregards the unrecorded
but no less real experiences our forefathers went in
simply trying their best to survive. These experiences are recorded
in the techniques of their styles of arnis. It is also quite possible that
there were blendings with
different styles of combat, but if so, these are quite difficult to
verify historically.
A key difficulty in researching
the origins of arnis is that most sources tend to be oral history or folkloric
in nature. They are not exactly historical documents
in the sense of being eyewitness accounts. Hence, their authenticity
in this sense is always suspect. On the other hand, as folklore, they serve
as a window, if you will,
into how people think. Folklore gives us an idea of how people actually
understand their world and their place in it.
Martial arts, in whatever form,
and in whatever place, are the unique product of the people who developed
them, as members of their culture. A case in
point is Japanese fencing, kendo in its modern format, kenjutsu as
the traditional form. Japanese fencing is a product of the technology and
the values and habits of
the Japanese. Similarly, it should be remembered that kali or arnis
as it is also called today, is very much a product of the Filipino cultural
experience. The relative
informality of most practice sessions, for instance, is a reflection
on the importance we place in building harmonious relationships with others.
In conclusion, it is not easy to
actually trace the origins of the art of kali or arnis. Perhaps we may
never actually trace it to a single key event in the lives of
our forefat1lers. On the other hand, it is equally important to remember
that the art itself is a continuing evolving product, subject to change
and refinement over the
years. What is also important is that we remain open-minded, willing
to improve our understanding of the origins of this martial art. Such open-mindedness
is useful
inasmuch as it provides us with further insights into our identity
as Filipinos.
Bibliography:
Canete, Ciriaco. Doce Pares. Cebu City. Doce Pares Publishing House, 1989.
Inosanto, Dan; Johnson, Gilbert; and Foon, George. The Filipino Martial Arts. Los Angeles. Know How Publishing, 1980
Presas, Ernesto. Arnis. Manila. 1988
Presas, Remy. Modem Arnis. Manila. Modem Arnis Publishing Co., 1974, 1993.
Yambao, Placido. Mga Karununngan sa Larong Arnis. Quezon City: UP Press, 1957.
For references on Philippine prehistory:
Jocano, F .Landa. Questions & Challenges in Philippine Prehistory. Professorial Chair lecture: UP Press, 1975.
Jocano, F Landa. Philippine Prehistory. Quezon City: PCAS, 1975
Scott, William Henry. Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History. Quezon City. New Day Publishers, 1974.
Scott, William Henry. Barangay. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila Press, 1994.