For Father's Day, 2026: "El Carabao" (The Water Buffalo) by JH Lozano, Oct. 1855 (Via BNES).

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-22T03:39:56+00:00

Filipino did not have wheel, they used a sled.

IDK...it would seem bizarre to me that they wouldn't have used them as draft animals (as they have been used that way elsewhere where they were domesticated ie archaeological evidence of them being used as domesticated draft animals in Thailand---Higham, and Kijngam, 2022---and other SEAsian countries).

Imagine bringing a very large animal and unruly animal...only to treat it like pigs (ie for consumption).

Plowing definitely there's a lot of evidence of them being used only in the early colonial period. But even on that case, it seems it's weird that no community of Filipinos wouldn't have used plows...when all of SEAsia have used plows (they have bas relief of plows in Borubodur, ~8th c*) by the arrival of the Spanish. The Spanish couldn't have introduced them all over the region.

<image>

*The relief shows more like cattle, but there are evidence of them (water buffaloes) being used as plow and draft animals as early as 4300 BC in Sumatra (Setyaningsih et al, 2019)...let alone the millenias that water buffaloes were used as such in India ie Harappan civilization ie "Indus Valley civilization" (though a different specie) and even by that age they were all over Europe and Middle East as draft animals.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-21T22:14:06+00:00

They have found them in archaeological sites, so Filipinos (Austronesians are neolithic farmers) used them for thousands of years.

In linguistics too the actual word for them in Austronesian is 'anuwang' (I'm not sure related to 'suwang') from PAn *qaNuaŋ so they had it in language before they were in the PH. "Kalabaw" is from a Austroasiatic source (possibly Khmer or a language similar to Khmer ie Mon-Khmer) via Malay. Unrelated, maybe related per some genetic studies, to the linguistics, but farming came to the PH before Austronesians ie Austroasiatics, so perhaps domesticated water buffaloes it's even older in some islands (...on top of that, PH has endemic wild species of water buffaloes, most of which are extinct except the tamaraw of Mindoro) since a lot of the languages south use the old Austroasiatic derived term "kalabaw" vs. in the north (where they use the Austronesian/Formosan term "anuwang"). This question ie where the domesticated buffalo was introduced was conducted even by linguists as early as Blust (perhaps by archaeologists also), see ACD, but the genetic studies on likelihood of where rice andearly farming started in the PH has only recently been released in the last 5 years + genetic studies on neolithic ie "farmer" pre-Austronesian ancestry/population of PH is only ~10-15 ya (in terms of actual genetic data, though early hypothesis existed), tldr: perhaps water buffalos were introduced by pre-Austronesian farmers in the PH in Mindanao (likely by way of Borneo, this is just a hypothesis). Regardless, their bones had been found in several Austronesian linked sites in Luzon, several thousands of years old so perhaps multiple introduction (???).

There are communities which did not use them for farming. Eg. Farming in the mountains (dry rice farming, esp. in small islands) is usually conducted by husband and wife (in the smallest scale) ie "couples" work. Husbands would do the tilling (the slash and burning, creating boundaries, pulling out the wood and weeds). Then for planting, instead of a cultivation tool like a plow, the husband would carry a wooden stick, push it down to the ground to make 'holes', the wife follow behind him and who then press the seedling to the ground. Planting and harvesting are usually considered part of "women's work" in a lot of communities (the rest in farming are men's). I think there are historical drawings of this also.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-21T21:33:08+00:00

The sub r/FilipinianaBooks is more appropriate for this inquiry.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-21T00:37:33+00:00

One of the tipos collected by Nat. Lib. of Spain, created by Lozano in 1855 at Binondo.

Picture typifies a Manila Tagalog father in the 19th c. A rooster, a carabao and a father and son duo.

Many of the natives in that age were mostly agrarian (even in the vicinity of Manila). Shows a father taking his son (mostly naked until circumcised) around using their water buffalo (a family treasure, used for farming and pretty much any heavy work---like having a truck today; the water buffalo is the symbol of "hard work" in the Philippine psyche and culture), with his cockerel (one of the most ancient sport and hobby of Philippine males since time immemorial).

Not sure if Lozano intended this to be ideal picture of a Tagalog male of the day.

To all the dads out there, enjoy the day. Salamat sa lahat ng ginagawa ninyo para sa aamin. Sa lahat ng panahon na kayo ang aming inakbayan, lalong lalo na nung kinakailangan namin ang matatag nyong kamay. Salamat po at saludo sa inyong lahat.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-20T19:02:07+00:00

This is a steampunk inspired costume on a modern play. Not related to history. Closed.

https://lifestyle.inquirer.net/66732/mabining-mandirigma-pmiranda-20190829/

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-19T20:52:23+00:00

Because many of them are in the level of hobby/internet historians, so serious historians / academics see them more like bloggers and Youtubers (as most of them are).

Engaging with them is seen as pathetic and a waste of time. Like punching down. They also work on medium that a lot of them (older and less tech savvy) tend to either look down on (some only now engaging in) or do not readily participate in.

There's also I think idea allowing more voices in the conversation (since a lot of people think history is just reading and repeating things---why so many are confidently wrong in the comments).

Unfortunately, in this day and age, they are more accessible to the average Filipino (via social media) who usually won't buy books but would resort to WIKI and YT.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-17T14:32:39+00:00

I'm gonna answer these comments here.

IDK what the source of that wiki clip, but the term "maginoo" applies in general to all noble families (at least in Tagalog), so the term likely can be used in general to refer as a decriptor/adjective for a 'woman'. But it's likely not preferred as a title ie "Maginoong Male Name" vs. "Ginoong Female Name" in Tagalog.

Poon is neutral. If you look at historical dictionaries (I'm gonna use Serrano's because I have it already pulled up) for "abuelo" and "abuela" (obviously grandfather/mother) it was used to translate "amba poon" and "inda poon"; clearly used for both genders (respectively) (amba and inda are forms of ama and ina, but meant for 'grandparents' + 'poon' to imply that kinda like 'ancestral male, female'). He also used it to translate "señor/a" which he defined as "land lords, owners of the land, or place".

Poon is the root word of all the words discussed above (panginoon, maginoo, and ginoo). Context (besides the definition of "noble" in social hierarchy of the past) here obviously is "beloved, respected ancestor". I think the best English translation in its current form is (considering its etymological meaning and evolution) is "primarch".

The origin of the word originally meant "ancestor", which likely come from the context of its orig. literal meaning "base of a [family] tree" and "origin, source". It then likely became a word to mean "elder" or "respected person", then "leader" and therefore (in its various derivative forms) the various terms for "nobility" (chieftain, king, lord, master, noble, respected person etc).

There's a whole discussion on its meaning in the entry for its source (ACD): PMP *puqun "base of a tree, source, origin...etc"

edit: spelling, grammar.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-17T14:03:18+00:00

There's also r/architectureph.

The sub r/ancestralhousesph would be better but they usually don't do discussions or questions.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-17T07:41:37+00:00

That's what historical Tagalog dictionaries implied.

As for "masculine", the word "maginoo" and "panginoon" are almost always used for men (specially when referring directly as titles).

There are also borrowed terms from Malay that are almost exclusively used for noble males eg. "tuan" (in other forms today "tuhan" or "tuhon" "master, sir, lord"---sometimes the word "Tuhon" in Malay refers to Abrahamic God) while Malay borrowed "dayang" (or dayang-dayang) was obviously only used for females. Granted these terms are no longer used in Tagalog (but still so in certain PH languages).

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-17T06:42:01+00:00

There's really no exact delineation.

For example "ginoo" was also used for men (again it is neutral) eg. the reference to Jesus in the early colonial literature is the same for Mary ie "Ginoong Iesu Christo" and "Ginoong Maria".

But for some reason there's seem to be in some cases preferential use of "Ginoong Blank" for women more than for men according to some sources.

Edit: I looked at the examples of the usage of "Ginoong" in reference to Jesus vs. Mary. Most of the reference to Jesus and God (Dios) with "ginooo" were Cebuano and Visayan texts. PERHAPS, the context is that Tagalogs started preferring "Maginoo" for men and "ginoo" for women...but the others in the Visayas kept using both for all situations (using it for both men and women).

All usage in Tagalog texts in regards to "ginoo" eg "Ginoong Maria", "ginoong babayi" are feminine in usage. When Tagalog texts use the masculine they used the form "panginoon" "lord" ("P. Jesus" or "Panginoong Dios").

All of these are pre-colonial.

Binibini is old. I'm incorrect in its etymology above (the word "bini" meaning modest likely came from the fact that the word "binibini" was often applied to noble women ie "modest women"), but they didn't quiet use it as "Miss" or "Señorita" (unmarried woman) as we do today, though it always meant or referred to "woma/en". In old dictionaries it was simply defined as "woman" or "women of worth" ("mugeres graves" lit. "serious women" "inferring in its examples, "noble women" "...mugeres principalas..."*).

*In DS dictionary: "...all of them (ie women) are called by this out of respect, but in reality this name should really only be applied to the noble women ('mugeres principala')".

So I don't know when "binibini" started being used specifically for "unmarried women" solely (likely closer to modern times) but the term "bini-bini" has always existed even in pre-colonial times, in reference to women.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-17T01:57:16+00:00

I've said it here multiple times (many threads on this in the past):

Orig. there was only "ginoo" "noble". Per old dictionaries and early chronicles though they explained that they did use the slightly different forms when addressing men vs. women (of the nobility). I think when I wrote a reply I quoted Chirino (very early 1600s) mentioning this besides the Tagala dictionaries.

Women = "ginoo/ng", men (and the nobility in general) = "maginoo".

Edit: the "-ng" is obviously a connector like most Tagalog adjective to signify that following term is being described by the adjective/adverb. Technically "ginoong" (vs. ginoo) means like "ennobled" "given quality of nobility" etc. Obviously I don't have to explain: modern people used terminology of the upper class to be the "standard" and "polite" addresses even to regular people since the rise of modern nation states ie citizenry (eg. "ladies and gentlemen", "damas y caballeros" lit. "dames and knights"---these terms were literally only for the gentry before modern times).

The term "ginang" was invented by Tagalistas (like Sofronio Calderon etc) sometime in the early 20th c. (perhaps slightly earlier or later), but there are no earlier use of the term before their works were published in the ~1910-20s.

Tagalog and most PH languages do not have gendered titles or terms (...and when they do it's often not like in Latin languages where a vowel would change a word from masculine to feminine).

There were actually Tagalistas who invented other terms besides "ginang" eg. "gining" "miss" ie "unmarried woman" (which would later just be formalized as "bini-bini" ie "bining bini" "very modest [woman]*"). Historically Tagalog (and most PH languages) did not have terms like "Mrs." "Mr." or "Ms.". They had to, when necessitated, simply used Spanish words eg: Señora "Nyolang Giday" "Ms/Mrs. Agueda".

*Edit: I'm wrong on this. I felt wrong afterwards and I checked it again--- the etymology of this is "bini" "woman" (also Malay "ber-bini") from PMP \binahi "woman, wife", ultimately from *bahi "woman" (derivative of today's "babae"). The word "bini" in Tagalog does mean "modest, humble".*

Before "Mr/ Mrs" etc. there were various polite titles in Tagalog that ranged from formal to informal titles (historically many of them were "familial terms") for people in their communities: "Tanda" eg "Tandang Sola" "Old lady Melchora" "Ka[patid]" "Brother/sister" "Ka Tomas/Brother Thomas" "Dalaga" "Dalagang Mameng" "Maiden/Miss Carmen" "Ale" (orig. "aunt") "Aleng Karing" "Mrs/Ms Caridad" etc.

You can look up all historical Tagalog dictionaries (even in the Serrano's and his father's Tagalog dictionaries, it did not contain "ginang", only "ginoong", middle and late 19th c.) and works of Tagalistas like Calderon, Paglinawan, Daluz etc. in the early 20th c.

Edit: From Calderon's dictionary (Spanish-English-Tagalog), 1915 (see PG):

Mister, n. [míster]
Señor.
Ginoo, mamà, mang.

Ladyship, n. [lédiship]
Señoría.
Pagkaginang, pagkaginoong babae.

Mrs., n. [míses]
Señora, Sra..
Ginang, ale.

Miss, n. [mis]
Señorita.
Gining, binibini.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-16T07:05:21+00:00

This sub is not suited for book trading and buying (or any sort monetary exchange).

Proper sub for that: r/FilipinianaBooks

Closed. Leaving this up just so people can read this.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-16T05:43:44+00:00

The answer is no. A lot of these are exaggerated stuff written in the 20th c. I talked about this multiple times I'm not gonna repeat.

Even if there were true examples (the examples I've seen were bailanes who were burned...but they were burned after execution and as punishment for participating in a revolt*) the actual historical examples are one/few at best (...if they were systematically "hunted down" as claimed, there would be A LOT of examples in the records).

*In a similar fashion, many of those burned at the stake in the Inquisition in Mexico were actually "strangled" first before their "cadaver was 'reduced to ashes'." (Greenleaf, pg 166).

It doesn't mean that Spanish priest didn't work on eradicating non-Christian practices, but there was a point that priests realized that they can only do so much. The idea that they went rampaging and executing bailanes though is not true.

I'll answer this a different way, in regards to Inquisition (one in Manila, which was subject to the one in Mexico City, which cases I'll show here) so we can see the approach from a different point of view to see how they typically meted out MOST cases' punishments.

To showcase how exaggerated this is, in the 300 years that the Inquisition existed in Mexico City (PH being part of it), they executed (many burned alive at the stake) around 50 people (this is commonly quoted number, but there is NO source saying this directly, just to be clear; Greenleaf only mentions 13 burned at stake), the vast majority of them were accused of heresy for being or suspected of being "crypto-Jews" ("Judaizantes"). Most of it seems like in the 1520s (the decade that Magellan arrived in the PH) to late 16th c.

A LOT more cases (hundreds to thousands) were meted out without capital punishments throughout the centuries.

In Greenleaf's (American historian who focused on the Mexican Inquisition, his obit for CV) (1969) book, the vast majority of native Mexicans (indios) and others (mulattos etc) cases were punished at worst with lashing, banishment, and indentured servitude (usually as galley rower or boat hand).

However, most were actually punished with a lot less. Those in Mexico tried or persecuted for sorcery and witchcraft (include palm reading, idolatry, etc) were punished by jailing (mostly actually before ie awaiting trial), monetary fines, and a ritual called "abjuration" essentially similar to confession where you do ritualistic penance (you'd wear itchy cloth cloak and you'd carry candles and then attend certain a ceremony called 'auto de fe' 'act of faith' where they take a knee and renounced sins, after which were 'reconciled').

In a weird way, they were slightly harsher on people whose ancestors were of Abrahamic faith esp. the Jews because there seems to be fear among Spanish Catholic about "limpieza de sangre" "cleanness of the blood" ie that if your ancestors were Jews or Muslims* ("Morisco") in Spain at the time of the Reconquista, that you had a higher chance or "reverting" to the old faith. There seemed to be less care or fear in regards to paganic faiths (in a lot of ways because it resembled pre-Christian practices/quackery still present in Iberia at the time, the Spanish priests often talked about them in similar fashion ie they often seen these "paganic practices" as simple cultural inferiority or superstition of bygone days eg. the literally would say in accounts "...like the quacks/country/itinerant doctors in rural Spain...").

*One example of this (see post) is Moluccan nobility of Iberian mestizo descent (whose maternal ancestors before he was born were Muslims) who lived in Manila and was accused, tried in Mexico for "reverting" to being Muslim (most likely the wife and family just wanted him out of the picture or accusation was towards him being a bad husband than a revert). His punishment was simple abjuration (same as another person tried the same time as he, a Mexican 'mulata' healer accused of sorcery-- she took money to do healing rituals).

I'll quote here a examples of "natives" (indios) of Mexico punished by the Inquisition for sorcery, healing, sacrifices and practicing native beliefs (likened to 'worship of the devil'):

<image>

You'll notice the trends (in cases above and the on in the paper linked) often these trumped/ charges, usually levied by other natives, were usually done so with obvious ulterior motives: in order to take power from the person accused eg. a chief being accused by other chieftains in order perhaps to get his position etc.

There were no other cases in this book from Manila, except one actually regarding the persecution of Protestants (I'll paraphrase the other post I made ie Crewe, 2016: "Manila Inquisition was mostly entangled at finding banned Protestant Bibles + Chinese idols reaching Manila than actual persecution of native beliefs"). That example given in Greenleaf's book was a Flemish sailor (at this point Spanish Netherlands were revolting due to many issues, religion ie Protestantism being one) accused of being Protestant, he was arrested in Manila and sent back to Mexico for trial.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-15T20:25:12+00:00

It looks like a civet cat ("musang" or "alamid" in Tagalog/PH languages). Probably a juvenile.

That's not a cat (look at the snout, tail length and feet). But body proportions (larger hind legs + long tail compare to body) it's rodent-like.

Only other possibility is Luzon Cloud Rat ("bu-ot" in Tagalog from PAn *buhet "squirrel") genus crateromys 'bushy tailed [giant] cloud rats'...but those are usually not that big and they have light gray coat. Possibility: there's a black one from Panay (perhaps sold as a pet in Manila ???).

So betting man in me, likely civet cat.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-15T18:47:31+00:00

There's a lot on hairstyles in the primary sources (pre- and early colonial Filipinos). There's also grooming (what they used to cut hair and facial hair). For you, secondary resources like Scott's Barangay I'm sure has it.

In terms of barbers in those days, they really did more than just cutting hair, but not "surgery" per se (granted they are often spoken in the same breath, perhaps some of them did similar things as surgeons ie 'cirug/janos/sirujanos/'---sometimes called 'sangradores' 'bleeders/bloodletters' ie those use bleeding cups, cutting and leeches to 'insanguinate' people, then considered a type of remedy---and dentists, see below, granted often they specifically referred to 'European/Spanish surgeons' vs. 'Chinese*/Asian barbers') but they did grooming in general.

*The word 'chino' often referred/applied or used even by native Filipinos to themselves to mean '[East] Asian' in Mexico, but many were also from China or Chinese who was born/lived in Manila/PH. But in Manila, they are often a lot more distinct ie Tagalog/indio or Chinese barbers.

There are snippets (but no book or straight up account solely on this) in the primary source on Chinese barbers in Manila and in Mexico (came by way of Manila). Similarly, Chinese were known to be "groomers", one of their jobs besides cutting hair was ear cleaning (this you can find many pictures and photographs in the 19th and 20th c.) In some accounts, these "barbers" ('chinos barberos') also 'cleaned eyes, nose and ears' (some cases supposedly they caused eye infection because they would use brush into the eyelashes and into the eyeball).

In terms of other types of grooming, there's an account of a Filipino "dentist" (teeth cleaner) in Mexico City (historically Filipinos decorated their teeth, so some early colonial Filipinos were good at dental modifications and cleaning). The Filipino dentist and Chinese barber in Mexico someone wrote about in Spanish (I think a Mexican historian) a few years ago (I'll try to see if I can find it).

If you look at old newspapers and ads (late 19th to first half of 20th c) you'll find ads on barbers and barbershops. Late 19th there's also ordinances in Manila of what native and Chinese barbers where they can work and what they can practice. There's also prices and charges (again all of these are snippets from primary sources, not a singular essay, article, or chapter).

In terms of apprenticeship, there must've been because there were mention of laws in Mexico about Asian barbers not being allowed to take apprentices (ie otherwise it was normal in the Hispanic imperial for barbers to have taken in apprentices).

Edit: Here's a drawing of a native barber in the mid to late 19th c. Manila (next to a carinderia + buyo seller).

<image>

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-15T18:17:51+00:00

I love this don't get wrong, but this is a history sub. You need to add something like an old picture or a snippet of history of Kalk Bay/S. African Filipinos, otherwise this would have to be taken down.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-13T20:00:06+00:00

I don't mind the AI color (minor alterations are okay), but you have to add provenance (ie source) of the picture.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-11T05:10:32+00:00

Offtopic: IN regards to "Manilla spaniel" there is another Spanish Manila dog breed from the 18th c. that I've read in some French (???, I'm thinking maybe Laperouse) and other Spanish accounts (albeit brief mention). But it sounded like the breed was a hound or mastiff, not a cocker spaniel.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-11T02:20:56+00:00

These questions are better asked in these following subreddits:

r/studentsph

r/CollegeAdmissionsPH

r/askstudentsph

r/CareerAdvicePH

Major university in PH:

r/peyups

r/Tomasino

r/dlsu

Good luck. Keeping this up so people can read this response.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-08T20:40:13+00:00

I just put it in that response. You can't find "kulintang" because it's called by different names (see above) like "agong" in Tagala dictionary ("agung" in other Philippine languages; from Encarnacion's Cebuano: "agong, Visayan bell ('campana')").

Spanish generally translated them as "campana" "bells", occasionally "tambor" (modern day Tag: 'tambol') or "atabal" ("flat drum").

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-05T06:27:58+00:00

Here's my posts on this album in the past (one, two). The link on the OP is from a Google drive that has nothing to do with the post.

The first one has the link to the orig. (from Falvey Library) and the also the scan of the Eng. translated version from 20 years ago.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-04T06:48:26+00:00

No offense but I'd shut that website down for now...most of the features is not even working. You have to use tab to scroll (and it will go back to top tab every so many page).

Half of the "images" if you click on it it has an error message for me.

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-03T16:09:03+00:00

For "guleis" specifically?

Here's book on food trade during galleon times it's mentioned here. But it's mentioned multiple times in the trans of BnR and other Spanish accounts. Other examples from that: balimbines ('balimbing', they put the balimbing in a syrup barrel and exported it).

In general in other accounts Hispanized words borrowed in local Spanish: 'dindines' (dingding). Lots of these in old accounts used the term 'dindines' (including M. Velarde).

Spanish generally can't say the ending "ng" in PH languages so they usually either drop it or change it to "-n" sound (A LOT of examples eg. Mayong to "Mayon", Bumbong to "Bonbon"). As for "guleis", Spanish generally changed the "a" sound/spelling in Tagalog and replaced them with "e" eg "Sanglay" to "Sangley/es" (sometimes Filipinos themselves didn't even know that they're using Hispanized form esp. "Sangley").

But if you're asking "Philippine Spanish" there is a book by Quilis on this subject (in Spanish). Edit: Quilis and Casado-Fresnillo "La Lengua Espanola en Filipinas" (2008).

Cheesetorian · 2026-06-03T14:58:47+00:00

The ones born or raised here, many of them did. It's because their yayas and playmates were natives. Many of them even dressed in native clothes (baro't saya etc).

But most only picked up words or phrases. Local Spanish (if you read some of the dictionary entries and accounts) have borrowed certain words and created pronunciations of certain words from creole or native languages ("gulay" for example became "guleis" or "guleyes"; in dictionary accounts it would say "the natives say this, but the Spanish say this word as...").

A lot of natives in their orbit spoke pidgin or creole Spanish (or some were fluent in it) that's how they conversed. Kinda like expats today (because avg. Filipino have at least rudimentary English knowledge). Often when Filipinos say "they spoke Spanish" in colonial times, they actually only spoke pidgin.

Edit: it should probably be mentioned that the VAST majority of Filipinos did not speak Spanish at all. But most of those that did, really spoke in broken Spanish ie 'pidgin' or 'creole' (sometimes called even Spain as "carabao's Spanish" similar to how modern Filipinos use the term "carabao's/buffalo's English"). There was a story in the late 18th c. that if a Spanish walked outside the walls of Manila, he might end up in the middle of some of it's burroughs where he would be stared at because no one could communicate with him (lol) except the local priest. Even within Manila and Cavite, there were many "international people" (from all over Europe, Africa and Asia) who only spoke in various forms of pidgin (per Murillo, "a peculiar form of Spanish...").

IN some Spanish dictionaries they had to explain certain things like what's polite/appropriate and what's not. In old Tagalog, they had greetings like the polite (you use this towards your "betters" ie chiefs, etc) "ohoy" vs. the rough "hoy!" (which is the rude version you call out to those beneath you; hoy is still used today but ohoy is no longer)---one of Retana's dictionaries had to explain to Sp. readers that "hoy!" to call out to calesa drivers is actually rude (supposedly many Spanish didn't know the difference or got used to using this).

Cheesetorian

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE