“Dasalan at Tocsohan” ni Marcelo H.

Del Pilar

May alam ka bang aklat o akdang pampanitikan sa kasalukuyang panahon na nagpapatungkol sa

pang-uuyam o sarcastic ang tema? Maaaring meron! At di rin natin maikakaila na laganap na rin
ang mga ganitong tema kahit sa telebisyon at sa iba pang media ngayon.

Subalit, di lang sa kasalukuyang panahon nauso ang ganitong tema. Kahit sa panahon pa ng
pananakop ng mga Espanyol sa Pilipinas ay usong-uso na ito, at ang mga prayle ang madalas na
pinupuntirya ng mga akdang nalilikha noon.

Isang halimbawa na lamang nito ay ang isinulat ni Marcelo H. Del Pilar noong 1888 na “Dasalan
at Tocsohan.”

Ito’y isang akdang nakakatawa dahil ipinapakita dito kung paano sobrang kaiba o kabaliktaran
ang ginagawi ng mga prayle noon sa kanilang mga sinasabi sa mga Pilipino. Kitang-kita dito ang
matinding kabalintunaan ng pagiging “banal” ng mga prayle noon sa Pilipinas. Subalit sa isang
banda, nakakalungkot din ang akda at kung mababasa mo ito’t ilalagay mo ang sarili mo sa
kalagayang panlipunan noon sa Pilipinas, masasabi mong nakakapukaw ito ng isipan at
damdaming mapanghimagsik dahil binigyang diin sa akdang ito ang mga panlilinlang at
pagsasamantalang ginagawa noon ng mga prayle sa mga Pilipino.

Narito ang ilang halimbawa ng mga parody ng mga dasal sa akdang ito ni Marcelo H. Del Pilar:

Ang Tanda ng Cara-i-Cruz

(Parody ng Sign of the Cross)
Ang tanda nang cara-i-cruz ang ipangadya mo sa amin Panginoon naming Fraile sa manga
bangkay naming, sa ngalan nang Salapi at nang Maputing binte, at nang Espiritung Bugaw. Siya
naua.
 Panginoon Kong Fraile
(Parody ng “The Act of Contrition”)
Panginoon kong Fraile, Dios na hindi totoo at labis nang pagkatuo gumaga at sumalacay sa akin:
pinagsisihan kong masakit sa tanang loobang dilang pag-asa ko sa iyo, ikaw nga ang berdugo ko.
Panginoon ko at kaauay ko na inihihibic kong lalo sa lahat, nagtitica akong matibay na matibay
na dina muli-muling mabubuyo sa iyo: at lalayuan ko na at pangingilagan ang balanang
makababacla nang loob ko sa pag-asa sa iyo, macalilibat nang dating sakit nang manga bulsa ko,
at nagtitica naman acong maglalathala nang dilang pagcadaya ko umaasa akong babambuhin ka
rin, alang-alang sa mahal na panyion at pangangalakal mo nang Cruz, sa pagulol sa akin. Siya
naua.

Amain Namin
(Parody ng Our Father)
Amain naming sumasaconvento ka, sumpain ang ngalan mo, malayo sa amin ang
kasakiman mo, quitlin ang liig mo ditto sa lupa para nang sa langit. Saulan mo cami ngayon nang
aming kaning iyonh inaraoarao at patauanin mo kami sa iyong pagungal para nang pag papataua
mo kung kami nacucualtahan; at huag mo kaming ipahintulot sa iyong manunukso at iadya mo
kami sa masama mong dila.

Aba Guinoong Barya

(Parody ng Hail Mary)

Aba guinoong Baria nakapupuno ka nang alcancia ang Fraile’I sumasainyo bukod ka niyang
pinagpala’t pina higuit sa lahat, pinagpala naman ang kaban mong mapasok. Santa Baria Ina
nand Deretsos, ipanalangin mo kaming huag anitan ngayon at cami ipapatay. Siya naua.
 Ang Mga Utos ng Fraile
(Parody ng The Ten Commandments)

Ang manga utos nang Fraile ay sampo:

Ang nauna: Sambahin mo ang Fraile na lalo sa lahat.

Ang ikalaua: Huag kang mag papahamak manuba nang ngalang deretsos.

Ang ikatlo: Mangilin ka sa Fraile lingo man at fiesta.

Ang ikapat: Isangla mo ang catauan mo sa pagpapalibing sa ama’t ina

Ang ikalima: Huag kang mamamatay kung uala pang salaping pang libing

Ang ikanim: Huag kang makiapid sa kanyang asaua.

Ang ikapito: Huag kang makinakaw.

Ang ikaualo: Huag mo silang pagbibintangan, kahit ka masinungalingan.

Ang ikasiyam: Huag mong ipagkait ang iyong asaua.

Ang ikapulo: Huag mong itangui ang iyong ari.

Itong sampong utos nang Fraile’I dalaua ang kinaoouian. Ang isa: Sambahin mo ang Fraile lalo
sa lahat.

Ang ikalaua: Ihayin mo naman sa kaniya ang puri mo’t kayamanan.

Siya naua.
Sa pagkakabasa ng mga parody na ito, masasabi natin na matindi talaga ang pagbibigay diin ni
Del Pilar sa mga pagsasamantalang ginagawa ng mga prayle noon sa mga Pilipino. At ayon nga
sa aklat na “CCP Encyclopedia of Philippine Art,” sinabi dito na ang mga akdang katulad nito ay
nakatulong sa pagpapabagsak ng “friarcracy” o ng mas sukdulang pagpapasinaya ng mga
Kastilang prayle ng mga kumbentong patakaran imbes ng panggobyerno—na di kalaunan nga ay
nagbunsod sa rebolusyon noong 1896.

Subalit kahit wala na si Del Pilar sa kasalukuyang panahon, maraming Pilipino pa rin ang mala-
Del Pilar ang istilo ng pagsusulat at nakakagulat din na buhay na buhay pa rin magpahanggang
ngayon ang parody niya na “Aba Guinoong Barya” subalit hindi na ito patungkol sa mga
Kastilang prayle.

Kung dati ay naisulat ni Del pilar ang mga parody na ito dahil sa mga di kanais-nais na
karanasan niya sa mga prayle noon, sa kasalukuyang panahon, nagkaroon ito ng mga bagong
bersyon na nagpapatungkol naman sa katiwalian at pagkadismaya ng mga mamamayan sa mga
pangulong nanunungkulan sa Pilipinas.

Isang halimbawa nga nito ay ang “Aba Ginoong Gloria” na isinulat para sa dating pangulong
Gloria Arroyo at narito ang isang katha ni Bart SD. Tubalinal, na nasipi ko mula sa comment box
ng isang artikulo na isinulat ni Perry Diaz sa website na globalbalita.com:

Aba Ginoong Gloria

Aba, Ginoong Gloria,

Punong-puno ka ng disgrasya,
Bukod kang nagkasala
Sa bayang iyong sinamantala.

Sa iyong huling paalam,

Nawa’y ikaw’y makulam
Sa gayon di ka parisan,
 Ng mga sunod na lingkod-bayan.

Paalam mo’y walang kwenta,

Dahil wala namang mapapala,
Sa kahirapang’yong pinalala,
At sa graft na iyong ipinunla.

Paalam ka na sa’yong bayang sawi,

Sa lupaing tigmak sa luha’t pighati
Iyong pagka-presidente di nakabuti,
Dahil nakaw ang trono, sa tulong ni Garci.

Kay dami ko pa sanang isasatsat,

Subali’t maaaring ako’y pigilan
Ng espayong sa pahinang nakalaan
Sa mga lumalaban sa mga haragan.

Kaya paalam ka na Gloria

Baka ikaw pa’y madisgrasya.

Lubusang malaya na nga ang Pilipinas mula sa mga kolonyalistang Kastila, subalit nagpapatuloy
pa rin sa kasalukuyan ang pagkatha ng mga akdang katulad nito na kumukutya sa mga katiwalian
na nagaganap sa ating bansa. Sa tingin mo, bilang isang mamamayan na namumuhay sa
kasalukuyang panahon, masasabi mo ba na sa paglayang iyon ng Pilipinas ay natapos na rin ang
kahabag-habag na dinanas na panlilinlang at pagsasamantala ng mga Pilipino noon? o nanatili pa
rin ito at mas sumisidhi pa?

Self-assessment 2
Using the table below compare the idea of the Marcelo H. del Pilar’s Dasalan at Tocsohan to the
real Catechism of the Catholic Church. Use key phrases/words only.
 Dasalan at Tocsohan Cathechism

Conclusion:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
LESSON 2: Making Sense of the Past: Historical Interpretation
In this lesson, we will analyze three historiographical problems in Philippine history to apply
what we have learned thus far in the work of a historian and the process of historical inquiry.
Earlier, we have been introduced to history as a discipline, the historical method, and the content
and context analysis of primary sources. Two key concepts that need to be defined before
proceeding to the historical analysis of problems in history are interpretation and multi-
perspectivity.

History is the study of the past, but a more contemporary definition is centered on how it impacts
the present through its consequences. (Geoffrey Barraclough defines history as "the attempt to
discover, on the basis of fragmentary evidence, the significant things about the past. He also
notes the history we read, though based on facts, is strictly speaking, not factual at all, but a
series of accepted judgments. Such judgments of historians on how the past should be seen make
the foundation of historical interpretation.

The Code of Kalantiaw is a mythical legal code in the epic history Maragtas. Before it was
revealed as a hoax, it was a source of pride for the people of Aklan. In fact, a historical marker
was installed in the town of Batan, Aklan in 1956, with the following text:

"CODE OF KALANTIAW. Datu Bendehara Kalantiaw, third Chief of Panay, born in Aklan,
established his government in the peninsula of Batang, Aklan Sakup. Considered the First
Filpino Lawgiver, he promulgated in about 1433 penal code now known as Code of Kalantiaw
containing 18 articles. Don Marcelino Orilla of Zarugoza, Spain, obtained the original
manuscript from an old chief of Panay which was later translated into Spanish by Rafael
Murviedo Yzamaney.”

It was only in 1968 that it was proved a hoax, when William Henry Scott, then a doctoral
candidate at the University of Santo Tomas, defended his research on pre-hispanic sources in
Philippine history. He attributed the code to a historical fiction writtern in 1913 by Jose E.
Marco titled Las Antiguas Leyendas de la lsla de Negros. Marco attributed the code itself to a
priest named Jose Maria Pavon. Prominent Filipino historians did not dissent to Scott s
findings, but there are still some who would like to believe that the code is a legitimate
document.

Historians utilize facts collected from primary sources of history and then draw their own
reading so that their intended audience may understand the historical event, a process that in
essence, "makes sense of the past. The premise is that not all primary sources are accessible to a
general audience, and without the proper training and background, a non-historian interpreting a
primary source may do more harm than good-a primary source may even cause
misunderstandings; sometimes, even resulting more problems.

Interpretations of the past, therefore, vary according to who reads the primary source, when it
was read, and how it was read. As students of history, we must be well equipped to recognize
different types of interpretations why these may differ from each other, and how to critically
sift these interpretations through historical evaluation. Interpretations of historical events change
over time; thus, it is an important skill for a student of history to track these changes to
understand the past.
Sa Aking Mga Kabata is a poem purportedly written by Jose Rizal when he was eight years
old and is probably one of the Rizal’s prominent works. There is no evidence to support the
claim that this poem, with the now immortalized lines “Ang hindi magmahal ssa kanyang
salita, mahigit sa hayop at malansang isda was written by Rizal, and worse, the evidence
against Rizals authorship of the poem seems all unassailable.

There exists no manuscript of the poem handwritten by Rizal. The poem was first published
in 1906, in a book by Hermenegildo Cruz.

Cruz said he received the poem from Gabriel Beato Francisco, who claimed to have received
it in 1884, Rizal's close friend, Saturnino Raselis. Rizal never mentioned writing this poem
anywhere in his writings, and more importantly, he never mentioned of having a close friend
by the person of Raselis.

Further criticism of the poem reveals more about the wrongful attribution of the poem to
 Rizal. The poem was written in Tagalog and referred to the word "Kalayaan”. But it was
documented in Rizal's letters that he first encountered the word through a Marcelo H. del
Pilar's translation of Rizal's essay El Amor Patrio, where it was spelled as kalayahan.

While Rizal's native tongue was Tagalog. he was educated in Spanish, starting from his
mother, Teodora Alonso. Later on, he would express disappointment in his difficulty in
expressing himself in his native tongue.

The poem's spelling is also suspect-the use of letters "k and "w" to replaced c and u,
respectively was suggested by Rizal as an adult. If the poem was indeed written during his
time, it should use the original Spanish orthography that was prevalent in his time.

Many of the things we accept as "true about the past might not be the case anymore, just because
these were taught to us as facts when we were younger does not mean that it is set in stone-
history is, after all, a construct. And as a construct, it is open for interpretation. There might be
conflicting and competing accounts of the past that need one's attention and can impact the way
we view our country's history and identity. It is important, therefore, to subject to evaluation not
only the primary source, but also the historical interpretation of the same, to ensure that the
current interpretation is reliable to support our acceptance of events of the past.

Multi-perspectivity
With several possibilities of interpreting the past, another important concept that we must note
is multi-perspectivity. This can be defined as a way of looking at historical events,
personalities, developments, cultures, and societies from different perspectives. This means that
there is a multitude of ways by which we can view the world, and each could be equally
valid, and at the same time, equally partial as well. Historical writing is, by definition, biased,
partial, and contains preconceptions. The historian decides on what sources to use, what
interpretation to make more apparent, depending on what his end is. Historians may misinterpret
evidence, attending to those that suggest that a certain event happened, and then ignore the rest
that goes against the evidence. Historians may omit significant facts about their subject which
makes the interpretation unbalanced. Historians may impose a certain ideology to their subject,
which may not be appropriate the period the subject was from. Historians may also provide a
single cause for an event without considering other possible causal explanations of said event.
These are just many of the ways a historian may fail in his historical inference, description, and
interpretation. With multi-perspectivity as an approach in history, we must understand that
historical interpretations contain discrepancies, contradictions, ambiguities, and are often the
focus of dissert.

Exploring multiple perspectives in history requires incorporating source materials that reflect
different views of an event in history, because singular historical narratives do not provide for
space to inquire and investigate. Different sources that counter each other may create space for
more investigation and research, while providing more evidence for those truths that these
sources agree on.

Different kinds of sources also provide different historical truths - an official document may
note different aspects of the past than, say, a memoir an ordinary person on the same event.
Different historical agents create different historical truths, and while this may be a burdensome
work for the historian, it also renders more validity to the historical scholarship. Taking these in
close regard in the reading of historical interpretations it provides for the audience a more
complex, but also a more complete and richer understanding of the past.
Case Study 1: Where Did the First Catholic Mass Take Place in the Philippines?
The popularity of knowing where the "firsts" happened in history has been an easy way to
trivialize history, but this case study will not focus on the significance (or lack thereof) of the site
of the First Catholic Mass in the Philippines, but rather, use it as a historiographical exercise in
the utilization of evidence and interpretation in reading historical events.

Butuan has long been believed as the site of the first Mass. In fact, this has been the case for
three centuries, culminating in the erection of a monument in 1872 near Agusan River, which
commemorates the expedition's arrival and celebration of Mass on 8 April 1521. The Butuan
claim has been based on a rather elementary reading of primary sources from the event.

Toward the end of the nineteenth century and the start of the twentieth century, together with the
increasing scholarship on the history of the Philippines, a more nuanced reading of the available
evidence was made, which brought to light more considerations in gong against the more
accepted interpretation of the first Mass in the Philippines, made both by Spanish and Filipino
scholars.

It must be noted that there are only two primary sources that historians refer to in identifying the
site of the first Mass. One is the log kept by Francisco Albo, a pilot of one of Magellan's ship,
Trinidad. He was one of the 18 survivors who returned with Sebastian Elcano on the ship
Victoria after they circumnavigated the world. The other, and the more complete, was the
account by Antonio Pigafetta, Primo Uaggio intorno al mondo (First Voyage Around the World).
Pigafetta, like Albo, was a member of the Magellan expedition and an eyewitness of the events,
particularly, of the first Mass.

On the 16th of March (1521) as they sailed in a westerly course from Ladrones, they saw
land towards the northwest; but owing to many shallow places they did not approach it.
They found later that its name was Yunagan.

They went instead that same day southwards to another small island named Suluan, and there
they anchored. There they saw some canoes, but these fled at the Spaniards' approach. This
island was at 9 and two-thirds degrees North latitude.

Departing from those two islands, they sailed westward to an uninhabited island of “Gada"
where they took in a supply of wood and water. The sea around that island was free from
shallows. (Albo does not give the latitude of this island, but from Pigatetta's testimony, this
seems to be the "Acquada or Homonhon, at 10 degrees North latitude.)

From that island they sailed westwards towards a large island names Seilani that was inhabited
and was known to have gold (Seilani- or, as Pigafetta calls it, "Ceylon-was the island of Leyte.)

Sailing southwards along the coast of that large island of Seilani, they turned southwest to a
small island called "Mazava." That island is also at a latitude of 9 and two-thirds degrees
North.

The people of that island of Mazava were very good. There the Spaniards planted a cross upon a
mountain-top, and from there they were shown three islands to the west and southwest, where
they were told there was much gold. "They showed us how the gold was gathered, which came
in small pieces like peas and lentils.

From Mazava they sailed northwards again towards Seilani. Tney followed the coast of Seilani
in a northwesterly direction, ascending up to 10 degrees of latitude where they saw three
small islands.

From there they sailed westwards some ten leagues, and there they saw three islets, where they
dropped anchor for the night. In the morning they sailed southwest some 12 leagues, down to
a latitude of l0 and one-third degree. There they entered a channel between two islands, one of
which was called "Matan" and the other "Subu."

They sailed down that channel and then turned westward and anchored at the town (la villa) of
Subu where they stayed many days and obtained provisions and entered into a peace-pact with
the local king.

The town of Subu was on an east-west direction with the islands of Suluan and Mazava. But
between Mazava and Subu, there were so many shallows that the boats could not go westward
directly but has to go (as they did) in a round-about way.

It must be noted that in Albo's account, the location of Mazava fits the location of the island of
Limasawa, at the southern tip of Leyte, 9°54N. Also, Albo does not mention the first Mass,
but only the planting of the cross upon a mountain-top from which could be seen three islands
to the west and southwest, which also fits the southern end of Limasawa.

Saturday, 16 March 1521- Magellan's expedition sighted a "high land" named "Zamal" which
was some 300 leagues westward of Ladrones (now the Marianas) Islands.
Sunday, March 17 "The following day" after sighting Zamal Island, they landed on "another
island which was uninhabited" and which lay "to the right" of the above-mentioned island of
"Zamal." (To the "righť here would mean on their starboard going south or southwest.) There
they set up two tents for the sick members of the crew and had a sow killed for them. The name
of this island was Humunu (Homonhon). This island was located at 10 degrees North latitude.

On that same day (Sunday, March 17), Magellan named the ensure archipelago the "Islands of
Saint Lazarus," the reason being that it was Sunday in the Lenten season when the Gospel
assigned for the Mass and the liturgical Office was the eleventh chapter of St. John, which tells
of the raising of Lazarus from the dead.

Monday, March 18 - In the afternoon of their second day on that island, they saw a boat coming
towards them with nine men in it. An exchange of gifts was affected. Magellan asked for food
supplies, and the men went away, promising to bring rice and other supplies in "four days.

There were two springs of water on that island of Homonhon. Also, they saw there some
indications that there was gold in these islands. Consequently, Magellan renamed the island and
called it the "Watering Place of Good Omen" (Acquada la di bouni segniali).

Friday, March 22-At noon the natives returned. This time they were in two boats, and they
brought food supplies.

Magellan's expedition stayed eight days at Homonhon: from Sunday, March 17, to the Monday
of the following week, March 25.

Monday, March 25 In the afternoon, the expedition weighed anchor and left the island of
Homonhon. In the ecclesiastical calendar, this day (March 25) was the feast-day of the
incarnation, also called the feast of the Annunciation and therefore "Our Lady's Day. On this
day, as they were about to weigh anchor, an accident happened to Pigafëtta: he fell into the
water but was rescued. He attributed his narrow escape from death as grace obtained through the
intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary on her feast-day.

The route taken by the expedition after leaving Homonhon was "toward the west southwest,
between four islands: namely, Cenalo, Hiunanghan, Ibusson and Albarien." Very probably
"Cenalo is a misspelling in the Italian manuscript for what Pigafetta in his map calls "Ceilon and
Albo calls "Seilani: namely the island of Leyte. Hiunanghan" (a misspelling of Hinunangan)
seemed to Pigafetta to be a separate island, but is actually on the mainland of Leyte "Ceylon'").
On the other hand, Hibuson (Pigafetta's Ibusson) is an island east of Leyte's southern tip.

Thus, it is easy to see what Pigafetta meant by sailing toward the west southwest" past those
islands. They left Homonhon sailing westward towards Leyte, then followed the Leyte coast
southward, passing between the island of Hibuson on their portside and Unangan Bay on their
starboard, and then continued southward, then turning westward to "Mazaua.

Thursday, March 28 In the morning of Holy Thursday, March 6, they anchored off an island
where the previous night they had seen a light or a bonfire. That island "lies in a latitude of nine
and two-thirds towards the Arctic Pole (i.e., North) and in a longitude of one hundred and sixty-
two degrees from the line of demarcation. It is twenty-five leagues from the Acquada, and is
called Mazaua. They remained seven days on Mazaua Island.

Thursday, April 4-They left Mazaua, bound for Cebu. They were guided thither by the king of
Mazaua who sailed in his own boat. Their route took them past five "islands" namely: "Ceylon,
Bohol, Canighan, Baibai, and Gatighan."

At Gatighan, they sailed westward to the three islands of the Camotes Group, namely, Poro,
Pasihan and Ponson. Here the Spanish ships stopped to allow the king of Mazaua to catch up
with them, since the Spanish ships were much faster than the native balangha - a thing that
excited the admiration of the king of Mazaua.

From the Camotes Islands they sailed southwards towards "Zubu”.

Sunday, April 7 - At noon they entered the harbor of "Zubu (Cebu). It had taken them three days
to negotiate the journey from Mazaua northwards to the Camotes Islands and then southwards to
Cebu.

It must be pointed out that both Albo and Pigafetta's testimonies coincide and corroborate each
other. Pigafetta gave more details on what they did during their weeklong stay at Mazaua.

Thursday, March 28-In the morning they anchored near an island where they had seen a light the
night before a small boat (boloto) came with eight natives, to whom Magellan threw some
trinkets as presents. The natives paddled away, but two hours later two larger boats (balanghai)
came, in one of which the native king sat under an awning of mats. At Magellan's invitation
some of the natives went up the Spanish ship, but the native king remained seated in his boat. An
exchange of gifts was affected. In the afternoon that day, the Spanish ships weighed anchor and
came closer to shore, anchoring near the native king’s village. This Thursday, March 28, was
Thursday in Holy Week, i.e., Holy Thursday.

Friday, March 29-"Next day. Holy Friday, Magellan sent his slave interpreter ashore in a small
boat to ask the king if he could provide the expedition with food supplies, and to say that they
had come as friends and not as enemies. In reply to the king himself came in a boat with six or
eight men, and this time went up Magellan's ship and the two men embraced. Another exchange
of gifts was made. The native king and his companions returned ashore, bringing with them two
members of Magellan's expedition as guests for the night. One of the two was Pigafetta.

Saturday, March 30 Pigafetta and his companion had spent the previous evening toasting and
drinking with the native king and his son. Pigafetta deplored the fact that, although it was Good
Friday, they had to eat meat. The following morning (Saturday) Pigafetta and his companion
took leave of their hosts and returned to the ships.

Sunday, March 31-"Early in the morning of Sunday, the last of March and Easter day," Magellan
sent the priest ashore with some men to prepare for the Mass. Later in the morning Magellan
landed with some fifty men and Mass was celebrated, after which a cross was venerated.
Magellan and the Spaniards returned to the ship for the noon-day meal, but in the afternoon, they
returned ashore to plant the cross on the summit of the highest hill. In attendance both at the
Mass and at the planting of the cross were the king of Mazaua and the king of Butuan.

Sunday, March 31-On that same afternoon, while on the summit of the highest hill, Magellan
asked the two kings which ports he should go to in order to obtain more abundant supplies of
food than were available in that island. They replied that there were three to choose from:
Ceylon, Zubu, and Calagan. Of the three, Zubu was the port with the most trade. Magellan then
said that he wished to go to Zubu and to depart the following morning. He asked for someone to
guide him thither. The kings replied that the pilots would be available "any time. But later that
evening the King of Mazaua changed his mind and said that he would himself conduct Magellan
to Zubu but that he would first have to bring the harvest in. He asked Magellan to send him men
to help with the harvest.

Monday, April 1 - Magellan sent men ashore to help with the harvest, but no work was done that
day because the two kings were sleeping off their drinking bout the night before.

Tuesday, April 2 and Wednesday, April3- Work on the harvest during the "next to days, 1.e.,
Tuesday and Wednesday, the 2nd and 3rd of April.

Thursday, April 4-They leave Mazaua, bound for Cebu.

Using the primary sources available, Jesuit priest Miguel A. Bernad in his work Butuan or
Limasauwa: The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A Reexamination of Evidence
(1981) lays down the argument that in the Pigafetta account, a crucial aspect of Butuan was not
mentioned-the river. Butuan is a riverine settlement, situated on the Agusan River. The beach off
Masno is in the delta of said river. It 18 a curious omission in the account of the river, which
makes part of a distinct characteristic of Butuan's geography that seemed to be too important to
be missed.

The Age of Exploration is a period of competition among European rulers to conquer and
colonize lands outside their original domains. Initially, the goal was to find alternative routes
by sea to get to Asia, the main source of spices and other commodities. Existing routes to
Asia were mainly by land and cost very expensive. A sea route to Asia means that Europeans
could access the spice trade directly, greatly reducing costs for traders. Spain's major foray
into the exploration was through Christopher Columbus, who proposed to sail westward to
find a shortcut to Asia. He was able to reach the Americas, which was then cut-off from the
rest of the known world.

Spain colonized parts of North America, Mexico, and South America in the sixteenth century.
They were also able to reach the Philippines and claim it for the Spanish crown. Later on,
other European rulers would compete with the activities of exploring and conquering lands.

It must also be pointed out that later on, after Magellan s death, the survivors of his
expedition went to Mindanao, and seemingly went to Butuan. In this instance, Pigafetta
vividly describes a trip in a river. But note that this account already happened after Magellan's
death.