Geographical Accuracy and Alignment with Historical Records
Limasawa’s geographical features and location align most closely with the descriptions provided
by Antonio Pigafetta and other members of the Magellan expedition. In his chronicles, Pigafetta
described Mazaua as a small island south of Leyte, with a strategic location along the fleet’s
route from Homonhon to Cebu (Pigafetta, as cited in NHCP, 2020). This matches Limasawa’s
position in present-day maps. Furthermore, the island’s size and features, as described in
historical accounts, correspond to Limasawa, which is situated along the path taken by the
expedition after leaving Homonhon (Mojares, 2018).
Claims for Butuan, on the other hand, lack geographical consistency. Butuan is not an island but
an inland settlement, which contradicts Pigafetta’s descriptions (NHCP, 2020). Homonhon, while
an important stop for Magellan’s fleet, was primarily a temporary landing point for provisions and
rest, not the site of the First Mass.
National Historical Commission of the Philippines. (2020). NHCP Board Resolution No. 2, s.
2020. From
http://www.nqc.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NHCP-Board-Resolution-No.-2-s.-2020.pdf
National Quincentennial Committee. (2021). Ending the Limasawa Controversy. From
http://www.nqc.gov.ph/en/resources/ending-the-limasawa-controversy/
National Quincentennial Committee. (2021). 500th Anniversary of the Mass at Limasawa. From
http://www.nqc.gov.ph/en/event/500th-anniversary-of-the-mass-at-limasawa/
Counterclaim:
While it may seem true that Limasawa’s description is accurate to Pigafetta’s statement,
it is important to note that this island was only 83km below Butuan. In the past, this was
considered a large distance in comparison to modern-day maps. Additionally, an analysis by
Precious et al. (2019) discovered that Pigafetta mentioned that Mazaua had a good harbor on
its western side. However, Mazaua is now officially known as Limasawa in the Philippines,
having a harbor on the east side, not the west. The study notes that the reason for this
misconception is because of mistranslation.
Counterargument:
Mistranslation is indeed evident when trying to source a book from history. However, it is
important to note that scholars discovered through Pigafetta’s manuscript that Butuan was never
mentioned as the site of the First Mass (NHCP, 2021). Moreover, a study by the Province of
Southern Leyte (n.d) stated that an examination of old maps and documents by Fr. Miguel
Bernad in 1981 proved that Butuan’s version was indeed a mistake. Through this, it was
confirmed that Limasawa is what Pigafetta referred to as “Mazaua”, which was confirmed by
William Henry Scott’s study in 1981.
Furthermore, an article by Regidor (2021) mentions that the confusion about Butuan
tradition stems from mistranslation as well. Through his analysis, a statement by Dr. Antonio
Sanchez de Mora can be read.
“The geographical description, the analysis of the directions, the revision of the
maps and the references to the island of Mazaua between 1521 and 1565 must identify
it with [modern-day] Limasawa,” Mora stated.
Mora’s words further solidify the discovery that Butuan was never the site of the first
mass.
https://upd.edu.ph/limasawa-vs-butuan-the-first-easter-mass/
https://southernleyte.gov.ph/limasawa/limasawa-history/
https://prezi.com/p/ngwo4nyosbsj/the-first-mass-was-in-masao-butuan/
