Talk:Enrique of Malacca

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

/summaryThis is a summary for use in translations and to initiate the articles in other languages.Please do not expand but feel free to include essential facts only.--Jondel 06:04, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] First Circumnavigator

Martin Torodash, in his own words, states in response to his name on this article that he was "NOT THE FIRST PERSON WHO STATED THAT HENRIQUE WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO CIRCUMNAVIGATE THE WORLD." I have at Martin Torodash's request deleted statements to the contrary which had been posted originally by Vincente De Jesus. I hope that in the pursuit of factual neutrality this misinformation will not be reproduced and propagated, as it borders on libel. Those wishing to dispute this could theoretically seek out Dr. Torodash to challenge this deletion, but I am not at liberty to assert what if any modes of communication he will acknowledge.

In my humble opinion, this is getting into silly technicalities. Even if Henry, Magellan or someone else managed to be present in all 360 degrees of longitude at some point during their lifetime, that does not constitute "circumnavigation of the world," and it denigrates the achievement to say otherwise. The first people to accomplish this, that we know of, were Elcano and his 18 men. Drake and his 62 men were the second to do so. To truly circumnavigate, you get in a ship, go all the way around the world, and live to tell about it. You don't go halfway, and then go the other half of the way years later. This business with Henry The Black smacks of political correctness of the worst kind. Just MHO...-- Jsc1973 16:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

"You don't go halfway, and then go the other half of the way years later."
And why not? How long is the explorer permitted to pause in any particular port, before Jsc1973 deems his expedition "not a true circumnavigation"? Three days? One week? Whatever time period Jsc1973 chooses will be arbitrary.
If I travel from New York to Chicago, get a job there, raise children and grandchildren, then travel to San Francisco, I have indeed traveled from New York to San Francisco. GPS Pilot 13:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

[edit] Definition of Term "Circumnavigation"

If we go by this definition, you'll be left standing alone in the debate. Most scholars, navigation historian, writers have allowed for a less circumscribed definition--Torodash, Morison, Joyner, Bergreen, Zweig, Quirino, McKew Parr, etc. well, just about everybody. You might call them or their definition silly, but all you've really achieved is to narrowly define the word as to allow only your stand to survive. Still, even the most liberal definition of "circumnavigation" won't validate the claim Magellan did it or Enrique. Magellan's claim rests on the unsupported assertion of 17th c. historian Argensola that Magellan was in the 1511 Abreu expedition to the Moluccas. Official records, accessed by contemporary historians, name Simão Afonso Bisagudo not Magellan as captain of the third ship. If Magellan had gone on this trip--and he didn't--his furthest east in 1511, as Morison described the phenomenon, at Banda on longitude 130°E was overlapped by six degrees in 1521 at Mactan which is on longitude 124°E. In the case of Enrique, his claim is based on false logic, fallacious interpretation of Pigafetta's text and total disregard of primary testimonies that Enrique did not speak Cebuano (Maximilian Transylvanus), that his language was Malay, the lingua franca of the region (de Mafra), and that he was Malaccan (Magellan) or Sumatran (Pigafetta).

So without changing the rules of the game, i.e., redefining "circumnavigation, and resorting to ad hominem you still end up with Sebastian Delcano and his 18 mates. You win fair and square. Vicente C. de Jesus 01:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

[edit] Libelous?

There's something inelegant, if undemocratic, to calm discussion that degenerates into threats of legal sanction when the tools of refutation--reasoned argument, logic, citations, sources, evidence, etc.--are there. Dr. Torodash states in "Magellan Historiography" (Hispanic American Historical Review, May 1971), "If scholars want to take credit from Magellan on a technicality, they should confer the honor of premier circumnavigator upon Henrique de Malaca, Magellan's slave, who certainly was the first man to take a 360 degree trip." He cites no source, offers no argument, and leaves the issue there. In the absence of any accreditation one is led to think it is an original thought. All the others who wrote on this issue, as far as I can gather, came after Torodash: Samuel Eliot Morison, 1974; Carlos Quirino, 1980; Tim Joyner, 1992; William Manchester, 1992; Laurence Bergreen, 2003; John Keay, 2005. Those running this great enterprise, Wikipedia, should set the example of scholarly discourse and not be quick to raise the specter of legal reprisal. We are reasonable men, and reasonable men use calm reason and reasoned argument. Whoever wrote the above has not done what every scholar ought to do which is to ascertain the veracity of any one's assertion. In any case Dr. Torodash is perfectly free to now tell us from whom he got the idea and what compelled him to hide that authority's identity. Because if he indeed got it from somebody, his failure to name his source makes him vulnerable to the charge of appropriation. (User:Vicente C. de Jesus 06:01, 6 September 2006)

[edit] Reference

The article is based on the following e-mail account from Mr. Nestor Enriquez:

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nestor Enriquez" <phix7@yahoo.com>
To: "John Martinez" <martinez@dempa.co.jp>
Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 6:07 AM
Subject: Re: Enrique the circumnavigator is Malaysian.


> Long long time ago I have been writing that Enrique
> was Malay and I stil do. The same as we say "Rizal is
> the Pride of the Malay Race" and Enrique is one too.
> 
> You are right that Enrique had problem commnicating in
> Samar and Cebu. On the second island called Mazzaua
> there was an instant commnunication with the 8 men on
> a boat approaching the water.
> 
> The ships headed toward a nearby land called Mazzava
> Island (where this island is a controversy for the NHS
> but to continue) a small boat of eight men approached
> them. Discouraged from the language barrier that he
> confronted at Homonhon, Enrique did not think they
> would understand him. To his surprise, his greeting in
> Malay dialect was returned.  Reluctant to enter, the
> small boat stayed by the ship. Enrique was amazed at
> the fact that he could communicate with the people as
> they surrounded him, chattering, because he didn't
> quite realize why he could understand him. He had made
> it all the way around the world, back to Malay
> homeland that he left 12 years earlier, making him the
> first man to do so. Enrique's conversation with the
> Mazzava (?) people definitively confirmed that the
> earth was round, not by what he was saying, but by the
> language with which he spoke. Magellan knew that he
> was close to reaching his goal, since he was once
> again amongst the Malay speakers.
> 
>  
> 
> Another romantic version..
> 
>  
> 
> ..Now came the wonder. The Islanders surrounded
> Enrique chattering and shouting, and the Malay slave
> was dumbfounded, for the understood much of what they
> were saying. He understood much of what they saying.
> He understood their questions. It was a good many
> years since he was snatched from his home, a good many
> years since he had last heard a word of his native
> speech. What amazing moment, one of the remarkable in
> the history of mankind! For the first time since our
> planet begun to spin upon its axis and to circle in
> its orbit, a living man, himself circling that planet,
> had got back to his homeland. No matter that he was
> underling, a slave, for his significance lies in his
> fate and not his personality. He is known to us by his
> slave-name Enrique; but we know, likewise, that he was
> torn from his home upon the island of Sumatra, was
> brought by Magellan in Malacca, was taken by his
> master to India, to Africa, and to Lisbon; traveled
> thence to Brazil and to Patagonia; and first of all
> the population of the world, traversing the oceans,
> circling the globe, he returned to the region where
> men spoke a familiar tongue. Having made acquaintance
> on the way with hundred of people and tribes and
> races, each of which had different way of
> communicating thought, he had got back to his folk,
> whom he could understand and could understand him. 
> 
> 
> 
> It was in Cebu where Enrique had problem
> communicating. Some would say that the native King
> just didn't  want to communicate with him directly
> because he was just a slave and would rather speak to
> his master. I rather think that Enrique even if he was
> indeed from the area definitely was not from Cuba
> because he needed another interpreter.
> 
>  
> 
> Again after the whole episode, drama and dialogue in
> Cebu including the alleged Enrique's betrayal I
> believe that Enrique stayed in Cebu naturalized for
> the rest of his life. He is a man (not the eunuch
> Chinese admiral ;-) who now probably was the first one
> to go around the world.  This will make the issue of
> that Enrique as the first circumnavigator mute) and
> some of us might have descended from him. 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- John Martinez <martinez@dempa.co.jp> wrote:
> 
> > (From a fellow filipino.)
> > 
> > Fair is fair,
> > 
> > According to this
> >
> [http://magazine.virtualmalaysia.com/sepoct03/view.cfm?article=enrique&page=
> > 2 (Pigafetta's account  search Sumatra)] he couldn't
> > speak with the common
> > natives but with the Royalty and traders which is a
> > feature of a lingua
> > franca(Malay), he couldn't speak Cebuano nor
> > communicate with people from
> > Samar. In Malaysian literature, he has the
> > appellation Panglima Awang.
> > 
> > John Martinez
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> =====
> Nestor Palugod Enriquez
> http://www.filipinohome.com
> Coming to America
> 
> Yesterday's history, tomorrow's a mystery.
> Today is a gift,and that's why we call it the present.

[edit] Enrique

Please incorporate the following text, cut from Enrique (now a redirect)

Magellan's slave, Enrique, is thought to be from there, but actually Malacca. Magellan bought Enrique 10 years earlier in Malacca, and he followed Magellan to Africa and to Europe. He could have come from the Philippine archipelago, having been captured as a child by Muslim raiders and sold in the slave mart. Whether he was originally from here or from another country, he may hold the distinction of being the first circumnavigator of the globe.

[edit] History writing is weighing between two equally compelling testimonies

Speculation, opinion, surmise, guessing like the above entry is all right if we're dealing with non-existent facts. Then one can let loose one's imagination; and that should properly be in novel writing. There are two eyewitnesses who gave specific places where Enrique came from, Magellan said Malacca, Pigafetta said Sumatra. There's the secondhand testimony by Maximilian Transylvanus, that the slave is Moluccan, which has much lesser evidentiary value and should automatically be excluded. The historian's task is to resolve the contradiction between Magellan and Pigafetta and argue why one is more credible than the other. The higher probability is Pigafetta is right. My argument is he had the ethnographer's gift to see people as they are and to understand their ways, the investigative reporter's knack for probing questions, and an uncommon ability for asking very personal questions. As a lexicographer, Pigafetta could precisely ascertain from where Enrique was more than Magellan who had less expertise in this very human science. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Enrique addresses some natives in a Malay dialect successfully. They are hospitably received at Limasawa Island (S of Leyte Island), and Enrique negotiates for more food with Rajah Calambu. The Rajah becomes blood brother to Magellan, with whom he feels a kinship. The armada regroups, relieved at the death of the demanding Captain General. Barbosa and Serrano are elected co-commanders. Enrique declares his freedom, and upon meeting resistance, he flees and begins to plot with Humabon. A feast for the leaders is planned by Humabon though actually a trap, and on arrival the Europeans are attacked (May 1, 1521).


[edit] Enrique is not from Cebu, Rajah Calambu is not King of Mazaua

The notion Enrique is from Cebu, that Rajah Calambu/Colambu is king of Mazaua (not Limasawa, an isle mistaken for Mazaua...it possesses not one property out of 32 that I have inventoried of Mazaua) is a product of imprecision, and a shaky uncertain grasp of basic sources. Philippine historian Carlos Quirino, who first made the claim Enrique is Cebuano, misread, misunderstood and distorted what Antonio Pigafetta wrote. Here is the incident in Mazaua--not Cebu--that Quirino misread, as written by Pigafetta: "Two hours or so later, we saw approaching two long boats, which they call Ballanghai, full of men, and in the larger was their king...the said slave [Enrique] spoke to that king [Raia Siaiu], who understood him well. For, in that country, the kings know more languages than the common people do." From this, Quirino made the ff. conclusions, all fallacious: 1) Enrique spoke Cebuano, therefore he was from Cebu; 2) Malay cannot be understood in the Philippines today, which is true enough, therefore it was not understood in 1521. Quirino forgot the incident happened in Mazaua where Butuanon not Cebuano is spoken, a language belonging to the Bisayan family. He also forgot he wasn't speaking of today's reality. He totally disregarded Pigafetta's explicit statement before this that Enrique "was of Zamatra, formerly called Traprobana." (Nancy-Libri-Phillipps-Beinecke-Yale codex, Magellan's Voyage tr. by R.A. Skelton. New Haven, 1969)

[edit] Quirino, father of Enrique notion, had not read de Mafra

Quirino had not read the little known account by Ginés de Mafra, the only crewmember of the Magellan's fleet to return to Mazaua, as pilot of galeota San Cristobal in late Feb. 1543, staying there 4-6 months. In his account, which is liberally cited and quoted by Laurence Bergreen as much as Pigafetta almost, de Mafra states, "[Magellan] sent a man named Heredia...ashore with an Indian [Enrique] they had taken, so they said, because he was known to speak Malay, the language common to those parts." That Malay was the trade lingua franca in much of Southeast Asia is an established linguistic fact. (Page 198, Libro que trata del descubrimiento principio del estrecho que se llama del Magallanes. Madrid, 1920).

[edit] No citation, no authority, no source

Quirino also states, in a 1984 speech, "Enrique freely talked with all its [Cebu's] inhabitants." He cites no authority, indeed all his writings and speeches are outstanding for citing no source, crediting no historian nor linguistic authority, offering no reasoned argument or proof. His statement is belied by Maximilian Transylvanus, who wrote an account of Magellan's voyage from interviews with survivors. Maximilian wrote, "Magellan had a slave, born in the Moluccas, whom he had bought in Malacca some time back; this man was a perfect master of the Spanish language, and, with the assistance of one of the islanders of Subuth as interpreter, who knew the language of the Moluccas, our men managed all their communications." (Page 200, in Lord Stanley of Alderley's book, First Voyage of the World by Magellan. London, 1874).

Magellan's Last Will describes Enrique as "my captured slave Enrique, mulatto, native of the city of Malacca." (P.321, F.H.H. Guillemard, The Life of Ferdinand Magellan. New York, 1890).

[edit] Fiction as history

Those who've taken up the torch of Quirino argue in this manner: Enrique was captured by pirates in Carcar, Cebu (pure fiction), taken to Jolo then to Malacca (pure imagination), bought by Magellan in Malacca (true) because he spoke a different language and talked about his hometown which was not Malacca, not the Moluccas, therefore must be Cebu (based on solid air). Accdg. to a scion of Quirino, invoking his conversations with his historian father, Quirino contends that de Mafra, Pigafetta, Albo, the Genoese Pilot, the entire crew--everyone who has written about Enrique and knew him--conspired to hide Enrique's real identity so that Magellan alone can claim to having circumnavigated the globe. Utter nonsense.

[edit] Eyewitness testimony out, imagination in

Quirino and those who follow in his wake totally disregard eyewitness testimonies holding up figments of their imagination as ultimate proof.Vicente C. de Jesus 08:30, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Mikkalai 07:01, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) As an Indonesian Javanese, I should add about Enrique the Black, That he is preferably from Sumatera, Java, West Borneo (Kalimantan) or Semenanjung Malaka. The first three islands are nowdays Indonesia, and the last are nowdays Malaysia. Malaka or Melaka is a name of area consisting of those islands, performed in Kingdoms with capitals mostly in nowdays Indonesia. Malaysian seafarers don't dare to go eastward, for there is the bugis and the makasar who would take them for breakfast. But the Sumateranese and Javanese have a save passage to go eastward for they are consider the relative of the east, in which Indonesian language are commonly spoken by people in the area. So, I should concluded although Enrique is from Malaka, he is not from Malaysia, but preferably from Sumatera or Java.

[edit] Proof that he is from Cebu

Enrique(Henry) helped Pigafetta write a Italiand Malay dictionary. However, if you examine the Malay words, they are unmistakeable old Cebuano that is recognizable even today. I am researching this and may links later.--Jondel 11:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC) (I am sorry but this statement is factually incorrect. Whoever wrote this is ignorant of the fact Pigafetta wrote a Butuanon-Cebuano (Bisaya) vocabulary of 145 words and a 450-word Malayan vocabulary. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] More tidbits

  • One other female slave was caught with Henry and broght to Europe. (This statement has no proof or evidentiary support. The best we know about this Malaccan woman was that she was brought together with Enrique by Magellan to be shown to king of Spain. There is no source that tells us how, when, where this woman was taken and who had procured her. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Serrão may have reached Mindanao, not Magellan

  • Magellan and some Portuguesse may have reached as far as Mindanao in 1511.--Jondel 11:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC) (This never happened, there is no reliable account of Magellan reaching even the Moluccas. It was Francisco Serrão and nine other Portuguese who, accdg. to Antonio Galvao in Tratados dos varios e diversos caminhos..., had accidentally reached Mindanao, exactly where it is not indicated, from Lucipara Island where Serrao's boat was lost and he got another ship on which they sailed to Mindanao. There is corroborative evidence in the account of the Genoese Pilot who relates when Magellan's fleet reached Homonhon a boatload from Suluan Island had told Magellan they had seen already men like them. The Suluans come from Sulu which is the furthest tip of Mindanao. If this is correct, Serrão and company had accidentally reached Sulu. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Death of Magellan

I don't understand the final sentence of this section. If everyone who attended the feast was killed (except for Juan Serrano), who was it who left Serrano on the beach and recorded his words? And wasn't Serrano presumably killed shortly thereafter. (The evidence is there were survivors; the fact is no one really had a precise count of who died. Sebastian de Puerta, survivor of the Laoisa expedition, 1523-1535, became a slave and was rescued 18 months after by the Saavedra expedition, 1527-1529. De Puerta, in Feb. 1528, related that he was made a slave and was brought to Cebu where he learned 8 of Magellan's men had survived the massacre and were sold to Chinese merchants in exchange for iron and copper. As late as 1544, Garcia de Escalante Alvarado of the Villalobos expedition, was told by natives of Leyte that there were still Spanish men of Magellan living in Cebu. Alvarado dismissed the story as wild imagination.Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Henry the Black? This name is an invention based on superficial knowledge

Also, what happened to Henry the Black after this incident? (Again, this term Henry the Black is highly objectionable. No serious scholar of Magellan historiography has called him by this name. It is the invention of a non-scholar whose surface knowledge seems to have supplanted the accumulated wisdom of all the cognescenti. After the Cebu massacre nothing more is heard of him. This however has not stopped non-historians from fabricating stories of his post-massacre life.Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

--Chris 17:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

No records of Henry. A friend of mine, Enriquez claims descendancy. El Cano was the person who historically recieved the title of firs circumnavigator. Antonio Pigafetta fled with him and a few other sailors. There is a list of sailors who returned at the Magellan page.--Jondel 05:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC) (Nestor Palugod Enriquez is a friend of mine. He comes from Cavite. That he descended from Enrique is a metaphorical statement based on an imaginary phenomenon. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Cebu hypothesis is belied by Maximilian Transylvanus

I am working on a neutral point of view and integrating the new info. My POV is that Henry is from Cebu. The arguments are placed below. --Jondel 01:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC) (You'll get a lot of imaginary information and you'll probably ignore a host of established facts, from eyewitnesses, that will invalidate your hypothesis. Maximilian Transylvanus makes it very clear Enrique could not speak Cebuano. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] "Henry the Black"? Let's stop this nonsense!

One of the more startling discoveries for me on the Net is to find Henrich/Enrique de Malacca subsumed under the title "Henry the Black." This is the rubric under which we find Enrique in Wikipedia.

What perplexes me is that one doesn't find that cognomen in serious Magellan historiography and Renaissance navigation history. None of the scholars as far as I can tell call him "Henry the Black": R.A. Skelton, Martin Torodash, Leonce Peillard, Samuel Eliot Morison, J.T. Medina, Antonio de Herrera, Martin J. Noone, Tim Joyner, Andrea da Mosto, Jean Denuce, Carlo Amoretti, Baron (Henry Edward John) Stanley of Alderley, James Alexander Robertson, Martin Fernandez de Navarette, Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo y Valdez, Charles E. Nowell, Francis H.H. Guillemard. Even the popularizers--William Manchester, Carlos Quirino, Stefan Zweig, Charles McKew Parr, Laurence Bergreen--have not referred to Enrique as "Henry the Black."

In fact, he was not black at all. Enrique was, as Magellan described him, a mulatto ("my captured slave Enrique, mulatto, native of the city of Malacca." Any serious scholar of this topic should refuse calling him Henry the Black. And I beg the people running Wikipedia to stop this nonsense. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)).

Many persons with brown and even light brown skin consider themselves to be "black." 24.55.107.138 13:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Many?? Like who? I'm Filipino and I've never heard anyone with my color consider himself "black"... Jbvillarante 06:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Henry is from Cebu arguments/Evidence

  • Spoke fluently to the Cebuanos
  • The 'Malay' dictionary contains ancient Cebuano. Many sites have published the words. The dictionary was compiled before Pigafetta and co. arrived in the Philippines.--Jondel 01:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I disagree that Henry the Black is from Cebu or Philippines; I have been in Ternate and surrounding isles, most of the people there can speak or understand Philippino language although they are Indonesian descendents. Quote: Ternate is the final destination of Magellan looking for clove trees. I agree that he is a seafarer, because he knows the longitudes of the many isles in that area, therefore, I predict he is from Malaya or Indonesia nowdays. [August R-Indonesian]

--the word MASAWA

Hello to those who are maintaining this page. There is a line that I wanted to comment about. I'm Filipino and I'm from Jolo, Sulu (We are called Tausug)and we also use the word "Masawa" meaning "bright", "clear" (as in clear skies, clear water or clear vision)or "brilliant". "Masawa" is not an exclusively Butuanon word. Just wanted to share the information. (This is correct and I admit I may have overstated my point by excluding Tausog. That language is historiographically explained by the relocation by a brother of the Butuan Chieftain together with his entourage to Basilan and to Sulu. This Butuanon became ruler of Sulu, as recounted in the chronicle of Fr. Francisco Combes, 1667. Muslim history expert Cesar Abdul Majul corroborated this story juxtaposing it against the Sulu tarsila. A. Kemp Pallesen in a study on linguistics traced Tausog's roots from Butuan.Vicente C. de Jesus 14:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

"On the second island, which was then called Mazzaua, a word which means "light" and is found only in one Philippine language, Butuanon, there was instant communication with Raia Siaiu".

144.100.197.50 17:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)Maurice Ycaza

--Cebuanon and the Malay Language

I also think that it would be difficult to use linguistics to identify Enrique's nationality because most of the dialects of the Philippines are derived from the Malay language.

I believe that Malay is an older language than Cebuano. Their heritage and culture is more ancient than the Philippines. At least that is what current historical evidence shows. (Which is older is not a relevant issue. The question is what language did he use. Ginés de Mafra explicitly said Enrique spoke Malay. That constitutes direct evidence. If he were Cebuano and Pigafetta or de Mafra or Francisco Albo and all the other eyewitnesses vouched that he did speak Cebuano, then that would be fact variously and severally reiterated. No one said he spoke Cebuano. Maximilian said he did not speak Cebuano. It has nothing to do with which language is older or younger. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

144.100.197.50 17:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)Maurice Ycaza

Pigafetta through Enrique's help created a 'Malay-Italian' dictionary the words were unmistakably ancient Cebuano. This is still not enough to identify Enrique's nationality?--Jondel 02:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC) (This is circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence consists in the explicit statement of Magellan that Enrique is a native of Malacca. At the same time Pigafetta gives another eyewitness testimony that Henrich is from Sumatra. Who is right between Magellan and Pigafetta is an issue which requires reasoned argument. I gave mine above. Vicente C. de Jesus 14:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Cleanup tag

Because of...

  • Extensive PoV, advocacy
  • Unencyclopedic treatment and form
  • Many spelling and grammar mistakes
  • Length
  • Spanish language used (copy-pasted?) in bibliography section

I completely agree. This has to be the WORST article I've read here, in that it is about a topic of possible interest (rather than not even counting as an article, such as corporate self-promotion spam pages), yet it has clearly taken the role of this talk page to the article itself. Please, people... either play fair or just keep it all to yourself and stew silently at your terminal. Fitzhugh 01:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


  • OK, I've inexpertly attempted to clean it up, by removing almost everything. I have not touched the bibliography. Please add to it and correct my mistakes, and remember not to squabble out in front there. Douglas Bagnall

[edit] Neutral point of view

To avoid the tone of advocacy, I have heavily reworded some of the claims in the first part of this article.

Hunting down the proper references for each claim may take some time, also, we need some help on cleaning up the bibliography and providing useful LIVE links, I have noticed that almost exact list of bibliography has also been posted elsewhere, [1]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Seth Nimbosa (talk • contribs) 17:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] = Objective point of view =

There is a perfectly certain way to resolve the issue of whether Enrique is from Cebu or from anywhere in the Philippine archipelago, e.g., Mazaua in Mindanao.

First, there is absolutely no primary or secondary or even thirdhand account that states Enrique is from Cebu, Mazaua, or anywhere from the Philippines.

Second, there is absolutely no primary or secondary or even thirdhand account that states Enrique spoke Cebuano anywhere in the Philippine archipelago, or Butuanon in Mazaua.

All those who have written on Enrique's coming from the Philippines--Carlos Quirino, William Manchester, John Keay, Laurence Bergreen--absolutely have not cited any primary, secondary, or thirdhand account. They, on their own authority, say he comes from Cebu based on a complete misreading of Pigafetta. Nowhere does Pigafetta say Enrique is from Cebu, nowhere does he say Enrique spoke Cebuano in Mazaua or in Cebu. Pigafetta explicitly, unambiguously, precisely state Enrique is from Sumatra. And if you are from Sumatra you speak Malay which, so states Pigafetta, was understood by the king of Mazaua (Raia Siaiu) because, states Pigafetta clearly, kings in those places spoke many languages.

This brainstorm of Quirino--which Bergreen, Manchester, etc. took hook, line, and sinker--is based on absolutely nothing more than Quirino's wild imagination. 01:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Vicente C. de Jesus

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/n/r/Talk%7EEnrique_of_Malacca_316c.html"