3.28.2007

Cyberfair


“The pride, unity and cultural wealth of a race emanate from a people's sense of self history, from the Early Filipinos, to the dawn of European colonization, the revolution of 1896, the birth of the Philippine Republic. The heroic contribution of the Cebuano people and the saga of events, which transpired on the islands of Cebu, are vital elements in the formulation of the nation we know today.
.
.
.
.
Their contribution should rightfully be emulated, immortalized and honored in a lasting monumental, aesthetic experience.

This work of art in Parian Park is the loving legacy of the City and Province of Cebu. This monumental-sculptural tableau is honor to the people of Cebu and is a tribute to all Filipino people and the wealth of our race. “(Heritage of Cebu)
This is what is written on the stone in front of the monument, Heritage of Cebu, sculpted by Eduardo Castrillo. The sculptural tableau cost P33.2 Million. The construction began on July, 1997 and was inaugurated on December, 2000. This monument showcases the history of Cebu during the Spanish Era. It shows how Christianity started, how Filipinos resisted their conquerors and how martyrdom existed in the Philippines.
The monument consists of different tableaus which reveals the history of the Philippines especially Cebu City. Part of the monument included the Catholic mass. The first Catholic mass in the Philippines was held in Limasawa, Leyte on March 31, 1521 by a Spanish friar named Pedro Valderama. It was at this time that the Spaniards introduced the image of the Child Jesus, Santo. Niño, to the Filipino natives. Christianity spread all over the Philippines. The Filipinos especially the Cebuanos became a devotee to the Child Jesus. Because of the Spaniards’ aim to spread Christianity, the Basilica of Santo Niño founded by the Augustinian priest, Andres de Urdaneta on April 28, 1565 was built. That is why the basilica together with the devotees of the Child Jesus was shown in the monument. Not only was the devotion to the Catholic religion but also the struggles to be free from the Spanish colonialism of the Filipinos shown. Ferdinand Magellan was the first Portuguese representing Spain who arrived at the Philippines, specifically Mactan. The Mactan natives did not like the idea of foreigners living in their land. So the first battle between the Filipinos and the European Conquerors occurred during April 14, 1521. The Filipinos, led by Lapu-Lapu, fought the pursuers which led to the death of Magellan. Thus, it made the Spaniards retreat to Spain. After the foreign colonialism in the Philippines, the country established their own government and elected their own presidents. Cebu is proud to say that it has produced a highly esteemed president by the person of Sergio Osmeña Sr. Cebu also produced Catholic martyrs. This was proven through the beatification of Pedro Calungsod.
Tourists from around the world now visit this monument. Hopefully, as time goes by, people will flock around the said monument and marvel at its beauty just as the local residents gaze at its astounding honor.
According to Marina Ybañez, a 65-year-old resident of Barangay Pari-an, the Heritage of Cebu was built at around year 1997 and was finished on year 2000. She witnessed the making of the monument and how it was established. She described it as marvelous that it can attract tourists from all over the world. Therefore, it promoted the tourism of the Philippines.
According to Miraciel Saberon, a 44-year-old resident of Barangay Pari-an, the monument signifies the Spanish occupation here in the Philippines. It was built in Pari-an because many Spaniards settled and made the place as their first residence. This was how Pari-an got its name which means “first village”. Because of the monument and some historical landmarks, Pari-an became a first class barangay.

1 comment:

Vicente Calibo 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