Problem

Dr. Antonio Morga wrote his book "Sucesos De Las Islas Filipinas (Events Of The Islands of the Philippines)" in 1609. This book was read and annotated by Dr. Jose Rizal. In Chapter 8 of this book Dr. Rizal made comments that seem to refer to Bohol.
Rizal's Comments

In the time of Diodorus Siculus (first century B.C.), Europe received information regarding some islands to the farthest corner of the east. The information was brought by a certain Greek named Iamboule. He was there in the places he mentioned (to Sumatra at least). He wrote a relation of his voyage.

When Ptolemy of Alexandria (the originator of a system of astronomical reference) wrote his geography of the world in the 2nd century A.D. he made the writings of Iamboule as a reference.

In the region of the Fareast, Ptolemy mentioned of the islands called Sindae in the Latin text. Ptolemy called this place as saruvssai (sarovisay). Dr. Rizal said it was Mindanao, Leite, Sebu, etc.). It was inhabited by people called aginnatai. We know that Bohol is between Leyte and Cebu, so Bohol must have been part of the "etc."

Other Records

If we compare the saruvssai of Ptolemy and the 3-islands of San su recorded by the Chinese writer Chau Ju Kua in 1225 A.D., it seems to be similar. The historian William Scott says that San su was Mindoro or Palawan. However, the historical writer Ramon Echevarria says it is Cebu because it was near Pulilu which is the island of Bohol. At least, Dr. Rizal was of the opinion that Pulilu was Bohol.

The Connection

We can connect with Ptolemy's geography through the place called saruvssai (saruvisay) inhabited by the aginnatai (ag-inatay).

In some place in Bohol we can hear the word sarong; parong, which is a variation of padulong or going to in English. The word saruvisay can be modernized as "sarong visaya" or going to the Visayas. At least Dr. Rizal recognized the "Visayas" because he commented that it consisted of Mindanao, Leyte, Cebu, etc.

In the towns of Inabanga, Buenavista, and Getafe, Bohol, the expression "ag-inatay" is still very common. It is just a derogatory remark and nobody knows what is meant by ag-inatay. Some would say that it came from the sickness of chickens called "atay".

This argument could not hold water. The "ag" is a variation of the Bisayan definite article "ang", which is equivalent to "the" in English. So if you would want to refer to the chicken sickness you would just simply say "ag-atay" not "ag-inatay".

Another explanation would be that "inatay" is a combination of "INAhan + taTAY = INATAY" or "mother-father". However, if you will hear the use of ag-inatay you will notice that it does not refer to someone who is a mother and at the same time acting also as the father. There must be a better explanation.

An Explanation

It is possible that 1,800 years ago (Ptolemy's era) there were people called ag-inatay leaving in northern Bohol and were conquered by new comers.

History tells us that around the 7th century A.D. the first group of Indonesians came to our place. So they must have conquered the early inhabitants called ag-inatay. As a name of a conquered people, the word ag-inatay soon became a derogatory remark.

Consider the Sanskrit word diwata. It is a word older than ag-inatay. In Sanskrit, the word diwata means holy or divine. However, the Christian Filipinos of today would use the word diwata to mean worship of false gods, superstitious beliefs, etc. Since diwata was used by a conquered religion, it became a derogatory word.

The Greek

When I went to the Butuan Museum to view the artifacts recovered from Mabini, Bohol, I noticed artifacts that were of Greek design. I wondered how the artifacts came to Bohol. Did a Boholano went to Greece and brought back the artifacts or did a Greek came to Bohol and brought the artifacts?

The name of the Greek informant of Ptolemy was Iamboule. How does the sound of the name differ from the Bisayan "Iyang bulî", Still a very common expression in Northern Bohol? Why is "Iyang is "Iyang bulî", a cuss word? We can say that it has the same origin with ag-inatay.

Was It Bohol?

If Ptolemy's saruvssai is Chau Ju Kua's San su and Echevarria's Cebu, then we can connect Bohol to Ptolemy's records, because Bohol is part of saruvssai.