254. MARFIL: Philippine Religious Ivory Carvings, part 2

STO. NIÑO, Head and hands of ivory, mounted on wooden body. Garbed investment embroidered with gold thread. 19^th c. Ht. 30 cm. Gopiao Collection.

By Jose Mari P. Treñas

Photography by  Patrick Uy

Philippine Religious Ivory Carvings.

Excavations show fossils of elephants and tusk-bearing relatives of elephants in various Philippine sites (Cagayan Valley, Pangasinan, Panay, Manila and Mindanao.) A Spanish Augustinian memo in 1573 mentions elephants in Sulu. Sixteenth and 17^th century Spanish accounts also state that ivory (marfil) was fashioned by the Filipinos into religious statuary, jewelry and weapon handles. Still the existence of a thriving ivory carving tradition before the Spaniards came cannot be ascertained. What is indisputable is that the earliest religious ivory carvings were commissioned by the Spanish friars initially from immigrant carvers from Southeastern China.

SANTO NIÑO, Solid ivory figure, arms carved separately. Gold crowns, traces of gilding on the hair. Glass eyes, 19^th c., Ht. 20 cm. Treñas Collection.

The most intriguing question is whether these were carved exclusively by the Chinese (which was the dogma upheld until fairly recently) or whether this craft passed on to Filipinos early on. Gatbonton initially expressed a theory about a “local” style in her 1982 catalogue, Imagery in Ivory for the ivory exhibit of the Intramuros Administration. The theory that Filipinos also carved ivory was again ventured by Gatbonton rather tentatively in her book published by the Intramuros Administration in 1983, entitled Philippine Religious Carvings in Ivory, when she states that, “We may reasonably assume that Filipino carvers, we working alongside the Chinese.” This assertion Gatbonton repeats more unequivocably in her article for Arts of Asia also published in 1983—but here she goes on a limb. She breaks the paradigm—she states that based on the collection gathered by the Intramuros Administration, it was possible to reassess the general belief that Chinese carvers were responsible for all the ivory carvings originating from the Philippines.

MADONNA AND CHILD. Solid ivory figure with gold leaf decorations; gold crowns and gold rostrillos (facial aureole). 18thc., Ht. 26 cm. Treñas Collection

She cites two reasons: 1. The Filipino carver’s attitude towards the theme of Crucifixion where Christ is the passive victim); 2. The Filipino carver’s tendency to carve for frontal effect.

This theory was actively pursued by Jose. Although it is not clear when Filipinos started to carve ivory santos, by the 1730s, the Spanish missionaries were praising the artistic skills of indios and mestizos. In 1729, the Archbishop of Manila states that in connection with a proposed deportation of the Chinese, the natives were ready to take over all crafts. In 1738, Fr. Pedro Murillo Velarde S.J. wrote that the Filipinos were ‘exceedingly clever in handiwork—good carvers, gilders and carpenters.” Significantly, Jose notes that the item ‘sculptor’ does not appear in the lists of Chinese professions in 1689, 1700 or 1745. All in all, historical evidence shows that the Chinese were absent from the Philippines for long periods of time. The answer to this question may not be definitive, but the paradigm has been broken.

SANTO NIÑO. Head, hands, feet of ivory mounted on wooden body. Garbed in vestment embroidered with gold thread,, silver crown,m Late 18th  cm., Ht. 39 cm.m Gopiao Collection.

Conclusion

While more research and documentation have to be done, significant strides have been made on the recognition of Philippine ivories. The Spanish scholar and writer, Margarita Estella Marcos, has traced a number of Philippine ivory carvings now in private collections. Jose enumerates some of these pieces: a Santo Cristo documented in 1585 in the Church of the Magdalena in Sevilla, a number of pieces given by Bishop Antonio Paino to the Church of Sta. Maria in Valladolid in 1630 and 1660, a plaque depicting the Crucifixion dated between 1694 in the Church of Vera Cruz in Salamanca, a San Miguel and San Juan Bautista dated between 1695 and 1712 in the Cathedral of Badajoz, a Divino Pastor dated 1699 in the Castle of the Family of San Francisco Javier in Navarra, a Cristo de los Peligros which arrived in Spain in 1715 and is now enshrined in the Parish of Belmonte in Cuenca.

PURISIMA CONCEPCION, Solid ivory figure. Gold ornaments, Late 18th  c., Ht. 27 cm., Maralit Collection.

In 1770, a dozen ivory figures (among them, the Four Evangelists, a Nuestra Señora de la Asuncion and the Four Doctors of the Church) were documented to have arrived in Mexico from the Philippines. The Museo Oriental in Valladolid exhibits many ivory carvings of Philippine provenance.

More and more, Philippine ivory carvings are emerging from the shadow of European ivories. Although there were early condescending references to the Philippine pieces as hybrid ivories with pious Oriental expressions, Western oses and agitated draperies, this has changed. These pieces, the result of a unique Filipino sensibility utilizing European models and Chinese tecniques, are now recognized as among the most beautiful religious ivory carvings produced during this period.

253. MARFIL: Philippine Religious Ivory Carvings, part 1

PURISIMA CONCEPCION, Solid ivory figure with hands carved separately. Gold leaf decoration. Gold ornaments. 19^th c., Ht: 21.5 cm., Gopiao Collection

By Jose Mari P. Treñas            Photography by  Patrick Uy

Long dismissed as crude and naïve expressions of alien faith, Philippine religious carvings in ivory are being seen in a new light. Exquisite examples of documented Philippine provenance in Europe and Mexico, beautiful pieces in the Intramuros Administration and the occasional rare item that still comes into the market, have debunked the conventional wisdom about Philippine ivories and have made historians and scholars rethink and reassess the same.

NIÑO DORMIDO, Ivory head, hands and feet mounted on wooden body. Garbed in vestment embroidered with gold thread. 19^th c., Lebgth: 20 cm., Maralit Collection.

I first became interested in Philippine ivory when I was twelve. My family would troop over regularly to my lola’s house for Sunday lunch and while everybody would lazily linger over coffee and dessert, I would politely leave the dining table to sneak to the altar in my lola’s room. There I would seek out two ivory heads hidden in the lower drawer. Barely two inches in size, they were so cool to my touch. The color was so fleshlike, the glass eyes staring enigmatically ahead and the lips carved into hieratic smiles. Even the cracks that randomly ran from the forehead down the neck had their own strange beauty. I think my lolal noticed my fascination, for the two heads were placed in my pocket to take home. Although I did not buy my first ivory until two years ago, I was hooked. It was not the first.

SANTO NIÑO, Solid ivory figure. Silver ornaments, 19^th c., Ht.: 27 cm, Maralit Collection.

In his introductory essay to the book, Masterpieces of Ivory from the Walters Art Gallery, which contains examples of Philippine ivory carvings bought in such diverse places as Venice and Paris, Richard Randall Jr. writes that, “throughout history, ivory has always been regarded as a rare and beautifuol substance, fit for gods and kings.” A passage in the Book of Kings which Randall quotes reads, “Once in three years comes the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold and silver and ivory, apes and peacocks.” Randall cites that many kings have sat on thrones made of ivory, Solomon among the first. A 17th  century ivory throne made for one of the kings of Denmark still exists in the Rosenberg Castle in Copenhagen.

NIÑO DORMIDO, Solid ivory body with glass eyes. 19^th c., Length: 18 cm., Maralit Collection.

The trade in ivory was mentioned in the Bible, both in the Book of Kings and Ezekiel. This has been subsequently confirmed by archaeological data. In Ezekiel, it is said that the men of Dedan on the Red Sea, “brought you for a present horns of ivory.” Aden, at the foot of the Red Sea, was the most active trading post of ivory when Marco Polo wrote about his travels in the 13th century. The route then started from East Africa to Zanzibar, then to Aden, up to the Red Sea to Egypt and overland to the Mediterranean. This route was pretty much the same in the 19th century, when ivory was shipped from Zanzibar through the Suez Canal and on to London and Antwerp.

What is Ivory?

In his excellent catalogue for the 19991 Philippine Exhibit of religious ivory carvings held at Pasadena’s Pacific Asia Museum, Regalado Jose Jr. writes that, “Today, the term for ivory has come to include material with similar qualities in varying degrees, obtained from the teeth or tusks of other animals such as the walrus, narwhal, sea cow, and hippopotamus.” However, only the tusk of the elephant which can reach 8 feet in length and weigh as much as 200 pounds is regarded as “true ivory.”

Jose further classifies elephant ivory into its three main sources: Fossil ivory, African ivory and Oriental ivory. Although the Philippines was closer to the sources of ivory (India. Indonesia, Burma, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Borneo) , the ivory used in Philippine religious carvings  was  African. Esperanza Gatbonton, in her article, “An Introduction to Philippine Colonial Carvings in Ivory” printed in the July-August 1983 issue of the Arts of Asia points out that the large scale commerce in ivory was undertaken by the Portuguese in 1509. The Portuguese then held sway in the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. They conquered Goa in 1510, Malacca in 1511. The result was a monopoly in ivory. These Portuguese vessels  would sail with the southeast monsoon and unload their cargo in Manila.

4. Santong Garing: PHILIPPINE IVORY SANTOS

Cold and white, hard and heavy, ivory has fascinated man throughout the centuries. It has always been a luxury, and has been reserved only for objects of prestige and ritual. Ivory is obtained from elephant tusks, though in wider sense the term also refers to hippopotamus, walrus, narwhal, and hornbill materials. Filipinos also carved various articles from the tusks, teeth and bones of the duyong or dugong (the sea cow), the wild boar, the crocodile and other animals.

In the Philippines, ivory was known as garing, a vague remembrance of the days when elephants and their cousins, the stegodons roamed the land. Fossil ivory and remains of theses proboscideans, dating to as far back as 500,000 years ago, have been found in the Cagayan Valley, Pangasinan, Manila, Panay, and northeastern Mindanao.


Early Spanish colonizers in the Philippines encountered the last remaining elelphants in Sulu, but these too, must have disappeared about the middle of the 17th century, as there is nor record of them after these period. One specimen was sent as a gift, complete with silk trappings, to the emperor of Japan before the end of the 16th century. According to accounts, it was such a big hit among the Japanese, who had never seen such a creature before.


The conquering Spaniards brought with them their love of saints’ images in ivory, and commissioned the Chinese to do the carving. Though we know that pre-Hispanic Filipinos used ivory for religious images (anitos), jewelry, and dagger hilts, frustratingly little has survived to give us an idea of this early art. Ivory began to be imported from African and Asian sources. The most important extant masterpiece of this early period is the Nuestra Señora del Rosario de la Naval, carved by a Filipino-Chinese artist in 1593, and now venerated in the Santo Domingo Church in Quezon City.


Workshops along the southeastern coast of China and in the Philippines were soon turning out exquisite religious images of ivory for the Spanish and Mexican markets. By the eighteenth century, the Filipinos themselves were warmly praised by the Spaniards for their artistic productions. Their works gracefully combined Asian eyes with Hispanic noses; above all they masterfully displayed the Oriental quality of tranquility.


Through more than 200 years of the Galleon Trade, countless ivory pieces left the Philippine shores for Spain and Mexico, brought out by friars, bureaucrats and merchants as gifts, mementos and even contraband. Because of its value, many ivory pieces were smuggled into these countries, thus hampering research on provenance and dates.

The noted Spanish art historian Margarita Estella has spent several years tracking down what she refers to as “Hispano-Filipino” ivories in Spanish churches and collections. Majority of the earlier and larger ivory santos have thus been identified to be, ironically, outside the country.


Philippine ivories were valued even in Christian China. Manuel Texeira, the distinguished Jesuit historian, has pointed out that the image of Macau’s patroness, the Immaculate Conception, was commissioned from the Philippines. The image, consisting of an ivory head and hands on a polychromed wooden body, is now enshrined in the Chapel of the Leal Senado in that city. Other Marian images in Macau, of a style attributed here as Goanese work, are referred to there as Philippine instead, “and therefore of great age”. Clearly, much more artistic sleuthing is needed to clarify influences and attributions.

In the Philippines, ivory santos today are not easily accessible given their rarity and value. They are a popular target of church thieves who sell dismembered heads and hands to unscrupulous buyers. A sizeable collection of them has been assembled by the Intramuros Administration in Manila, thus keeping a number of important pieces in the public domain.


Major collections abroad are the Museo Oriental in Valladolid, Spain and the Museo Nacional del Virreinato in Tepotzotlan, Mexico. International awareness of Philippine art in ivory was highlighted by a special exhibit held in 1990-1991 at the Pacific Asia Museum in Pasadena, California. Another exposition was recently held at the Ayala Museum in Makati, where these photographs were taken.

Today, as elephants fall to the greed of the “white gold” hunters, the trade in ivory is banned in most parts of the world. Although we continue to pay tribute to Filipino’s artistry in ivory, we also bid goodbye to an era of despoliation in the name of art.

(Text: Regalado Trota Jose / Photography: Kathleen Palasi,
Reprinted from Design & Architecture, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1992. pp. 92-95)