Depending on sources, Mindanao is claimed to host eighteen major tribes: Subanen, B‟laan, T‟boli, Mandaya, Mansaka, Tiruray, Higaonon, Manobo, Bagobo, Bukidnon, Tagakaolo, Obu, Banwaon, Kalagan, Dibabawon, Talaandig, Mamanwa and Manguangan.
For its part, Davao City recognizes eleven groups as ‘tribes.’ Categorized as indigenous clusters are the Bagobo-Klata, Ata, Obu-Manuvu, Matigsalog, and Tagabawa while clustered as ‘Moros’ are the Tausug, Maguindanaoan, Iranun, Kagan, Maranao, and Sama. The classifications, however, need a revisit and should be subject to more academic debates.
Iranun and Maranao, for instance, should be fused because they are one and the same. Historian James F. Warren of Murdoch University (Australia) has made an extensive study on this. On the other hand, the Sama tribe, which is restrictive, should be expanded to Sama-Bajau.
In the case of indigenous factions, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples classifies the Bagobo as a major tribe, making the Tagabawa, Clata (Guiangan), and Obu its subgroups. In effect, the city should only have two principal tribes and five primary Moro groups.
Stripped of redundancy, the final listing of tribes present in the city should include only the Tausug, Maguindanao, Iranun-Maranao, Kagan, Sama-Bajau, Bagobo, and Matigsalog. All other indigenous groups, for obvious reason, should be classified as subtribes or subgroups.
Classifying indigenous peoples (Moro and Lumad) should not be left in the hand of bureaucrats and politicians. A thorough understanding of how socio-linguistic groups operate should be measured, among others, using the gradations of linguistics and ethnology.
Ethnology is defined as ‘the study of the characteristics of various peoples and the differences and relationships between them’ as opposed to ethnography, which is ‘the scientific description of the customs of individual peoples and cultures.’
On the other hand, linguistics is described as ‘the scientific study of language and its structure, including the study of morphology, syntax, phonetics, and semantics.’
Andrew F. Gallman, in his dissertation ‘Proto-South-East Mindanao and Its Internal Relationship’ (1979), studies the original sounds or phonology of several indigenous languages and their relation to each other dating to roughly 2,500 years ago. In particular, he delves into the data on the dispersal of Mandaya dialects in various areas of the eastern seaboard of Davao region.
He writes that four Mandaya dialects ‘are spoken to the north, east, and south of the [territories populated by] Mansakas.’ For the Mandayan-Maragusan dialect, he got his data from Maragusan Valley, Davao Oriental, south of the Mansakas, while his facts on Mandayan-Kabasagan dialect came from Kabasaga, Boston area, northeast of the Mansaka region.
On the other hand, he gathered his information on Mandayan-Caraga dialect from Sangab, Caraga, Davao Oriental, east of the Mansakas, and the Mandayan-Boso data originated from Boso, Mati, Davao Oriental, south of the Mansaka domain.
The role of linguistics in classifying tribes is significant. Experts in the field use lexicostatistical studies as a foundation for an in-depth appreciation of how languages evolved. But more importantly, they conduct detailed probes of sound shifts and grammatical structures in establishing the scientific grouping of languages and dialects, which are helpful in cataloging tribes.
In David Thomas and Alan Healey’s ‘Some Philippine Language Subgroupings: A Lexicostatistical Study’ (1962), the split of Philippine languages occurred some 700 B.C. But it was not around 100 B.C. that the Southern Philippine Family split resulted in the rise of at least nine branches. Mansaka and Kalagan languages belong to this break-up.
