|WikiProject Tambayan Philippines||(Rated B-class, High-importance)|
|This article uses Philippine English dialect and spelling (color, realize, center). Some terms used in it may be different or absent from Singaporean, Indian, or other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
"These titles are the equivalent of European dukes and marquesses." <---- Just curious: On what basis is this comparison made? Alternativity 17:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Sino sino ang sampung bornean datu na dumating sa pilipinas?
Answer: The extent of power, wealth and influence that a local prince had, especially also if he was a kapanalig (or an ally under the protection of a Rajah or King or any other greater unit in the precolonial societies of the Archipelago). It is a rough comparison.--126.96.36.199 (talk) 13:41, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
This article is only talking about the "Datu" title in Philipines, but no mention of the "Datu" title in Sabah, Malaysia. There are notable Sabahans like politicians who have the "Datu" title. --אדמוןד ואודס自分の投稿記録 15:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
- Wow. I personally did not know that. If you have sources, I do suggest you [[Wikipedia:Be_bold|Be Bold] and make the necessary changes to the article? With the caveat of course that the data already here should be respected. (Meaning, not discarded) It would be nice to see this article expanded, but I'm afraid I'm not very knowledgable about the Datu rank as used in Sabah and I have no sources with me on the matter, so I'm afraid I'd be of little help to you. Good luck with the editing, though. Cheers. Alternativity (talk) 17:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Datu only in the Philippines?
Well, I made just a brief research, but, found no sources for Datus in Sabah. Up to know, I only found sources about the titel Dato and Datuk to be awarded by Malaysia. The Datu was not even listed in a very complete glossary that names probably all noble and Royal titles in Malaysia, even several different versions of Dato and datuk, like Datuk Patinggi or Dato Kurnia Bakti DiRaja. May be, the heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu and Sabah, are those who live in Malaysia and do use the Philippine datu title. There must be many people who are entitled to lower titles or datu titles by genealogical relation in Malaysia. That could be an explanation, but, may be, someone can enlighten us more. Regards About the Sultan (talk) 11:04, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually we did not call our chiefs Datu we called them Apo in the preoccupation times.Kasumi-genx (talk)
For Junji: I have already added a section and many references to the Lumads of Mindanao in this article about the Datus. Please help watch and protect this article from those who wish to alter the facts in it.--TLS MMM (talk) 19:03, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
In Malaysia and Indonesia therms used are Dato and Datuk. Datu is used in local Filipino tribes. There is an article about Dato, and a sub-article about Datuk. --TLS MMM (talk) 15:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Datu in Malaysia and Indonesia
Thank you for your contribution about the local laws that protect the rights of indigenous peoples of the Philippines, including also the rights of local nobilities of Sulu.
However, please do not erase the section pertaininf other laws in the Country, especially the Constituional basis, that sheds light to the truth about noble titles in the Philippines.
I have incorporated your contribution in the section about the Present day Datus, putting into the footnotes the citations you used in your previous edition. If you have questions and contentions please do it first in the discussion board of this article, so that the users of Wikiepdia will be enlightened by the truth about the issue concerned. --TLS MMM (talk) 12:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
For TLS MMM
Thank you for your message, I agree with you in some part but in some part I do not. You mentioned that Datus can only by blood descent, that is, one has to have Filipino blood in his veins, and has to be a descendant of ancient Filipino royal or noble families. That is not true as in 1878 Sultan of Sulu (who was Sovereign at that time granted Baron de Overbeck Datu title)! I can provide you with certified copy of this document translation, therefore I require you will remove this sentence from the article. Also please take a note by law of succession the Sultan of Sulu office still exist.
Secondly you removed Sulu from first sentence just before Mindanao (if you are familiar with Philippine geography you should know that they are different areas, therefore I require you will add Sulu there, as most of the Datu titles were granted by Sultan of Sulu!!!
Also I would not dear to call Sultanate as tribe and Sultan as tribe leader. Even presently Sultan is recognised as head of the Muslim Community, therefore please add before tribe leaders also a Sultan. Thank you for advance RDAndrew (talk) 15:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
For TLS MMM 2
Thank you, I shall create page Raja Muda (Raja Mudah) shortly, I am happy with your additions, but I will also add Datu in Royal Sultanate of Sulu as it is describe din 1974 book. It has solid reference. RDAndrew (talk) 21:48, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
For TLS MMM 3
I think you are not familiar with Sultanate of Sulu. Raja Muda means Crown Prince!. Crown Prince will succeed his father, therefore other claimants claims are null as they have no proof of recognition. The last recognised coronation of Raja Muda was in 1974, therefore the current head of the Royal House of Sulu by law of succession is Raja Muda Muedzul Lail tan Kiram! Or if you have any documents which show that the names you added were recognised by government please share them:D RDAndrew (talk) 20:56, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I have already intedgrated your legitimate suggestions. Please take note that I have highlighted the title Raja Mudah. But it seems that there is no wikipedia article about this. Would you be kind to create it. I think you are more competent in doing it. Please also take note of the Philippine legal provisions in that article, and also in related articles about honorary titles. There are objections to some honory titles given to non-tribe members and to foreigners, also in view of the provisions of the Constitution, as well as regarding the sentiments of local nobles and tribe members. Filipinos are sensitive to some insinuations that foreigners are accorded higher status over them, in their own native land, especially that their own Constitution prohibits them to receive or confer new such nobiliary titles. I know you are aware of the colonial experience, and struggles of the Filipinos for independence and for equal status with foreign colonizers.--TLS MMM (talk) 13:37, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
The previous editions that you have undone shows a more complete picture and topics about the subject. Please present your suggestions with corresponding references, before deleting any section. This is the second time that you have deleted parts of the article on Datu - parts which are well-documented. If there are contrary facts, please present them before deleting anything. If there are suggestions that are valid, well documented, from your part, I am sure that they welll be well considered. Articles should present facts that are related to the topic.--TLS MMM (talk) 16:13, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I re-examined the section you deleted, and it presents the other claimants to certain royal titles in the Philippines. The references are valid. I can see no reason why they should be deleted, unless you have documentations that these are not true claimants, and that what are said about them are not factual. --TLS MMM (talk) 16:24, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
With regards to the Social Structure of Sulu, the section you added was very specific, which would mean that this article will have to accomodate all the rest of the relevant and specific customs of each tribe in the Philippines. However, there is already a specific article that mentions exactly what you wish to incorporate in this article. So, what you added was summarized somewhere on the sub-section on honorary titles, and a link was placed so that if readers are interested to what you want to present, they can refer to it in an article, where it is more sutitably discussed. It seems fair that way.
If you can give a generic summary of the customs of all the Muslim tribes in Mindanao without referring to just one type of society, it might be a good contribution to this topic. Thank you for your efforts to enlighten wikipedians.--TLS MMM (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
For consistency in the presentation of entries in the sub-section on the Present Day Datus, all the Sultans of Sulu were grouped together in the entry for the Sultanate of Sulu, in the same style of presentation of the Sultanates of Maguindanao, Lanao, etc.--TLS MMM (talk) 20:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Since there are several claimants to being head of the ruling family of the Sultanate of Sulu, it seems better say that the crowned Raja Muda is considered by a branch of the ruling family as their head. --TLS MMM (talk) 14:53, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
The section about datu in martial Arts was removed because it is impertinent to the topic of this article. it is adviced that it should be placed in some article about martial arts.--Sulbud (talk) 19:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
What to do with Scott's assertion "Datus were not called kings"
Hi everyone. First of all, the article is looking great! Congrats on the fantastically effective collaboration on this page!
I was doing some reading today and had a thought. In his discussion of Tagalog Society and Religeon, Scott asserts that "...Datus were not called kings (Hari), not even paramount chiefs; that term was known only in reference to foreign monarchies (kaharian) and their viceroys (halili). It is significant that Spaniards called them principales (chiefs), not regulos (rulers)."
My understanding is that this Spanish interpretation came about because Datus did not hold absolute dominion over their "subjects" the way european royals did. This question might not be so significant on this page, as there's no question that Datu is still a royal title of sorts. But it does beg the question of what to call the territories they ruled. Would we be correct in calling such territories "kingdoms"? And if not, what should they be called? I am not sure how to integrate the Scott quote into this text. I'll give it some thought first. But if anybody else wants a crack at it, I certainly wouldn't object. The reference is on Page 221 of Scott, William Henry (1994). Barangay: Sixteenth Century Philippine Culture and Society. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press. ISBN 971-550-135-4.. - Alternativity (talk) 02:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Not all Barangays were like European kingdoms. But, we also had real kingdoms, e.g., Butuan, etc. As regards the smaller and lesser influential ones, Scott also mentioned about "autonomous Principalities", and so did Morga, who had lived at a more proximate time to the epoch when this social reality was still existent (cf. precolonial section of this article). A principality (like Monaco and Andorra in Europe) does not necessarily have the vastness of a territory, etc. of what might qualify a kingdom. But its ruler is nonetheless a royal sovereign prince. And again, we have to consider that this is another western convention in expressing what is innate to the culture of East Asia- another analogy, I would say. Well, the people in this Archipelago had their own way of conceiving and practicing a monarchic type of government, which had similarities and also, dissimilarities with their European counterparts or those in other parts of the globe.(Cf. Short paragraph, which cites footnote n. 22). --188.8.131.52 (talk) 13:53, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
The Section on "Recorded list of Datus in the Philippines" was transferred to another article (Recorded list of Datus in the Philippines), to make the entry on "Datu" concise. Most data in the section that was transferred lacked sufficient citations. That rendered this article less scientific. Besides, the list could go on and on, making it difficult to confirm the claims of those who add names to the list without citing references. Those who are interested in the above-mentioned section are invited to edit the new article created and to improve it by adding suitable citations. --Sulbud (talk) 12:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)