Friday, July 25, 2008

'March 15, 1521 Magellan "discovered" the Philippines' ni ka tony

...or the Pilipinos discovered Magellan and suffered 400 years of cruelty under Spain’s colonization. Instead of losing to the revolution initiated both by Cuba and the Philippines, Spain sold her four remaining island colonies, including Guam and Puerto Rico for $20,000,000. to the Americans - in 1898 Treaty of Paris. The church and the colonial government of Spain, positioned and glued in our mind, that the reason for their colonization is to “save our soul.” A lot of people really don't know much about Magellan...he was a great explorer, "discovered the Philippines" he was Portuguese and the rest we don’t really know.


Just like Columbus’ past and remains which still a big unsolved mystery. Most history books stated that Columbus was born in the coastal town of Genoa, Italy. Some researchers now are saying that he was Catalan from Catalonia, Spain after a long investigation and research basing on his choice of words, style of writing in Spanish of the day to day accounts he wrote in his diary. Was he Italian, Spanish or Catalan? His remains is more mysterious than his origin, a lighthouse called “Faro a Colon” (Lighthouse of Columbus), in Hispaniola now the Island of Santo Domingo house a box said to contain his bones. Santo Domingo’s government claimed that this box came from Seville, Spain in 1542, was requested by Don Diego, son of Columbus who was the Governor during that time. There are also Columbus’ bones in a box inside a tomb made of ornate bronze, in Seville’s Cathedral, Spain, claiming his remains.


Why do most of these "great explorers" have questionable or little known past? Simple, most of them were mercenaries, criminals, ex-convicts, pirates, thieves or treasure hunters. By bringing looted goods, treasures and new colonies to their King, their past were forgiven or covered. Instead they were given titles and power by the King or Queen who sponsored their exploration. Sir Francis Drake was a pirate, his ship “The Golden Hind” was the second ship in history that sailed around the globe, looting Dutch, French cargos, Spanish galleons, even English ships. Drake was responsible for the ignominious slave trade. Trading rum (which was part of crew's ship compensation) and sugar from Cuba, selling the goods in Europe, using the profit to purchase African slaves in slave markets of West Africa, then sold and traded slaves in Cuba! He and his crew were fugitive by The English Navy, until he brought gold from Spanish colonies and looted goods to the Throne of England, Sir Francis Drake was knighted.


Before Magellan, the China Sea functioned as a Mediterranean. The people along its littoral were long in contact with each other, which had of course, cultural consequences. It was possible that the Philippines was visited and traded with the famous Chinese-Muslim Admiral Zheng He, a great sailor historians credited that he was the first person to reach the Americas. The Philippines was one of the most important centers of Chinese commerce. Chinese chronicles and old maps refer to the country as MA-I ("The Three Islands") that may well refer to the three big islands. Pasig River was a long stretch highway used in trading between the Taga Ilog (Tagalog) and the Chinese. Arabs traded with the natives of Mindanao and shared their Muslim faith. The Hindus from India traded in southern Philippines and shared their titles “Raja” with us. All these exchanged of goods, faith, culture and ideology happened before the time of Magellan and none of these traders claimed they “Discovered the Philippines”


Magellan having lived in India and the Portuguese colony Malacca or Moluccas, must have heard or knew the Philippines from Hindu, Chinese and Malay traders. Magellan was in Cochin in 1512, participated in the attack on Goa, India, sailed as far as Moluccas in Malaya, where he purchased a 13 year old slave latter, named him ENRIQUE or “Enrique de Malacca.” Magellan is like a father to Enrique and Magellan was fond of his page. Magellan wrote in his will that when he dies, Enrique would be a freeman. Magellan and Enrique took part in fighting the Moors in Morocco, fighting English pirates at sea which made Enrique famous for his courage, pirates called him "BLACK HENRY" Enrique or HENRY in English, BLACK - because of his skin color. At the battle of Azamor, Magellan received wounds, slashes of sword left him scars on his face and a deadly cut in his knee that left him permanently lame. Afterwards, he entered the customary claim for a larger allowance from the king of Portugal. It was refused, with the imputation that Magellan was entirely cured. His honor was insulted; he not only left his country but published a formal renunciation of his Portuguese citizenship.

Took his page Enrique, his friend Ruy Faleiro, a geographer and astronomer of Lisbon, whom from him, Magellan learned his navigational skills all went to Spain in 1517 and became Spanish citizens. While in Seville Magellan married Beatriz Barbosa and fathered a son Rodrigo.


With Magellan's experience in Malacca, courage, and his navigational skills, the king of Spain was impressed by Magellan's qualities and agreed in 1518 to supply him with men, supplies and 5 ships, Trinidad, Magellan’s flagship, San Antonio, Concepcion, Victoria and Santiago. In return, over half the profits from any products Magellan might bring back were reserved for the Crown. Juan de Cathergena – captain of San Antonio, Luis Mendoza – captain of Victoria, Gaspar Quesada – captain of Concepcion and Magellan’s Portuguese cousin, Joao Serrao – captain of Santiago. Luckily Magellan had a passenger, a civilian tourist, going along simply for the adventure of the trip. He was the 28 year old ANTONIO PIGAFFETA, a native of Vicenza, Italy. The only person who documented the trip, which the journal he wrote was the only basis of the first circumnavigation of the world of the ship "VICTORIA." August 10, 1519 the crewmen, all 270 or so assembled at dawn for a solemn Mass. Before reaching the Pacific, the smallest ship Santiago having been wrecked on a scouting mission. The ship San Antonio, sailed behind one of the islands in South America, turned back to Spain. The 3 remaining ships left South America on November 28, 1520, entered an unknown ocean to continue the voyage that answered the question "is the world round?" Discovered unknown countries, territories, straights, International Date Line and the world largest body of water the "Pacific Ocean."


After 3 months of sailing an endless but calm ocean, Magellan named it “Pacifico” meaning peaceful. Dying of hunger and thirst, the crew ate their last worm-filled biscuits and went hunting for rats. Luckily they came across a small island, where they landed get food and water. The natives of the island traded with the crew, but stole one of their life boat and goods. Magellan being mad with what happened, ordered his crew to burn the village and named the island “LADRONES” or Island of Thieves. March 6, 1521, ten days after leaving Ladrones, now Guam, Magellan landed in Limasawa held thanks giving mass. He named the place "San Lazaro", for it was St Lazarus day. The crew was amazed with Magellan's page ENRIQUE, the natives were able to communicate with him and acted as an interpreter.


Six weeks later, sailed to the island of Cebu, where they were welcomed by the natives lead by their king Raja Humabon. Being the first two Pilipino collaborator/balimbing in Philippine history, Raja Humabon and Datu Zula convinced Magellan joined them in battle with the neighboring island, Mactan ruled by Lapu Lapu. Magellan to show the power of “modern weapon and warfare” promised to lead the raid himself taking only 60 men. Being low tide during the time of the battle of Mactan, Magellan’s ships failed to be close to shore to be able to fire and reach Lapu Lapu’s village.


*from Pigaffeta’s diary…

“When morning came, forty-nine of us leaped into the water up to our thighs, and walked through water for more than two cross-bow flights before we could reach the shore. The boats could not approach nearer because of certain rocks in the water. The other eleven men remained behind to guard the boats. When we reached land, [the natives] had formed in three divisions to the number of more than one thousand five hundred people. When they saw us, they charged down upon us with exceeding loud cries... The musketeers and crossbow-men shot from a distance for about a half-hour, but uselessly... Recognizing the captain, so many turned upon him that they knocked his helmet off his head twice... A native hurled a bamboo spear into the captain's face, but the latter immediately killed him with his lance, which he left in the native's body. Then, trying to lay hand on sword, he could draw it out but halfway, because he had been wounded in the arm with a bamboo spear. When the natives saw that, they all hurled themselves upon him. One of them wounded him on the left leg with a large cutlass, which resembles a scimitar, only being larger. That caused the captain to fall face downward, when immediately they rushed upon him with iron and bamboo spears and with their cutlasses, until they killed our mirror, our light, our comfort, and our true guide. When they wounded him, he turned back many times to see whether we were all in the boats. Thereupon, beholding him dead, we, wounded, retreated, as best we could, to the boats, which were already pulling off.”


Magellan lost his life along with forty of his crew on April 27, 1521. After Enrique’s master, Magellan’s death, the remaining Spanish Captain refused to give Enrique his freedom. Enrique sought out the disillusioned Raja Humabon and Datu Zula, convinced the two “balimbing” about his plot to get the Spanish goods and kill the crew, which the two agreed. Enrique told the Spanish crew that Raja Humabon is giving them a farewell banquet and gift of jewels. Greedy, 29 officers came ashore for the party for food, wine and favors from Humabon’s women. Enrique’s vengeance was completed in the massacre that followed. The remaining crew, scared, confused and not knowing what to do, sail southward. Enrique was left behind by the 3 remaining ships; one of them was leaking and was destroyed.


The Victoria and Trinidad set out for Borneo. In November reached the Moluccas-Tadores. In December, they sailed southwest and separated. The Trinidad tried to recross the Pacific, but was forced back by headwinds to the Moluccas, where she was captured by a Portuguese squadron. Victoria with her valuable cargo, under a Basques captain Sebastian Del Cano, had touched Timor, and then crossed the Indian Ocean early in 1522. She rounded Cape of Good Hope in May. In a final run to Spain the Victoria anchored in Seville on September 8, 1522, after 3 years at sea. The cargo of the Victoria was sold for enough money to pay for the expedition! Del Cano was rewarded with a pension. Pigaffeta presented to Charles V his diary, or a copy of it, whereabouts is not known today. He visited Portugal, where he gave the king a manuscript, then to France and gave it to Marie Louise, regent and mother of Francis I.


ENRIQUE, Enrique de Malacca or Black Henry as he was called, was the first man to circumnavigate the world. Magellan's journal described Enrique's origin, as not a native of Malaya, but from somewhere else. According to Tome Pires's "Summa Oriental", people from Luzon and other parts of the islands, was living in the Malay Peninsula when the Portuguese conquered Malacca in 1511. Enrique was a captive warrior in Malaya and was sold as a slave, possibly a victim of the practice of slave-raiding. Was the knowledge of Enrique about the area made Magellan confident, convinced King Charles I of Spain and was sure of the expedition? Was this the reason why Magellan “knew the area” so well? Not like Columbus who sailed west to reach India failed, reached America instead, and still believing he made it to India called the Native Americans “Indians.” Like Columbus, Magellan sailed west and reached Asia, as he expected. Was it with the help of Enrique, like his people from Asia who sailed east on their simple and small boat and reached tiny islands of Micronesia and Polynesia? Was Enrique then a Pilipino? Pigaffeta, the Italian scribe of Magellan's expedition was quite explicit in his observation that Enrique spoke and understood Visayan, had familiarity of the geography, rejoined the natives after the battle of Mactan. With the Cebuanos he led a plot to kill more Spaniards, stayed in Cebu and blended with his roots. Pilipino? I really think he was.



ka tony

the 16th of March, 2007

9 comments:

FilMasons NSW said...

Most likely, Ka Tony; that Enrique was a native of the islands. I would not however, label him Pinoy as such. But obviously he was one of our ancestors. Even nowadays, if you go to Cebu and don't know a word of Cebuano, you can't communicate. So I must agree that Enrique, based from Pigafetta's journal; must be a local.

Congrats on your blog...

ka tony said...

Hello NSW,
Thanks for you comment & best regards to the land down under. You are right there is no such thing or country called "Philippines" back then for me to call him a "Pinoy" There are 97 dialects and 4 languages in our country. The same as the barangay or small boats that have different rules & customs.
Thanks again,
ka tony

BCS said...

Very very VERY interesting :)

ka tony said...

Yeaahhh bcs,

Very interesting indeed!!! and as usual a Pinoy was eliminated in the higher league books of world history!

Vic de Jesus said...

"First mass" was held at Limasawa?

Magellan didn't go to Limasawa. Or Butuan.

The place where Magellan’s fleet anchored and where an Easter mass was celebrated on March 31, 1521 was not Butuan. Or, Limasawa.

It was in the island-port named Mazaua. Being an island, it was surrounded by sea water.

There is an article at Wikipedia on Mazaua where all the properties of Mazaua–its location, size, kind of port, shape, the name of its king, its flora and fauna, distances from Homonhon to the port, latitude, etc. etc.–are explicitly defined. Click http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazaua.

A fairly comprehensive but not exhaustive historiography of the Mazaua issue is contained in an article published in the website of the Italian nuclear scientist and Italian translator of Dr. Jose Rizal, Dr. Vasco Caini, at http://www.xeniaeditrice.it. When the page opens scroll down to the article Mazaua.

The notion the March 31, 1521 mass was held at Butuan comes from the garbled account by Giovanni Battista Ramusio. It is such a corrupted translation of the original that the account is not Antonio Pigafetta’s at all. In this translation, which Henry Harrisse says is a plagiarism by Ramusio of an anonymously published book that saw print in 1534 (no one has seen this edition) and republished in 1536 (which is extant), Ramusio removed “Mazaua” and replaced it with Butuan.

The Butuan error stayed uncorrected for 266 years from 1534 or 1536 until 1800. The error was detected in a book containing the authentic Pigafetta narration of the Magellan voyage, edited by the ex-Augustinian polymath Carlo Amoretti.

But in correcting the error, Amoretti made a colossal blunder which was only detected in 1996 by the author. Amoretti in two footnotes surmised that Mazaua (his exact names for the island was Massana and Mazzana) MAY be the “Limassava” island in the 1734 map of the Philippines by French mapmaker Jacques N. Bellin. This map was an exact copy of the most famous map ever made in the Philippines by Fr. Pedro Murillo Velarde, the edition of 1734.

Amoretti, by way of offering proof to support his assertion, states Limasawa and Mazaua are in the latitude given by Pigafett, 9 degrees and 40 minutes North. This is wrong on three points: 1) Limasawa’s latitude is 9 deg. 56 min. N; 2) There is no island at Pigafetta’s latitude; 3) There are two other readings of latitude for Mazaua, 9 degrees North by The Genoese Pilot which is supported by the Portuguese squadron leader, Antonio de Brito, who embargoed all objects found at the flagship Trinidad including a number of logbooks and other papers, and 9 deg. 20 min. North by Francisco Albo, the Greek mariner who piloted the Victoria back to Spain on Sept. 6, 1522.

The notion Combes’ Limasawa was Magellan’s Mazaua where the “first mass” was held is a false notion. Combes nowhere says his Limasawa is the port where the fleet moored on March 28-April 3, 1521. Nowhere does Combes say there was any mass held in his Limasawa or anywhere in the Philippines for that matter on March 31, 1521. To verify this, go to the English translation of the 3-paragraph story by Combes of Magellan’s sojourn in Philippine waters. Click http://books.google.com/books?id=NbG7kHtBma8C&pg=PA1&dq=First+mass+in+Limasawa&ei=6w27SZi7IoLKlQS8neDVAg#PPA4,M1. The original Spanish text may be accessed at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;q1=Limasaua;rgn=full%20text;idno=ahz9273.0001.001;didno=ahz9273.0001.001;view=image;seq=00000134

Where then is Magellan’s port today? The answer may be found at the ff. Wikipedia articles:

1. First mass in the Philippines –http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_mass_in_the_Philippines

2. Carlo Amoretti — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Amoretti

3. Gines de Mafra — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gines_de_Mafra

4. Mazaua — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazaua

5. Francisco Combes — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Comb%C3%A9s

6. Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_de_Herrera_y_Tordesillas

7. Andres de San Martin — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9s_de_San_Mart%C3%ADn

8. Ruy Lopez de Villalobos — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruy_Lopez_de_Villalobos

No serious scholar of Magellan historiography today still thinks Limasawa is Mazaua. Only the National Historical Institute and fanatic advocates (not scholars) of Amoretti’s Limasawa hypothesis still think the southern isle is or can be Mazaua.

Ironically, some writers from Butuan think in the same way as NHI itself. For what unexplained reason, it’s not clear.

The only remaining problem is whether the suspect isle of Pinamanculan-Bancasi is really Mazaua. This issue is not historiographical. It is archaeological, i.e., there is need to come up with artefacts directly traceable to Magellan, Gines de Mafra, and a number of other recorded visits by Europeans in the 16th century.

These artefacts cannot be produced by further historiographical conversation. It is only by digging that concrete evidence may be found.

VICENTE CALIBO DE JESUS
ginesdemafra@gmail.com

Vic de Jesus said...

Enrique de Malacca...a Cebuano?

Magellan's slave has acquired fame because of the notion he was first to round the globe.
One hypothesis is he was Cebuano so when the fleet reached Cebu he ahead of anyone on earth became the first man to circumnavigate. The other hypothesis is he was Malay, either from Malacca or Sumatra or even the Moluccas, and after May 1, 1521 he somehow was able to hop unto a sailing ship—an event recorded by no man but absolutely imaginable--and reached his hometown at a date unspecified by even the most inventive mind ahead of Victoria, the nao of Magellan’s Armada that made it to Seville on Sept. 6, 1522.
The slave’s name is "Henrich" in Antonio Pigafetta's account (Page 89, R.A. Skelton English edition of the French Nancy-Libri-Phillipps-Beinecke-Yale codex, click http://books.google.com/books?id=RB4usvtAZrEC&pg=RA1-PT1&dq=Magellan%27s+Voyage+by+R.A.+Skelton&ei=V-utSa7-IZeOkAStnO2XBQ#PPA89,M1). It's "Henrich" as well in the extant Italian manuscript, called Ambrosiana, and found in the English translation of James Alexander Robertson, Page 183, click http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;q1=Henrich;rgn=full%20text;idno=afk2830.0001.033;didno=AFK2830.0001.033;view=image;seq=189;page=root;size=s;frm=frameset.

He is "Henry" in the English translation by Lord Stanley of Alderley of the French extant MS 5650, click http://dlxs.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=sea&cc=sea&idno=sea061&q1=Duarte+Barbosa&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=189.

He is "Henrique" on Page 66 of Martin Fernandez de Navarette's Colección de los viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar los españoles desde, fines del siglo XV, con varios documentos inéditos concernientes á la historia de la marina castellana y de los establecimientos españoles en Indias, Tomo IV, click http://www.archive.org/details/coleccibonviages04navarich.

"Henrique" is most likely his baptismal name; it's how the Portuguese spells it. He was baptized when his master, Fernao de Magalhaes, was still a Portuguese subject and thus would have followed Portuguese ways.

Malaccan? Sumatran? Moluccan? What was his language?
Pigafetta states explicitly Henrich was Sumatran. The episode where Henrich was identified to be from Sumatra, that he spoke his native tongue, Malay, and was understood was at Mazaua, see Ambrosiana codex, edition of Theodore J. Cachey, Page 34, http://books.google.com/books?id=Mcgy9Xn2KkEC&pg=PA129&dq=Magellan+by+F.H.H.+Guillemard&lr=&ei=Fx2qSd6OEYGElQT_pOmUBA#PPA34,M1. This is on Page 113 of Blair & Robertson, Vol. 33, at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer&cc=philamer&idno=afk2830.0001.033&q1=Mazaua&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=119. This is corroborated in Stanley’s English translation of the extant French MS 5650 at http://digital.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=sea&cc=sea&idno=sea061&q1=Taprobana&node=sea061%3A5&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=162.
Magellan, in his Last Will and Testament signed on August 24, 1519 at Seville, states Enrique was a native of Malacca. The Will's English translation by F.H.H. Guillemard is in the book, The Life of Ferdinand Magellan and the First Circumnavigation of the Globe 1480-1521. London: 1890, Pages 317-326. Reference to Enrique is at the 4th paragraph on Page 321: “And by this my present will and testament, I declare and ordain as free and quit of every obligation of captivity, subjection, and slavery, my captured slave Enrique, mulatto, native of the city of Malacca, of the age of twenty-six years more or less, that from the day of my death thenceforward ....” Guillemard’s text was reprinted in Tim Joyner’s Magellan, International Marine: 1992, Pages 299-302.

Captured or bought?
The idea he was bought comes from Maximilianus Transylvanus’ 2ndhand account of the voyage. It's in Stanley's, Page 200. The English translation was done by Mr. James Baynes of the Printed Book Department of the British Museum, click http://digital.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=sea&cc=sea&idno=sea061&q1=Lord+Stanley+of+Alderley&node=sea061%3A1.3&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=288

Most accounts by historians several centuries removed from the event talk of Enrique having been bought. It's easy enough to resolve whether Magellan was wrong and Maximilianus was right. Magellan knew Enrique first hand, was with him from 1511 until April 27, 1521. Maximilianus neither met nor knew the slave, personally. He only heard of him from stories of the survivors of the voyage.

Was Henrich Cebuano?
Carlos Quirino in a speech at the University of the Philippines on July 16, 1980 (see attached Jpeg image) claimed Enrique could not have been understood if he spoke Malay at Mazaua. In fact Quirino fails to mention Mazaua, to avoid having to explain how he came to the notion Cebuano was spoken at this isle. This is because Malay, Quirino argues, is not understood in the Philippines today. Thus, he must have spoken Cebuano. Therefore he was born at Cebu: Therefore, when he reached Cebu, he had circumnavigated the globe.

There are several flaws here. Malay was spoken widely in Southeast Asia. In Language and Language-in-education Planning in the Pacific Basin by Robert B. Kaplan, Richard B. Baldauf, Ricard B. Baldauf Jr., the authors who are linguistics experts—Quirino has no credential in the field—state “Malay was lingua franca of the region for perhaps a thousand years…”, click http://books.google.com/books?id=FgCa3Rt19MQC&pg=PA83&dq=Malay+as+SEA+lingua+franca&ei=VGGnSbSuHZnClATrmrmPBA.

Carlo Amoretti, discoverer of the first true Italian Pigafetta account, states in a footnote on the Mazaua incident, “From the Philippines to Malacca the Malay tongue is universally spoken. It is therefore by no means astonishing an inhabitant of Sumatra should be understood in the Philippine Islands.” See John Pinkerton’s English tr., Page 328, http://books.google.com/books?id=KVG-d40WYesC&pg=PA288&dq=John+Pinkerton+on+Pigafetta%27s+Voyage+Round+the+World&ei=-mWnScHqNJLOlQTUkKSnBA#PPA328,M1

Gines de Mafra was explicit in saying the slave-interpreter (he doesn’t give a name) was pressed into service "because he was known to speak Malay, the language common to those parts." For both Spanish text and English translation of de Mafra, click http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gin%C3%A9s_de_Mafra#Chapter_XI.2C_which_deals_with_what_transpired_after_Magellan.27s_departure_from_the_Ladrones_islands.

Quirino assumes the language used in Mazaua is Cebuano. This is wrong. The language of Mazaua is most likely Butuanon. The proof of this is it is among over a dozen languages and dialects within the band of latitudes from 12 deg. North down to 8 deg. North that has the word "masawa" from which the isle got its name. :"Masawa" means brilliant light; the word’s significance may be seen in the context of Pigafetta's words, "On Thursday morning, March 28, as we had seen a fire on an island the night before, we anchored near it." Click http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer&cc=philamer&idno=afk2830.0001.033&q1=Ceilon&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=119.

Thus, going by the logic of Quirino, since Enrique spoke the language of Mazaua, Butuanon, he had rounded the world on reaching the isle. Not one of those who took up the cause of Quirino ever detected this flaw in his logic. But those closest to Henrich are explicit, he was a Malay either from Sumatra or Malacca. We can dismiss Maximilianus’ claim as hearsay.

The fallacy of the hypostatized proof
It's almost unthinkable that a historian whose knowledge of the past is derived from accounts of an event by eyewitnesses and secondhand sources can find contrary evidence from outside the body of established primary and secondary sources. It's not just unthinkable, but impossible.

Quirino was editor of a 1968 edition of the Pigafetta English of Robertson and the Stevens' Maximilianus. He knew the Last Will and Testament of Magellan. He had not read Gines de Mafra. How did he surmount the direct evidence coming from Magellan, Pigafetta, and Maximilianus?

Those who have espoused the "Enrique de Cebu" notion have not read Quirino's article in Philippines Free Press of Dec. 29, 1991 (see attached Jpeg image). It’s here that one sees the logic behind Quirino's improbable enterprise of negating his primary sources. Here Quirino recounts an incident at a Malacca slave market where Magellan and Enrique converse. This event is not found anywhere outside of Quirino’s own imagination. Advocates of the "Enrique de Cebu" notion--many of whom have not read Quirino, do not cite him, do not even know him--are completely ignorant of this incident which is the basis for Quirino's being able to dismiss all known sources.

Quirino describes the phantom event: "After his return to Malacca [from Sabah], he [Magellan] learned that there was a teen-age male to be bought at the slave market; one who, after he had conversations with him, said that he had come from an island farther east than Sabah on the same longitude as the Moluccas, but considerably north of it. The young slave, subsequently baptized with the name Enrique, must have told Magellan how he had been captured by Muslim pirates and that Europeans were unknown in his area of the Pacific Ocean. He must have come from one of the islands then known as the Luzones, about 12 days by sail northeast of Borneo. The idea of claiming that region, composed of a group of islands, must have entered the mind of Magellan. So he returned to Portugal in 1512, taking with him Enrique to propose to his master, King Emanuel of Portugal, that he be allowed to lead a seafaring expedition to those islands and claim them as part of the Portuguese empire."

This paragraph contains many falsehoods. One, longitude was not determined correctly until late in the 18th century with John Harrison's invention of a reliable chronometer around 1740. Ascribing an uncanny ability to know longitudes to this lowly slave is a case of projecting what we know today to someone over 400 years removed from us. The Pacific Ocean wasn't named so not until Magellan's voyage in 1519. In any case, this incident is belied by the fact Enrique wasn't bought in a slave market.

But Quirino reified--made real in his own mind--his own invented event which allowed him to dismiss Magellan's Last Will as the product of a liar, Pigafetta's account, Maximilianus assertion it was not Enrique who did the interpreting at Cebu but a native, and whatever contrary testimony one can present. Here is what Quirino said of Magellan's testimony Enrique was from Malacca: "Magellan obviously wanted to keep secret the real birthplace of Enrique as east of Borneo." Quirino had sense enough not to say outright “Enrique came from Cebu."

In this Free Press article Quirino's inventive mind allowed him to write pure fiction. "Enrique immediately recognized his father, one of the dons around the rajah [Humabon]. He held his hands together to his forehead, the customary salutation of a Malay to his elder; the father smiled as he recognized his son whom he had given up for dead. His mother was one of the attendants of the Ranee, and beside her was a young and pretty maiden whom he realized was once his teenage sweetheart."

Quirino's reification of his "Enrique de Cebu" tale ends, in the Free Press article, with a quotation of a passage in the biographical-psychological study on Magellan by the famous popular Austrian biographer, Stefan Zweig, that you can read at http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=tLoWg9mMh04C&pg=PA302&lpg=PA302&dq=Ferdinand+Magellan%27s+Last+Will+and+Testament&source=bl&ots=Ydlxdv0s6v&sig=GVYQJGnHmNOjXl56ebuVFyNXe1Q&hl=en&ei=7SqqSZ-9NJWukAXhu7jkDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=8&ct=result#PPA234,M1

But Quirino deliberately removed this portion, "the Malay slave was dumbfounded, for he understood much of what they were saying…he was torn from his home upon the island of Sumatra, was bought by Magellan in Malacca…”

What happened to Enrique after Cebu massacre?
Quirino's last stab at his Enrique brainstorm was a short piece in his book Who's Who in Philippine History. See cover, http://books.google.com/books?id=ZvO5AAAAIAAJ&q=Carlos+Quirino&dq=Carlos+Quirino&ei=iE6fSaTgEZ-OkASU-9WNAg&pgis=1; attached is the Jpeg image of the article.

Here Quirino completes the fairy tale, gives a date of Enrique's demise, what happened to him on May 1. 1521 after the massacre at Cebu took place and the remnant of the fleet left. Enrique's year of death Quirino tells us was 1563; he was from an specific place in Cebu, Carcar; he was caught by pirates while fishing off the coast of Cebu [Quirino could not make up his mind what time of day, and if it was sunny and if he had company]. After May 1, 1521 Henrich served at the court of Humabon as Spanish and Portuguese interpreter. Enrique got married [name of wife hadn’t occurred to Quirino’s mind] and raised a family [number of children unspecified]. Enrique died in his seventies—why not 80s? Or 90s? Or better still 150?--just before Legazpi arrived in Cebu. If he had lived long enough, Quirino would probably have him meet McArthur at the beaches of Leyte, why not?
What does the record say?
Here are what contemporary accounts say what happened to Henrique:
1. In the extant French manuscript called Nancy-Libri-Beinecke-Yale codex, Antonio Pigafetta writes that massacre survivor João Serrão, who was pleading with his comrades to save him from the Cebuanos, said all who went to the banquet were massacred except Henrique. Click http://books.google.com/books?id=RB4usvtAZrEC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Magellan%27s+Voyage&ei=B_GpSYmGC5-OkAT-q9ThBA#PPA90,M1.
This is also found in the Ambrosiana MS in the edition of Theodore J. Cachey Jr., click http://books.google.com/books?id=Mcgy9Xn2KkEC&pg=PA129&dq=Magellan+by+F.H.H.+Guillemard&lr=&ei=Fx2qSd6OEYGElQT_pOmUBA#PPA60,M1.
2. Accdg. to the Genoese Pilot, Henrique “had been killed with Fernan de Magalhaes.” Click http://digital.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=sea&cc=sea&idno=sea061&q1=Junk+of+Ciama&frm=frameset&view=image&seq=98. This is obviously wrong. He survived the April 27 battle of Mactan.
3. Martin Fernandez de Navarette, from official records of the Casa de Contratación de Las Indias, lists “Henrique, de Malaca” as one of 27 men killed in the May 1 massacre. Go to Page 66 of http://www.archive.org/details/coleccibonviages04navarich
4. Sebastian de Puerta, survivor of Loaisa expedition (1523-1535), narrated February 1528 to men of the Saavedra expedition (1527-1529) that “eight of Magellan’s men survived the massacre and had been sold as slaves to Chinese merchants in exchange for a fixed quantity of iron or copper.” See http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=philamer;cc=philamer;q1=Sebastian%20de%20Puerta;rgn=full%20text;idno=adn6882.0001.001;didno=adn6882.0001.001;view=image;seq=207;page=root;size=s;frm=frameset Noone’s source was Martin Fernandez de Navarette, Colección de los viages y descubrimientos que hicieron por mar los españoles desde fines del siglo XV, con varios documentos inéditos concernientes á la historia de la marina castellana y de los establecimientos españoles en Indias, Tomo V, Page 115, click http://www.archive.org/details/coleccibonviages05navarich.
The historical record isn't clear. So it's all well to imagine along with Quirino. In fact I suspect Enrique was among those who received Legazpi with courtesy, elegance, and urbanity. Fairy tales are so much nicer.

Wikipedia tackles Enrique
At Wikipedia, editors have yet to resolve if Enrique is indeed from Cebu. Some editors assert he wrote together with Pigafetta the Cebuano vocabulary (they forget it was started in Mazaua and contains Butuanon words), that he had inserted Cebuano words in the Malay vocabulary Pigafetta wrote. Where and how they got this notion is no different from Quirino’s conjuring anything his imagination could contrive.

The editors are aware of the primary and secondary accounts that puts the lie to the “Enrique de Cebu” tale but are hoping evidence will surface in some happy future that will affirm Quirino's "Cebu de Carcar." This is what is called in logic the fallacy of the possible proof. If they hold on to this frame of mind, there will be no resolution. Because the fallacy allows eternity as the deadline for these proofs to come in.
Can fairy tales ever end?
At Wikipedia, there’s one sucker born every day who defends Quirino’s tall tale. A number of sensible minds have been seduced by this enthralling tale—Laurence Bergreen, William Manchester, John Keay, Chitang Nakpil, Alejandro Roces, Perry Diaz, and countless other lesser lights. It’s time we end this fairy tale before it claims any more victims.
To the credit of the linguistics world, no expert has even bothered to comment on Quirino’s basic assertion. It’s on its face a fatuous inanity.

mcneil88888 said...

Very interesting: Who is Enrique De Mallaca? Is he really a Cebuano?... If not, why he could communicate the local from Limasawa and made him as there interpreter. They pressumed that Enrique are capable of interpreting dialects from locals because he is from Sumatra or Mallaca which in a Malay race...Which they have considered Malay as a universal tongue before...SO.. SO.. UNCONSIDERABLE! ... Considering not all Filipinos can speak or understand Cebuano dialect, you could not serve as an interpreter unless you are locals from Visayas or in Mindanao, but an interpreter locals from Sumatra and in Mallaca I don't think so...
So I must also agree that Enrique was a native from the island whos capable to speak Cebuano...Maybe he is from Junquera? Who knows?....

ka tony said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ka tony said...

Hi mcneil88888,
"...SO.. SO.. UNCONSIDERABLE! ... Considering not all Filipinos can speak or understand Cebuano dialect, you could not serve as an interpreter unless you are locals from Visayas or in Mindanao, but an interpreter locals from Sumatra and in Mallaca I don't think so..."

Well said!!!!!! There's only one source of Magellan's voyage to the Philippines & that is Antonio Pigafetta's journal & the rest are all conclusions of "historians." There's no use to challenge other people's conclusion by just reading; one or two, or three or more articles & stating their source & makes one so well verse. No matter what, all these came from Pigaffeta.

Thank you mcneil88888, a great one liner, and you said it all. My kudos!!!
ka tony