In the past, Manobos were not politically centralized nor their social structure rigidly stratified. Then as now, leadership was or is in the hands of elders (maniga-en). In the past, these were the “warriors” (bagani) and shaman-priests (baylanen) who had charisma for they were specialists in ritual knowledge and had therefore affinity with the spirit world that legitimated their authorities. Elders’ opinions influence decisions during arbitration of disputes and peace-making gatherings (tampudaq). “Truths” and “guilt” in Manobo customary justice are or were validated by them through divination in ritual and other methods of “trial-by-ordeal.”

    Political matters, though, have changed since the delegitimation of Manobo customary law, especially during the American colonial period. The baganis were outlawed or “domesticated” so to speak by modern colonial and postcolonial notions of justice and state power.

    In 1996, the idea of “political organization” as part of a local modernity was put into practice. Upon the encouragement of the provincial and regional government offices in the capital, the idea of datuship was introduced, along with the revival and re-invention of Manobo heritage.

    Most Manobos welcomed this political recognition of Manobo identity in the Visayan-dominated public sphere. It gave them pride and honor. Tribal leaders were conducted to office with newly-made attire marked by traditional designs and accessories and they were addressed with newly, self-imposed ethnic names (as in the photo above). This association re-authorized the new Manobo datus to settle disputes and it gave impetus to the reclaim of lands, now known as “ancestral domains.”

    However, due to lack of funds and the present weak leadership, nothing substantial came out of that initial impulse to organize politically as a modern “tribe” in 1996.