ACERCA DE TAWALISI DE IBN BATUTA

This historical commentary is believed to form part of ‘Notes’ (written in collaboration with

A.B. Meyer and F. Blumentritt) on a Chinese code in the Middle Ages, translated from the

German by Dr. Hirth. Written on January 7, 1889, the article was about the “Tawalisi” which

refers to the northern part of Luzon or to any of the adjoining islands. It was also in London

where Rizal penned the following historical commentaries: “La Political Colonial On Filipinas”

(Colonial Policy In The Philippines), “Manila En El Mes De Diciembre” (December , 1872),

“Historia De La Familia Rizal De Calamba” (History Of The Rizal Family Of Calamba),

and“Los Pueblos Del Archipelago Indico (The People’s Of The Indian Archipelago).

This part of our history is always seek an answer if this is exists. But who is Ibn Battuta?

Ibn Battuta, also spelled Ibn Baṭṭūṭah, in full Abū

ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Lawātī

al-Ṭanjī ibn Baṭṭūṭah, (born February 24, 1304,

Tangier, Morocco—died 1368/69 or 1377, Morocco),

the greatest medieval Muslim traveler and the author of

one of the most famous travel books, the Riḥlah

(Travels). His great work describes his extensive

travels covering some 75,000 miles (120,000 km) in

trips to almost all of the Muslim countries and as far as

China and Sumatra (now part of Indonesia).

Maybe in Pangasinan?

I am very interesting about the history of every provinces in the Philippines. Talking about the

history, we cannot neglect what our textbooks in schools are saying about Princess Urduja who

was undeniably sculpted in our minds as the province hero. Everytime we talked about Princess

Urduja we have to mention Pangasinan. Princess Urduja was a princess who was the ruler of a

city called Kaylukari in the land of Tawalisi mentioned in the travel account of Ibn Battuta (1304

- possibly 1368 or 1377 C.E.), a Muslim traveler from Morocco who was on his way to China.

Princess Urduja was described as a daughter of a king named Tawalisi of a land that was also

called Tawalisi. The ruler of Tawalisi, according to Ibn Battuta, possessed many ships and was a

rival of China, which was then ruled by a Mongol dynasty. Ibn Battuta sailed for 17 days to

reach China from the land of Tawalisi."

This Tawalisi is a great difficulty. The French translators say, " The Isle of Celebes, or rather

perhaps Tunkin;" Dulaurier, "The coast of Camboja, Cochin-China, or Tunkin ; " Lassen, "By

this name no place can be meant but Tonkin ; " whilst Walckenaer identifies it with Talual, a

small island adjoining Bachian, one of the Moluccas. This last suggestion seems to have been

based on the name only, and all have been made in connection with the assumption that the Mul-

Jawa of our author is Java, which we have seen that it cannot be.

It seems to me impossible that Tawalisi should be Cambodia, Cochin-China, or Tunking, for two

conclusive reasons (1) that the voyage from Mul-Jawa to Tawalisi occupies seventy-one days,

and is considered by our traveller's shipmates an unusually good passage ; (2) that the last thirty-

seven days of this time are spent on the passage of the Bahr-al-Kdhil, disturbed by neither winds
nor waves, a character which in this case we should have to attach to the China Sea, the very

metropolis of Typhoons.

Indeed, considering that Killer-Karai is the real name of a port in South India, and that Ur duja is

a name which our author in a former part of his travels has assigned to one of the Queens of

Mahomed -Uzbek Khan on the Wolga, and has explained to mean in Turkish 'Born in the Camp,'

whilst the Lady of Tawalisi herself is made to speak not only to the traveller but to her own

servants a mixture of Turkish and Persian, a faint suspicion rises that Tawalisi is really to be

looked for in that part of the atlas which contains the Marine Surveys of the late Captain

Gulliver.

Putting aside this suspicion, no suggestion seems on the whole more probable than that Tawalisi

was the kingdom of Soolo or N.E. of Borneo. "Owing to some cause or other," says Crawfurd,

"there has sprung up in Soolo a civilisation and power far exceeding those of the surrounding

islanders. A superior fertility of the soil, and better means of maintaining a numerous and

concentrated population, has probably been the main cause of this superiority ; but whatever be

the cause, it has enabled this people not only to maintain a paramount authority over the whole

Archipelago (i. e. the so-called Soolo Archipelago), but to extend it to Palawan and to the

northern coasts of Borneo and islands adjacent to it." Adopting this view, we should have the

Bahr-al-Kali:it in the sea between Java Borneo and Celebes, where hurricanes are unknown, and

stormy weather is rare. And, the time mentioned by Ibn Batuta, if we suppose it occupied in the

voyage from the upper part of the Gulf of Siam through the Java Sea and Straits of Macassar to

Soolo, a distance of some 2,200 nautical miles, over a great part of which the ship had to be

towed, would seem much less improbable than if the course were to Cochin-China or Tonkin.

The naval power of Tawalisi is one of the most prominent features in the narrative, and the Soolo
people have been noted throughout the seas of the Archipelago for the daring exploits of their

piratical fleets from our earliest acquaintance with those regions. It would seem also from Ibn

Batuta's expression, "the load of two elephants in rice," that elephants were used in Tawalisi.

Now the elephant is alleged by Dalrymple to exist in Soolo, and though Crawford doubts the

fact, there seems no sufficient reason for his doubts. It is known, moreover, to exist in the

adjoining part of Borneo, which may have belonged to Soolo then as it does now, and though not

used now it was found in a domesticated state at Brunei by Magellan's party in 1521. These are

the only portions of the Archipelago east of Sumatra in which the elephant is known.

Jose Rizal disagreed with the scholar Henry Yule who said:

"Indeed, considering that Killa-Karai is the real name of a port in South India, and that Urduja

is a name that our author in a former part of his travels has assigned to one of the Queens of

Mahomed Uzbek Khan on the Volga, and has explained to mean in Turkish 'Born in the camp,'

whilst the Lady of Tawalisi herself is made to speak not only to the traveler but to her own

servants a mixture of Turkish and Persian, a faint suspicion rises that Tawalisi is really to be

looked for in that part of the atlas which contains the Marine Surveys of the late Captain

Gulliver."

In a letter to A.B. Meyer of the Dresden Museum, Dr. Jose Rizal wrote:

"I cannot accept Yule's suggested suspicion that Tawalisi may be found only in Gulliver's

Geography. While I have doubts regarding the accuracy of Ibn Batuta's details, still I believe in
the voyage to Tawalisi. There are details that only the reality of the statements could have

furnished, details which could not have been invented -- like the change in the government of

Kailucary, previously ruled by the son of the King, etc. Besides, what possible interest could Ibn

Batuta have had in falsifying? In this travel account, he introduces nothing in favor of his

religion or to himself, nor does he mention new marvels or entertaining adventures. The traveler

had visited so many and such beautiful countries much more interesting than Tawalisi. He would

not go out of his way to discredit them in order to invent an insignificant incident. That after his

return he tried to embellish his travels with some exaggerated and fanciful details is possible.

But imagination, love of the marvelous or a certain confusion produced by the multitude of

things seen can equally well have been the cause.

"The principal data in which I think this ought to be sought are the distances, which do not vary

with time and I give preference to these over details regarding names and customs. Travel from

Kakula, in Mul-Java, to Tawalisi usually took 74 to 84 days. Ibn Batuta spent 71 days, 34 going

under sail and 37 days rowing. From Tawalisi to Canton was 15 days with a favorable wind.

These details argue for Ibn Batuta's veracity since travelers usually make the lands they invent

remote.

"With these two data, and knowing the average attainment of Ibn Batuta's ship was from eight to

10 geographical leagues (15 of these to the degree) -- from the Maldives to Bengal, 43 days,

from Bengal to Barahuagan 15, we may trace two arcs, one from Canton with a radius of 180

geographical leagues -- on the supposition that with favoring winds the day's sail might be 12

leagues, and the other arc from Kakula (between Java and Sumatra) of 430 leagues 7 radius --
calculating that by oars the speed would only be half. The intersection of these arcs, we should

find, would be exactly in the neighborhood of the northern part of the Philippines."

On the whole, Ibn Battuta is reliable; only his alleged journey to Bulgary was proved to be

invented, and there are some doubts concerning the East Asian part of his travels. A few grave

and several minor discrepancies in the chronology of his travels are due more to lapses in his

memory than to intentional fabrication. A number of formerly uncertain points (such as travels in

Asia Minor and the visit to Constantinople) have since been cleared away by contemporary

research and the discovery of new corroborative sources

There’s a lot of questions in this piece of history.

Sources:

https://www.aswangproject.com/princess-urduja/

https://gopangasinan.blogspot.com/2006/12/tawalisi-in-pangasinan.html

https://ourhappyschool.com/literature/jose-rizal%E2%80%99s-essays-and-articles

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ibn-Battuta/Time-in-India-and-later-journeys