Rediscovering Fo’na and Pontan
This paper complements the film, I Tinituhon: Rediscovering Fo’na and Pontan, and aims to provide a better understanding of the CHamoru origin story by weaving together available linguistic and cultural knowledge to analyze the historical and contemporary literature. Research has revealed that historical records note various spellings of the two ancestors in the CHamoru origin story. This paper aims to provide evidence of linguistic and cultural knowledge to redress what was told about our CHamoru origin story in the historical records written by non-CHamoru people and to give it meaning. Furthermore, evidence in the historical records suggest that the sacred rock from which CHamoru are believed to emerge from may be in a different location than Fuha.
Narrative of the CHamoru people
Many civilizations have stories about their people’s beginning. These stories are passed down from one generation to the next through chants, songs, dance, traditional lullabies and other means. The stories explain how a culture began, and provide symbolism of the first ancestors. For the CHamoru people, our story begins with a brother and sister, understood today from historical records as Fu’una, the female, and Puntan, the male.
These siblings, according to historical documentation, created the universe and are regarded as the first ancestors. In honoring the first mother of the CHamoru people, the indigenous people would visit a rock considered sacred that chroniclers variously inscribed as Funna, Fuña, Fugna, Fu’una, or Fu’uña to pay homage. During this tribute, gifts such as rice cakes, fishing implements, farm produce, jewelry, and other items would be presented to the rock for a divine blessing. Afterward, the gifts would be given to the needy to cure sickness, at celebrations to honor individuals for their achievements, and to those who returned safely from the neighboring islands.
These occasions served as an opportunity to keep the story of our people alive and to remind the CHamoru people of our origins. According to historian Dr. Lawrence Cunningham, this rock was the site of many festivals during which the people celebrated the gift of life and the creation of the universe. These festivals were an important source of the continuation of the oral tradition, as during these times, the people spoke fondly of the brother and sister ancestors.
The oral story plays a significant role in CHamoru gender relations, and it is used to perpetuate CHamoru customs. In ancient CHamoru society, it is believed that women were not only the head of the family but also the future of the family lineage, partly because the admired sister in the origin story took more of an active role in the creation of the universe than the brother did. The brother would have been the Maga’låhi, the first-born son, who was considered an important member of the original clan. The leadership role was given mutually to the Maga’håga, the first-born daughter. Regardless of the difference in roles between men and women, at the heart of the CHamoru people and based on the origin story, the values and the views are that it is the duty of brothers and sisters to work harmoniously to ensure the survival of our clans which is evident in the brother and sister story.
Importance of CHamoru origin story
The importance of this origin story cannot be undervalued. Humans are curious and desire simple yet clear answers about how their world came to exist, how the first man and woman were created in their culture, where they came from, and where their souls will end up when they die. By sharing their origin story, the CHamoru people can learn more about our first ancestors, our fundamental traditions and values, and our cultural identity. This is an opportunity to understand our place in this world and our relationship with the land. However, the current spelling and understanding of the names of the two ancestors are unclear within the community. Our language is not standard in writing, and we have not adopted the orthography as a community and enforced it, which provides a variety of spellings and sounds when spoken.
Creation myths tell us how things began. All cultures have creation myths; they are our primary myths, the first stage in what might be called the psychic life of the species. As cultures, we identify ourselves through the collective dreams we call creation myths, or cosmogonies. Creation myths explain in metaphorical terms our sense of who we are in the context of the world, and in so doing, they reveal our real priorities, as well as our real prejudices. Our images of creation say a great deal about who we are.
Origin stories can help people set priorities, in knowing our values and prejudices, and in making sense of the world and our roles in it. Knowing our origin story will also aid in mapping the parameters of our cultural boundaries and learning how connected we are with our geographical territories and by satisfying the need to understand in a deeper context the names and importance of this story and the life lesson it communicates to us.
The origin story, for instance, explains the importance of geftao, which encompasses compassion, selflessness, and familial bonds. The story captures how the brother sacrificed his body to create the world and how the sister loved her brother so much that she helped him accomplish his dream: creation of the world. It also sets an example of encouraging CHamoru men and women, as siblings, to work together and actively participate in communal duties. This is the value of inafa’maolek, or to make good for all.
The birthplace of the CHamoru people and culture is in the Marianas archipelago, a group of 15 islands in Micronesia. Much of what is known about the ancestral times were documented by Europeans as early as 450 years ago as well as from more contemporary archaeological and ethno-historical work. It is believed that the CHamoru people had good road networks and well-organized agricultural practices and that there were two classes: the high class, Matao, and the group that paid respect to upper class, Manåchang.
As the CHamoru used a matrilineal system of government, children depended heavily on their mother’s reputation to become relevant and prominent in society. That is, a woman in CHamoru society could be either poor or rich based on her matrilineal clan or achafñak, her family wealth, her titles, or her names. The eldest female child in a manggåfa was also expected to receive much of the inheritance and respect of her parents compared to other children from the same clan.
However, contact and occupation from countries like Spain, Germany, Japan, and the United States have changed the values and traditions of the CHamoru people. When the first Catholic missionaries arrived, CHamoru adopted or were forced to accept Catholicism. Many gave up cultural practices such as the annual celebration of the origin story. This is evident given that the CHamoru people believe our culture and language came from Spain, Mexico, or the Philippines. This wave of cultural change has confused efforts to preserve the CHamoru identity. As we relearn information about ourselves and our culture, we must think critically about the information written about us.
In explaining the importance of the origin story, we must look at the historical records and oral histories within families, analyze the language in relation to the people, and review the historical and cultural information that may have been passed down.
Oral history can help preserve languages and dialects. By preserving the sound and cadence of spoken words, it can help keep languages alive… Although, in some cases, language barriers might exist and may pose a challenge that can alter the pronunciation of the words after it is transcribed and may be interpreted differently based on how it was written.Barbara Sommer
Transcribing information and analyzing texts
After contact with Europeans, the CHamoru language (as they understood it) was documented in various European orthographies as they sought to record native words, references to the origin story as told by CHamorus, observations of cultural practices, wars, village names, and important people during that time. This is why we have variations in the spellings, pronunciation, and understanding of the names of the two siblings and many other native terms in the historical records.
Principal researcher, Bernard T. Punzalan, of the Chamorro Roots Genealogy Project also sees this in the various censuses that he has reviewed and concurs that transcriptions of information were based on how the transcribers heard the terms and reflected the orthography of the time.
It was not until 1983 that the first CHamoru written orthography was adopted, and it was later modified in 1984. With the available orthography, the words in the historical records must be reviewed and cross-referenced with existing words in today’s vernacular. As we learn the language both spoken and written, spelling is important as it gives an accurate phonetic representation about how a word is actually pronounced.
The following provides examples of these discrepancies, whereby we must consider the following points when we encounter the various spellings of certain terms in the historical literature:
- The ethnic background of Taotao Lågu or Gilagu that documented native terms and observed and described cultural practices, customs, and traditions.
- The way the observer heard the word being spoken and the interpretation of the word.
- The transcription process of the words in the writing system of the observer that was familiar at the time in the various European orthographies.
- The interpretation and transcription of historical accounts by contemporary scholars.
- The interpretation and direct translation by students who are writing about the topic and incorporating these words, which results in the perpetuation of the inaccurate spelling and pronunciation of native terms.
Primary examples are evident in the following table, broken down by language, and with the various spellings of the village, sacred rock, and the name of our female ancestor. In reviewing the following tables, consider the various names and ask an elder about them, or do your own research and look up definitions of the spellings (if any).
Table 1.1 Various spellings in historical records
|Spanish||Fa’una, Fa’uña, Funa, Funna, Fu’una, Fu’uña, Fuña|
Table 1.2 Spelling of village names in historical records compared to today
|European (In historical records)||CHamoru (In current use)|
|Agadna, Agana, Agaña||Hagåtña|
|Sumay, Sumaye, Sumai||Sumai|
|Guan, Guajan, Guam||Guåhan/Guahǻn|
Furthermore, the following table lists words according to how they were spelled, the year, the location, the publication, and by which observer or author. This is a good illustration of the spelling inconsistencies that have occurred over the years.
Table 1.3 Spellings in different publications
|Funa||1602||Rota||See Bibliography||Pobre, Juan|
|Puntan||1670||Guam||See Bibliography||San Vitores|
|Fuuña||1670||Guam||History of Micronesia||Levesque/San Vitores|
|Funa||1670||Guam||History of Micronesia||Levesque/San Vitores|
|Fugna||1819||Mariana Islands||An Account of the Corvette |
L’Uranie’s Sojourn at the Mariana
|De Freycinet, Louis Claude|
|Puntan||1819||Mariana Islands||An Account of the Corette|
L’Uranie’s Sojourn at the
|De Freycinet, Louis Claude|
|Fuuna||1967||Guam||Discovering Guam||Beaty, Janice|
|Puntan||1974||Guam||Chamorro Legends on the|
Island of Guam
|Van Peenan, Mavis Warner|
|Fu’una||1991||Northern Marianas||History of the Northern|
|Putan||1991||Northern Marianas||History of the Northern|
|Putan||1992||Guam||Daughters of the Island||Souder, Laura T.|
|Fuuna||1992||Guam||Daughters of the Island||Souder, Laura T.|
|Puntan||1992||Guam||Ancient Chamorro Society||Cunningham, Lawrence J.|
|Fuuna||1992||Guam||Ancient Chamorro Society||Cunningham, Lawrence J.|
|Fuuna||1998||Northern Marianas||Tiempon I Manmofo’na||Russell, Scott|
|Puntan||1998||Northern Marianas||Tiempon I Manmofo’na||Russell, Scott|
Importance of historical revisionism
Influenced by access to new data or developments in science and technology, historical revisionism refers to the use of new evidence, facts, or opinions to critically reshape and reinterpret established historical records as well as the traditional views of cause and effect. It encompasses reviewing and changing mainstream conclusions about the historical details of cultures, societies, events, villains, and heroes, a process that usually leads to controversies, outrage, and backlash from individuals and supporters who are uncomfortable with change and the revising of their views.
History is usually written by those who win the wars, and it is no surprise that their historical accounts may be skewed and predisposed to favor their culture and ideological views, resulting in many errors and misunderstandings of the conquered.
As indigenous people, it is important that we interpret based on our understanding, our language, and our views and that we challenge the history that is written about us by making sense of what is being told of us and giving it profound meanings.
Understanding and reinterpreting the names of the origin story
According to Ernst Cassirer, “The essence of each mythical figure could be learned directly from its name.” Warren Rochelle states that “myths thus express truths of human condition in metaphoric and in symbolic language, and it is only in this language, in the narrative of the myth, that these truths can be understood.”
The I Fanlalai’an Oral History Project under the leadership of master of CHamoru Chant Leonard Z. Iriarte, the group’s research working team, and an educator and student of the CHamoru language, Jeremy Cepeda, are responsible for analyzing and understanding the names in the origin story based on linguistic symbolism as well as the story’s meaning in simplistic form.
The researchers eventually accepted the names Fo’na and Pontan after thoroughly reviewing the historical literature, looking at linguistic evidence, and identifying the symbolism behind the names. The word Fu’una is without meaning in our language while Fo’na means ‘first, ahead or origin.”
If you compare the two words Fu’una to Fo’na they are phonetically different. Pontan means “ripe coconut” and is symbolic of starting anew while Puntan (based on spelling) is believed (today) to be derived from Punta which means a “tip of a knife, point, or end” in Spanish. The two words may sound slightly similar when pronounced, however the meanings are different. The Puntan to Pontan difference is the use of the vowels “u” and “o.”
To provide further evidence in support of the change to the true name of Fo’na from the previous Fu’una, the following table lists two publications that noted the meaning of the female ancestor next to her name. Going forward in this paper, only Fo’na will be used, unless there is a need to reflect how they were written in the historical records and contemporary literature.
Table 1.3 Spelling and definitions in publications
|Fuuna||Author provides definition near the word “first” and also mentions that Fuuna is a “man” and not a woman as we know it.||1967||Discovering Guam||Beaty, Janice|
|Fu’una, Fu’ona||Author provides definition near both terms: “first” and “origin.”||1988||Guåhan: Guam||Sanchez, Pedro C.|
These two ancestors are not just any normal humans; they are a brother and sister who did extraordinary things to be remembered in this way. She and her brother, Pontan, are the first brother and sister in CHamoru society.
Analyzing Lopez’s map
In addition to the historical records, maps of the region were reviewed. The maps noted a place and/or island called, variously, Fuuna, Fuña, or Funna. This first map spelled the location of the rock as Funna, providing evidence that the area is west of Håga’ (Hågat) or south of Sumai when comparing Alonzo Lopez’s 1671 map to a 1995 map.
If you compare the maps and look at the various texts, you will find that there is no consistency in the spelling of most of the village names. If you look at the words listed and try to pronounce them as they are spelled, you will produce a variety of words that sound different to those understood by the community today. This situation has contributed to contemporary pronunciations, and therefore they cannot always be assumed to be an accurate representation of what was actually meant by these terms and phrases when spoken during that time.
Sacred rock, sacred village
In the historical accounts, there is mention of a rock the CHamoru people visited each year to celebrate because they believed they originated from that place. The rock is considered sacred by the indigenous people.
One of the first known written accounts about the social life and customs of the CHamoru people were reported by Fray Antonio de Los Angeles, who lived on the southernmost island, Guåhan, from 1596 to 1597, about 66 years before the establishment of the first permanent Catholic mission.
In 1596 Los Angeles wrote:
They say a woman gave birth to the land and sea, and to all that is visible…. They believed they are born of a rock—whence they all go each year for a fiesta.
This celebration was brought back as the annual “Lukao Fuha” event organized by Our Islands Are Sacred and Independent Guåhan.
One of the prominent villages during this time was Fo’na. In The Apostle of the Marianas, Fauña was called
a town sacred to the Indios because of a local tradition which related that it is the site of the origin of man, the first couple having emerged from some rock which later became an object of veneration.
Father Diego Luis de San Vitores further noted the importance of the sacred town:
Fuuña is celebrated among these natives, because they point out a rock there from which they believe that all men had their origin. It is near several harbors, and from one cape that points west, northwest, and which rises 36 to 48 feet above the sea, one can see at a great distance the ships that sail from Nueva España to the Philippines.
The only cape or peninsula that Guåhan has is the Uloti (Orote) peninsula, which today houses US Naval Station.
We closed the account of last year with the erection of the new church of San Jose in the town of Fuuña.Father Diego Luis de San Vitores
The town that the church was established in is Fo’na, which is very different from what Janice Beaty mentions in her text—that a church was built in Fuuna, as she spelled it, near the village of Humåtak.
Translator Rodrique Levesque noted that:
We can safely determine that the site of the ancient town of Fu’uña [Fuuna, Fuuña, Fuña, Funa] was next to what is now called Apaga or Apaca Point. A monument should be built on this site as it is the exact site of the sacred stone marking the spot where man was created, according to legend/story of the Chamorro.
San Jose de Fo’na
About two centuries later, the French explorer Louis Claude de Freycinet arrived in the Marianas in approximately March of 1819. One of the passages from Freycinet’s expedition suggests the importance of a town:
Overcoming the variety of a blockade to which he was being subjected, the new Superior of the mission wanted to found an establishment at Fugna, a township situated beside a rock celebrated in native superstition.
During the Spanish time, the Catholic missionaries decided that churches should be built on the islands of Luta and Guåhan. The church that was built in the village of Fo’na was called San Jose church. The Spaniards grouped this town with other nearby villages, such as Sumai, Tipalao, Håga’, Talisai, and Uloti. These villages are within a short distance from one another. Levesque goes on to say:
Well then, to eliminate any risk of missing contact with the passing galleons on their way to the Philippines, and the succor they bring and to expand or more easily confirm the faith in the people in and around Fuuña, often visited by the Indians of the neighboring villages, this site was chosen.
The Levesque translations further states:
The village called Fuña is famous among a few of them for a monument in the bush, which even now they point as being the place of origin of the whole human race, so they say or believe… At first, the Indians were none too happy about having the first residence in their village, but matters were smoothed out… There was a certain peninsula in the west truly pleasant and fertile, and rather ideal from our point of view, as it was beaten by the sea on all sides, with steep cliffs, and would admit entrance on only one (inland) side. If it were affected by force, it would be not a small relief to know that the rear and sides would be secured, and only the front would have to be defended. A cross was erected on this site, which was placed under the protection of Saint Joseph. The first task was to clear the dense wood. Within a short time, a house was erected, suitable for lodging two Fathers and 12 companions on the upper floor. The lower part was reserved for a church, until a more suitable place could be built for one.Louis Claude de Freycinet, 1819
This suggests that the 200-foot rock in Fuha in today’s Humåtak village may not be the actual site referred to in the historical accounts as the site that the CHamoru people believed to be the place of our origins. The historical record of the French navigator, Freycinet, who was a cartographer, noted that Fugna and Fouha are different and in two separate locations. The first researchers that reviewed the available historical records may have confused the location of the village of Fuha based on linguistic errors and derivatives of the place name that is still known as today.
The leaders of San Jose de Fo’na informed the churchgoers that it was forbidden to pay homage to the rock. They called it sinful and said that any natives that tried to visit it would be punished by the church. Due to the forced Christianization of the CHamoru people, the natives gathered to revolt against the Spaniards. One of the revolts was led by Agualing (Aguarin), who formed a league among the villages to massacre the Spaniards. Around this time the church of San Jose was burned down. In conversations with Lawrence Cunningham, he noted that the church was eventually relocated to the village of Inalåhan, where San Jose parish still exists. Nonetheless, wherever the origin rock is believed to be located, the symbolism of paying homage to our ancestors is of most importance, and the fact that we are reviving this tradition is worth celebrating.
Indigenous revisionism is a form of historical revisionism. Indigenous revisionism can be defined as an effort to rewrite and review history based on indigenous perspectives. This form of revisionism is usually inspired by the indigenous peoples, who feel marginalized, stigmatized, or culturally separated as a result of official historical records written by foreigners about the local people’s culture. We must continue to review the language and cultural practices as documented in the historical literature from an indigenous perspective so we can pass it on to future generations.
The objectives of indigenous revisionism are three-fold: to rewrite the incorrect versions of the indigenous cultures, to reclaim indigenous identities, and to change historical interpretations that are not consistent with indigenous language and values. Like most indigenous peoples, many CHamoru historians, such as Laura M. Torres Souder, believe that only the CHamoru people, not outsiders, can provide an untainted historical narrative of their culture. Contending that the CHamoru people can become once again our own storytellers, she notes:
We can interpret and give meaning to events that have taken place even if we haven’t lived that experience—even if it is not part of our memory, we can lend our cultural insights, our optics which are unique to us an indigenous people… We have our language which is valuable to our knowledge framework. So much knowledge is embedded in the CHamoru language. We have to trust ourselves, trust these young people who are coming up with ideas because who says that their understanding of things is not on target? This new interpretation, these new ideas come from any age. What makes us responsible thinkers is not our age, but our mindset. It is to reclaim cultural identity and that is what cultural revisionism or indigenous revisionism is all about.Laura T. Souder
Souder’s advice resonates among some CHamoru people; however, there is a movement to rediscover more indigenous terms and revive certain practices, such as the creation story, and reintroduce these findings to the community. This, from my understanding, is credited to the work of I Fanlalai’an Oral History Project, with its mission of composing chants devoid of Spanish loanwords and telling our stories the way our ancestors did. I Fanlalai’an also assisted Fermina “Mina” Sablan with the I Fino’Håya Project from Guam Community College, as well as many others.
Future of CHamoru culture depends on origin story
Humans are curious beings. They want to know what is beyond the sky and what is beneath the ground. They want to know where they came from, who created them, what their roles are in relation to the universe, or what would happen to them if they died. At the heart of their inquisitiveness is a desire to find answers to all these unknowns by understanding their creation stories, philosophy, history, and science and by utilizing technology to tell their stories. Although the story of Fo’na and Pontan is receiving the more attention, the colonization of our people since the first missionaries came, disconnected our people with our traditional practices. This is an important story that we are relearning about our people as it can help the CHamoru community reconnect with our spiritual, intellectual, and cultural traditions.
In order to achieve this understanding, the CHamoru community must address the lack of awareness of the origin story and acknowledge the historical names, not the names that evolved as a result of transcription errors. It is our responsibility to perpetuate the legacy of Fo’na and Pontan and to honor their true names. It is our duty as students, educators, scholars, indigenous revisionists, and cultural enthusiasts to continue to learn about ourselves and explore the depth and coverage of the CHamoru culture with the aim of inspiring younger generations to value our oral traditions and make sense of our cultural identity. This, in part, is a collaborative effort for acceptance of the correct spellings and pronunciations which will reveal the true meanings. A people without knowledge of their origin or creation story is like a family without a name.
The following is a reinterpretation of the creation story:
Fo’na yan Pontan: Marianas creation story
Gi tinituhon, i tinituhon, ge’halom hinasson i Yahulolo’, manetnon i hinafa siha, táihinekkok yan taichi.
Gi tinituhon, guaha hinemhom, ti mafa’titinas i tano’ yan i langet, guaha ginen sumåga maisa na taotao ni mafana’an Pontan.
Annai manmaloffan mígagagai na såkkan, mumalångu si Pontan, ya ha ågang i che’lu-ña palao’an as Fo’na, ni mafañågon táinana yan táitata taiguihi gi iya guiya. Manågo’ si Pontan nu i håfa u mafa’tinas nu i tataotao-ña.
Si Fo’na, ni kakahnå-ña, ha chule’ i tataotao-ña as Pontan ya ha fa’tinas i hilo’ tåno’.
Ginen i atadok-ña siha ha fa’tinas i atdao yan i pilan. Ginen i ha’of-ña, i langet. Ginen i tatalo’-ña i tano’. Ginen i babali-ña, i isa, ya ginen i tétehnan i tataotao-ña i ekso’ yan guåksalok siha, ya ha fa’tinas i saddok yan i tasi ginen i me’me’-ña.
Monhan mama’tinas si Fo’na nu i hilo’ tåno’, mumahålang ya manhasso na u fama’tinas taotao. Na u nina’siña gui’ chumo’gue ini, ha nå’en maisa gui’ guatu gi i tasi. Ya ginen ayu nai manhuyong i manmofo’na na taotao, i Taotao Håya.
In the beginning, the beginning, within the mind of the most high, all things were one, infinite and limitless.
In the beginning, when there was darkness, before the creation of the earth and the celestial bodies in the sky, there lived a man named Pontan.
After a long period of time had passed, Pontan felt ill, so he called on his sister, Fo’na, who, like himself, had been born without a mother or father. Pontan gave instructions as to the disposal of his body.
Fo’na, with her supernatural powers, took the body parts of Pontan and created the world.
With his eyes she made the sun and moon. With his chest, the sky. With his back, the earth. With his eyebrows, the rainbows, and the rest of his body the mountains and valleys and his urine to make the rivers and the sea.
After Fo’na created the world, she felt lonely and decided to create people. In order for her to do this, she gave herself to the sea. And from that moment appeared the first people, the indigenous people.
Editor’s note: Interpreted by Leonard Iriarte, Jeremy Cepeda, and Brandon L. Cruz. Translated by Jeremy Cepeda and edited by Dr. Laura M. Souder.
For further reading
Beaty, Janice J. Discovering Guam: A Guide to its Towns, Trails and Tenants. Tokyo: Tokyo News Service, 1967.
Cassirer, Ernst. Language and Myth. New York: Dover Publications, 1953.
Cunningham, Lawrence J. Ancient Chamorro Society. Honolulu: Bess Press, 1992.
Cunningham, Lawrence J., and Janice J. Beaty. A History of Guam. Honolulu: Bess Press, 2001.
Driver, Marjorie G. The Account of Fray Juan Pobre’s Residence in the Marianas, 1602. MARC Miscellaneous Series No. 8. Mangilao: Micronesian Area Research Center, University of Guam, 1993.
Farrell, Don A. History of the Mariana Islands to Partition. Saipan: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Public School System, 2011.
Flores, Judy. “Leonard Iriarte.” In Guampedia, last modified 13 April 2022.
Freycinet, Louis Claude Desaulses de. An Account of the Corvette L’Uraine’s Sojourn at the Mariana Islands, 1819. Translated by Glynn Barratt. Saipan: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Historic Preservation, 2003.
Historyplex. “What is Historical Revisionism and How Does it Influence History?” 2 July 2015.
Leeming, David Adams. Creation Myths of the World: An Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2010
Ledesma, Juan. The Cause of the Beautification of Ven. Diego Luis de San Vitores, Apostle of the Deposition on the Life and Martyrdom. Rome: The Sacred Congregation for the Causes of Saints, 1949.
Lévesque, Rodrigue. History of Micronesia: A Collection of Source Documents. Vol. 2, Prelude to Conquest. Québec: Lévesque Publications, 1992.
Risco, Alberto, SJ. The Apostle of the Marianas: The Life, Labors, and Martyrdom of Ven. Diego Luis de San Vitores, 1627-1672. Translated by Juan M.H. Ledesma, SJ and edited by Msgr. Oscar L. Calvo. Hagåtña: Diocese of Agana, 1970.
Rochelle, Warren. Communities of the Heart: The Rhetoric of Myth in the Fiction of Ursula K. Le Guin. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2001.
Rogers, Robert. “Gibraltar of the American Lake 1945-1950.” In Destiny’s Landfall: A History of Guam. Honolulu: University of Hawai`i Press, 2011.
Russell, Scott. Tiempon I Manmofo’na: Ancient Chamorro Culture and History of the Northern Mariana Islands. Saipan: Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Division of Historic Preservation, 1998.
Sanchez, Pedro C. Guahan Guam: The History of Our Island. Hagåtña: Sanchez Publishing House, 1987.
Sommer, Barbara W., and Mary Kay Quinlan. The Oral History Manual. 2nd edition. Lanham: AltaMira Press, 2009.
Marianas Variety. “Chamorro Historian Promotes Indigenous Revisionism.” 4 September 2017.
Souder-Jaffery, Laura Marie Torres. Daughters of the Island: Contemporary Women Organizers of Guam. MARC Monograph Series 1. Mangilao: Micronesian Areas Research Center, University of Guam, 1987.
Topping, Donald M., Pedro M. Ogo, and Bernardita C. Dungca. Chamorro-English Dictionary. Honolulu: University of Hawai`i Press, 1975.
Van Peenen, Mavis Warner. Chamorro Legends on the Island of Guam. Mangilao: Spanish Documents, Richard F. Taitano Micronesian Area Research Center, University of Guam, 2008.
Williams, David. A People’s History of the Civil War: Struggles for the Meaning of Freedom. New York: The New Press, 2012.
Woodward, C. Vann. The Future of the Past. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.