1848 is a watershed date in local history, and many see this event as more than just the conquest of Davao but also the start of an irrevocable colonial influence in the region.
But the larger aspect of Davao’s subjugation by Spain is another proud moment in Davao’s storied past. It is an indirect admission on the part of the Spaniards that it took them 293 years after Manila’s founding before they managed to remove Davao from the grasp of a Maguindanao-inspired polity represented by Datu Bago.
What makes the conquest of Davao exceptional, though achieved with Spanish support, is the fact that it was not an initiative of the colonial administration. Don Jose Oyanguren, who led the expedition, was not a government functionary even if in later accounts he was given the sobriquet of ‘last Spanish conquistador.’ He was removed as Tondo judge in 1845.
In recent times, judicious historians have dug deep into the ethnologic origin of the Moro people and have stumbled on a yet to be substantiated oral tradition that this group of people, even before Islam was introduced in Mindanao, was known by other names.
Two theories have slowly gained interest in recent decades, namely: (i) they are Sangils who originated from northern Indonesia, and (ii) they are chiefly Manobos from the Agusan area who resettled via riverine migration to the western side of southern Philippines.
Linguistically, the Manobo languages are extensively dispersed outside the Caraga regions where they are accepted to have originated. A comparative study of dialects shows a kind of Manobo diaspora in northern and central Mindanao, the littorals of Sultan Kudarat, and the remote areas of Cagayan and Palawan where Manobo dialect is still spoken. Both the Magu-indanao and Manobo tongues, interestingly, are subgroups of the Austronesian languages.
Sangil migration to Sarangani, which can still be reached from the Celebes region by boat using only wind power, has long been documented in many accounts. That answers why there exists in Davao and Gen. Santos a sizeable but dispersed population of Indonesian-blooded settlers. With their Malay features, they can pass up without effort as Filipinos.
On the other hand, the Manobo theory is anchored on the assumption that long before the Maguindanao identity was even recognized, the Manobo, arguably the second people to popu-late Besar Maluku (Mindanao’s old moniker) after the Mamanua of Surigao, was already ex-ploring the network of waterways that define the entire island of southern Philippines.
In the process of this exploration, the hypothesis goes, the Manobos set up hamlets in areas where there was an abundance of food. Though most of the small settlements can be described as stopovers, demographics, intermarriage, and the rise of smaller shelters finally resulted in the formation of enduring settlements. Inter-tribal trade and exchange also helped define the growth of the communities which became tribes, and later formed into a polity known as the sultanate.
Theories, however, remain until contrary evidence is shown to buttress another hypothesis. As it is now, the Sangil migration and the Manobo relocation models are conceptually sound and can be adopted as interesting fields for historical research.
If, indeed, the Manobo model is recognized, the identity of Datu Bago as part-Maguindanaoan takes an even more weighty meaning because this would confirm the tradition that the precolonial Manobo was an itinerant people who extensively explored the inner regions using the convenience of a riverine highway that continues to link most of Mindanao to this day.
Beyond theories, the Spanish conquest of Davao reinforces the long-held belief that Minda-nao, even until the early American rule, was never occupied under a pure State initiative.
