Genetic studies on Filipinos

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗

Various genetic and anthropology studies have been performed on Filipinos to analyze the population genetics of the various ethnic groups in the Philippines.

The results of a DNA study conducted by the National Geographic's "The Genographic Project", based on genetic testings of Filipino people by the National Geographic in 2008–2009, found that the Philippines is made up of around 54% Southeast Asia and Oceania, 36% East Asian, 5% Southern European, 3% South Asian and 2% Native American genes.[1]

Origins

A chronological map of the Austronesian expansion.[2]

The first Austronesians reached the Philippines at around 2200 BC, settling the Batanes Islands and northern Luzon. From there, they rapidly spread downwards to the rest of the islands of the Philippines and Southeast Asia, as well as voyaging further east to reach the Northern Mariana Islands by around 1500 BC.[2][3][4] They assimilated the older Negrito groups which arrived during the Paleolithic, resulting in the modern Filipino ethnic groups which all display various ratios of genetic admixture between Austronesian and Negrito groups.[5]

A 2008 genetic study by Leeds University and published in Molecular Biology and Evolution, showed that mitochondrial DNA lineages have been evolving within Maritime Southeast Asia since modern humans arrived approximately 50,000 years ago. The authors concluded that it was proof that Austronesians evolved within Island Southeast Asia and did not come from Taiwan (the "Out-of-Sundaland" hypothesis). Population dispersals occurred at the same time as sea levels rose, which resulted in migrations from the Philippine Islands into Taiwan within the last 10,000 years.[6]

These have been repudiated by a 2014 study published by Nature using whole genome sequencing (instead of only mtDNA) which has found that all ISEA populations had genes originating from the aboriginal Taiwanese. Contrary to the claim of a south-to-north migration in the "Out-of-Sundaland" hypothesis, the new whole genome analysis strongly confirms the north-to-south dispersal of the Austronesian peoples in the prevailing "Out-of-Taiwan" hypothesis. The researchers further pointed out that while humans have been living in Sundaland for at least 40,000 years, the Austronesian people were recent arrivals. The results of the 2008 study failed to take into account admixture with the more ancient but unrelated Negrito and Papuan populations.[7][5]

A 2021 study states that the Philippines faced five migratory waves, with the first being led by Northern and Southern Negritos, who were distantly related to Australian and Papuan groups. The next wave was led by Manobo and Sama, who populated the southern Philippines. The Sama show high genetic affinities with Austroasiatic-speaking groups in Mainland Southeast Asia such as Mlabri and Htin and diverged from a common East Asian branch before Han, Dai, and Kinh split from Amis, Atayal, or Cordillerans.[8]

The latest wave was led by the Cordillerans, who settled in the Cordilleran mountain range of north-central Luzon. They mixed with the older Negrito populations although Southern Negritos received additional Papuan-related ancestry. central Cordillerans show no admixture with Negritos despite extensive interaction with their neighbors. The study also found evidence of Northeast Asian ancestry, originating from the coastal China/Taiwan area, being dispersed into the Batanes Islands and coastal regions of Luzon. Overall, all Filipino ethnic groups share more alleles with Cordillerans than with Austronesians like Ami or Atayal, who display some admixture with Austroasiatic-related and Northeast Asian-related groups.[8] Also included is haplogroup H1a, that came from South Asian sources.[9][10][11]

There is evidence of low-lying European ancestry in individuals from Bolinao, Cebuano, Ibaloi, Itabayaten, Ilocano, Ivatan, Kapampangan, Pangasinan, and Yogad groups, dating back to the Spanish colonial period. They are also present in some urbanized lowlanders, Bicolanos and Spanish Creole-speaking Chavacanos. Nonetheless, Filipino demography remains relatively unaffected by Spanish colonialism compared to other colonies.[8]

Y-DNA haplogroups

The distribution of Y haplogroup O lineages in East Asia

The most frequently occurring Y-DNA haplogroups among modern Filipinos are haplogroup O1a-M119, which has been found with maximal frequency among the indigenous peoples of Nias, the Mentawai Islands, northern Luzon, the Batanes, and Taiwan, and Haplogroup O2-M122, which is found with high frequency in many populations of East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Polynesia.

In particular, the type of O2-M122 that is found frequently among Filipinos in general, O-P164(xM134), is also found frequently in other Austronesian populations, including Polynesians.[12][13][14] Trejaut et al. 2014 found O2a2b-P164(xO2a2b1-M134) in 26/146 = 17.8% of a pool of samples of Filipinos (4/8 = 50% Mindanao, 7/31 = 22.6% Visayas, 10/55 = 18.2% South Luzon, 1/6 = 17% North Luzon, 2/22 = 9.1% unknown Philippines, 2/24 = 8.3% Ivatan).

The distributions of other subclades of O2-M122 in the Philippines were sporadic, but it may be noted that O2a1b-JST002611 was observed in 6/24 = 25% of a sample of Ivatan and 1/31 = 3.2% of a sample from the Visayas, O2a2a1a2-M7 was observed in 1/6 = 17% of a sample from North Luzon, 1/55 = 1.8% of a sample from South Luzon, and 1/31 = 3.2% of a sample from the Visayas, and O2a2b1a1a-M133 was observed in 2/31 = 6.5% of a sample from the Visayas.[13] A total of 45/146 = 30.8% of the sampled Filipinos were found to belong to Haplogroup O2-M122.[13]

In a study by Delfin et al. (2011), 21.1% (8/38) of a sample of highlanders of northern Luzon (17 Bugkalot, 12 Kalanguya, 6 Kankanaey, 2 Ibaloi, and 1 Ifugao) were found to belong to haplogroup O2a2a1a2-M7, which is outside of the O2a2b-P164 clade and is uncommon among Austronesian-speaking populations, being rather frequently observed among speakers of Hmong-Mien, Katuic, and Bahnaric languages in southwestern China and eastern Mainland Southeast Asia.[15] (Delfin et al. also observed O-M7 in 5/39 = 12.8% of a sample of Agta from Iriga in southeastern Luzon and 5/36 = 13.9% of a sample of Ati from Panay.[15])

Haplogroup O1a-M119 is also commonly found among Filipinos (25/146 = 17.1% O1a-M119(xO1a1a-P203, O1a2-M50), 20/146 = 13.7% O1a1a-P203, 17/146 = 11.6% O1a2-M50, 62/146 = 42.5% O1a-M119 total according to Trejaut et al. 2014) and is shared with other Austronesian-speaking populations, especially those in Taiwan, western Indonesia, and Madagascar.[16]

Haplogroups R-M343 and I-M253

The most common Y-DNA Haplogroup type is O, which Filipinos share with Chinese and fellow Southeast Asians. The South Asian Y-DNA H1a (H-L901) indicate the presence of Indians. The 13% frequency of European Y-DNA R1b (R-M343) is evidence of Spanish immigration.[9][10][11]

After the 16th century, the colonial period saw the influx of genetic influence from other populations. This is evidenced by the presence of a small percentage of the Y-DNA Haplogroup R1b (R-M343) present among the population of the Philippines. DNA studies vary as to how small these lineages are. A 2001 study conducted by Stanford University Asia-Pacific Research Center stated that 3.6% of the Philippine population had European Y-DNA.[9][10][11]

This is contrasted by genetic studies done by Applied Biosystems and FamilyTreeDNA, wherein the R1b Y-DNA Haplotype common in Spain and Western Europe was detected among 12-13% of the sample size of Filipinos, which had come to the area, via immigration from Spain and Latin America. Haplogroup I1 (I-M253), which came from Germanic Europeans and had spread to the Philippines mostly from Anglo-America (USA), represented about 0.95% of the sample size. Also included is haplogroup H1a (H-L901), that came from South Asian sources.[9][10][11]

A 2015 genetic study by the Kaiser Permanente (KP) Research Program on Genes, Environment, and Health (RPGEH), substantial number of Californian residents self-identifying as Filipinos sampled have "modest" amounts of European ancestry consistent with older admixture.[17] Therefore implying that the mostly native majority population of the Philippines, still possess Spanish admixture in their genetics in minor percentages per person.[17]

A 2021 analysis of the full autosomal genome of 1,082 individuals from the Philippines has shown that "in contrast to several other Spanish-colonized regions, Philippine demography appears to have remained largely unaffected by admixture with Europeans" (Larena et al. 2021). European admixture is found at a low level among individuals from lowland groups such as Ilocanos and Cebuanos, and reaches significant population-wide levels among urbanized lowlanders (who form half the population of the country),[18] Bicolanos and Chavacano-speaking Mestizos.[19]

Haplogroup Q-M242

A 2011 study found that the Y-DNA of 2 out of 64 sampled Filipino males belonged to Haplogroup Q-M242, which has its highest frequency among Native Americans, Asian Siberians, and in Central Asians.[20] Coincidentally, it is in a similar percentage to the previously mentioned National Geographic study, which stated that 2% of the population is Native American.[1]

Mitochondrial DNA haplogroups

From India

The Indian Mitochondrial DNA haplogroups, M52'58 and M52a are present in the Philippines, suggesting that there was Indian migration to the archipelago starting from the 5th Century AD.[21]

The integration of Southeast Asia into Indian Ocean trading networks around 2,000 years ago shows some impact, with South Asian genetic signals that are present in the Indonesian archipelago also extending into the Philippines among the Sama-Bajau communities.[19]

A 2014 genetic study found 10-20% of Cebuano ancestry is attributable to South Asian (Indian) descent,[22]-

Anthropology

Craniometry

A Craniometric Racial Graph of Filipinos (using Historical samples and Modern samples) by Matthew C. Go. Structure map showing estimated ancestry proportions for the historical (H) and modern (M) Filipino populations when shown using the posterior group membership probability for reference pools that are Hispanic, Asian, European, and African. Every person is symbolized by a single vertical line divided into four segments of varying colors, each of which represents the estimated ancestry elements. The posterior probability value is the length of the colored section. The people are arranged in decreasing order according to their amount of estimated Asian heritage.

Scientist, Matthew C. Go, in a Trihybrid Ancestry Variation Analysis approach to Admixture in Filipinos, published a study wherein it was discovered that upon exhuming the remains around the public cemetery of the "Manila North Cemetery" as well as other public cemeteries across the Philippines, and practicing forensic anthropology on them, Matthew C. Go estimated that 71% of the mean amount, among the samples exhumed, have attribution to Asian descent while 7% is attributable to European descent.[23] Filipinos have significantly less Asian ancestry compared to other Asian nationalities like the Koreans who are 90% Asian, Japanese at 96%, Thai at 93%, and Vietnamese at 84%.[23]

Nevertheless, a 2019 Anthropology Study by Beatrix Dudzik and also Matthew Go, while using skeletons collated by the University of the Philippines and sampled from all across the Philippines, thus published in the Journal of Human Biology, using physical anthropology, estimated that, 72.7% of Filipinos are Asian, 12.7% of Filipinos can be classified as Hispanic, 7.3% as Indigenous American, African at 4.5% and European at 2.7%.[24]

This is only according to an interpretation of the data wherein the reference groups, which were attributed to the Filipino samples; for the Hispanic category, were Mexican-Americans, and the reference groups for the European, African, and Indigenous American, categories, were: White Americans, Black Americans, and Native Americans from the USA, while the Asian reference groups were sourced from Chinese, Japanese, and Vietnamese origins.[24]

In contrast, a different anthropology study using Morphoscopic ancestry estimates in Filipino crania using multivariate probit regression models by J. T. Hefner and also Matthew C. Go, published on year 2020, while analyzing Historic and Modern samples of skeletons in the Philippines, paint a different picture,[25] in that, when the reference group for "Asian" was Thailand (Southeast Asians) rather than Chinese, Japanese, and Vietnamese; and the reference group for "Hispanic" were Colombians (South Americans) rather than Mexicans,[25] the combined historical and modern sample results for Filipinos, yielded the following ratios: Asian at 48.6%, African at 32.9%, and only a small portion classifying as either European at 12.9%, and finally for Hispanic at 5.7%.[25]

In 2017, a Japanese scientist, Nandar Yukyi,[26] using a Multivariate Analysis of Craniometric Variation Of Modern Asian And Hispanic Individuals as her graduate thesis,[26] found that Mexican and Filipino skeletal samples taken from prisons at Mexico and the Philippines, cluster together, when it comes to physical dimensions. Samples from Guatemalans also misclassify as Filipino, and that there were several instances wherein Filipinos and Mexicans were misclassified into each other's racial categories. The same happened to Ainu Japanese skeletal samples.[26]

Population Data

As for the general population of the Philippines, there are several data points elucidating that the Philippine population is racially diverse.

Mexican Filipinos

Of the Mexican ancestry in Filipinos, there are records to distill their general number, according to Stephanie Mawson in her 2014 M.Phil thesis entitled Between Loyalty and Disobedience: The Limits of Spanish Domination in the Seventeenth Century Pacific. In the 1600s, thousands of Latin American settlers were sent to the Philippines by the Spaniards per year. Around that time frame, the Spaniards had cumulatively sent 15,600 settlers from Peru and Mexico[27] while there were only 600 Spaniards from Spain,[28] that supplemented a Philippine population of only 667,612 people.[29]

Due to the initial low population count, people of Latin American and Hispanic descent quickly spread across the territory.[30] Several hundred Tlaxcalan soldiers sailed to the islands in the 16th century, with some settling permanently and contributing numerous Nahuatl words to the Filipino languages.[31] It was royal policy to use Peruvian and Mexican soldiers as colonists to the Philippines.[32]

Geographic distribution and year of settlement of the Latin-American immigrant soldiers assigned to the Philippines in the 1600s.[33]
Location 1603 1636 1642 1644 1654 1655 1670 1672
Manila[33] 900 446 — 407 821 799 708 667
Fort Santiago[33] — 22 — — 50 — 86 81
Cavite[33] — 70 — — 89 — 225 211
Cagayan[33] 46 80 — — — — 155 155
Calamianes[33] — — — — — — 73 73
Caraga[33] — 45 — — — — 81 81
Cebu[33] 86 50 — — — — 135 135
Formosa[33] — 180 — — — — — —
Moluccas[33] 80 480 507 — 389 — — —
Otón[33] 66 50 — — — — 169 169
Zamboanga[33] — 210 — — 184 — — —
Other[33] 255 — — — — — — —
[33] — — — — — — — —
Total Reinforcements[33] 1,533 1,633 2,067 2,085 n/a n/a 1,632 1,572

The book Intercolonial Intimacies Relinking Latin/o America to the Philippines, 1898–1964 by Paula C. Park cites "Forzados y reclutas: los criollos novohispanos en Asia (1756-1808)" gave a higher number of later Mexican soldier-immigrants to the Philippines, pegging the number at 35,000 immigrants in the 1700s,[34] in a Philippine population which was only around 1.5 Million,[35] thus forming 2.33% of the population.[36]

Spanish Filipinos

In 1799, Friar Manuel Buzeta estimated the population of all the Philippine islands as 1,502,574.[37] Despite the number of Mixed Spanish-Filipino descent being the lowest, they may be more common than expected as many Spaniards often had Filipino concubines and mistresses and they frequently produced children out of wedlock.[38]: 272 

In the late 1700s to early 1800s, Joaquín Martínez de Zúñiga, an Agustinian Friar, in his Two Volume Book: "Estadismo de las islas Filipinas"[39][40] compiled a census of the Spanish-Philippines based on the tribute counts (Which represented an average family of seven to ten children[41] and two parents, per tribute)[42] and came upon the following statistics:

Data reported for the 1800 as divided by ethnicity and province[39][40]
Province Native Tributes Spanish Mestizo Tributes All Tributes[a]
Tondo[39]: 539  14,437-1/2 3,528 27,897-7
Cavite[39]: 539  5,724-1/2 859 9,132-4
Laguna[39]: 539  14,392-1/2 336 19,448-6
Batangas[39]: 539  15,014 451 21,579-7
Mindoro[39]: 539  3,165 3-1/2 4,000-8
Bulacan[39]: 539  16,586-1/2 2,007 25,760-5
Pampanga[39]: 539  16,604-1/2 2,641 27,358-1
Bataan[39]: 539  3,082 619 5,433
Zambales[39]: 539  1,136 73 4,389
Ilocos[40]: 31  44,852-1/2 631 68,856
Pangasinan[40]: 31  19,836 719-1/2 25,366
Cagayan[40]: 31  9,888 0 11,244-6
Camarines[40]: 54  19,686-1/2 154-1/2 24,994
Albay[40]: 54  12,339 146 16,093
Tayabas[40]: 54  7,396 12 9,228
Cebu[40]: 113  28,112-1/2 625 28,863
Samar[40]: 113  3,042 103 4,060
Leyte[40]: 113  7,678 37-1/2 10,011
Caraga[40]: 113  3,497 0 4,977
Misamis[40]: 113  1,278 0 1,674
Negros Island[40]: 113  5,741 0 7,176
Iloilo[40]: 113  29,723 166 37,760
Capiz[40]: 113  11,459 89 14,867
Antique[40]: 113  9,228 0 11,620
Calamianes[40]: 113  2,289 0 3,161
TOTAL 299,049 13,201 424,992-16

The Spanish-Filipino population as a proportion of the provinces widely varied; with as high as 19% of the population of Tondo province[39]: 539  (The most populous province and former name of Manila), to Pampanga 13.7%,[39]: 539  Cavite at 13%,[39]: 539  Laguna 2.28%,[39]: 539  Batangas 3%,[39]: 539  Bulacan 10.79%,[39]: 539  Bataan 16.72%,[39]: 539  Ilocos 1.38%,[40]: 31  Pangasinan 3.49%,[40]: 31  Albay 1.16%,[40]: 54  Cebu 2.17%,[40]: 113  Samar 3.27%,[40]: 113  Iloilo 1%,[40]: 113  Capiz 1%,[40]: 113  Bicol 20%,[43] and Zamboanga 40%.[43] According to the data, in the Archdiocese of Manila which administers much of Luzon under it, about 10% of the population was Spanish-Filipino.[39]: 539  Summing up all the provinces including those with no Spanish Filipinos, all in all, in the total population of the Philippines, mixed Spanish-Filipinos composed 5% of the population.[39][40]

Afterwards there was a later census, compiled and published in the year 1818, conducted by Buzeta and Bravo; that rather than was a travelling account was a systematic compilation of baptismal and tribute records, as outlined below.

[Click "Expand" to view the Compiled Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (1818)]
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Albay, 1818)[44]: 603 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Negrito Families Chinese Filipino Families
Albay Albay, Cabicera 5,515 2 2
Manito 240 4
Bacon 2,119 45
Cuba 2,162 52
Casiguran 1,025 28
Juban 396 18
Sorsogon 1,783 149
Bulusan 1,777 19
Bulan 714 16
Donsol 241
Quipia 269
Lilog 821 33 23
Bacacay 1,295 77
Malilipot 981 53
Tabaco 3,347 225
Malitao 2,844 241
Tibi 2,069 157 110
Lagonoy y su anejo 1,669 18 521
San Jose 1,829 114 470
Caramoan 641 72
Total 31,737 1,249 1,198 2
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Isla De Ticao, 1818)[44]: 603 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Negrito Families Chinese Filipino Families
Isla de Ticao San Jacinto 266 8
Total 266 8
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Isla De Masbate, 1818)[44]: 603 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Negrito Families Chinese Filipino Families
Isla de Masbate Mobo 912 1
Total 912 1
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Isla De Catanduanes, 1818)[44]: 603 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Negrito Families Chinese Filipino Families
Isla De Catanduanes Virac 1,581 91
Calolbon 847 3
Eiga 847 3
Payo y sus anejos Bagamanoc y Ooc 644 17
Pandan y Caramoan 489 2
Total 4,408 116
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Antique, 1818)[45]: 302 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Chinese Filipino Families
Antique San José de Buenavista, cabecera 5,925 6
San Pedro de Balbalan 2,247
Sibalom 4,665 2
Patnongon y su visita Coritan 2,097 3
Bugason 3,060 1
San Antonio de Nalupa, su anejo Culari y visitas Tibiao, Bitad, Tun, Bacafan y Batunan 2,542 19
Pandan 300
Antique 2,304 12
Dao 1,296 7
Cagayan Chico en la isla del mismo nombre 527
Total (Across the Province) 24,963 50 40
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Bataan, 1818)[45]: 357 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Moreno Filipino Families Negro (Black) Filipino Families Chinese Filipino Families
Bataan Balanga, cabecera 1,608 12 18 8
Abucay 1,406 20 3 5
Samar 1,000 4 1
Orani 1,000 25 8
Llana-Hermosa 716 1
San Juan de Dinalupijan 451 19 7 3
Pilar 899
Mariveles y su visita Morong 1,522 3 1 5
Orion ú Odiong 1,550 8 2 18 3
Total 10,152 92 3 52 27
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Batangas, 1818)[44]: 394 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Chinese Filipino Families
Batangas Balayan, cabecera. 4,521 22
Lian. 629 7
Nasugbů. 866 2
Rosario 1,758 4
Santo Tomas. 1,256
San Pablo de los Montes 1,948 7
Taal 8,312
Baoan ó Banang 5,813
Batangas 6,889
San José 2,427
Tanauan. 2,106
Lipa 4,104
Total 40,629 40 2
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Bulacan, 1818)[45]: 414 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Converted Negro Families Chinese Filipino Families
Bulacan Bulacan, cabecera. 5,200
Bigáa. 1,876
Guiguinto. 1,291
Malolos. 8,110
Paombon. 1,058
Hagonoy. 4,572
Calumpít. 2,628
Quingua. 2,912
San Isidro. 2,560
Baliuag. 4,296
San Rafael. 1,650 10
Angat. 5,441
San José. 219
Santa María de Pandi. 1,588 17
Bocaue. 2,550 88 2
Marilao. 881 28 5 1
Meycauayan. 2,375 46
Polo. 3,160 44 4
Obando. 2,493
Total 54,360 233 5 7


Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Cagayan, 1818)[46]: 466 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families
Cagayan Lal-lo, cabecera. 975 313
Camalaniugan. 1,156
Piat y su visita. 899
Tabang.. 201
Cabagan. 3,543
Malaveg con su visita Mabanaug. 524
Tuao.. 1,393
Iguig y su visita Amulong. 403
Tuguegarao. 5,072
Aparri.. 1,715
Abulug. 1,162 1
San Juan y su visita Masi. 913
Nasiping y su visita Gataran. 573
Ilagan.. 1,150
Gamú y su visita Furao. 586 16
Tumauini. 827
Bugay.. 299
Aritao.. 580
Dupax. 867 6
Bambang.. 893
Bayombong. 771
Lumabang. 332
Bagabag y su Fuerza. 508
Carig y su Fortaleza el Sto. Niño. 305
Camarag. 488
Angadanan. 320
Cauayan. 318
Calaniugan. 135
TOTAL 26,726 336
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Calamianes, 1818)[45]: 456 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families
Islas de Calamianes
Calamianes Culion en la de Calamianes, Isla de Linacapan, e Isla de Coron. 1,044 2
Isla de Paragua
Taytay, Silanga, Meitejet, Pancol, Guinlo, y Barbacan. 1,424 4
Islas de Dumaran y Agutay
Isla y pueblo de Dumaran e Isla y pueblo de Agutay. 632
Islas de Cuyo
Isla y pueblo de Cuyo y su anejo, Canipo, e Isla de Pagaguayan. 2,430 25
TOTAL 5,530 31
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Camarines, 1818)[44]: 605 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipinos Chinese Filipinos
Partido de Vicol (Ciudad de Nueva-Caceres)
Camarines Tabaco y Santa Cruz. 3,593 301 4 3
Naga. 956
Camaligan. 1,388
Canaman. 1,589
Magarao ó Mangarao. 1,862
Bombom ó Bonbon. 1,245
Quipayo. 784
Calabanga. 1,174
Libmanan ó Libnanan. 1,490 1
Milaor. 1,902 7
San Fernando. 688 2
Minalabag. 901
Partido de la Rinconada
Bula. 471
Bao ó Baao. 1,538 37 4
Nabua. 2,612 2 2
Iriga. 2,040 1
Buhi ó Buji. 1,979 10
Bato. 495
Partido de la Iriga
Libon. 410 4
Polangui. 2,903 15
Ors ú Oas. 3,614
Ligao. 2,968 24
Guinobatan. 2,605 1
Camalig. 2,330 39 9
Cagsava. 2,870
Monte Isaroc
Pueblo y Mision de Manguirin. 160 629
Goa, Tigabon y Tinambag. 1,123 2 625
Partido de la Contra-Costa
Sipocot, Lupi y Ragay. 406
Daet. 1,449 26 10
Talisay. 1,055 2
Indan. 675 6
Paracale. 697 34
Mambulao. 950
Capalonga. 137 4
TOTAL 50,762 512 2 1,287 3
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Capiz, 1818)[44]: 606 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Chinese Filipino families
Capiz Capiz y su visita Ibisan. 2,650
Panay. 2,275
Panitan. 1,485
Dumalag y sus visitas Dao y Tapas. 3,158
Dumarao. 2,600
Mambusao y sus visitas Sigma y Jamindan. 1,924 13
Batan y su visita Sapiang. 2,255 56
Banga y su visita Madalag. 1,579 8
Malinao. 1,487 11
Calibo y su visita Macao. 2,700 167
Ibajay. 1,268 30
Isla de Romblon
Romblon. 1,514 15
Isla de Sibuyan
Cauit, Pagalar, y Cajidiocan. 1,114
Isla de Banton
Banton.
Isla de Tablas
Guintinguian, Aghagacay, Odiongan, Lanan, y Loog.
Isla de Simara
San José, Coloncolon.
Isla del Maestre de Campo
Sibali.
TOTAL 26,009 285
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Caraga, 1818)[44]: 542 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Chinese Filipino families
Distrito de Surigao y Siargao
Caraga Surigao (cabecera), Tagauan, Gigaquit ó Higaguit, Cabubungan, Isla y pueblo de Dinagat, Caco en la isla de Siargao, Dapa en dicha isla, Cabuntug en la misma isla, Sapao en la citada isla. 2,475 25
Distrito de Butuan y Talacogon
Butuan, Habungan, Tabay, Maynio, Talacogon. 1,593 10
Distrito de Cantilan y Mision de San Juan
Lutao, Hingoog, Cantilan, Tago, Tandac, Lianga y la Mision de San Juan. 1,155
Distrito de Bislic y Mision de Caraga
Jinatuan, Bislic, Catel, Bagangan y la Mision de Caraga. 955
TOTAL 6,178 35
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Cavite, 1818)[44]: 564 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Morenos Chinese Filipino families
Cavite Plaza y puerto de Cavite. 221 153 5 100
San Roque. 3,906 143 3 35
Cavite viejo. 1,855 55 4
Bacood ó Bacor. 1,729 19 4
San Francisco de Malabon. 1,510 69 3
Santa Cruz de Malabon. 2,090 3 1 2
Pueblo y Hacienda de Nait. 942 3 4 2
Marigondon. 2,043 3
Indan. 2,759 36 2
Silang. 2,255 6 1 4
Imus. 2,015 125 5
TOTAL 21,325 612 14 164
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Cebu, 1818)[44]: 609 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Chinese Filipino families
Isla de Cebu
Cebu Cabecera, El Sto. Nombre de Jesus. 868 255
Parian, Yutaos y Sogod con la visita de este, Simugui. 1,795 109
San Nicolás y sus visits Talisay, Lipata, Tansan, y Pitao. 2,420
Opon y Talamban. 2,850
Mandave ó Mandaui. 2,729 20
Danao y Catmon. 2,656 57
Barili y sus visitas Duman, Jod, Malhual, Coston, Badian y Taiuran. 1,943 14
Samboan y sus visitas Jiratilan, Malabuyot, y Taburan. 2,496 69
Bolojon y sus visitas Tayon, Calob, Mambuji y Yunan. 2,420
Dalaguete. 2,556
Argao y Carcar. 3,250
Isla de Bantayan
Bantayan y sus visitas Octon y Davis, Daan, Bantayan y sus visits Sogod y Cavit. 2,169 75
Isla de Siquijor
Siquijor y su visita Canoan. 2,450 46
Isla de Bohol
Inabangan y sus visitas Pampan, Corte, Taoran, Canogon, Tubigon, Ipil, Talibon, Tabigui, Inbay, y Cabulao. 1,815 41
Gindulman y sus visitas Quimale y Cugton. 1,500 6
Jagna. 3,255
Dimiao. 2,016
Loay. 1,614 5
Lobog y su anejo S. Isidro. 3,852
Baclayon. 3,549 5
Tagbilaran. 2,370 2
Pimin-vitan. 1,414
Malabohoo. 2,269
Loon y su visita Catarbacan. 1,990
Calape y sus visitas Bintig y Mondoog. 1,932
Isla de Davis
Davis. 2,055 9
Panglao. 1,350
Isla de Camotes
Poro y sus visitas (administración de Mandave).
TOTAL 60,305 638
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Ilocos Norte, 1818)[44]: 95 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Chinese Filipino families
Ilocos Norte Bangui. 1,449 5
Nagpartian. 423
Pasuquin. 1,530
Bacarra. 4,901
Vintar. 2,064
Sarrat ó San Miguel de Cuning. 2,755
Pigdig y su visita Santiago. 4,015
Dingras. 4,559
Laoag. 12,055
San Nicolás. 3,498
Batac. 7,026
Paoay. 7,447
Badoc. 3,356
TOTAL 55,078 5
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Ilocos Sur, 1818)[45]: 505 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Chinese Filipino families
Ilocos Sur Sinait. 2,625
Cabugao. 3,595
Lapoc. 1,791
Masingal. 2,740
Bantay y su visita San Ildefonso. 5,535
Santo Domingo. 2,912 36
San Vicente Ferrer. 2,113 10
Santa Catalina. 4,292
Vigan. 6,849 421 14
Santa Catalina V. y M. 1,750
Narvacan. 4,185
Santa Maria. 2,985
San Esteban. 819
Santiago. 1,023
Candong. 5,709
Santa Lucia y su visita Santa Cruz con la mision de Ronda. 3,690
Tagudin y Ous. 2,620
Mision llamada Sevilla.
Mision de Argaguinan.
Bangas y sus misiones. 2,582
Villa-Cruz y San Rafael.
Namacpacan. 2,564
Balaoan. 2,703
Distrito del Abra
Tayum en el Abra. 1,307 4
Bangued en idem. 1,836 9
TOTAL 61,397 530 14
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Iloilo, 1818)[45]: 506 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Chinese Filipino families
Iloilo Iloilo (cabecera) y Guimaras. 1,594 103
Molo. 3,457 23
Mandurrio. 5,966
Barotac, Asuy y Batag. 1,200
Ooton. 5,395
Tigbauan. 3,248
Guimbal y Tabungan. 4,209
Miagao. 4,096
San Joaquin. 1,180
Igbaras. 3,329
Camando. 1,974
Alimodian y San Miguel. 4,230
Ma-asin. 2,880
Cabatuan. 6,470
Xaro. 6,871
Santa Bárbara. 3,600
Janiuay. 4,158
Lambuso. 1,040
Calinog. 960
Pasi y Abaca. 2,637
Laglag y Diale. 2,252
Pototan. 3,000
Dumangas, Anilao, Banate y Barotac. 3,200
TOTALS 77,862 126
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Laguna, 1818)[45]: 507 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Morenos Chinese Filipino families
Laguna Pagsanjan, cabecera. 4,785 7
Lumban. 1,983
Paete. 1,088
Longos con su anejo San Antonio del Monte. 944
Paquil. 628
Panguil. 1,030
Siniloan. 1,911
Mavitac. 525
Santa Maria Caboan. 257
Cavioli. 854
Majayjay. 4,948
Lilio. 2,168
Nagcarlan. 2,557
Santa Cruz. 2,528
Bay. 668
Pueblo y hacienda de Calauang. 610 2
Pila. 1,117 3
Los Baños. 460 5
Calamba. 959 4 15
Cabuyao. 1,755 1 14
Santa Rosa. 1,760 9
Biñan. 2,598 8 2 2
San Pedro Tunasau. 1,112 2 1
Pililla. 1,096
Tanay. 1,352
Binangonan de Bay. 1,234
Moron. 1,747
Baras. 486 3
Pueblo y hacienda de Angono. 513 2 2 3
TOTAL 40,239 34 5 6 41
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Leyte, 1818)[45]: 508 
Province Pueblo Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Chinese Filipino families
Leyte Taclovan (cabecera) y Palo. 2,290 11
Tanauan. 2,155 29
Dulag y Abuyog. 2,229 14
Barayuen, Haro y Alang-alang. 864
Barugo y San Miguel. 626
Carigara y su visita Leyte. 2,253
Palompon, Ogmug y Baybay. 826
Hilongos, Bato, Matalom, y Cajanguaan. 1,231 2
Indan, Dagami, e Isla de Panamao. 1,978
Islas de Biliran y Maripipi
Biliran, Isla de Maripipi, y Maripipi. 538
Isla de Panahon y Costa Sur
Isla de Panahon, Ma-asin, Sogod, Cabalian, y Liloan. 1,450
TOTALES 16,244 56
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Mariana Islands, 1818)[45]: 308 
Provinces Pueblos Native Citizens Spanish Citizen
Marianas Islands (Across the Province in General) 7,555 160
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Mindoro, 1818)[45]: 513 
Province Pueblo Number of Native Families Number of Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Morenos Chinese Filipino families
Mindoro Calapan (cabecera) y sus anejos Baco, Sabuan, Abra de Ilog y Dongon. 970 8
Naujan y sus anejos Pola, Pinamalayan, Mamalay, Manaol, Bulalacao, Bongabon, Manjao, Manguirin y la Isla de Ilin. 924 6
Isla de Marinduque
Santa Cruz de Napo. 1,600 1
Boac. 1,908 31 4
Gazan. 316 1 1
Isla de Luban
Luban. 1,699
TOTAL 7,455 47 5
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Misamis)[45]: 514 
Province Pueblo Number of Native Families Number of Spanish Filipino Families Lacandula Families Negro Filipino families Morenos Chinese Filipino families
Partido de Misamis
Misamis Plaza y presidio de Misamis, y su anejo Loculan. 334
Presidio de Iligan, con su anejo Initao. 169
Partido de Dapitan
Dapitan, y su visita San Lorenzo de Ilaya. 666 2
Lobungan, y sus visitas Dipolog, Piao, Dohinog, y Dicayo. 701
Partido de Cagayan
Cagayan, y sus visitas Iponau, Mulingan, Agusan, Cagaloan, Lasaan, Balingasay, Salay, Quinoquitan ó Bacay, Mubijut, y la Mision de Pinangudan. 3,177 1
Isla de Camiguin (Partido de Catarman)
Catarman, y sus visitas Mambujao, Guinsiliban, y Sagay. 1,693 35
TOTAL 6,740 38
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Samar, 1818)[47]: 113 
Provinces Pueblos Native Families Spanish Filipino Families Negrito Families Chinese Filipino Families
Samar Samar island, in general. 16,671 174
Felipe Bravo Census Demographics (Zamboanga, 1818)[45]: 482 
Provinces Pueblos Native Citizens Spanish Filipino Soldiers Kapampangan Soldiers Spanish and Mexican Citizens
Zamboanga Zamboanga-province and peninsula . 8,640 300 100 A very large but unknown amount of the civilian population, they are mostly employed in the navy and shipping.

Chinese Filipinos

Meanwhile, government records show that 1.35 Million pure-bred Chinese live in the Philippines[48] and 20% of the Philippines' total population were either half Chinese or mixed Chinese-Filipinos.[49][48]

According to a research report by historian Austin Craig who was commissioned by the United States in 1915 to ascertain the total number of the various races of the Philippines, the pure Chinese, referred to as Sangley, number around 20,000 (as of 1918), and that around one-third of the population of Luzon have partial Chinese ancestry. This comes with a footnote about the widespread concealing and de-emphasising of the exact number of Chinese in the Philippines.[50]

Another source dating from the Spanish Colonial Period shows the growth of the Chinese and the Chinese mestizo population to nearly 10% of the Philippine population by 1894.

Race Population (1810) Population (1850) Population (1894)
Malay (i.e., indigenous Filipino) 2,395,677 4,725,000 6,768,000
mestizo de sangley (i.e., Chinese mestizo) 120,621 240,000 500,000
mestizo de español (i.e., Spanish mestizo) 7,000 (tributes) x 5 (Minimum family-size) = 35,000[39][40] 70,000 140,000
sangley (i.e., Unmixed Chinese) 7,000 25,000 100,000
Peninsular (i.e., Spaniard) 4,000 10,000 35,000
Total 2,619,705 5,184,814 7,772,628

In the 1860s to 1890s, in the urban areas of the Philippines, especially at Manila, according to burial statistics, as much as 3.3% of the population were pure European Spaniards and the pure Chinese were as high as 9.9%.[51] The Spanish-Filipino and Chinese-Filipino mestizo populations may have fluctuated. Eventually, everybody belonging to these non-native categories diminished because they were assimilated into and chose to self-identify as pure Filipinos.[51]: 82  Since during the Philippine Revolution, the term "Filipino" included anybody born in the Philippines coming from any race.[52][53] That would explain the abrupt drop of otherwise high Chinese, Spanish and mestizo percentages across the country by the time of the first American census in 1903.[51]

American Filipinos

The Philippines, after the Philippine-American War was briefly an American colony. During colonial rule, an estimated 800,000 Americans were born in the Philippines[54] The Japanese occupation of the Philippines during World War 2, exterminated a large portion of the American and European population of the Philippines. By 2013, some 220,000 to 600,000 American citizens were living in the country.[55] In the same time period, there were 250,000 Amerasians scattered across the cities of Angeles City, Manila, and Olongapo, forming aboout 0.25% of the Philippine population.[56]

By 2025, the number of Americans living in the Philippines increased to at least 750,000, forming 0.75% of the Philippine population.[57] When summing up the percentage of individuals of pure American descent (0.75% of the population) and partial American ancestry (Amerasians) (which form 0.25% of the population) about 1% of the total Philippine demographics has full and partial American descent.[57]

See also

References

  1. "Genographic Project - Reference Populations – Geno 2.0 Next Generation". National Geographic. April 13, 2005. Archived from the original on May 22, 2019.
  2. Chambers, Geoff (2013). "Genetics and the Origins of the Polynesians". eLS. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. doi:10.1002/9780470015902.a0020808.pub2. ISBN 978-0-470-01617-6.
  3. Mijares, Armand Salvador B. (2006). "The Early Austronesian Migration To Luzon: Perspectives From The Peñablanca Cave Sites". Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association (26): 72–78. Archived from the original on July 7, 2014.
  4. Bellwood, Peter (2014). The Global Prehistory of Human Migration. p. 213.
  5. Lipson, Mark; Loh, Po-Ru; Patterson, Nick; Moorjani, Priya; Ko, Ying-Chin; Stoneking, Mark; Berger, Bonnie; Reich, David (2014). "Reconstructing Austronesian population history in Island Southeast Asia" (PDF). Nature Communications. 5 (1): 4689. Bibcode:2014NatCo...5.4689L. doi:10.1038/ncomms5689. PMC 4143916. PMID 25137359. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2014-06-29. Retrieved 2021-10-20.
  6. Martin Richards. "Climate Change and Postglacial Human Dispersals in Southeast Asia". Oxford Journals. Archived from the original on October 8, 2012. Retrieved April 10, 2014.
  7. Rochmyaningsih, Dyna (28 October 2014). "'Out of Sundaland' Assumption Disproved". Jakarta Globe. Archived from the original on 25 December 2018. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
  8. Larena, Maximilian; Sanchez-Quinto, Federico; Sjödin, Per; McKenna, James; Ebeo, Carlo; Reyes, Rebecca; Casel, Ophelia; Huang, Jin-Yuan; Hagada, Kim Pullupul; Guilay, Dennis; Reyes, Jennelyn (2021-03-30). "Multiple migrations to the Philippines during the last 50,000 years". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 118 (13) e2026132118. Bibcode:2021PNAS..11826132L. doi:10.1073/pnas.2026132118. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 8020671. PMID 33753512.
  9. "With a sample population of 105 Filipinos, the company of Applied Biosystems, analysed the Y-DNA of average Filipinos and it is discovered that about 0.95% of the samples have the Y-DNA Haplotype "H1a", which is most common in South Asia and had spread to the Philippines via precolonial Indian missionaries who spread Hinduism and established Indic Rajahnates like Cebu and Butuan. The 13% frequeny of R1b also indicate Spanish admixture". Archived from the original on 2017-05-25. Retrieved 2021-10-20.
  10. "Manual Collation". Archived from the original on 2022-10-26. Retrieved 2022-10-26.
  11. Philippines DNA Project Archived 2023-02-04 at the Wayback Machine - Y-DNA Classic Chart
  12. Sheyla Mirabal, Kristian J. Herrera, Tenzin Gayden, Maria Regueiro, Peter A. Underhill, Ralph L. Garcia-Bertrand, and Rene J. Herrera, "Increased Y-chromosome resolution of haplogroup O suggests genetic ties between the Ami aborigines of Taiwan and the Polynesian Islands of Samoa and Tonga." Gene 492 (2012) 339–348. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2011.10.042
  13. Trejaut, Jean A; Poloni, Estella S; Yen, Ju-Chen; Lai, Ying-Hui; Loo, Jun-Hun; Lee, Chien-Liang; He, Chun-Lin; Lin, Marie (2014). "Taiwan Y-chromosomal DNA variation and its relationship with Island Southeast Asia". BMC Genetics. 15: 77. doi:10.1186/1471-2156-15-77. PMC 4083334. PMID 24965575.
  14. Karafet, Tatiana M.; Hallmark, Brian; Cox, Murray P.; et al. (2010). "Major East–West Division Underlies Y Chromosome Stratification across Indonesia". Mol. Biol. Evol. 27 (8): 1833–1844. doi:10.1093/molbev/msq063. PMID 20207712.
  15. Delfin, Frederick; Salvador, Jazelyn M.; Calacal, Gayvelline C.; Perdigon, Henry B.; Tabbada, Kristina A.; Villamor, Lilian P.; Halos, Saturnina C.; Gunnarsdóttir, Ellen; Myles, Sean; Hughes, David A.; Xu, Shuhua; Jin, Li; Lao, Oscar; Kayser, Manfred; Hurles, Matthew E.; Stoneking, Mark; De Ungria, Maria Corazon A. (February 2011). "The Y-chromosome landscape of the Philippines: extensive heterogeneity and varying genetic affinities of Negrito and non-Negrito groups". European Journal of Human Genetics. 19 (2): 224–230. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2010.162. PMC 3025791. PMID 20877414.
  16. Chang JG, Ko YC, Lee JC, Chang SJ, Liu TC, Shih MC, Peng CT (2002). "Molecular analysis of mutations and polymorphisms of the Lewis secretor type alpha(1,2)-fucosyltransferase gene reveals that Taiwanese aborigines are of Austronesian derivation". J. Hum. Genet. 47 (2): 60–5. doi:10.1007/s100380200001. PMID 11916003.
  17. Yambazi Banda (2015). "Characterizing Race/Ethnicity and Genetic Ancestry for 100,000 Subjects in the Genetic Epidemiology Research on Adult Health and Aging (GERA) Cohort". Genetics. 200 (4): 1285–1295. doi:10.1534/genetics.115.178616. PMC 4574246. PMID 26092716. Subsection: (Discussion) "For the non-Hispanic white individuals, we see a broad spectrum of genetic ancestry ranging from northern Europe to southern Europe and the Middle East. Within that large group, with the exception of Ashkenazi Jews, we see little evidence of distinct clusters. This is consistent with considerable exogamy within this group. By comparison, we do see structure in the East Asian population, correlated with nationality, reflecting continuing endogamy for these nationalities and also recent immigration. On the other hand, we did observe a substantial number of individuals who are admixed between East Asian and European ancestry, reflecting ~10% of all those reporting East Asian race/ethnicity. The majority of these reflected individuals with one East Asian and one European parent or one East Asian and three European grandparents. In addition, we noted that for self-reported Filipinos, a substantial proportion have modest levels of European genetic ancestry reflecting older admixture."
  18. "Urban Population of the Philippines (2020 Census of Population and Housing)". Philippine Statistics Authority. 5 July 2022. Retrieved 7 May 2023.
  19. Larena, Maximilian; Sanchez-Quinto, Federico; Sjödin, Per; McKenna, James; Ebeo, Carlo; Reyes, Rebecca; Casel, Ophelia; Huang, Jin-Yuan; Hagada, Kim Pullupul; Guilay, Dennis; Reyes, Jennelyn (2021-03-30). "Multiple migrations to the Philippines during the last 50,000 years". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 118 (13) e2026132118. Bibcode:2021PNAS..11826132L. doi:10.1073/pnas.2026132118. PMC 8020671. PMID 33753512.
  20. Kim, Soon-Hee; et al. (2011). "High frequencies of Y-chromosome haplogroup O2b-SRY465 lineages in Korea: a genetic perspective on the peopling of Korea". Investigative Genetics. 2 (1): 10. doi:10.1186/2041-2223-2-10. PMC 3087676. PMID 21463511.
  21. Delfin, Frederick; Ko, Albert Min-Shan; Li, Mingkun; Gunnarsdóttir, Ellen D.; Tabbada, Kristina A.; Salvador, Jazelyn M.; Calacal, Gayvelline C.; Sagum, Minerva S.; Datar, Francisco A.; Padilla, Sabino G.; De Ungria, Maria Corazon A.; Stoneking, Mark (February 2014). "Complete mtDNA genomes of Filipino ethnolinguistic groups: a melting pot of recent and ancient lineages in the Asia-Pacific regio". European Journal of Human Genetics. 22 (2): 228–237. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2013.122. PMC 3895641. PMID 23756438. Indian influence and possibly haplogroups M52'58 and M52a were brought to the Philippines as early as the fifth century AD. However, Indian influence through these trade empires were indirect and mainly commercial; moreover, other Southeast Asian groups served as filters that diluted and/or enriched any Indian influence that reached the Philippines
  22. Delfin, Frederick; Min-Shan Ko, Albert; Li, Mingkun; Gunnarsdóttir, Ellen D.; Tabbada, Kristina A.; Salvador, Jazelyn M.; Calacal, Gayvelline C.; Sagum, Minerva S.; Datar, Francisco A.; Padilla, Sabino G.; De Ungria, Maria Corazon A.; Stoneking, Mark (2014). "Complete mtDNA genomes of Filipino ethnolinguistic groups: A melting pot of recent and ancient lineages in the Asia-Pacific region". European Journal of Human Genetics. 22 (2): 228–237. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2013.122. PMC 3895641. PMID 23756438.
  23. Go, Matthew C. (January 15, 2018). "An Admixture Approach to Trihybrid Ancestry Variation in the Philippines with Implications for Forensic Anthropology". Human Biology. 232 (3): 178. doi:10.13110/humanbiology.90.3.01. PMID 33947174. Retrieved September 11, 2020. Filipinos appear considerably admixed with respect to the other Asian population samples, carrying on average less Asian ancestry (71%) than our Korean (99%), Japanese (96%), Thai (93%), and Vietnamese (84%) reference samples. We also revealed substructure in our Filipino sample, showing that the patterns of ancestry vary within the Philippines—that is, between the four differently sourced Filipino samples. Mean estimates of Asian (76%) and European (7%) ancestry are greatest for the cemetery sample of forensic significance from Manila.
  24. An Inter-University Study published in the Journal of Forensic Anthropology concluded that the bodies curated by the University of the Philippines, representing the country, showed the percentage of the population that's phenotypically classified as Hispanic is 12.7%, while that of Indigenous American is 7.3%. Thus totaling to 20% of the sample representative of the Philippines, are Latino in physical appearance. Dudzik, Beatrix; Go, Matthew C. (2019-01-01). "Classification Trends Among Modern Filipino Crania Using Fordisc 3.1". Human Biology. 2 (4). University of Florida Press: 1–11. doi:10.5744/fa.2019.1005. Archived from the original on January 7, 2021. Retrieved September 13, 2020. [Page 1] ABSTRACT: Filipinos represent a significant contemporary demographic group globally, yet they are underrepresented in the forensic anthropological literature. Given the complex population history of the Philippines, it is important to ensure that traditional methods for assessing the biological profile are appropriate when applied to these peoples. Here we analyze the classification trends of a modern Filipino sample (n = 110) when using the Fordisc 3.1 (FD3) software. We hypothesize that Filipinos represent an admixed population drawn largely from Asian and marginally from European parental gene pools, such that FD3 will classify these individuals morphometrically into reference samples that reflect a range of European admixture, in quantities from small to large. Our results show the greatest classification into Asian reference groups (72.7%), followed by Hispanic (12.7%), Indigenous American (7.3%), African (4.5%), and European (2.7%) groups included in FD3. This general pattern did not change between males and females. Moreover, replacing the raw craniometric values with their shape variables did not significantly alter the trends already observed. These classification trends for Filipino crania provide useful information for casework interpretation in forensic laboratory practice. Our findings can help biological anthropologists to better understand the evolutionary, population historical, and statistical reasons for FD3-generated classifications. The results of our studyindicate that ancestry estimation in forensic anthropology would benefit from population-focused research that gives consideration to histories of colonialism and periods of admixture.
  25. Go, Matthew C.; Hefner, Joseph T. (14 January 2020). "Morphoscopic ancestry estimates in Filipino crania using multivariate probit regression models". American Journal of Biological Anthropology. 172 (3): 386–401. Bibcode:2020AJPA..172..386G. doi:10.1002/ajpa.24008. PMID 31943139.
  26. Yukyi, Nandar (2017-08-02). Craniometric Variation of Modern Asian and Hispanic Individuals Using Multivariate Analysis (Thesis).
  27. Stephanie Mawson, 'Between Loyalty and Disobedience: The Limits of Spanish Domination in the Seventeenth Century Pacific' (Univ. of Sydney M.Phil. thesis, 2014), appendix 3.
  28. Spanish Settlers in the Philippines (1571–1599) By Antonio Garcia-Abasalo
  29. The Unlucky Country: The Republic of the Philippines in the 21st Century By Duncan Alexander McKenzie (page xii)
  30. "Filipino-Mexican-Central-and-South American Connection, Tales of Two Sisters: Manila and Mexico". June 21, 1997. Retrieved August 18, 2020. Tomás de Comyn, general manager of the Compañia Real de Filipinas, in 1810 estimated that out of a total population of 2,515,406, "the European Spaniards, and Spanish creoles and mestizos do not exceed 4,000 persons of both sexes and all ages, and the distinct castes or modifications known in America under the name of mulatto, quarteroons, etc., although found in the Philippine Islands, are generally confounded in the three classes of pure Indians, Chinese mestizos and Chinese." In other words, the Mexicans who had arrived in the previous century had so intermingled with the local population that distinctions of origin had been forgotten by the 19th century. The Mexicans who came with Legázpi and aboard succeeding vessels had blended with the local residents so well that their country of origin had been erased from memory.
  31. "When Tlaxcalan Natives Went to War in the Philippines". LATINO BOOK REVIEW. Retrieved 2024-09-23.
  32. "Orden de enviar hombres a Filipinas desde México" (Consejo de Indias España)(English Translation from Spanish original: "Royal Decree to the Count of Coruña, Viceroy of New Spain, informing him that, according to information from Captain Gabriel de Rivera who came from the Philippines, on a journey made by Governor Gonzalo Ronquillo to the Cagayan River some Spaniards were lost, and that to make up for this lack and populate these islands it was necessary to take up to two hundred men to them. The viceroy is ordered to attend to this request and send them from New Spain, in addition to another two hundred that were entrusted to him from Lisbon."
  33. Convicts or Conquistadores? Spanish Soldiers in the Seventeenth-Century Pacific By Stephanie J. Mawson AGI, México, leg. 25, núm. 62; AGI, Filipinas, leg. 8, ramo 3, núm. 50; leg. 10, ramo 1, núm. 6; leg. 22, ramo 1, núm. 1, fos. 408 r –428 v; núm. 21; leg. 32, núm. 30; leg. 285, núm. 1, fos. 30 r –41 v .
  34. Intercolonial Intimacies Relinking Latin/o America to the Philippines, 1898–1964 by Paula C. Park page 100
  35. "The Unlucky Country The Republic of the Philippines in the 21st Century" By Duncan Alexander McKenzie (2012)(page xii)
  36. Garcia, María Fernanda (1998). "Forzados y reclutas: los criollos novohispanos en Asia (1756-1808)". Bolotin Archivo General de la Nación. 4 (11).
  37. "The Unlucky Country The Republic of the Philippines in the 21st Century" By Duncan Alexander McKenzie (2012)(page xii)
  38. Doran, Christine (1993). "Spanish and Mestizo Women of Manila". Philippine Studies. 41 (3). Ateneo de Manila University Press: 269–286. ISSN 0031-7837. JSTOR 42633385.
  39. "ESTADISMO DE LAS ISLAS FILIPINAS TOMO PRIMERO By Joaquín Martínez de Zúñiga (Original Spanish)" (PDF). 1893. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 9, 2016. Retrieved February 3, 2024.
  40. ESTADISMO DE LAS ISLAS FILIPINAS TOMO SEGUNDO By Joaquín Martínez de Zúñiga (Original Spanish)
  41. "How big were families in the 1700s?" By Keri Rutherford
  42. Newson, Linda A. (April 16, 2009). Conquest and Pestilence in the Early Spanish Philippines. Honolulu, Hawaii: University of Hawaiʻi Press. ISBN 978-0-8248-6197-1. Archived from the original on March 8, 2023. Retrieved February 3, 2024.
  43. Maximilian Larena (January 21, 2021). "Supplementary Information for Multiple migrations to the Philippines during the last 50,000 years (Appendix, Page 35)" (PDF). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 118 (13): 35. Bibcode:2021PNAS..11826132L. doi:10.1073/pnas.2026132118. PMC 8020671. PMID 33753512. Retrieved March 23, 2021.
  44. Buzeta, Manuel; Bravo, Felipe (1850). Diccionario Geográfico, Estadístico, Histórico, de las Islas Filipinas (in Spanish). Madrid: Imp. de D. José C. de la Peña. Retrieved March 18, 2026 – via University of Santo Tomas Digital Library and Archives.
  45. Diccionario Geográfico, Estadístico, Histórico, de las Islas Filipinas By Fr. Manuel Buzeta and Fr. Felipe Bravo, Volume 1, Published Madrid :(Impr. de J.C. de la Peña) 1850-1851.
  46. Buzeta, Manuel; Bravo, Felipe (1850). Diccionario Geográfico, Estadístico, Histórico, de las Islas Filipinas (in Spanish). Madrid: Imp. de D. José C. de la Peña. Retrieved March 18, 2026 – via University of Santo Tomas Digital Library and Archives(466).
  47. de Zúñiga, Joaquín Martínez. Estadismo de las Islas Filipinas (PDF). Princeton University. p. 113.
  48. Macrohon, Pilar (January 21, 2013). "Senate declares Chinese New Year as special working holiday" (Press release). PRIB, Office of the Senate Secretary, Senate of the Philippines. Archived from the original on May 16, 2021.
  49. Guanqun, Wang (August 23, 2009). "Chinese lunar new year might become national holiday in Philippines too". Xinhua. Archived from the original on August 26, 2009. Retrieved February 8, 2023.
  50. Full text of "Report of ... Austin Craig on a research trip to the United States, December 15th, 1914, to May 5th, 1915". Manila. c. 1915.
  51. Doeppers, Daniel F. (1994). "Tracing the Decline of the Mestizo Categories in Philippine Life in the Late 19th Century". Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society. 22 (2): 80–89. ISSN 0115-0243. JSTOR 29792149. Archived from the original on September 14, 2021. Retrieved July 22, 2021.
  52. Hedman, Eva-Lotta; Sidel, John (2005). Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century: Colonial Legacies, Post-Colonial Trajectories. Routledge. p. 71. ISBN 978-1-134-75421-2. Archived from the original on February 18, 2023. Retrieved July 30, 2020.
  53. Steinberg, David Joel (2018). "Chapter – 3 A SINGULAR AND A PLURAL FOLK". THE PHILIPPINES A Singular and a Plural Place. Routledge. p. 47. doi:10.4324/9780429494383. ISBN 978-0-8133-3755-5. Archived from the original on February 18, 2023. Retrieved July 22, 2021. The cultural identity of the mestizos was challenged as they became increasingly aware that they were true members of neither the indio nor the Chinese community. Increasingly powerful but adrift, they linked with the Spanish mestizos, who were also being challenged because after the Latin American revolutions broke the Spanish Empire, many of the settlers from the New World, Caucasian creoles born in Mexico or Peru, became suspect in the eyes of the Iberian Spanish. The Spanish Empire had lost its universality.
  54. "The Bagelboy Club of the Philippines – History of the Bagelboy Club". www.thebagelboyclub.com. Archived from the original on August 25, 2018. Retrieved October 18, 2018.
  55. Cooper, Matthew (November 15, 2013). "Why the Philippines Is America's Forgotten Colony". National Journal. Archived from the original on February 18, 2015. Retrieved January 28, 2015. c. At the same time, person-to-person contacts are widespread: Some 600,000 Americans live in the Philippines and there are 3 million Filipino-Americans, many of whom are devoting themselves to typhoon relief.
  56. "200,000–250,000 or More Military Filipino Amerasians Alive Today in Republic of the Philippines according to USA-RP Joint Research Paper Finding" (PDF). Amerasian Research Network, Ltd. (Press release). November 5, 2012. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 1, 2013. Retrieved July 11, 2016.Kutschera, P.C.; Caputi, Marie A. (October 2012). "The Case for Categorization of Military Filipino Amerasians as Diaspora" (PDF). 9TH International Conference On the Philippines, Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 1, 2013. Retrieved July 11, 2016.
  57. US-PH alliance 'stronger than ever'—envoy By Raymund Antonio (Manila Bulletin)"Beyond the economic and defense partnership, the US and Philippines maintain "meaningful people-to-people ties," which Carlson described is "the foundation of everything we do together." Some four million Filipinos and Filipino-Americans call the United States their home, while more than 750,000 US citizens are currently living in the Philippines, she noted."
  1. Including others such as Latin-Americans and Chinese-Mestizos, pure Chinese paid tribute but were not Philippine citizens as they were transients who returned to China, and Spaniards were exempt