head of A and B, the avengers are likely to take a head or heads
from some of the others rather than continually to place themselves
in jeopardy by their expeditions into an enemy region. Especially
is this true if the enemy's village be distant. If the villages
be near, it is probable that C, D, E, F, G, H, I, or O might walk
past the ambush of the avengers at first with impunity, since
the avengers are desirous of taking the heads of the principals,
and do not want to put the principals on their guard by slaying
those whose guilt is less.
83. Drunkenness and insanity in relation to criminal
responsibility.--Except in the case of murder, drunkenness mitigates
the severity of punishment, provided there be no evidence to show that
the culprit became intoxicated with the intent to commit the crime,
and provided he sincerely repents on becoming sober. Even insanity
is not an alleviating circumstance in the case of murder; but it is
one in all other crimes.
84. The relation of intent to criminal responsibility.--Gulad or
intent, is probably the greatest single factor in determining penal
responsibility. Thus:
A deed committed without intent, and without carelessness, is
excused. One has not, usually, even to make restitution for the
injury done. Thus, in the case of a bolo flying out of a man's hand,
and putting out the eye of another, no damages were assessed. An
enormous number of men, every year, are injured in the free-for-all
scrambles over sacrificed carabaos. Many of these injuries result in
stiff joints; some of them in deaths. In no case, not even in the
case of death, is a payment demanded. Suppose that in the chase a
number of hunters have surrounded a wild boar. The boar charges one of
them. This man leaps backward, and, at the same time, draws back his
spear to throw it at the boar. In so doing, he stabs a companion behind
him with the shod end of the spear handle. This is not an uncommon
accident. The others of the party are witnesses that the killing was
purely accidental (naloktat). No fine is assessed; but the killer,
to show that he is sorry, usually assists in the funeral feast. Of
course, if there were no witnesses, and if there were a possible motive
to complicate matters, the ending of the case might not be so happy.
Suppose that a number of men are throwing at a target with their
spears. A child runs in the way, and is killed. One-half the usual
fine for manslaughter is assessed on the ground that the thrower was
careless in that he did not make sure before he threw the spear that
such an accident could not occur. In this case there was an absence
of intent; but carelessness was present.
A man kills a neighbor at night, acting under the impression that
he is killing an enemy seeking his life. He is subjected to a much
heavier fine than if he had killed him through carelessness, since
there is present both the intent to kill, although not criminal,
and carelessness in that he did not make sure at whom he was casting
his spear. [15]
OTHER FACTORS AFFECTING LIABILITY
85. Alienship.--If the culprit be of a foreign village, the fact that
he is a foreigner is a strong aggravating circumstance. If found in
delicto, he is almost sure to be killed, in cases of theft or the
more serious crimes. In such crimes as insult, the same fine might be
demanded of the foreigner as of a co-villager, but not so much effort
would be made to arrange matters peaceably. If the fine demanded be
not paid and paid quickly, a kidnapping would ensue, or the culprit
would be killed. A man committing a minor crime in a foreign village
if not killed would be caught, tied, and held prisoner until redeemed.
86. Confession.--Confession before steps have been taken to inflict
punishment alleviates to a considerable degree except in murder and
adultery. In the latter case, if the adulterer made a voluntary
confession of guilt to the offended spouse, without having been
confronted with the evidence, it would be taken as brazen boasting,
and of the nature of an insult.
87. Kinship.--Kinship is so strong a mitigating circumstance as often
to excuse crime altogether. It has already been stated that crimes
of one brother or sister against another are not punished. Inasmuch
as all procedure is conducted by and between families, and since the
family of the two brothers is identical, procedure in such cases is
impossible. In the case of relatives of remoter degree, kinship is
a strong extenuating circumstance in the event of the more serious
crimes. In minor crimes, while the usual amount of the fine might
be demanded, it would very frequently not be collected; especially,
if the offender were very poor.
It has previously been said that the family is the only organization,
political or social, that the Ifugao has, and that, in proportion
as it is precious and necessary to him, he cherishes it; that Ifugao
law, consequently looks with the greatest disfavor upon anything that
would divide a family or destroy its unity.
In case a man steals from his cousin, who is married, restitution is
usually demanded, together with half the usual fine, which half goes
to the cousin's spouse--not to himself. Insults on the part of one
cousin to another are rare and are more rarely prosecuted.
88. Rank and standing in the community.--This is probably the greatest
single factor in determining the severity of punishment in cases
where a crime is punishable by fine. But the aggressiveness and the
war footing of the two parties to the controversy enter even here to
an astounding degree.
In the Kiangan-Maggok area, there are three grades of fines--the
highest for the punishment of crimes of one kadangyang or rich man,
against another; a medium grade for crimes of persons of the tumok,
or middle class, against each other; and a third and lowest grade for
the nawatwat, the poverty stricken. [16] Each lower grade of fine is
a little more than half the next higher one.
In the Kababuyan area, there are five grades of fines--one for the
very rich, one for the fairly rich, one for the middle class, one
for the poor, one for the poverty stricken. In Sapao and in Asin,
there are four grades.
So long as both offender and offended are of the same class, there
is no trouble about determining the fine proper in a given case. But
when they are of different classes, the case is not so simple, and
the factors of fighting strength and personality enter.
Suppose that R, a rich man, commits adultery against P, a poor
man. P sends a go-between to demand the highest grade of fine
for this crime--that is, the grade which kadangyang pay. R does
not deny the crime, but states that he considers the payment of
the fine that is due one rich man from another preposterous. He
states that he is willing to pay the fine proper to the poorer
class. To this P replies that he did not begin this action for the
purpose of getting money, but for the purpose of so punishing R
as to make a repetition of the crime improbable. There are three
possible endings in such a case:
(a) P's kin represent to him that they cannot afford to have war
with R; that R's people hold a lot of debts over their heads;
that should R prove obdurate, and should the affair end in a
lance throwing, R's people would wipe them off the earth. They
advise P to be satisfied with the lowest grade of fine. He agrees.
(b) P and R compromise on the grade of fine that is midway between
their stations; that is, the fine of the middle class. In Kiangan
this is the usual settlement.
(c) P shows such bungot (wrath and ferocity) that R's kin advise
him to pay the larger fine. They point out that the fine is a
small matter as compared with the loss of life, and state that
there is no telling what this poverty-stricken but rampant dog
will do. This settlement is not uncommon in the Kiangan area,
where the poor people have a great deal of pride and bravery,
but rare in other parts of Ifugao.
Aside from other matters, the diplomacy and tact of the go-between
would have a great deal to do toward determining which of these
contingencies would result.
It is extremely hard to make a general statement as to fines when
offender and offended are of different classes. It may safely be said
that the fines assessed average the amount midway between the fines
proper to the two classes concerned. Thus, when a poor man offends a
rich man, and when a rich man offends a poor man, the average of the
fines assessed equals approximately the fine assessed for injuries
within the middle class. In questions in which rich and middle class
persons are involved, the fines approximate an amount half way between
the fines of the rich and of the middle classes.
89. Importance of influential position and personality.--The fact
has already been mentioned (see sec. 4) that Ifugao administration
of justice is remarkably personal in nature. We have just seen,
in the example given in section 88, to what an extent personality
and war-footing enter into the infliction of fines when offender and
offended are of different classes. Nowhere can a man of magnetism and
force reap greater benefit from these qualities, relatively speaking,
than in an Ifugao controversy. The fact stares us in the face in
every phase of Ifugao law, especially in procedure.
89a. Cripples and unfortunates.--Cripples and those afflicted by
disfigurements or disfiguring diseases are often in a desperate
mood for the reason that life is not at all precious to them. They
are likely to be erratic and to constitute exceptions in punishment
of crimes and procedure. I remember a case that happened in Baay
District a few years ago which illustrates to what extent determination
and absolute abandon to a single purpose are valuable in carrying a
point in Ifugao procedure. I did not make note of the names but shall
designate the rich man as R and the poor man as P. P was afflicted with
the disease hiphip--probably ichthyosis--a skin disease in which the
skin becomes white, rough, and scaly. R met P one day and sneered at
him, saying, "Although you have neither fields, gongs, nor jewelry,
I see that you have become a kadongyang, for you are wearing a white
coat" (referring to the skin disease). P became violently angry but
restrained himself from assaulting R. He calmly informed R that for
this insult he fined him a large and valuable field, R's property in
Dayukong; that life meant little to himself, and that if R resisted and
interfered with his taking possession of the field, he would certainly
kill him. P further stated that he knew that R's kin would retaliate
and that he would lose his own life but that he did not care since he
was miserable anyway. None of the women would deign him their favors
and being poor--well, what was the use of living! P carried his point
and maintains possession of the field to this day. Having the field,
he managed to get a wife, who, although homely, has borne him two or
three children who are not afflicted with his disease.
Another case in point is the following: Piklud, a fairly wealthy man
of Kurug, was paralyzed from the knees down and in his locomotion he
had to crawl on all fours. He loaned a neighbor a chicken. There was a
quarrel over the repayment of this which left ill feeling between the
two. A little while after the quarrel, the neighbor met Piklud crawling
along the path through the village, and called to him as to a dog,
"Doa! doa! dé-dé-dé!" Piklud pretended not to notice and even feigned
amiability. He gossiped a little about the drought which was parching
the rice fields. Finally he said, "Let me see your spear." He felt
the edge and then with the words, "It is pretty sharp, isn't it?" he
thrust it upward into the other's abdomen.
THE PRINCIPAL CRIMES AND THEIR FREQUENCY
90. List of offenses.--In the Kiangan-Nagakaran-Maggok area, the
principal crimes, in order of their probable frequency, are: sorcery;
adultery; theft; murder (or in the case of women and children,
kidnapping); the putting of an innocent person in the position of
being considered an accessory to crime; manslaughter; rape of a
married woman; arson; incest. Minor crimes are: insult; slander;
false accusation; rape of a girl.
SORCERY
91. The ayak (soul-stealing) is a series of religious ceremonies in
which the sorcerer calls to a feast the ancestral spirits of some man
whose death he desires to encompass, together with many maleficent
spirits and deities, and bribes them to bring to him, incarnated as
a blue-bottle fly, a dragon fly, or a bee, the soul of the man whose
death he desires. When one of the insects mentioned comes to drink
of the rice wine in front of the sorcerer, it is imprisoned and put
into a bamboo joint tightly corked. The enemy, being thus deprived
of his soul, will die.
This form of sorcery cannot be practiced unless the sorcerer knows the
names of the ancestral spirits of his victim-to-be. For this reason,
when the Lamot people, who are famous sorcerers, come to Kiangan and
approach a religious feast, the Kiangan people do not invoke their
ancestral spirits until after the visitors have gone. Needless to say,
sorcery is always practiced in secret. It sometimes happens that it
is practiced by a man against his kin. In such a case, kinship does
not extenuate his punishment, since the preservation of the family
necessitates the extirpation of the sorcerer within its gates. This
is the only exception I know of to the general rule that a family
may not proceed against one of its members.
92. Other forms of sorcery.--Certain persons have an evil "cut" of
the eye, which, whether they wish it or not, brings misfortune or
sickness on whomsoever or whatsoever they see. Injury by means of the
"evil eye" may be effected intentionally or entirely unintentionally.
The words of certain persons even though innocent and unconnected with
evil, and though spoken as they usually are without malicious intent,
have the quality of bringing whatever is spoken to an evil end.
Thus A, afflicted with the "blasting word," goes to the house of B,
and, seeing a sow with a litter of handsome pigs, remarks, "That's
a fine litter of pigs you have!" If A be truly afflicted with
the blasting word, the pigs will die, even though A was without
intent to do injury, and was even ignorant of his affliction.
The evil eye and the blasting word are frequent
afflictions--afflictions that their possessor is the last to learn
about. They may be cured by the possessor's offering sacrifices of
the proper sort. In the event of injury unintentionally being done
by evil eye or blasting word, no punishment is meted out, although
in some cases restitution is demanded.
Curses are of two kinds: directly by word, and indirectly by curses
laid on food, drink, or betels. Kiangan people are afraid to purchase
rice from the Lamot people to the south of them through fear of being
affected by curses that may have been laid on the rice.
93. Punishment of sorcery.--Sorcerers are not punished hysterically. To
his credit, it must be said that the Ifugao proceeds slowly in
condemning a person for this crime. Before he takes action, he demands
not merely strong grounds for suspicion, but proof beyond a reasonable
doubt that the suspected person is a sorcerer. Proof that one has
performed the ayak ceremony against a person is sufficient ground for
the infliction of the death penalty. But in the case of the evil eye
and the blasting word, it must be proved that the death of the pigs,
the betel vine, or whatever it be that dies, was due to the glance
or words of the bewitched, and that both glance and words were used
with evil intent. This would obviously be hard to do; but for the
purpose of justifying an injured person in killing such a sorcerer or
bewitched one, a record of previous misdeeds of the kind, and a general
conviction, in which a portion, at least, of the man's kin concurred,
that the suspect was a malicious sorcerer, would be sufficient.
A curse, by one who has no reputation for supernatural powers, is
punishable by the following fine:
KADANGYANG MIDDLE CLASS NAWATAVAT
Hin-bakid (One ten) Hin-bakid (One ten) Na-onom (Six)
Pu-u (2 death Pu-u (death
blankets) P16.00 blanket) P8.00 Pu-u (dili) P8.00
Hay nub palyuk 5.00 Haynub palyuk 5.00 Natauwinan 1.00
Hay nub palyuk 2.00 Haynub palyuk 2.00 Nuntuku .50
Natauwinan 1.00 Natauwinan 1.00 Natuku .50
Natauwinan 1.00 Natauwinan 1.00 Na-oha .20
Natauwinan 1.00 Natauwinan .50 Liwa comes out
Natauwinan .50 Nuntuku .50 of the No-onom
Nuntuku (3 each) .50 Nuntuku .40
Nuntuku .50 Nunbadi .40
====== Na-oha .20
P27.50 Liwa comes out
Liwa or fee of of the Hin-bakid
go-between (1 death
blanket) P8.00
====== ====== ======
Total, P35.50 Total, P19.00 Total, P10.20
A curse by one who had a reputation of being a sorcerer might possibly
lead to the death of the sorcerer on the spot. In case he were not
killed, and the person or thing cursed died, the death penalty would
be inflicted later.
The following instances will be of value as illustrations. Some are
recent, others historical:
Before the coming of the Spaniards, Atiwan of Longa acquired
a reputation as a sorcerer. He killed several of his kinsmen in
Baay. Even his relatives in Longa admitted that he was a sorcerer,
and said that he ought to be killed. Ginnid of Baay and several
companions went to Longa one night, and called to Atiwan that
they had come to see him. He opened the house and put down the
ladder. The party ascended, and set upon Atiwan with their war
knives and killed him. In trying to protect him, his wife, Dinaon,
was wounded. The killing was universally approved.
Kimudwe (alias Dulnuan) of Tupplak is a famous, or rather an
infamous, sorcerer. Owing to a quarrel with one of his nephews,
Butlong, over a debt, he performed an ayak to cause the latter's
death. Butlong was informed of the fact by one who, eavesdropping
below Kimudwe's house, heard the prayers and incantations. On
a certain day on which there was a feast in Ambabag, to which
Kimudwe was nearly certain to come, Butlong waylaid him, firing
a rifle at him from cover near Ambabag. His marksmanship was
atrocious. Before he could reload women rushed out from the
village and covered Kimudwe with their bodies, interceding, and
stating that there was not sufficient certainty that Kimudwe was
guilty to justify his nephew in killing him. (This occurred in
the interval between Spanish and American rule.)
Kimudwe is reputed to have killed by means of sorcery several
of his kinsmen. Recently a child died in Tupplak whose death was
attributed to him. He killed, it is said, the son of Bahni, another
of his nephews. Bahni sent Dulinayan of Ambabag as a go-between
to Kimudwe to challenge him to an ordeal, saying that he had no
intention of killing him, even if guilty, owing to the peculiar
prejudice of the Americans against such doings, but for his own
satisfaction he wanted to know if Kimudwe were the sorcerer. He
stated that in case Kimudwe won in the ordeal, he (Bahni) would pay
a fine of a gold bead for having accused him falsely. This was an
unusually large fine. Kimudwe refused, or rather evaded, saying:
"If I am a sorcerer, it is a case of the entire family, including
Bahni, being guilty." In other words, he took refuge behind the
Ifugao doctrine of collective responsibility (see sec. 4).
In cases of strong suspicion, a supposed sorcerer was often openly
accused and challenged to an ordeal. The ordeal was usually more
in the nature of a duel, the two exchanging spears at twenty steps
(20 meters) distance. If the ordeal showed the suspect guilty, he was
killed if he stayed in the region. He was not, however, killed on the
field of duel--unless killed in the duel or ordeal itself--because
such an execution might precipitate a battle with this kin.
ADULTERY
94. Forms of adultery.--In its unaggravated form, adultery is called
luktap. Luktap signifies sexual intercourse between a spouse and some
person other than the one to whom he (or she) be married, uncomplicated
by insults and scandalous behavior flaunted in the face of the injured
spouse. The intention to abandon the spouse is either not present,
or is concealed.
The aggravated form of adultery is called hokwit. It consists of openly
and scandalously bestowing one's love and body upon some other person
than the spouse; of insulting the injured spouse; or of repeatedly,
while living under the same roof with the spouse, meeting the third
person and having sexual intercourse. The intention is present of
separating (or effecting a separation) from the injured spouse. The
following is an illustration:
Maxima, a girl of Umbul, was married to Ananayo of
Pindungan. But Ananayo had not yet reached the age of puberty,
while Maxima herself had reached that age. Sergeant Dominong,
of the constabulary company at Kiangan, began paying attentions
to Maxima, while Maxima was living in the house of Ananayo 's
father. During the season of watching the rice fields against
theft of water these two continually cohabited, the sergeant
going to where Maxima was watching the fields at night. Ananayo
attaining the age of puberty in the meantime, Maxima refused
to have anything to do with him. Both Maxima and Dominong were
guilty of hokwit in this case. Maxima's conduct was considered
especially reprehensible, since she was a binawit in the house
of Ananayo 's father (see sec. 14).
95. Punishment of adultery.--In both luktap and hokwit, the offending
spouse and the lover (or mistress) are equally guilty. Each is
equally liable to punishment. However, the offended spouse may, if he
chooses, forgive the offending spouse without forgiving the partner
in crime. This frequently happens. A wife is more likely to forgive
than is a husband.
The adulterer when taken in delicto is sometimes punished by death. The
offended spouse is justified by public opinion in administering this
punishment to a considerably greater degree than our laws in the United
States would justify him. Several stories are told of persons caught
in the commission of this crime who were impaled by a single spear
thrust. It should be stated that the kin of those killed for this crime
rarely look upon the killing as justified, and often avenge it. They
take the stand that the offended spouse ought to have demanded the
usual fine; that if this had not been immediately forthcoming no one
would have questioned the propriety of the killing. On the other hand,
the kin of the offended spouse take the ground, and it may be said
that in general public opinion backs them in it that a self-respecting
man could not well do otherwise than kill the offender, and that the
holding off and demanding money would savor too much of the mercenary.
It is to be noted that a sexual offense committed after the mommon
ceremony is punished by a small fine; that an offense committed after
the imbango or hingot ceremonies is punished by a larger fine, and
that an offense committed after the bubun ceremony is punished by what
to the Ifugao is a very large fine. These fines are diagramed Ifugao
fashion in sec. 75. Hokwit, aggravated adultery, is punished by twice
the greatest fine demanded in the case of simple adultery, luktap.
Adultery being a very hard crime to prove, the Ifugao takes as proof:
(1) the confession of either party; (2) evidence that the accused
wilfully and intentionally placed themselves in such a position or
circumstances that the crime would be presumed by any reasonable person
to have been consummated. Thus, the sleeping of the accused together
at night in the absence of the spouse would be sufficient evidence.