Pigafetta's “Primo Viaggio Intorno al Mondo” and
Morga's "Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas" brought into
emphasis the difference between ethnography and
description. Pigafetta and Morga are both historical
figures who wrote about the Philippines during the
Spanish colonial period, but their perspectives and
approaches to writing about the country were
different. Pigafetta wrote from the perspective of an
outsider who was documenting his experiences as an
explorer, while Morga wrote as a colonizer who was
documenting the history of a colony. For this journal
entry, I found out that there is a need of an in depth
understanding of this two important historical works
for us to fully explain their differences and highlight
the needed information.
Morga and ethnography & description.
Discussing the difference between Pigafetta &
JOURNAL #3
Antonio Pigafetta was an Italian scholar and explorer
who traveled with the Portuguese explorer Ferdinand
Magellan during his expedition to circumnavigate the
world from 1519 to 1522. Pigafetta wrote a detailed
account of their journey, which included descriptions
of the Philippines, its people, and its customs.
Pigafetta's writings about the Philippines can be seen
as a form of ethnography because he observed and
described the customs and practices of the people he
encountered during his travels. He was interested in
understanding the culture and way of life of the
people he encountered. He also wrote about their
eating habits, noting that they ate rice, fish, and
various fruits, and that they used their hands to eat
rather than utensils. Moreover, one of the most
significant aspects of Pigafetta's writing as a form of
ethnography is his attention to detail. He wrote
providing readers with a comprehensive understanding
of the culture and way of life of the people he
encountered.
On the other hand, Morga was a Spanish historian
who lived in the Philippines from 1590 to 1603 and
wrote a book called "Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas"
(Events of the Philippine Islands). His book is a
historical account of the Philippines during the Spanish
colonial period, covering topics such as the early
history of the islands, the arrival of the Spanish, and
the political and social conditions of the time. He
documented the various influences that shaped the
country, including its indigenous cultures, its
interaction with other Southeast Asian nations, and the
impact of Spanish colonization. His descriptions of the
political and social conditions of the time provide
insight into the power dynamics and social structures
of the Philippines during this period. He did include
some information about the customs and practices of
the people, his primary focus was on the historical
context and political conditions of the time. Moreover,
one of the notable aspects of Morga's descriptive
writing is his use of primary sources. He relied on
documents such as official reports, letters, and
historical records to inform his writing, providing
readers with a more objective and accurate account of
the events and conditions of the time.
The statement "The more we become objective, we
become subjective. The more we become subjective,
we become objective" can be related to the writings of
Pigafetta and Morga about the Philippines in the sense
that both authors took different approaches to
documenting their observations and experiences of the
country, which resulted in different levels of
objectivity and subjectivity in their writings. This
suggests that there is a relationship between
objectivity and subjectivity, and that they are not
mutually exclusive.
Pigafetta's writing about the Philippines can be seen
as more subjective in nature, as he wrote about his
personal experiences and observations of the people
and the culture during his travels. He documented the
customs and practices of the people he encountered
through his own European worldview, which was
subjective in the sense that it was based on his own
cultural background and biases. On the other hand,
Morga's writing about the Philippines can be seen as
more objective, as he relied on primary sources such
as official reports and historical records to inform his
writing. He documented the historical context and
political conditions of the country during the early
colonial period through an objective lens, which was
based on factual information rather than personal
biases or opinions.
Nevertheless, both authors' writings also contain
elements of subjectivity and objectivity, which are
inherent in any form of documentation or
interpretation of the world around us. In this regard,
I may assert that since historians work to present the
truth, history itself is objective. By carefully
comprehending what occurred—the actual facts—we
can discover the truth about the past. My assessment
is that it became subjective the minute their own
ideas, viewpoints, and prejudices began to have an
impact on history. As a result, history is a collection
of the realities we come to understand and make an
effort to express through language, even as their
representation is based on both objective language and
personal judgments.
