Talk:Limasawa

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Islands

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles

The Limasawa Hoax

The Philippines foremost hero Dr. Jose P. Rizal is on record the first Filipino and the first Philippine historiographer to have read an authentic Antonio Pigafetta account.

He read the Carlo Amoretti edition of the Ambrosiana manuscript, the only Italian text of four extant manuscripts of Pigafetta’s account of Magellan’s voyage. Amoretti, conservator at a Milan library, had discovered in 1798 the lost Pigafetta manuscript, and in no time had his transcription of the cancelleresco script of the Ambrosiana codex.

Amoretti is the unknown and unsung author of the notion Limasawa, a place name he saw on a map of Jacques N. Bellin, is Magellan’s island-port Mazaua. Amoretti had not read the original story of Limasawa by Fr. Francisco Combés, S.J. who like Amoretti and Bellin had not read a single eyewitness account. W.A. Retana’s edition of Combes has been digitized and published on the web at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer&cc=philamer&idno=ahz9273.0001.001&q1=Limasaua&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=5.

Before Amoretti’s edition what Philippine historians and historiographers had read was the false story of Magellan’s circumnavigation by Giovanni Battista Ramusio, 16th century travel writer. (Go to http://www.bibliotecaitaliana.it/xtf/view?docId=bibit001323/bibit001323.xml&chunk.id=d6313e18525&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d6313e18525&brand=default) Ramusio’s work, which Henry Harrisse charged is a plagiarism (see Page 250, Bibliotheca americana vetustissima. A description of works relating to America, published between 1492 and 1551, click http://www.archive.org/details/bibliothecaam00harrrich), is the source of the geographical blunder making Butuan, in 16th century geographical conception a huge portion of Mindanao stretching from Surigao ending at Quipit in Zamboanga del Norte, instead of Mazaua the anchorage of Magellan’s fleet from March 28-April 4, 1521. Mazaua was a tiny isle which eyewitness Ginés de Mafra said had a circumference of 3 to 4 leguas or an area of some 39.30 square miles or up to 3930 hectares. (For the mathematical conversion of circumference/perimeter of Mazaua, go to Page 56, click http://www.xeniaeditrice.it/mazaua.pdf)

Rizal was researching in 1889, almost a century after Amoretti’s book came out, at the British Museum at London, for his edition of Antonio Morga’s Sucesos de las Islas Filipinas (Rizal’s ed. is at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;view=toc;idno=AHZ9387.0001.001) and chanced upon Amoretti. Rizal forthwith wrote on 4 February 1889 Plaridel (Marcelo H. del Pilar), urging him to tell the Filipino intellectual community to study Italian so they can read “Italian manuscripts that deal with the first coming of the Spaniards in the Philippines. A companion of Magellan writes them. As I have no time to translate them on account of my numerous chores, it would be advisable that a countryman of ours translates them into Tagalog or Spanish so that it may be known how we were in 1520. Italian is easy. In one month it can be learned with the Method of Ahn. Now I am studying Dutch.”

By that time a number of scholars had already repeated unthinkingly Amoretti’s “Limasawa may be Mazaua.” At almost every repetition Amoretti’s “may be” would become “is” with increasing degree of certainty without any proof and supportive argument added. Not one recalled the axiom, “To assert is not to prove.” Amoretti offered one—and only one—argument to support his assertion: That Limasawa is in Pigafetta’s latitude for Mazaua, 9 deg. 40 min. North. This is invalid on several points: 1) Limasawa is not in that latitude but at 9 deg. 56 min. N; 2) There are two other fixes for Mazaua, Albo’s 9 deg. 20 min. N found in the London copy. This is unknown to Philippine historians who’re know only of the Albo of the Madrid copy which is found in Navarette and read by most via Robertson’s English translation. The third fix is The Genoese Pilot’s 9 deg. N; 3) More to the point nowhere does Combes say his Limasawa is the port of March-April 1521. Combes, whose knowledge is based on Ramusio, dismissed the Mazaua account found in Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas.

To be fair, Rizal did not endorse Amoretti’s dictum. Indeed, he was oblivious to the Mazaua issue, his interest lay in ethnographical information in Amoretti. Even as he promoted the spread of Amoretti’s edition, Rizal was in no way or form a promoter of the Limasawa=Mazaua idea.

You can access the letter of Rizal at the website of Dr. Robert L. Yoder at http://joserizal.info/.

Here is a chronological study of the evolution of the Limasawa “may be” idea from belief to orthodoxy, then myth which the National Historical Institute turned into an accidental hoax in 1998 in a “decision” of the Gancayco panel made up of retired Associate Justice Emilio Gancayco, historian Dr. Ma. Luisa T. Camagay, Atty. Bartolome C. Fernandez Jr., Dr. Samuel K. Tan, Asst. Dir. Emelita V. Almosara, and Dr. Augusto V. de Viana, secretary of the panel.

Amoretti’s Dictum…Tracing how a false assertion became historical orthodoxy

1667 Fr. Francisco Combés, S.J. writes a book Historia de las Islas de Mindanao, Iolo, y sus adyacentes...Madrid: Herederos de Pablo de Val, 1667. It contains a 3-paragraph epitome of Magellan’s sojourn in Surigao Strait which says the port of March-April 1521 was Butuan, an idea lifted from Ramusio. There is no mention of an Easter mass on 31 March 1521. Combés talks of a cross being set up at Butuan. His three paragraphs were translated by pro-Limasawa writer, Fr. Miguel A. Bernad, and may be read at http://books.google.com/books?id=NbG7kHtBma8C&pg=PA1&dq=First+mass+in+Limasawa&ei=6w27SZi7IoLKlQS8neDVAg#PPA4,M1. Combés had not read one single primary history of Mazaua; these came out only over a century after him: Antonio Pigafetta saw print only in 1800, some 135 years after the death of Combés. The others followed much later than Pigafetta: The Genoese Pilot, 1826; Francisco Albo, 1837; Ginés de Mafra, 1920; Martín de Ayamonte,1933. In fact Combes’ Limasawa unintentionally took the place of Gatighan, the waystation on Magellan’s fleet sailing to Cebu. Limasawa and Gatighan are one and the same.

1800 Carlo Amoretti published his Italian transcription, revision, with notes, of Antonio Pigafetta’s manuscript known as Ambrosiana codex, entitled Primo viaggio intorno al globo terracqueo ossia Ragguaglio della nauigazione alle Indie orientali per la via d' occidente fatta dal caualiere Antonio Pigafetta...sulla squadra del capit. Magaglianes negli anni 1519-1522. Ora pubblicato per la prima volta , tratto da un codice ms. della Biblioteca Ambrosiana di Milano e corredato di note da Carlo Amoretti; contiene anche: Raccolta di vocaboli fatta dal caualiere Antonio Pigafetta ne' paesi, ove durante la navigazione fece qualche dimora. Con un Transunto del Trattato di nauigazione dello stesso autore, In Milano : nella stamperia di Giuseppe Galeazzi, 1800. In two footnotes, on Pages 66 and 72, Amoretti surmised that Magellan's port--which he named Massana and appears otherwise as Mazaua or Mazzaua in the clear calligraphic writing of the Beinecke-Yale codex, where the Armada de Molucca anchored from March 28 to April 4, 1521--may be the Limassava inJacques N. Bellin’s map of the Philippines. On Page 72, Amoretti offers one proof in support of his guess: the latitude of Limassava is at Pigafetta's latitude for Mazaua at 9°40' North. He was mistaken on two counts, Limasawa is at 9°56' North while Mazaua had three latitude readings by three members of the Armada, 9°40' N by Pigafetta, 9°20' N by Francisco Albo, and 9° N by the Genoese Pilot.

1801 French translation of Amoretti’s edition of Ambrosiana. The two notes are on Pages 79 in the book (Page 161 in pdf). Note on latitude is on Page 87 in the book (Page 169 in pdf). Click http://gallica2.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k828291.print?premierePageChoisie=1&dernierePageChoisie=-1&formatDownload=PDF&printOrDownload=download&debutSelection=premierePage&finSelection=finOuvrage&modeAffichage=image&f=1&valueLastPage=509&nombrePage=null

1803 James Burney, Discoveries in the South Sea or Pacific Ocean, Part I, Page 61 in the book, Page 94 in the pdf, “Believed to be the island, marked in some of the present charts, Limasava, near the south end of the island of Leyte. Pigafetta calls its latitude 90 40’ North, and its distance from Humunu 25 leagues. French Copy, p. 87.” Click http://books.google.com/books?id=Mf0nAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=James+Burney&ei=I-a4SfelCZL-lQS6tPzuCw#PPR1,M1.

1814 John Pinkerton’s English translation of Amoretti’s French edition is printed. See Page 330 regarding Amoretti supposition Limasawa may be “Massana” or “Mazzana.” URL: http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=WxsnAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA288&dq=Pigafetta%27s+Voyage+Round+the+World&lr=&ei=i-0xSYDtHpuKkAS526zADQ&hl=en#PPA330,M1 On latitude supposition, see Page 333, URL: http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=WxsnAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA288&dq=Pigafetta%27s+Voyage+Round+the+World&lr=&ei=i-0xSYDtHpuKkAS526zADQ&hl=en#PPA333,M1

1836 Sentence on Page 50 of An historical account of the circumnavigation of the globe, and of the progress of discovery in the Pacific Ocean, from the voyage of Magellan to the death of Cook. Illustrated by a portrait of Cook, engraved by Horsburgh after Dance; a facsimile of his observations of the transit of Venus in 1769; and twenty-one highly-finished engravings by Jackson states, “At a small island named Mazagua, and supposed to be the Limasawa of modern charts…”, see http://www.archive.org/stream/historicalaccoun00edinuoft

1874 Note 1, Page 79, Lord Stanley of Alderley, The First Voyage Round the World: “The King of Butuan was also King of the Island of Massaua, between Mindanao and Samar. Note, Milan edition.” Click http://digital.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=sea;cc=sea;idno=sea061;q1=Junk%20of%20Ciama;frm=frameset;view=image;seq=13;page=root;size=s Note 1, Page 83, Lord Stanley…: “If Massaua is the island of Limassava of Bellin’s map, it is in 9 deg. 40 min. N. latitude, but in 190 deg. W. longitude from the line of demarcation. Note, Milan edition.” Click http://digital.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pagevieweridx?c=sea&cc=sea&idno=sea061&q1=Junk+of+Ciama&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=169

1889 Jose Rizal tells Marcelo H. del Pilar in a letter dated February 4 to get one Filipino to study Italian as he has seen a manuscript (Carlo Amoretti’s 1800 edition of Pigafetta) that talks of the Philippines at the time of the entry of Spanish in the archipelago in the 16th century. Miguel Bernad, S.J., referred to this letter in his article (http://books.google.com/books?id=NbG7kHtBma8C&pg=PA1&dq=Limasawa&ei=7K9MSY-IGY3WlQTLpKzWBA#PPA18,M1) but failed to see its import; Bernad and all historians who have worked on this problem never saw this book as the source of the “Limasawa may be Mazaua” notion. Click http://joserizal.info/Writings/Letters/Reformer/ref_ltrs_1889_a.htm#104._%C2%A0Rizal,_London,_4_February_18__%7C%7C__To_Marcelo_H._del_Pilar

1890 José Toribio Medina, Chilean historian, published the first Spanish translation of Carlo Amoretti’s French edition of Antonio Pigafetta’s Ambrosiana codex, in Colección de documentos ineditos para la historia de Chile, Tomo II, Pp. 417-524. This is the Pigafetta read by Fr. Pablo Pastells, S.J., which he cites in his edition of Francisco Colin’s Labor evangelica de los obreros de la Compañia de Jesus en las islas Filipinas (1904). This has yet to be digitized and published on the Web.

-- F.H.H. Guillemard, The Life of Ferdinand Magellan and the First Circumnavigation of the Globe 1480-1521, states on Page228-29, “[The fleet] arrived on the morning of March 28th at Mazzava or Mazaba, a small island which now appears upon the charts as Limassaua.” Guillemard’s biography even now is viewed as the premier biography in English on Magellan and has had deep impact on succeeding works on the circumnavigation. Guillemard was a meticulous, lucid thinker who observed rigorously the canon of evidence and logic. See http://ia341027.us.archive.org//load_djvu_applet.cgi?file=1/items/lifeofferdinandm00guilrich/lifeofferdinandm00guilrich.djvu.

1897 Wenceslao E. Retana came out with an edition of Historia de Mindanao y Joló: por el p. Francisco Combés…Obra publicada en Madrid en 1667, y que ahora con la colaboración del p. Pablo Pastells ... sanca nuevamente á luz W. E. Retana. In a note, written by Pastells, it asserts the first mass was not held at Butuan but does not say it was in Limasaua, as Combés story is silent on this. Combés only talks of a cross being set up in Butuan which is his port for the March-April 4 period. See http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;q1=Messana;rgn=full%20text;idno=aqn8199.0001.001;didno=aqn8199.0001.001;view=image;seq=00000078

1899 In Manuel Walls y Merino Spanish translation of Amoretti, Primer viaje al rededor el mundo, from the combined Italian, French, and English texts, footnote 67 on Pages 135-136 states: “Según este relato, parece evidente que la primera misa que se celebró en el archipiélago Filipino, lo fué en la isla que hoy se llama Limasaua.” To be precise, Amoretti’s words were tentative if probabilistic, “The King of Butuan was at the same time King of Massana, or Mazzana, probably the Limassava of Bellin.” Click http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=WxsnAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA288&dq=Pigafetta%27s+Voyage+Round+the+World&lr=&ei=i-0xSYDtHpuKkAS526zADQ&hl=en#PPA330,M1. Walls' edition is accessible at Europeana, http://www.europeana.eu/portal/record/02428/44FF902F422A01CD419F798C0C370F0B9DFC0EAA.html?start=24&query=what%3AViajes+alrededor+del+mundo+OR+dc_type%3AViajes+alrededor+del+mundo&startPage=13. It has also been published in full by Harvard University, at http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/11301550?n=1&imagesize=1200&jp2Res=.25&printThumbnails=no.

1903 Note 25, Vol. 2, Blair & Robertson, Page 64, states: “Regarding Mazaua (Massava, Mazagua) Stanley cites—in First Voyage by Magellan (Hakluyt Society Publications, no. 52), P. 79—a note in Milan edition of Pigafetta’s relation, locating Massaua between Mindanao and Samar. It is doubtless the Limasaua of the present day, off the south point of Leyte.” This is called in logic the fallacy of hyperbole. The idea Limasawa=Mazaua was never “doubtless” and there was never any proof nor is there today to back it up. Click http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;idno=afk2830.0001.002;size=l;frm=frameset;seq=66. In Footnote 59, Page 193, of “Relation of the Western Islands Called Filipinas” by Captain Artieda, Vol. 3, BR, Robertson asserts, “Mazoga is the same as Massava of other early writers; it is now Limasaua Island.” See http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;idno=afk2830.0001.003;q1=Limasaua;size=S;frm=frameset;seq=191.

1906 Note 263, Vol. 33, B&R, “In MS. 5,650, ‘Mazzaua;” in Eden, ‘Messana;’ in Mosto, ‘Mazana,’ while in the chart it appears as ‘Mazzana;’ Transylvanus, ‘Massana;’ and Albo, ‘Masava.’ It is now called the island of Limasaua, and has an area of about ten and one-half square miles.” Click http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;idno=afk2830.0001.033;q1=Mazzana;size=s;frm=frameset;seq=336. Robertson has been mistaken by some in the Philippines as the first to assert Limasaua is Mazaua, citing above as authority. Not to put too fine a point on it, it was Robertson’s endorsement of the Kalantiaw Code, in an international conference in San Francisco, U.S.A., that ensured acceptance of this greatest hoax in Philippine history. Go to http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer&cc=philamer&idno=afj6028.0001.001&q1=The+Pacific+Ocean+in+History&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=170.

1908 Committee made up by Trinidad Herminigildo Pardo de Tavera, Dr. Najeeb Mitry Saleeby, Carlos Everett Conant and Emerson B. Christie revised map of “The World Book Co.” and spelled the name “Limasawa” by way of resolving the confusion of the many names the supposed anchorage of Magellan’s fleet was then known to have, i.e., Limasaoa, Limasaua, Limasana, Limasava, Limasagua, Dimasaua, Dimasawa, Dimasagua, Simasaua, Masaua. This orthography was adopted by government’s “Philippine Committee on Geographical Names” which was created in 1903 by Exec. Order No. 95 signed by American Civil Governor William Howard Taft. Tavera was its first chair. The Committee’s thinking was wholly based on Tavera’s one-sentence dictum that the mass of March 31, 1521 was not in Butuan but in Limasaua. No one traced this notion to “the Milan edition” and precisely to Amoretti. The discussion on how the Committee arrived at “Limasawa” go to http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;q1=Limasawa;rgn=full%20text;idno=aqp4775.0001.001;didno=AQP4775.0001.001;view=image;seq=192;page=root;size=s;frm=frameset;

Succeeding writings on Mazaua geography, referred to in Philippine historiography almost exclusively as “The site of the first mass…” including the pronunciamentos of the National Historical Institute from 1950 up to today, 25 May 2009, have been fossilized on this bedrock of Limasawa thinking—the one sentence Tavera remark which proves nothing, and is not even a clear notion of the historical fact it seeks to establish.

1996 Vicente Calibo de Jesus (http://www.google.com.ph/search?q=Vicente+Calibo+de+Jesus&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a) in a study submitted to the National Historical Institute, challenges the validity of the framework, “Where is the site of the first mass, Limasawa or Butuan?” He traces the Butuan error to Giovanni Battista Ramusio--as earlier pointed out by W. H. Scott in a short piece at Kinaadman, a journal published by Xavier U of Cagayan de Oro City—who mystifyingly and inexplicably replaced Mazaua, the island port, with Butuan which is not an island. De Jesus also traced the Limasawa error to Amoretti. The proposition, he points out, consists of the logical fallacy of the false dichotomous question which asks the reader to pick between two false options, Limasawa whose story has no reference to a mass and Butuan which is not an island and comes from a translation blunder. The solution, the study suggests, is to list all properties of Mazaua an operation called analytical definition. Only after making such an inventory should one ask, “Magellan’s port, Mazaua: Is it Limasawa or Butuan?” In fact one will not ask that question anymore after a simple historiographical review of the literature. It also adds for the first time the revolutionary insights of Gines de Mafra, the only crewmember in Magellan’s fleet, to return to Mazaua staying there for four to six months in 1543, and writing his account after his second stay.

1998 The NHI officially proclaims once more, for the 4th time, Mazaua was Limasawa; that the Ginés de Mafra account was fake even as it fully knew it’s not; it decides the discussion must still be “Where is the site of the first mass…?” The NHI “decision” is published on several sites on the Web, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:First_mass_in_the_Philippines, http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Talk:Gines_de_Mafra.

2000 De Jesus brings the Mazaua issue to an international audience, The Society for the History of Discoveries, at its annual conference on October 13, 2000 held at the U.S. Library of Congress, Washington D.C. (Go to http://www.sochistdisc.org/annual_meetings/annual_2000/annual_meeting_2000_abstracts.htm) It was a deliberate move to yank Mazaua outside the stranglehold of casuists who have no bona fides in the first place. He reframed the issue out of its religious mooring which has served to obfuscate discussion, placing it in the context of the history of navigation, geography, exploration, discovery, archaeology. He predicted Mazaua will be found at latitude 9 degrees North, based on the correlation of testimonies of Pigafetta, Albo, The Genoese Pilot, Martin de Ayamonte, using de Mafra’s testimony as the axial unifying, harmonizing, correlating principle to make a compelling historical fact. His paper, and its revised edition, are published on various sites, e.g., http://firstcircumnavigator.tripod.com/Mazaua.htm, http://butuanon.org/essays/vdjmazaua.htm, http://www.cebuasia.com/2008/02/08/cebuasia-unveils-vicente-de-jesus-mazaua-magellans-lost-harbor/, butuanon.org/essays/MarineScienceInstitutePaper.pdf, www.xeniaeditrice.it.

2001 A group of geologists, archaeologists led by the Philippines first geomorphologist, Dr. Ricarte S. Javelosa, discovers an isle exactly as predicted. The isle consists of the geo-political entities of Barangays Pinamanculan and Bancasi in Butuan City. Artefacts are found showing the isle was inhabited before the Spanish entrada. A bronze pestle, of European provenance, was also dug up at the isle but it hasn’t been dated. A comprehensive excavation at a cove where most likely the Mazaua village was located has yet to be undertaken. This scientific investigation is discussed on Page 74 of his paper above.

2008 The National Historical Institute calls for another talk exercise although this time it obviously has learned, from my advice, that “Where is the site…?” is not a valid proposition. NHI refuses to apologize for its falsification of history, it pretends it has not done anything wrong, it assumes no new ground has been gained that removed the issue away from local, parochial, insular historiography and into global archaeology, nuclear science, geomorphology, and other allied physical sciences. It still operates under the delusion, as stated by former NHI Chair Samuel K. Tan and reaffirmed by its current Chair Ambeth Ocampo, that only NHI can proclaim “the ultimate truth” of any historical issue. No civilized group of historians has had to work under the weight of such self-delusion. And it forgets for over half a century it has been proclaiming out of incompetence and lack of true scholarship the ultimate untruth, that Limasawa is Mazaua. In 1998 it did this with impunity and lack of integrity. It might be apropos to remind NHI that no one among its rank has any bona fides in navigation history; and since Mazaua has become a legitimate issue among the world’s experts in the history of geography, navigation, cartography, etc. shouldn’t NHI first show its credentials before it enters the discussion? Picasa has a graphics-rich presentation of the hoax perpetrated by Ambeth R. Ocampo and his colleagues at the National Historical Institute. Go to https://picasaweb.google.com/103135314023445858830/AmbethOcampoSLimasawaHoaxOhWhatATangledWebWeWeaveWhenFirstWePractiseToDeceive.

It may be in order, as a matter of punctilio to ask, What are the bona fides of NHI to enter the global discussion on Mazaua? Never mind if it has no credentials to sit in judgment which in any case is no way to find solution in a globlalized setting. For over half a century NHI has been asking the wrong question, “Where is the site …?” For more than 50 years it never knew “Limasaua” was an invention of one man who had not read a single firsthand account and who rejected the authentic story of Mazaua by Antonio de Herrera. That it never found out in all these years that the Butuan landfall was an error of the author of a 1536 Italian retranslation of Pigafetta that Giovanni Battista Ramusio plagiarized and grabbed in 1563 as his own, 27 years after it first appeared in print for three times anonymously. For over 50 years NHI never got wind of the fact Amoretti is the author of the Limasawa=Mazaua notion out of ignorance of meaning of the Combes’ coined word “Limasawa.” For all these years NHI did not know there was a crewmember of Magellan’s fleet who wrote about Mazaua after his second visit to the isle and a stay of about six months. Not only did it not know, but when faced with Gines de Mafra’s account NHI rejected it as fake, even as it knew fully well it was authentic. This is ignorance made unforgivable by its utter dishonesty. In today’s globalized world what are its bona fides to make it worthy to sit as a reliable, upright, earnest, honest, competent, rational participant in the international conversation on Magellan’s island-port? --Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk) 08:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Info

The merging will force a fundamental review of Limasawa's true identity. Limasawa, a skerry west of the island of Panaon, southmost island of Leyte, Central Philippines, is believed to be Mazaua, port of the Magellan fleet of March-April 1521. Carlo Amoretti, who discovered in 1797-98 the Ambrosiana codex of the Antonio Pigafetta account of Magellan's expedition, surmised Limasawa was Mazaua. He based it on a map of Jacques N. Bellin, French hydrographer-cartographer, which was a copy of a map of the Philippine made in 1734 by Fr. Pedro Murillo Velarde, S.J. The map contains an island named Limasawa which is phonetically close to Mazaua. What Amoretti did not know is that this island was named Dimasawa in 1663 combining the Bisayan article, Di, meaning not and the placename Mazaua, to signify this island is not where an Easter mass--missa--was held on 31 March 1521. Five years later, it was renamed Limasawa by Fr. Francisco Combés, S.J. who followed another version of an account by Gian Battista Ramusio that mentions no mass at all. Combés renamed Dimasawa Limasawa since he did not have to negate a mass that is not mentioned in his main source.

There are some 32 properties possessed by and data connected to Mazaua from firsthand accounts by Antonio Pigafetta, Ginés de Mafra, Francisco Albo, the so-called Genoese Pilot, and Martín de Ayamonte. Two of these will suffice to prove Mazaua and Limasawa are not one and the same. Mazaua was an excellent port; Limasawa has no anchorage. From west of Mazaua it took one whole day and 80 nautical miles sailing towards Panaon to reach 10°N latitude. From Limasawa at 9°56' N it's only 4 nautical miles and less than 30 minutes sailing to reach 10°N. Just as instructive, it is an absurdity--and a physical impossibility--to sail towards Panaon from west Limasawa when the destination is Cebu. The track must be westward, sailing away from not towards Panaon.

Was the Easter mass of March 31, 1521 in Limasawa? Or Mazaua?

All the five eyewitness accounts of Magellan's voyage--by Antonio Pigafetta, Gines de Mafra, Francisco Albo, The Genoese Pilot, and Martín de Ayamonte--that contain references to a port named Mazaua, do not mention any island named Limasawa. There is no Philippine language that has that word.

In fact, the placename "Limasawa" is an invention of Fr. Francisco Combés, S.J. Combés published in 1667 a book on evangelization of Mindanao. In his story he narrates the sojourn of Ferdinand Magellan's fleet in Philippine waters. He states the fleet went to Butuan where a cross was planted on March 31, 1521. He mentions no mass held on that day.

In fact his Limasawa is not the Mazaua of Magellan. It is the isle Gatighan which is found at 10 degrees North latitude. In the story and map of Antonio Pigafetta, it is the waystation where the Armada de Molucca hove to late in the afternoon of April 4, 1521 where they caught one bat which they ate. Gatighan, like Limasawa, did not afford any anchorage.

It will be recalled Fr. Combés had no knowledge of Mazaua that was correct and factual. He in fact dismissed the account of Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas who said the island-port was named Mazaua. Instead Combés opted for the garbled story by Giovanni Battista Ramusio who said the port was Butuan. Combés also dismissed the name given four years earlier by Fr. Francisco Colín, S.J., for the same island. Colín's name for Pigafetta's Gatighan was "Dimasawa," an invented word, which was to signify it is not the Mazaua of Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas where an Easter mass was held. Colín and Combés both adopted the story--garbled and awfully mistaken--of Giovanni Battista Ramusio that the island-port where a mass was held was Butuan.

If Limasawa and Dimasawa are misnomers for Pigafetta's Gatighan, who then said that Limasawa and Mazaua are one and the same?

The man who said Combés's Limasawa is Magellan's Mazaua was Carlo Amoretti who had not only not read Combés but had not read a single primary account of Magellan's voyage except the Italian manuscript of Antonio Pigafetta. He certainly did not read Ginés de Mafra's account which is the most authoritative on Mazaua. Ginés de Mafra was the only crewmember of the fleet who was able to return to Mazaua, in 1543, and stayed there for about six (6) months. He was part of the expedition under Ruy Lopez de Villalobos. His testimony about the port is precise. In any case, Carlo Amoretti said in his edition of the Italian Pigafetta which he published in 1800 that Limasawa may be the island named Limasawa in the map of Jacques N. Bellin and that both are found in latitude 9 degrees and 40 minutes as located by Pigafetta. What he did not know was that Limasawa is in 9 deg. 56 minutes North, and there are three readings for Mazaua: Pigafetta's, Albo's 9 degrees and 20 minutes North, and The Genoese Pilot's 9 degrees North.

What is most telling is the fact that Limasawa, as stated by the Coast Pilot, has no anchorage. Mazaua had an excellent harbor. Philippine historians and historiographers who have entered the discussion on Mazaua are not navigation historians and therefore this technicality has not registered on them.

It is lamentable that those who're engaged in this controversy do not take the pains to trace the word "Limasawa" to its very beginning, 1667 when it was first invented by Combés who knew nothing about Mazaua, and what he knew of it was absolutely wrong. And they should indeed trace the idea Limasaw=Mazaua to Carlo Amoretti who was ignorant of what Combés's Limasawa was. --Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk) 06:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The account of Ginés de Mafra

The manuscript of Ginés de Mafra was entrusted to a shipmate in the Ruy Lopez de Villalobos expedition sometime in 1546. This was edited by an unknown hand which manuscript surfaced only in the 20th century. De Mafra's account saw print in 1920. Here are the two chapters that pertain to Mazaua. This English translation of the Spanish text is by Ray Howgego, author of the massive work, Encyclopedia of Exploration:

-Page 198-

Capitulo XI que trata de lo que mas sucedió á Magallanes partido de las islas de los ladrones.

Partió Magallanes de estas islas que pusieron nombre de ladrones, y navegando al poniente al cabo de diez dias llegó a una isla pequeña de buen parescer aunque despoblada la cual esta en doce grados de la vanda del norte y le puso nombre de la aguada , por que en ella tomó agua y leña; y otro dia luego partió de esta isla, y navegando su viage llegó a otra isla que tendrá de circuito de tres hasta cuatro leguas. Esta isla tiene un puerto bueno a la parte del poniente della, y es poblada. Surta la armada en el dicho puerto, luego los naturales del salieron á rescibir la armada con buen semblante; como Magallanes les vió, y vió que en tan pequeña tierra habia oro, por que la gente le traia, dijo a los suyos que ya estaba en la tierra que habia deseado, y mandó a un hombre que se llamaba Heredia que era escribano de la nao, que fuese en tierra con un indio que llevaban que decían que era lengua por que sabia hablar Malaya, que es lengua que todas aquellas partes es muy comun. Mas por entonces el interprete aprovechó poco por que con el deseo que el llevaba y con el buen aparejo que en la tierra y en los naturales della alló, se emborrachó con el vino que le dieron. Otro dia que era viernes de la cruz, el señor de aquella isla vino a la nao y hablo muy bien a Magallanes y a todos y hizo paces con ellos a la costumbre de la tierra, que es sangrandose del pecho ambos, echada en un vaso la sangre junta, revuelta con vino, beve cada uno la mitad. Esto aunque paresce que es cerimonia, para buena amistad algunas gentes dellos hay que no la guardan, aunque hay otros que en estremo la guardan. Con esta nueva paz tan deseada, aquel señor de aquella isla dio á la armada arroz y puercos segun su posibilidad. Este señor despues en el año de cuarente y tres le vieron los de la armada en que fué Ruy Lopez de Villalobos general, y todavia se acordaba de Magallanes y mostraba algunas cosas que el le dió.

Chapter XI, which deals with what transpired after Magellan's departure from the Ladrones islands.

Magellan left those islands to which they had given the name of Ladrones, and sailing westwards arrived after ten days at a small but uninhabited island of pleasant aspect, lying at latitude twelve degrees north, and it was named Aguada, because they took water and firewood from it. And after another day he left this island, and sailing on his way arrived at another island three or four leagues in circumference. This island has a good harbor4 on its western side, and is inhabited. He anchored the fleet in that port, then the natives came out to welcome the fleet. On seeing the natives, Magellan saw that in such a small land there was gold, because the people were wearing it. He told his men that they were now in the land he had desired, and sent a man named Heredia, who was the ship's clerk, ashore with an Indian9 they had taken, so they said, because he was known to speak Malay, the language common to those parts. But then the interpreter was of no use for the purpose for which he had been brought along and despite his good intention and in the face of the warm welcome by the place and its people, he became drunk on the wine which they gave him. On another day, which was the Friday of the cross [Good Friday], the chief of that island came to the ship and convinced Magellan and everybody else and made peace with them according to the custom of the land which is to draw blood from the chests of both men, to toss it into a glass so that the blood unites, to mix it with wine, then for both to drink a half. Although this appears to be a ceremony for long-lasting friendship, some do not keep to it, while there are others who keep to it to the last. With this new peace [he] so much desired, the chief of that island gave the fleet as much rice and pigs as he could afford. This same chief we saw in the year fifteen forty-three by those of us in the fleet of General Ruy López de Villalobos, and he still remembered Magellan and displayed to us some of the things he [Magellan] had given him.

- Page 199 -

Capitulo XII que trata de como Magallanes llegó con su armada a la isla de Cubu y como fuébien rescibido y de los cristianos que alli hizo

Con alguna dadiva que Magallanes dió al Señor de esta isla que se llamaba Macagua cobró del tanto amor que lo llevaría a otra isla muy grande que se llama Cubu, donde era señor un pariente suyo la cual isla tenia muchos bastimentos y era muy rica y muy poblada. Magallanes holgó de ello y concertados para el dia se partió el armada para Cubu. De este Señor de Macagua, supo Magallanes que en una provincia que se llamaba Butuan que es en la isla de Mindanao que es de la parte del norte della quince leguas de Macagua había gran cantidad de oro y venian de otras partes allí a solo cargar dello con algunas mercaderias. Ya llegaba el armada cerca de la isla de Cubu por que el camino no es muy largo y es todo por entre isles. Aquí dejó el Señor de Macaguaba a Magallanes que quería adelantar en un navio de remos pequeño suyo que allí llebaba para que los de Cubu no se alterasen de su llegada, mas como las naos iban con buen viento llegaron tan presto como el. Visto por los de Cubu se armaron y con alfanges y flechas bajaron al puerto a defender a los nuestros la salida y aqui se parescio que antes desto por aquellas tierras no habian visto navios tan grandes ni de aquella guisa segun la admiracion que de los navios esta gente mostro y aunque en la China hay mayors navios que los nuestros y en los Luzones podria ser que hasta entonces no hubiesen navegado por aquellas mares, pues estando apercibidos los de Cubu para defender su Puerto llegó el Señor de Macagua y dijo tales palabras al Señor de Cubu que le aplacó y tuvo por bien venida la armada de los nuestros a su tierra aquí surgeron las naos en un buen Puerto el cual esta de la vanda del este y tiene una muy fresca playa con un hermoso palmar de cocos que por ella se estiende. Nuestra gente se regocijó aqui mucho; las muestras de la gente de la tierra fueron de mucho placer y el señor de esta…

Chapter XII, which concerns how Magellan arrived with his fleet on the island of Cubu and how he was received and of the Christians that he made there.

Because of the gift Magellan had given to the chief of this island which is called Macagua, he gained so much affection in return that he was to be accompanied to another very large island called Cubu, where the chief was his relative, and which had rich provisions and was very prosperous and thickly populated. Magellan was much pleased by this information and arranged for the fleet to depart that day for Cubu. From the chief of Macagua, Magellan learned that a province called Butuan, on the island of Mindanao, which is somewhere fifteen leagues to the north of Macagua, possessed a large quantity of gold and that people came there from other regions solely to buy gold and other merchandise. Soon he brought the fleet close to the island of Cubu, for that route is not very long and is entirely between islands. Here the chief of Macaguaba (sicéé) left Magellan as he wanted to get ahead in a boat of small oars so that the ships’ arrival should not perturb the natives of Cubu, but as the ships had a favourable wind they arrived there much ahead of the boat. Upon sight of the ships the natives of Cubu armed themselves and with cutlasses and arrows came down to the harbour to block the exits. They gave the appearance of not having previously seen in those lands ships so large, nor of that type, as manifested by the awe that this people showed for the ships, and although in China there are bigger ships than ours, and in the Luzones it could be that until then they had not navigated those seas, because the people of Cubu had prepared to defend their port, the chief of Macagua arrived and said such words to the chief of Cubu that appeased his concern over our arrival and to welcome our fleet in their land: here the ships anchored in a good harbour which lies to the east and has a very pleasant beach with a beautiful grove of coconuts at the fringes. Here our men cheered up a lot. The people in this land gave our men much pleasure and the chief of this…

English translation by Ray Howgego —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk • contribs) 07:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fr. Francisco Combés and his Limasaua

The word "Limasaua" first came into being in the book of Jesuit chronicler Fr. Francisco Combés, Historia de las Islas de Mindanao, Iolo, y sus adyacentes...Madrid: Herederos de Pablo de Val, 1667.

The occasion for inventing the word pertains to an incident in the voyage of Armada de Molucca, the fleet under Captain-General Ferdinand Magellan, in Philippine waters when the fleet was anchored at the island-port named Mazaua. At the time Combés wrote his 3-paragraph story of Magellan's sojourn at Surigao Strait he had no access to authentic sources, none of the eyewitness accounts with references to Mazaua had been published. All these were published much more than a century latter, the last one by Martín de Ayamonte saw print only 266 years after. Here are the dates of publication of the eyewitness accounts: Antonio Pigafetta,1800; The Genoese Pilot, 1826; Francisco Albo, 1837; Ginés de Mafra, 1920; Martín de Ayamonte,1933. This fact would impact on the version by Combés of an incident the real story of which he did not know. The repercussions of his distorted story reverberates to this day in the 21st century four centuries after Combés had written his thin story.

Indeed, his invented word, "Limasaua", is viewed ironically diametrically opposite of what he had intended it to mean. It's only now that his true meaning is being given critical analysis. Because of Combés's limited and distorted view of the episode--which is hardly understood by historians and historiographers at work on this incident--his invention is seen as pointing to Mazaua, the real port, which in fact Combés's "Limasaua" sought to negate.

"Limasaua" is not found in any of the primary or secondary accounts of the circumnavigation voyage of Ferdinand Magellan. It is not found in the languages of the area encompassed by the story of Magellan's sojourn in Philippine waters, e.g., Cebuano, Waray Waray, Butuanon, Tausug, Surigaonon, Manobo, etc. For that matter, none of the over 100 languages of the Philippines has that word. It's a pure invention.

The word is a combination of the prefix "Li" which has no linguistic origen in any Philippine language and "mazawa" which could only have come from the Spanish chronicler Antonio de Herrera, one of three sources of Combés. His two other sources were Giovanni Battista Ramusio and Fr. Francisco Colín, S.J., whose name for the same southern Leyte isle pointed to by Combés was "Dimasaua," another neologism or invention. "Dimasaua" is made up of the Bisaya prefix "di" meaning "not" and "masawa" the placename given by Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas for the island-port where Magellan's fleet anchored from March 28 to April 4, 1521. "Dimasaua" expressly signifies the island it points to is not where an Easter mass was held by Magellan, his men, and the Mazawans.

The reason Combés did not adopt Colín's "Dimasaua" is because his story does not contain any reference to an Easter mass happening on March 31, 1521. So his name does not negate a non-existing mass.

Both Combés and Colín wrote that Magellan's fleet anchored at Butuan, adopting the story of the Renaissance travel writer Giovanni Battista Ramusio. Ramusio's work was a hopelessly garbled Italian translation of the eyewitness account of Magellan's voyage based on the text of the Colines edition. The Colines edition is a French translation by Jacopo Fabri, in reality Jacques Lefevre. This was printed at Paris anonymously for Simon de Colines with the title Le voyage et navigation faict par les Espaignolz es Isles de Mollucques, and is believed to have seen print sometime between 1526 and 1536. The Italian translation of the Colines was published anonymously in 1536 probably in Venice? and by N. Zoppini? Its title was Il viaggio fatto da gli Spagniuoli a torno a'l mondo.

This translation came out anonymously as "Viaggio attorno il mondo scritto per M. Antonio Pigafetta...tradotto di lingua francese nella Italiana" in the 1550 edition of Primo Volume delle Navigationi et Viaggi...Venetia, gli heredi di Luc' Antonio Giunti, 1550. It appeared again anonymously in the 1554 edition of Vol. I. Only in the 1563 edition was the authorship by Gian Battista Ramusio asserted and printed. Volume I was further republished in 1588, 1606 and 1613. Volume I was translated into French in 1556 and published in two volumes at Lyons.

There are clearly differences in the editions of Volume I. Colín's version follows an edition that is represented by the English translation by Richard Eden. On the other hand, Combés' follows an edition represented by the English translation by Samuel Purchas. Eden's talks of an Easter mass, Purchas' does not mention any.

Here is the English translation by Fr. Miguel Bernad, S.J. of Combés' story of Magellan's sojourn:

"The first time that the royal standards of the Faith were seen to fly in this island [of Mindanao] was when the Archipelago was first discovered by the Admiral Alonso de Magallanes. He followed a new and difficult route [across the Pacific], entering by the Strait of Siargao, formed by that island and that of Leyte, and landing at the island of Limasaua which is at the entrance of that Strait. Amazed by the novelty and strangeness of the [Spanish] nation and the ships, the barbarians of that island welcomed them and gave them good refreshments.

"While at Limasaua, enjoying rest and good treatment, they heard of the River of Butuan, whose chieftain was more powerful. His reputation attracted our men thither to see for themselves or be disillusioned, their curiosity sharpened by the fact that the place was nearby. The barbarian [chief] lived up to our men's expectations, providing them with the food they needed...Magellan contented himself with having them do reverence to the cross which is erected upon a hillock as a sign to future generations of their alliance...The solemnity with which the cross was erected and the deep piety shown by the Spaniards, and by the natives following the example of the Spaniards, engendered great respect for the cross.

"Not finding in Butuan the facilities required by the ships, they returned to Limasaua to seek further advice in planning their future route. The Prince of Limasaua told them of the three most powerful nations among the Pintados [Visayans], namely those of Caraga, Samar, and Zebu. The nearness of Zebu, the facilities of its port, and the more developed social structure (being more monarchical) aroused everyone's desire to go thither. Thus, guided by the chief of Limasaua, passing between Bool and Leyte and close to the Camotes Islands, they entered the harbor of Cebu by the Mandawe entrance on the 7th of April 1521, having departed from Limasaua on the first day of that month."''

Translation by Fr. Miguel Bernad, S.J., "Butuan or Limasawa?" in: Kinaadman, Vol. III, 1981, pages 4-5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Antonio de Herrera's Mazaua

One of the three sources of Fr. Combés was Antonio de Herrera who wrote Historia general de los hechos de los Castellanos en las islas y tierrafirme del mar oceano, t. VI. Madrid: 1601. De Herrera identified Andrés de San Martín as one of his authorities for his story of Magellan's circumnavigation.

Andrés de San Martín was chief pilot-astrologer of the Armada de Molucca, one of the finest mariners of the Renaissance period, who twice during the Magellan voyage was able to determine the longitudes of two places, a feat unequaled for two hundred years. His Treatise and other papers were entrusted to Ginés de Mafra at Cebu sometime before May 1, 1521 the day a number of the fleet crewmembers including San Martín was massacred by Rajah Humabon and his subjects.

These papers were confiscated from de Mafra, a prisoner of the Portuguese, upon his arrival in Lisbon in July 1526. These papers were combed by Portuguese historians of that time and transferred to Madrid sometime during the unification of Spain and Portugal from 1580-1640.

Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas was cronista mayor or official chronicler of the Spanish royal court in 1596. Herrera extensively used the papers of San Martin and his story of the Mazaua incident was the only faithful chronicle up until 1800. De Herrera is the source of the word "masawa" for Combés "Limasaua" and for Fr. Francisco Colín's "Dimasaua." De Herrera's chirography of "Mazagua" contains "gu" which is the Hispanicized equivalent of w, a letter absent in the alphabet of Romance languages. Herrera's "Mazaua" is the only source of that word from published materials in the entire period beginning from the 16th century until 1890 when the biography of Magellan by F.H.H. Guillemard saw print; the word "Mazzava" appears on page 229 where the value of "v" is w. All the other printed documents either had "Messana" or "Massana" as the name of the island-port. Even as late as 1894, Andrea da Mosto's faithful transcription into modern Italian of the Ambrosiana codex, which established the text of Pigafetta and on which James Alexander Robertson based his classic English translation, the name of the Armada's anchorage was still "Mazana," which is a throwback to the name given by Maximilianus Transylvanus.

Here is de Herrera's reconstruction of the Mazaua incident:

"We discovered many other islands, from which we got many supplies, and an Indian Magellan brought aboard who knew the language [Malay]; navigating through these islands, there appeared a small isle called Mazagua near a small village.

"Their King [Raia Siaiu in Antonio Pigafetta's account] sent a boat with 10 men, to find out what we sailed in there for and what we were looking for and because he knew the language, Magellan [through the Malay slave, Enrique] answered:

" 'We are subjects of the King of Spain who desires peace with you. And to buy merchandise to bring and if you have food, tell us which and we will pay for those.'

"Their King replied: 'We don't have very much for our own people, but we will share what we have with you.'

"The boats brought 4 pigs, 3 goats and some rice; and because that day was the celebration of the Feast of Resurrection, Magellan ordered all to attend and hear mass, and a large cross was placed atop a high hill, and because other boats brought it there, it was evident there were Christians in that isle.

"Magellan asked the King if there was some place where they could dock. He said: "About 20 leagues away lies a big island where the King, who is my kin, would give you what you need." And because the guides were with him, here offered to go himself. The King went aboard with some Indians. Arriving at the island of Cebu (as it was called), from a village came more than 2000 men armed with lances and arrows, and from the beach looked with awe at the ships they had never seen before. The King of Mazagua landed." [Translation of pages 22-23 of Herrera's "Third Decade" by Roger C. Birosel] --Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Purchas translation of one edition of Ramusio

Travel and navigation historian Samuel Purchas translated into English a version of Giovanni Battista Ramusio's Italian retranslation of Antonio Pigafetta. Purchas' work is the authority for the story by Fr. Francisco Combes, S.J. of Ferdinand Magellan's sojourn in Philippine waters. Purchas' work differs significantly from that of the original edition of Ramusio's work: it does not talk of a mass being held anywhere in the Philippines on March 31, 1521. The facsimile edition in eBook format of Purchas is accessible at the U.S. Library of Congress website, included among the Kraus Collection of Sir Francis Drake, http://international.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=rbdk&fileName=d0401//rbdkd0401.db&recNum=272&itemLink=r%3Fintldl%2Frbdkbib%3A%40field(NUMBER%2B%40od1(rbdk%2Bd0401))&linkText=0 Here is the portion that pertains to an anchorage in Butuan:

"The eight and twentieth day of March they [Magellan's fleet] came to the Iland of Buthuan, where they were honourably entertayned of the King and the Prince his sonne, who gave them much Gold and Spices. The Captaine [Magellan] gave the King a Vesture of red Cloth, and another of yellow, made after the Turkish fashion, and also a red Cap: and gave likewise to other that came with him, certaine Knyves, Glasses, and Beades of Crystall. After that the Captaine had shewed the King the secrets of his ship, and such Merchandize as hee had therein, hee caused a piece of Ordenance suddenly to be shot off, whereat the King was greatly amazed, untill the Captaine comforted him. Then the Captaine commanded one of his men to be armed from the head to the foot, and caused three other to strike him with their Swords: whereat the King marvelled greatly, and said to the Interpretor (who was a slave borne in Malacca) that one of those armed men was able to encounter with a hundred of his men. But he marvelled much more, when the Captaine told him by the Interpretor, how he found the Strait by the Compas and Loadstone, and how many dayes they were without sight of nay Land...When the King saw Antonie Pigafetta write the names of many things, and afterward rehearsed them againe, he marvelled yet more, making signes, that such men descended from Heaven. The King brought them first to his Pallace, where he entertayned them honorably, and gave them many gifts, as did also the Prince in his Pallace, being in another Iland named Caleghan.

"As they sifted a certaine Myne of Earth in the Kings Iland, they found pieces of Gold some as bigge as Nuts, and other as bigge as Egges. All the Kings Vessels...

"The Captaine or Generall caused a Crosse to be brought forth, with Nayles, and a Crowne of Thornes, giving commandement to all his men to give reverence thereunto, and signifying to the Kin gs, by the Interpreter, that that Banner was given him by the Emperour, his Lord and Master, with the comandement to leave the same in all places where hee came, to the great commoditie and profit of all such as would reverently receive it, as an assured token of friendship: and that hee would therefore leave it there, as well to accomplish his Lords commandement, as also, that if at any time any ships of Christians should chance to come that way, they might, by seeing that Crosse, perceive that our men had beene well entertayned there, and would therefore not onely abstayne from doing them any hurt or displeasure, but also helpe to ayde them against their enemies: And that therefore it should be requisite to erect that Crosse upon the top of the highest Mountaine that might be seene from the Sea on every side; also to pray unto it reverently: and that in so doing, they should not be hurt with Thunder, Lightning, and Tempests. When the Kings heard these words, they gave the Captaine great thankes, promising gladly to observe and fulfill all such things as he required. Then the Captaine demanded, whether they were Mores or Gentiles? They answered, that they had none other kind of Religion, but that lifting up their hands joyned together, and their faces toward Heaven, they called upon their God Abba. Which answere liked the Captaine very well, because the Gentiles are sooner perswaded to our Faith then the Mores.''

"Departing from hence, they came to the Ilands of Zeilon, Zubut, Messana, and Calaghan, by the conduct of certaine Pilots of the said Kings. Of these, Zubut is the best, and hath the Trade of best Traffique. In the Iland of Messana they found Dogges, Cats, Hogges, Hennes, Goates, Ryse, Gynger, Cocus, Myll, Panicke, Barly, Figges, Oranges, Waxe, and Gold, in great quantitie. This Iland is above the Equinoctiall toward our Pole nine degrees, and two third parts, and a hundred threescore and two degrees from the place from whence they departed. They remayned in this Iland for the space of eight dayes, and then directed their Voyage toward the Northwest, and passed between these five ilands, Zeilon, Bohol..." From: Hakluytus Posthumus or Purchas His Pilgimes, Containing a History of the World in Sea Voyages and Lande Travells by Englishmen and others By Samuel Purchas, B.D., Volume II. Glasgow,1625.--Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk) 07:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giovanni Battista Ramusio account as translated by Richard Eden

In 1536 a book came out anonymously, probably published by Zoppini? in Venice? There is no certainty as to who the publisher was and where it was printed. This was a retranslation back to Italian of a French translation supposedly by Jacopo Fabri from an original Italian text of Antonio Pigafetta's account of the Magellan voyage.

This same Italian translation came out again anonymously in Vol. I of a compilation of travel accounts titled Delle navigationi e viaggi...Venice: Pp. 380-98. In the 1554 edition of Vol. I, the account again appears anonymously. Only in the 1563 edition does the name of Giovanni Battista Ramusio appear as author.

This edition was translated into English by Richard Eden, a graduate of Cambridge University, who published his compedium of travel stories in 1555 under the title The Decades of the Newe Worlde or West India...Wrytten by Peter Martyr...and translated into Englysshe by Rycharde Eden. London, G. Power. Ramusio's work came under the title "A briefe declaration of the vyage or nauigation made abowte the worlde. Gathered owt of a large booke written hereof by Master Antoine Pygafetta..."

The spelling is quaint English of the Elizabethan era.

"The XXVII daye of Marche, they came to the Ilande of Buthuan where they were honorably interteyned of the Kynge and the Prince his soonne who gave them muche golde and Spice. The capitayne gave the kynge a vesture of red clothe and another of yelowe made after the Turkysshe fashyon, and also a red cappe....

"The laste day of Marche neare unto Easter, the capitaine caused his preeste to say masse, and sente to the kynge by the interpretoure, that his commynge a lande at that tyme was not to dyne with hyme, but only to heare masse. The Capitayne came alande with fyftie of his men in theyr best apparel with owte weapons or harnesse, and all the resydue well warmed. Before the boates came to lande, he caused fire pieces of ordinaunce to be shotte of in token of peace, and so came aland, where the two kinges embraced hym, and accompanyd hym to the place appoynted for masse to be sayde not farre frome the seasyde. Sumwhat before the beginnynge of masse, the Capitayne sprinkeled the kynges with damaske water. When the preeste was at mid masse at the offertorie, the kings profered them sclues to go to kysse the crosse with the capytayne, but offered nothynge. At the tyme of sacringe when the preeste lifted uppe the bodie of Christ, and the Christians kneeled downe and helde uppe their handes joyned together, the kinges dyd the like also with greate reverence. In the same tyme, whyle certeyne of the Christians were at the communion, a handegunne was shotte of to signifie unto theym that were in the shyppes, to discharge all thyre ordinaunce. When masse was fynysshed, the Capitaine caused certeyne of his men to put on theyr harness and to make a combat with theyr naked boddies, wherat the kynges tooke great pleasure. This doone, the Capitaine caused a crosse to be brought forth, with nayles and a crowne of thornes, gyvynge commandement to all his men to gyve reverence therunto, and signifyinge to the kynges by the interpretour that that banner was..."

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk • contribs) 03:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC) --Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk) 06:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fr. Francisco Colín's "Dimasaua"

Fr. Francisco Colín, S.J., wrote an epitome of Ferdinand Magellan's voyage in Philippine waters four years before Fr. Francisco Combés, S.J. Colín was a meticulous historian who showed reverential respect for his sources whom he acknowledges unlike Combés who assigns to his reader the task of finding out where he got his ideas. Colín names Giovanni Battista Ramusio work as his source of Antonio Pigafetta, not knowing the garbling of the Mazaua episode where Ramusio replaces Mazaua with Butuan. He also mentions Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas as source. From de Herrera he got the word "masaua"--spelled "Mazagua" by Herrera, his gu being the equivalent of w which is absent in the Spanish alphabet--as well as the name "Las Velas" (the Sails) which is the name for Guam. De Herrera is also the source of the information that the chiefs of Cebu, Butuan, and Mazaua are blood kins which fact is also contained in the account of Ginés de Mafra. De Herrera's source for this information was Andrés de San Martín whose papers and navigational notes were in the possession of de Mafra for five years. These papers were confiscated by the Portuguese and deposited in a Lisbon archive where these were accessed by contemporary historians like João de Barros, Gaspar Corrêa, Damião de Góis, and others. These papers were later transferred to Madrid during the union of the two Iberian kingdoms, 1580-1640.

Colín faced a dilemma whose solution created a geographical conundrum that has yet to run its course. In Ramusio's story the port where an Easter mass of March 31, 1521 was celebrated at "Butuan." In de Herrera the port was "Mazaua" and this is where the Easter mass was held.

Colín adopted the Ramusio version of the episode assuming it was the eyewitness report of Pigafetta. He therefore rejected de Herrera's version. This rejection is signified by the coined word--a pure invention--"Dimasaua" which means "not the Mazaua that de Herrera asserts to be where the 'First mass in the Philippines' was held." Colín's "Dimasaua" points to an tiny island west of the island of Panaon in southern Leyte. In the 1734 map of Fr. Pedro Murillo Velarde, S.J., which the French Encyclopedist-cartographer Jacques N. Bellin copied, this isle is named "Limasaua," Combés's name for the isle. In the map of Antonio Pigafetta (in all four extant codices, namely, the Italian Ambrosiana, the French Beinecke-Yale codex, French Manuscript 5650, and French Manuscript 24224) there is such an isle sandwiched between Bohol and Panaon. Pigafetta's name for the isle is "Gatighan."

Colín's solution is adopted by Combés but not totally. Combés rejects the prefix "di" which he changes to "li," an enigmatic prefix that has no antecedent in a Philippine language nor Spanish or Italian or French. He rejected the dismissive connotation of "di" because his story does not contain any reference to an Easter mass. This is the supreme irony of the popular belief Combés "Limasawa" is where an Easter mass was held in March 31, 1521.

Colín had no access to any eyewitness report. These were published much later than 1664: Antonio Pigafetta,1800; The Genoese Pilot, 1826; Francisco Albo, 1837; Ginés de Mafra, 1920; Martín de Ayamonte,1933.

Here is the pertinent portion of Colín's story on the Mazaua incident from the English translation by Fr. Miguel Bernad, S.J.:

"At the end of three months and twelve days during which they traversed 4,000 leagues, having crossed the Equator a second time, they climbed up to 15 degrees North latitude where they came upon two islands which they named Las Velas [the Sails]. At 12 degrees North they came upon the Ladrones Islands. A few days later they saw the island of Ibabao [Samar] in this Archipelago. But the first island they touched was Humunu, a small uninhabited island near Guiuan Point...To that and other islets they gave the name of Buenas Señas [Good Omens] but to the entire Archipelago they gave the name San Lazaro, being the Saturday of Saint Lazarus' Sunday in Lent of the year 1521.

"On Easter Day, in the Territory of Butuan, the first Mass ever offered in these parts was celebrated and a cross planted. Magellan then took possession of the Islands in the name of the Emperor and of the Crown of Castile.

"The man who gave the most signal service to our men was the Chief of Dimasaua [sic] a relative of the chief of Butuan and that of Zebu, whither he led the armada, which entered that harbor at noon on the 7th of April, the Octave of Easter."

Source: Miguel A. Bernad, "Butuan or Limasawa? The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of the Evidence." In: Kinaadman, Vol. III,. 1981, p. 2-3.--Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk) 07:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 11 November 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 11:49, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Limasawa, Southern Leyte → Limasawa – The island municipality is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term Limasawa. RioHondo (talk) 12:40, 11 November 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 01:12, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support this is the island article as well, so should be located at the base name, as it is the island. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 10:17, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Limasawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:29, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]