Deciphering and Decolonizing the Spanish Transpacific

Regarding the Torture of the Indio Escribiente

John Carlos Duque and Clariza Macaspac

Introduction

These manuscripts come from “Expediente sobre prisión del fiscal Francisco Leandro de Viana” (1758-1759) a case about an indio escribiente named Joseph Vicente de León who was unfairly imprisoned by his boss, the Justicia Mayor Francisco Antonio Zapata. León gets thrown in Zapata’s basement/bodega and shackled at the legs and wrists. The fiscal Francisco Leandro de Viana ¹ finds out about the case, and an investigation is launched. In the process, testimonies were retrieved from the employees of Zapata’s household, a medical officer, Vicente’s mom María Josepha, Zapata, as well as Vicente himself. Each testimony reveals details about Zapata’s physical harm and intentions to kill Vicente, as well as hearsay about the reason as to why he imprisoned Vicente to begin with. The below testimonies were chosen from this case. The first of which was the testimony of the cirujano [doctor-surgeon],or the medical staff, who analyzed the injuries on Vicente’s body to try and understand when and how they might have been inflicted. The second testimony is from María Josepha, Vicente’s mother. In her testimony, she reveals that there had been rumors that Zapata had accused Vicente of having “illicit friendship” with his wife. These two testimonies show two people involved in the case who had different intentions, as well as different privileges and power in influencing the case. María Josepha, as Vicente’s mother, wanted fair treatment for her son - a desire she can only express and act on by testifying and giving her statement. On the other hand, the cirujano was in a position to provide care for Vicente and possibly change his life, yet didn’t show desire to do so.

The Cirujano

What caught our attention was the terms used by the cirujano as he described the poor condition of the imprisoned indio. Specific descriptions of which part was fractured, bruised, or suffered contusions were given priority by the medical expert in the text. Serving for a particular purpose, that is to prove the abuse of Don Francisco Antonio, the testimony was structured to give emphasis to certain signs of physical traumas found in the body. Beyond the underlying political motivations, the cirujano’s testimony betrayed the importance of the body in the discourse of justice in a colonial setting. The text is important as it opens to the interrogation of the role and significance of the natives’ bodies as sites of colonial (in)justice.

This (in)justice is worsened by the lack of clarity in regards to how the cirujano was planning on healing Vicente, or if he desired to at all. At the very least, he had the power and position to suggest putting a stop to the torture. But he probably was also in the position to implement said suggestion by demanding life-saving interventions or performing them himself. Instead, he treated Vicente as an unnamed body waiting to be examined like an object, only speaking on his diagnoses and lacking treatment, suggesting that doctors didn’t have the obligation and duties of saving lives during this time period. From a health or medical standpoint, this demonstrates a likely inequality in access to healthcare based on the social and racial hierarchical lens in which the worth of bodies were determined.

The Mother, María Josepha

Through the mother’s testimony to the court, few intriguing points could be glimpsed and further explored. For example, it was not stated if María Josepha - who was described as poor and miserable - needed an interpreter when she gave her testimony, like it was specified in the other testimonies. But looking at her statement, other pieces of evidence gave an insight into María Josepha as an educated woman. She was able to reference specific laws and gave knowledge of the justice system’s norms, such as calling out the unfairness of the possibility of Zapata being a judge in this case where he is a perpetrator. She also mentioned information that none of the other women in this case had, which shows that she had access to an inner circle that none of the other women were, showing that she was not literally a “pobre india,” as she mentioned, but more so an india in a sad or pitiful situation. This shows the diversity in the lives of women, especially indigenous women, during this time period - that indigenous women were also educated and well-connected, which, in this case, she was using as leverage to save her son showing a strong bond/relationship between mother and son, specifically a single mother and her son. Through the evidence of education, it can be concluded that she also spoke Spanish and indeed, authored her own testimony.

Looking at the formulaic structure of such testimonies, the appearance of the line “through the blood of Jesus Christ, his death and sorrowful passion of His Holy Mother” seemed to be a strategy employed by María Josepha to appeal her case. However, looking beyond it as a legal strategy, the invocation of the religious imagery in a legal text also opened a small glimpse of the thought process/es of an india who sought justice in a colonial catholic society. How do big concepts, such as ‘justice’ were articulated through the religious experiences of the natives? The text could be of great use for someone that is interested in looking at the intersection of religion, law, and justice.

Lastly, the text could contribute to looking at how the native women in the colonies participated in the process of seeking ‘justice’ in the Spanish colonial courts. By using and comparing this text with other women testimonies seeking justice, they could potentially reveal how native women played within and subverted the established norms and procedures to seek what they thought to be just.

Useful in the task of recovering the voices of the marginalized, these documents - the testimonies of the doctor-surgeon and the mother of Joseph Vicente de León - revealed a nuanced reconstruction of the concept of ‘justice’ in the 18th century Philippines. However, more than serving its purpose for solely reconstruction of the colonial concept of ‘justice’ among the natives, creative and against the grain interpretation of the texts could yield interesting points of discussion. Through these two testimonies, the lives of indiosin Manila in the mid to late 1700s were highlighted: the injustices they faced, the officials who fought for their rights, familial relationships, education, religion, and more. Even though these are only two testimonies, it shows that there is a lot to be learned from this case alone. It will be worth examining the other statements to get a broader perspective and understanding of what life was like for the people who lived in this time period, especially under the household of someone like Francisco Antonio Zapata.

• Transcription
• Translation