Masao-Limasawa: The story we know…so far.

A position paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the Readings in Philippine History Subject
By: Sua, Joaquin Gabriel L. - CAS-06-201P

The first mass ever held in the Philippines, an event that started the spread of Christianity for the
next 501 years. An event that would remarkably change the cultural identity of the Philippines drastically,
and would shape the way our country is recognized within the Asian community. Accounts of the
chronicler, Antonio Pigafetta, stated that on the 31st of march, 1521, the first mass was held on an island,
which he identified as “Mazaua.” The true location of the first mass, remains to be a debate amongst
historians as 2 major parties argues on the subject. These two parties being Masao, Butuan, Agusan Del
Norte and Limasawa Island, Southern Leyte. However, certain accounts also suggest 2 more locations
namely; Homonhon, Samar and Mahaba Island, Placer, Surigao del Norte. To this present day, albeit still
in debate, the National Historical Institute has deemed that Limasawa Island is the best possible answer
to the question, in accordance to the writings of several historians, as well as from the evidence provided
in the chronicles of Pigafetta. With the collected evidence we have and the perspectives collected over
the years of our history, a conclusion remains incomplete due to the lack of a clear definition of the site.
Questions rise on whether or not our evidences are viable, as we still lack certain pieces into unlocking
the secrets of the first mass. Speculative history has fueled what seems to be a geographical jigsaw puzzle
that seeks to give us the answer to the question “Where did it all start?” In light of this challenge, I
proceeded to research and criticize the facts and evidences given, and formulate my own conclusion
based on what I can find, to which I deemed it to be Limasawa Island.

Until the late 1900s, it was widely believed that Masao, Butuan Agusan Del Norte has been the
site of the first mass held. And as such, on 1872, a monument was installed in Butuan, to commemorate
the alleged first mass. This was due to the writings of Francisco Colin, in his Labor Evangelica, published
on 1663, where he cites:

“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 formal possession of the Islands in the name of the emperor and
of the Crown of Castille
 The man who gave the most signal service to our men was the chief of Dimasaua (sic), relative of
the chief of Butuan and of that of Zebu, whither he led the armada, which entered that harbor at noon on
the 7th of April, the Octave of Easter.”

This account is further emphasized by the writings of Francisco Colombes, in his Historia de
Mindanao Y Jolo, published on 1667, where he states the following:

“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.”

These accounts, that emphasize the importance of Butuan, more importantly, Butuan river and
Masao, allowed for us to believe that Butuan was in fact the site of the first mass. These writings as
emphasized by Bernad (1982), “exercise a strong influence over subsequent writers” and as such, the
writers and historians that came after these writings, wrote similar accounts, and some have distorted
facts leading to a vague yet believable definition of how Butuan was the site of the first mass, this went
on from the 17th century until the year 1997.

In comparison to the Writings of Alderly (1874), a manuscript from the translation of Pigafetta’s
accounts of the mass where it states that the following events:

” On Sunday, the last day of March, and feast of Easter, the captain sent the chaplain ashore early
to say mass, and the interpreter went with him to tell the king that they were not coming on shore to dine
with him, but only to hear the mass. The king hearing that sent two dead pigs. When it was time for saying
mass, the captain went ashore with fifty men, not with their arms, but only with their swords, and dressed
as well as each one was able to dress, and before the boats reached the shore our ships fired six cannon
shots as a sign of peace. At our landing the two kings were there, and received our captain in a friendly
manner, and placed him between them, and then we went to the place prepared for saying mass, which
was not far from the shore. Before the mass began the captain threw a quantity of musk rose water on
those two kings, and when the offertory of the mass came, the two kings went to kiss the cross like us, but
they offered nothing, and at the elevation of the body of our Lord they were kneeling like us, and adored
our Lord with joined hands. The ships fired all their artillery at the elevation of the body of our Lord. After
mass had been said each one did the duty of a Christian receiving our Lord. After that the captain had
some sword-play by his people, which gave great pleasure to the kings. Then he had a cross brought, with
the nails and crown, to which the kings made reverence, and the captain had them told that these things
which he showed them were the sign of the emperor his lord and master, from whom he had charge and
commandment to place it in all places where he might go or pass by.”

The excerpt mentioning two kings which at the time were determined as Raia Calambu and Raia
Siami, the two chiefs who are presently identified as the leaders of Butuan - Calaghan, and Limasawa
respectively. This identification further strengthened the claim of Butuan to being the actual site of the
first mass. However, a deeper study from Bernad (1982), uses this script as an example of how incomplete
the records of both Colombes and Colin are; specifically, as to how Magellan and his crew travelled to
Butuan without explanation and detail, and the inaccuracies presented in their accounts based on
geography among other factors.

The inaccuracies presented in these early manuscripts were later answered by findings from the
transcription of Andrea Da Mosto, in his Il primo viaggio intorno al globo di Antonio Pigafetta E Le Sue
Regole Sull'arte Del Navigare, that contained a better interpretation of the writing of pigafetta. That
included several parts that were altered or removed from older translations. This was further
strengthened with the emergence and study of some of the members of the expedition namely: Francisco
Albo and the Genoese pilot. The accounts from these individuals laid the foundation of what we currently
believe as the true site of the first mass. Their accounts constitute of the near specific direction that the
expedition took along with dates on when they travelled. Upon examination of footnotes from the Da
Mosto transcriptions, it is revealed the roteiro of the Genoese pilot tells of the specifics in terms of their
travel:

“(3) The Roteiro (loc. Cit. P. 278, r. 4) calls it "Macangor" and gives it the latitude of 9 °. He adds
that it is twenty leagues from Hummunu Island. Register (loc. Cit. IV, 22o) puts it at latitude 9 ° 4o north
and calls it "Mazava". The Transylvano (loc. Cit. IV, 268) says that they landed there, pushed by a storm,
who had prevented them from landing in Selana, and gives it the name of "Masana". This island most likely
corresponds to today's Limasana.” This account lies parallel to the account of Albo that states: “From here
we departed and sailed W., and fell in with a large island called Seilani, which is inhabited, and contains
gold; we coasted it, and went to W.S.W., to a small in- habited island called Mazaba. The people are very
good, and there we placed a cross upon a mountain.”

These writings are further expounded by filipino scholars, Trinidad Pardo De Tavera and Padre
Pedro Pastells, by which they deemed that the identification of Butuan as the site was, in fact, erroneous,
and thus began a deeper search and questioning of what we know today. Statements from Tavera state
that:

“...not only was Butuan not the piece of Philippine soil on which the first mass was celebrated,
but it was not even visited by that bold navigator in his memorable expedition.” As well as:

“It has been a mistake to affirm that the first mass was said in Butuan as a stone to preserve the
memory of an imagined event.” These statements are further supported by a statement of pastel:

“Magellan did not touch at Butuan, but from the island of Limasaua he went straight to Cebu.”

The findings of these individuals, as well as other forerunners of the Mazzua investigation, intiated
a governmentaction that started three panels, namely: Gancayco, Legarda, and the most recent, Mojares.

All three, voting in favor of Limasawa as the site. The Mojares Panel discussed proposals from Malvar, The
Atego presentation, and the Hontiveros article, all pro-butuan views and evidences presented, but were
ultimaltely deemed invalid due to inconsistencies within texts provided, as well as the usage of a false
account of Magellan’s voyage.

In a cross examination of my own, with the Butuan evidences, in reference to the other
transcriptions, I found it hard to believe, in relation to weather conditions, and technological advances,
that Magellan’s crew made it all the way south to Butuan. In line with this, based on the illustrations
representing the island of Mazzaua, I find it dubious at the least that a location landlocked on three sides
could be defined as an “Island”. Furthermore, it is also mentioned in the transcriptions, certain familiar
names such as Zamal (present day samar) and Bohol. Relative to the distance of Butuan and Limasawa, it
is simply too far off for the island to be Butuan.

Following the written accounts and evidences provided, a close examination of the Skelton
translation of the Yale-Beinecke codex reveals a footnote in reference to Mazzaua, with a familiar name:
Limasawa. This further strengthens my belief that Limasawa is the true site of the first mass.
 Looking through a geological perspective, the coordinates from the De Mosto transcription, lines
up considerably with other texts such as the Yale-Beinecke and Amoretti transcription, on the description
of the latitude and longitude of Mazzua.

In terms of a geographical perspective, a review of the terrain in Butuan, in comparison to the

terrain in Limasawa, shows that the peak closest to the shoreline in Butuan is atleast 45 minutes away,
and would not be a viable place to place a cross at its peak, considering the fact that a large wooden cross
would be a terrible endeavor to undertake in the heat and the terrain.

A presentation by Dr. Rolando Borrinaga would later on shed light on the missing pieces that we
so clearly failed to see on our first try, according to his study, he expressed 3 points that have substantial
evidences and relative similarities to the accounts of Pigafetta. His points are the following:

“a.) that another site, specifically Barangay Triana on the western side of the island, was the place
where the First Easter Sunday Mass was celebrated and not Barangay Magallanes on the eastern side
where a shrine of the First Mass is now located.

b) A nearby hill named Saub Point overlooking Saub Bay was the place where a cross was planted
by Magellan’s men;

c) The three islands Pigafetta saw can be seen from Saub Point and these are believed to be those
of Camiguin, Bohol, and the Surigao area of Caraga.”

Dr. Borrinaga also emphasized that until 1602, Limasawa was phonetically called “masawa”,

although being similar to the location in Butuan named “Masao”, this leads me to a stronger belief of

limasawa being mazzua.

With the rise of concrete evidences, and the greater plausibility of the Island of Limasawa being

the true site of the mass, it has been unanimously concluded that it was indeed Limasawa. Of course, this

decision does not come with doubts as we cannot truly confirm the identity of the island without having

to experience the year 1521 on our own. These proposals and presentations only serve to inform us of

how difficult it is to truly determine the origins and stories of historical events, and how deep the influence

of perspective is on our history. On the facts that I have gathered, and on the readings brought upon the
historians and writers that has led us to the point of investigation that we are now, I conclude that the

true location is true to what has been unanimously decided, it being Limasawa. The inconsistencies of

translations and interpretations of Magellan’s Voyage, blurs the line on what we can call facts and

speculation, it is only on human reasoning that we may be able to give a smidge of sense on what

happened on 1521. Of course, these only stem from the manipulation of history, creating holes,

misinterpretations, and inconsistent answers and literature for the next generations, therein lies the

question on what we can do to stop these changes to history and preserve the truth. My personal take on

this would be to first, preserve what could be called the most viable piece of literature and records of our

history, in order to prevent further misinformation and misinterpretation, seeing as to how fake news is

prevalent, and media is easy to use and manipulate to spread falsehood. As per this specific story, the

best solution to all the unanswered questions is to track down the source of all these speculations; The

original Manuscript of Pigafetta that has been lost to time. A manuscript free of translations, and free of

revisions to give us a clear glimpse of the truth of Mazzua, and the First Mass.
References:
Alderley, L. S. O. (2010). The First Voyage Round the World, by Magellan (Hakluyt Society, First
Series) (1st ed.). Hakluyt Society. Retrieved March 1, 2022, from
http://ia600501.us.archive.org/9/items/firstvoyageround00piga/firstvoyageround00piga.pdf
Arnaiz, J. (1999, April 15). 1st Mass controversy: It’s Limasawa - FEATURES (April 15, 1999). 1st
Mass Controversy: It’s Limasawa. Retrieved March 1, 2022, from
https://firstcircumnavigator.tripod.com/limasawa.htm
Bernad, Miguel A. (2002). Butuan or Limasawa: The Site of the First Mass in the Philippines: A
Reexamination of the Evidence. _Budhi: A Journal of Ideas and Culture_ 5 (3 6.1):133-166.
Retrieved March 1, 2022, from
https://journals.ateneo.edu/ojs/index.php/budhi/article/view/582/579
De Jesus, V. C. (n.d.). Mazaua: MagellanÂ’s Lost Harbor. Firstcircumnavigator. Retrieved March
1, 2022, from https://firstcircumnavigator.tripod.com/Mazaua.htm
Da Mosto, A. (1893). Il primo viaggio intorno al globo di Antonio Pigafetta. Retrieved March 1,
2022, from
https://ia600809.us.archive.org/29/items/IlPrimoViaggioIntornoAlGloboDiAnt/Il_primo_viaggio
_intorno_al_globo_di_Ant.pdf
Carillo, J. A. (2021, August 18). Getting our Philippine history right after 500 years – Part 21. The
Manila Times. Retrieved March 1, 2022, from
https://www.manilatimes.net/2021/08/19/campus-press/getting-our-philippine-history-right-
after-500-years-part-21/1811438
National Historical Commission of the Philippines. (2020, August 21). The Final Report of the
Mojares Panel on the Butuan-Limasawa Controversy on the Location of the 1521 First Easter
Sunday Mass in the Philippines. Retrieved March 1, 2022, from https://nhcp.gov.ph/official-
position-of-the-national-historical-commission-of-the-philippines-on-the-site-of-the-1521-
easter-sunday-mass-2/