The Philippine Islands, 1493-1898/Volume 1/Junta of Badajoz
April 11. On the bridge over the river Cava, situated on the boundary line between Castilla and Portugal the twenty-three deputies exhibited their authorizations. This first day passed in reading the treaty of Vitoria, negotiated February 19, 1524, and the letter of commission of the nine judges for Spain; the recall of Esteban Gomez, who does not understand why he should take part in negotiations for our service, and the appointment in his place of Fray Tomás Duran under date of Burgos March 20, 1524; the appointment of the nine Portuguese judges; the appointment of one attorney for Spain, and two attorneys for Portugal; and a secretary for Spain, and the same for Portugal.
II They took the solemn oath to act in the sight of God and conscientiously.
III The judges ordered the attorneys of either side to state their side of the case, and to proceed with the matter.
IV The attorneys disputed as to who should act as plaintiff. Each one wished the other to act in this capacity. The Spanish attorney asserted that this affair was at the instance of Portugal, and that the ambassadors had been sent for this purpose by that country. The Portuguese attorney asserted that there was nothing upon the matter in the treaty, as was well known to Spain. In this wise passed the day.
April 14. On the said bridge. The Portuguese attorneys presented a notification, asserting that they made no petition; they said that the King had had possession of Maluco for more than ten years; therefore Spain ought to ask for and accept the witnesses which, according to the terms of the treaty of Vitoria, they were prepared to give as their proofs.
The Spanish attorney gave answer, insisting that the King of Portugal had moved first in this matter, and therefore should be the plaintiff. As to the rest he said that the suit was obscure, vague, and general, insufficient to form a case on possession, and to pass a sure sentence upon it, let them specify wherein they thought the treaty was not observed, and let them attempt the fitting remedy and interdict, and he will answer them.
April 20. In the chapter of the Cathedral church of San Juan at Badajoz. The attorney for Portugal said that it was not apparent from the records that his King had moved first in this matter, nor even if such a thing should be apparent, could it be called a provocation, because this matter was between those who could not be coerced into judgment, since they recognized no superior. As to the claim that their suit was vague, that was no reason why it was not a suit. They stated clearly that their King had been in possession ten years and more. Therefore Spain should act as plaintiff.
April 21. Under the same head. The attorney for Spain insisted upon what he said before, adding only that in regard to this matter being started by Portugal, they denied what they knew to be so, and such a thing could be proved quickly. As to Portugal's saying she had been in possession furnished no reason why Spain should be plaintiff:
April 22. Ibid. In a meeting of the judges, the three lawyers of Portugal gave expression to the following interlocutory opinion: that each side should make cross-examinations according to law, in order that they might examine the witness produced by the attorneys. Thus the latter could offer any writs, proofs, and documents from which they hoped to gain aid in this case, so that, when everything was seen and examined, this case and the doubt as to whom the possession belonged could be determined.
The three Castilian lawyers declared that the petitions of the Portuguese attorneys had no place, and therefore within three days they would state and plead their right.
The Portuguese judges said that both informal opinions agreed in each side pleading its right, but the Castilian judges did not state in theirs whether they should be by court or by petition, and they therefore asked them to make such declaration. The Castilian attorney said that the opinion of his side was clear and there was no occasion for the suit.
The legal judges for Castilla made the same assertion.
May 4. In Yelves, in the town hall. The attorneys for Portugal replied that they would receive hurt from the opinion of the Castilian judges, because the latter claimed wrongly that they were the plaintiffs; that the two interlocutory decisions of either part were not the same. And they asserted that to be in accord with justice, and the treaty, which was in harmony with the opinion of their judges, they ought to form a court of cross-examination and furnish as proofs to the attorney for Castilla those things placed before them. And if they would not do this, then it was evident that the delay in the case was due to the Castilian judges and attorney.
May 6. Ibid. The attorney for Castilla denied that the parties to the suit could compel the arbitrators to submit to their opinions. He defended the opinion of his judges; demonstrated that the contrary was unjust and null and void, because they demand witnesses and proofs to be received without a suit, debate, or conclusion preceding, a thing quite contrary to all order in law. He impugned the secret motive that could provoke the Portuguese judges to their interlocutory opinion, the apparent meaning of which was to make a summary investigation concerning the possession in order thereby to clear the way for the decision of ownership, thus making defendant and plaintiff change places. This had no place in the proceedings because they could not prepare the decision in which they did not make investigations. Further it would be a perversion of the order given by the two sides, both for petitioner and possessor, and clearly what they would do would be null and void. For this and other reasons the opinion of the Portuguese judges had no value. They ought to conform to ours, and not doing so, it is evident that they are guilty of the time already lost and which will be lost.
May 7. Ibid. The Portuguese attorney shattered at length the reasons of Ribera with texts from Bartulo[1] and Baldo, and concluded by saying that the opinion of the Castilian judges was null and void and wrong, and ought to be rectified. Without doubt this was the instruction received from the court.
May 13. At Badajoz, in the council house of the said town. The attorneys for Portugal petitioned that the reply of the attorney for Castilla should not be read, because it should have been presented in the junta before the twelfth. There was a dispute on this point, but it was read. It contradicted the other side, and insisted on the same thing as before. At the end it threw the blame for the delay on the Portuguese deputies, inasmuch as they would not come to an agreement with the intention of their Majesties that the cases be determined in the time allotted. The same day, ibid. In the afternoon meeting Ribera said that the onslaught of the Portuguese deputies on the preceding afternoon had been expected, and it was understood that today was the first meeting at which he ought to speak. Therefore he asked that the petition which precedes be admitted and be placed on record. This was ordered.
May 18. Ibid. In the afternoon the vote of the Portuguese judges taken the morning of the same day was made public, namely, that they clung to their opinion, and threw the blame for the delay on the opposite side.
May 19. The vote of the Castilian judges was made public. It was to the same effect. They added that the judges of Portugal should consider whether they could find any expedient or legal form, whereby the remaining time should not be lost, without prejudice to their declaration. The Portuguese judges asserted the answer given at Yelves, whereupon Ribera presented a petition, setting forth the intention of their Majesties, and throwing the blame on the other side for not having even commenced the case by wishing for proof without suit or foundation.
May 23. In Yelves, in the town hall. The attorneys for Portugal said that, with regard to the fault of the others who would not make use of the remedies provided by law in such cases, they found no other expedient except the one they had set forth in their interlocutory opinion.
May 24. Ibid. The judges for Portugal declared they had a letter from their King, in which he told them that the Emperor was writing to his deputies to agree to resolve themselves into courts for cross-examination and to continue the time. In the afternoon the judges for Spain answered that they were ready for any good expedient and method whereby this negotiation could be brought to a speedy close, in accordance with their Majesties' wish. Those of Portugal replied that they did not answer whether they had such a letter from the Emperor, and if there was any delay, they were to blame.
May 25. Ibid. In the morning the judges for Castilla said that inasmuch as the matter upon which they had been notified was a weighty one, they would defer their answer until the next meeting on the twenty-seventh. Then the attorney Ribera presented a paper wherein he stated that the attorneys for Portugal ought to be compelled justly to act as plaintiffs, as in fact they had proved themselves to be in their petitions, conforming themselves therein with their sovereign who had provoked and commenced this negotiation. Therefore they were acting contrary to their words and deeds. The judges for Portugal ought to act in accordance with the interlocutory opinion of Castilia, so that the case might be valid. We did not have to solicit proofs and witnesses, since our rights were so well-known. But how could we solicit such things without a preceding sentence in accord with the suit depending upon the petitions, etc? Outside of this, since sentence must be passed jointly on possession and ownership, and the judges appointed for this purpose by the King of Portugal having placed a thousand impertinent obstacles in the way, it was evident that the deputies on the other side were avoiding the judgment and suit, and were eluding and losing the time of the compromise. Then he petitioned that they act in accord with his petition.
May 27. Ibid. The Emperor's deputies, in answer to the notification of the twenty-fourth, said that although it was proper that their interlocutory opinion be acted upon, nevertheless, because their Majesties wished the affair settled within the time agreed upon, they would agree that the attorneys of each side should plead their rights within three days.
In the afternoon meeting the deputies of Portugal responded saying that the answer was unsatisfactory. It was unnecessary to have the attorneys of each part plead, since such a thing had been ordered without avail on the eleventh of April. Therefore they insisted upon the interlocutory assembly.
May 28. Ibid. The attorneys for Portugal presented a writ to the effect that the time limit expired on the last of May, and the matter was in such shape that it would be finished briefly; for in regard to the ownership, their attorneys were unanimous on the three points, except in matters of slight moment, in which they could soon agree. In the matter of possession, the witnesses of both sides were present, and such an expedient could be adopted that this case could be determined immediately. "Therefore we petition," said they, "for a continuation of the time limit. In this will be done what ought to be done, and what the Emperor seems to wish, since he has told the ambassadors of our King that your graces could extend the time, and were empowered to do it by the said treaty."
The licentiate Acuña answered immediately that prorogation was an act of jurisdiction, and should be determined on the boundary line, where, according to the order, they must meet during the last three days; and that he was ready to discuss the matter on Monday, May 30 with the licentiate Acevedo, the member first named on their commission.
Acevedo consented, and they agreed to meet on the said day at seven in the morning.
May 30. When the deputies met on the boundary line Acevedo gave his vote, namely, that bearing in mind the treaty and that the matter could be settled briefly, the two cases be continued through June.
Acuña's vote was to the effect that it stipulated in the treaty that, if the case was in such shape it could be settled in a short time. In the matter of possession there was no case nor any sign that there would be one during the month. In that of ownership they differed from the very first point—some insisting that they should count from the island of La Sal, and others from that of San Antonio. He thought the time spent here by the deputies would be lost, and his presence was necessary in the employment and discharge of his duty. He did not see any other expedient but to refer the matter to their principals. Therefore, it was his opinion that the matter should not be continued.
Immediately the attorneys for Portugal declared that their King had written to the Emperor, both upon the question of proceeding by means of courts of cross-examination and upon that of continuing the case, and as he expected a favorable reply within eight or ten days, they should at least prorogue it until that time. To this effect notification should be made by licentiates Acuña and Acevedo.
Acuña answered that he had given his final answer in his reply. On the thirty-first there would be no meeting in regard to the possession.[2]
April 11. On the bridge of Caya River assembled the licentiates Cristóbal Vasquez de Acuña, a member of the council, Pedro Manuel, a member of the audiencia and chancery of Valladolid; Fernando de Barrientos, a member of the council of Ordenes; Don Hernando Colon, Simon de Alcazoba, Doctor Sancho de Salaya, master of theology; Fray Tomás Duran, Pero Ruiz de Villegas, Captain Juan Sebastian del Cano; likewise the licentiate Antonio de Acevedo Coutiño, Doctor Francisco Cardoso, Doctor Gaspar Vasquez, all of the desembargo of the King of Portugal; Diego Lopez de Sequera, of the King's council and his chief magistrate, Pedro Alonso de Aguiar, nobleman of the said King's household; Francisco de Mela, master of holy theology; licentiate Tomás de Torres, physician to the said King; Simon Fernandez, Bernaldo Perez, knight of the order of Christ—arbitrators appointed by Spain and Portugal. In the presence of the secretaries Bartolomé Ruiz de Castañeda and Gomez Yañes de Freitas, the treaty appointments, etc., were read. And the witnesses, Doctor Bernaldino de Ribera, attorney of the chancery of Granada, and attorney-general for Spain; and the licentiate Juan Rodriguez de Pisa, advocate to their Majesties; and the licentiate Alfonso Fernandez and Doctor Diego Barradas, attorneys-general for Portugal[4] took the solemn oath.
Upon this day, the Portuguese attorneys declared that Alcazaba could not take the oath or act as judge, inasmuch as he had fled from Portugal with intent to be disloyal to his King, who had, for good and sufficient causes, refused him certain rewards, and had ordered him tried for certain offenses committed in India. This was the reason for his flight, and therefore he was a suspicious person and ought not act as judge. The attorneys asserted strenuously that they would not assent to anything Alcazaba did, and that their King had written the Emperor to appoint another in his place.
Nevertheless the judges ordered that he be sworn and he took the oath with the others. Immediately Doctor Ribera, attorney for Spain, said that the reasons were trifling, and seemed to have been invented to delay the case. A copy was given to the attorneys for Portugal and the day of
April 12. Ibid. The latter said that they held their suspicions justly, and therefore the King had written to the Emperor, etc.
April 20. In the chapter of San Juan, the Cathedral church of Badajoz. A despatch from the King of Portugal was read, removing Bernardo Perez from participation in the case, "because of certain reasons that move us" [could he have been refused by the Emperor in reply to the refusal of Alcazaba? could the said Perez be a Spaniard?] and appointing in his place master Margallo. Another provision of their Majesties was read, removing Simon de Alcazaba, "because he must occupy himself with matters connected with our service," and appointing in his stead Master Alcarez; dated Burgos, April 10, 1524.—Secretary Cobos. Margallo and Alcarez took the oath and the matter of the demarcation was begun, by the reading of the treaty of Tordesillas of June 5, 1494,[5] with the confirmation given to the same at Arevalo, July 2, of the same year; and the agreement of May 7, 1495, as to the prorogation of the ten months allowed to the caravels to determine the said demarcation.
April 23. Ibid. They began to treat formally of the matter, and in accordance with what had been discussed before, the attorneys propounded three questions.
1st. In what manner the demarcation should be determined.
2d. How the islands of Cabo Verde were to be situated and located in their proper place.
3d. From which of the said islands they should measure the three hundred and seventy leagues.
The judges for Spain voted that these questions should be examined in this order.
May 4. In Yelves, in the town hall. The attorneys for Portugal deferred their voting until this day, and voted that the order of examination should be in the inverse order. Immediately the deputies for Spain declared that in order to avoid discussions they made the declaration of the following writ. In substance this was reduced to saying that they ought to determine first the manner of locating the islands and to choose the meridian for the three hundred and seventy leagues. But this matter being easy and one of pure reason, it ought not obstruct the investigation of the other two, and therefore they would summon the attorneys within three days, to give their decision as to the first question. And they would treat immediately of the other two, since the time limit was short, and already they had lost time enough both because of the refusal to accept Alcazaba and the illness of certain Portuguese deputies.
The Portuguese deputies voiced the following expression in the afternoon: that the reason for not meeting sooner was because certain of the Castilian deputies were not empowered. Moreover they insisted that the first point to be discussed was the one declared by them, but they agreed to the declaration of the attorneys concerning it within three days.
May 6. Ibid. In the morning the attorneys discussed the matter. They sent for the sea-charts and globes of each side which each desired. Several examinations were made. The same discussion was continued in the afternoon, and voting was deferred until
May 7. Ibid. In the morning the Portuguese representatives said that sea-charts were not so good as the blank globe with meridians as it represents better the shape of the world. Then they discussed the best means of putting the lands, islands, and coasts upon it, as they were quite prepared to do this.
The judges for Spain said that they preferred a spherical body, but that the maps and other proper instruments should not be debarred, in order that they might locate the lands better upon the said body.
May 12. In Badajoz, in the chapter of the said church. The judges for Spain said that on May 4 they had ordered the attorneys to discuss the question of the island from which the three hundred and seventy leagues should be measured; that their intention was to hear them viva voce; that time was short, and they summoned them for the following day.
May 13. At Badajoz, in the town hall. Having given notification, the togated attorney of their Majesties and the licentiate Juan Rodriguez de Pisa, of the Council and advocate in this case, discussed the law. The attorneys for Portugal talked also. Then the judges for Spain voted as follows: as to the island from which we should begin to reckon the three hundred and seventy leagues, it is our opinion that it should be the most westerly, San Antonio. They proved this conclusively both by the natural meaning of words, and by the intention and purpose of the Portuguese King to have it as far west as possible. It was also evident from other documents [he alludes to the bull] that Portugal had one hundred leagues on the other side of the islands, and two hundred and seventy more were conceded to her. Then the three hundred and seventy leagues must begin from the most westerly, that of San Antonio. [This is doubtless the paper of Hernando Colon, for it says spherical and contains other sentences peculiar to it.] It was signed at the bottom by the astrologers and pilots alternately in the following order: D. Hernando Colon, Fray Tomás Duran, Magister, Doctor Salaya, Pero Ruiz de Villegas, Master Alcaraz, Juan Sebastian del Cano.
In the afternoon the judges for Portugal rendered the following vote: that the measurement of the said three hundred and seventy leagues should be made from the islands of La Sal or Buena Vista, which were on the same meridian. They adduced several trifling reasons which are not worth recording. They signed it at the bottom: Francisco de Melo, Diego Lopez de Sequera, Pedro Alfonso de Aguiar, Master Margallo, Licentiate Torres, Simon Fernandez.
May 14. Ibid. Having discussed the matter in regard to the judges for Portugal telling those for Castilla that they should give the form of their agreement, the latter presented the following writ: "The principal grounds upon which the judges for Portugal take their stand is, because in the treaty of 494 [sic] it is stated that the caravels shall sail from Canaria to the Cabo Verde Islands, of which the first and principal ones are La Sal and Buena Vista, as if that more than disposed of the voyage, and it was only necessary to finish the measurement." Then they confirmed the reasons given in their former paper and showed conclusively that the judges for Portugal ought to act in accord with them, or the blame for the delay would be theirs, etc.
May 18. Ibid. The judges for Portugal say that they cannot act in accordance with them, because the treaty states that the measurement shall begin at the Cabo Verde Islands, and this must not be understood indefinite, in such manner that it signifies all of them, but that it must be from a meridian where several islands are found. This is the case at the islands of La Sal and Buena Vista. They repeated this with the terms á quo and ad quern, and other subtle phrases, and concluded their long writ by saying that those of Castilla should act with them.
The judges for Castilla presented the following writ immediately: notwithstanding the contention in regard to the place from which they should calculate the three hundred and seventy leagues—to which they thought those from Portugal should conform themselves through fear of God—that they thought it best to pass beyond this question, and to locate the seas and lands on the blank globe. Much advantage would be derived from this. By so doing they would not be standing still and doing nothing. The location of the said lands and seas had no connection with the discussion, but perhaps it would prove to whom the Malucos belong no matter how the line be drawn. Therefore this ought to be done without awaiting the replies or debates which they have insinuated in their discussions, since they had not come here for debates nor to expect other agreement than the determining of justice. Then the judges for Castilla notified those of Portugal that they were acting up to what they said, and would continue to do so. And they would cast the blame upon them as acting contrary to right and law, and it could be seen that they were persisting in their attempt at delay, etc.
In the afternoon the judges for Portugal made answer asserting that their vote was in accordance with law, and they hoped those from Castilla would act in harmony with it. Moreover they agreed to pass on to the other matters of this negotiation.
May 23. In Yelves, in the town hall. The judges for Castilla said that, in accordance with the agreement, they had brought in the map showing the navigation from Castilla to the Malucos. In this was set down especially the cape of San Agustin in Brazil, in eight degrees of south latitude, and in twenty degrees of longitude west of the island of San Antonio; likewise was shown all the coast to the strait of the Malucos [Magallanes] whose entrance lies in fifty-two and one-half degrees of south latitude and four and one-half degrees of longitude farther west. The map contained also all the Maluco Islands, Gilolo, Burnel, Tincor, and many others which were named by Captain Juan Sebastian [del Cano], navigators who sailed in the "Victoria" and who were present at the assembly, and others who together with the foregoing discovered them, calling them the archipelago of the Malucos; and being situated in two degrees on each side of the equinoctial, and lying a distance of one hundred and seventy degrees from the meridian of the cape of San Agustin and one hundred and fifty from the divisional line. They handed this map to the judges for Portugal so that they might examine it, and petitioned them to show their navigation [eastward].
In the afternoon those acting for Portugal said that the foregoing map was of use only in determining the third point, for the Cabo Verde islands were not on it, with the exception of a portion of the island of San Antonio. "Many other lands were lacking and, above all, the Line of Demarcation was drawn contrary to our opinion, nor is it sufficient to say that it was the navigation of Captain Juan Sebastian del Cano. Likewise we showed a similar map on which the Malucos were one hundred and thirty-four degrees distant [eastward] from La Sal and Buena Vista, quite different from theirs." But inasmuch as neither touched upon the case, they notified the Castilian deputies to present maps containing all the necessary lands, and "we would do the same."
Immediately the Castilian deputies petitioned that both maps be signed by the secretaries, and they showed theirs with all the Cabo Verde islands added to it, and some lands which the judges for Portugal passed by, so that on their part this did not remain to be done.
The Portuguese map contained Cape Verde with the Rio Grande to the Arbitro, but no more; and toward the north Cape Bojador, which lies thirteen and one-half degrees from Cape Verde; Item, an islet called La Ascencion, and then nothing to Cape Buena Esperanza, which was a northwest direction with a north and south distance of fifty-two and one-half degrees, and a run of sixty degrees; Item, a nameless bay; Item, Cape Guardafui whither it was navigated from Buena Esperanza to the northeast, with a north and south distance of fifty and one-half degrees, and a run of fifty-six degrees; Item, Cape Comerin whither it was navigated from Guardafui in an east and west direction, one-half degree northwest, five degrees east, and a run of twenty degrees; Item, to Zamatra and up to the point called Ganispola, a run of fifteen and one-half degrees, from which point to the Malucos it was twenty-seven degrees.
Thereupon the judges for Portugal, with the exception of Francisco de Melo, who had departed, said they would answer the other points made by the deputies from Castilla in the morning.
May 24. Ibid. The judges for Castilla presented the following writ: "To say that the maps were only for the purpose of locating the Cabo Verde islands is strange, inasmuch as we are discussing the bringing by each side of our respective navigations, in order to determine the distance of the Malucos, as witness the members of the Council, who were and are present. It is also strange that among such persons they should withdraw the plans and maps of their navigation, and not allow us to examine them. In our navigation the only thing necessary is to see the distance in dispute, and we will locate on it anything else they wish. The line is drawn according to our opinion. Let them do the same on theirs meanwhile, in order that it may not prove an obstacle to the third point. As to what they say about their map being like ours, it is not so, for they have located only capes and points. We show the entire navigation up to the Malucos just as they saw it therein. As to the principal matter that there are one hundred and thirty-four degrees eastward from La Sal to Maluco, that is a matter we shall look into, and discuss, and say what we shall deduce as the truth. As to whether we have located the Cabo Verde islands properly, why was there no doubt about that when they agreed to it yesterday afternoon, comparing them in the book of Domingo Lopez de Sequerra, wherein the whole world is shown in meridian circles? Pero Alfonso de Aguiar assured the licentiate Acevedo, who showed doubt upon the matter, many times of this. But for greater abundance of proof we are going to bring back the maps so that they will be sure of it." [This writ seems to be an answer to the following one, but they are in the order written.]
Then the following writ of the judges for Portugal was read. In substance it said that the maps presented by Castilla located the Cabo Verde islands farther west than they should be; that it was unnecessary to present maps showing their navigations, since the only thing they ought to discuss was the location of the Cabo Verde islands.
Then the judges for Castilla offered for a second time their map with the Cabo Verde islands, from which the measurements were taken.
In the afternoon the Portuguese deputies said in substance that the navigations should not be examined, but only the locations of the Cabo Verde islands with their respective distances. This ought to be done in order to determine the meridian at the three hundred and seventy leagues.
The Castilian deputies declared immediately that they were ready to do this, without prejudice of going on to the decision of the negotiations.
Those from Portugal measured the maps, finding several differences between the one of Castilla and their two—a large one and a small one.
Those from Castilla petitioned that the differences be pointed out and that the Portuguese deputies should state what they considered the truth; and that they were quite ready to acquiesce.
May 25. Ibid. Those of Portugal declared that they found differences in this place of one degree, in that of five, which they should try to reconcile. Neither had those of Castilla shown the locations of the Canaries and Cape San Vicente, and it was necessary to have these lands indicated.
The Castilian deputies offered a map with the lands in question, saying that, if this was the opinion of the Portuguese deputies they would conform to it, only they would take back the map presented first, being ready to conform with this opinion in order to get rid of the disputes which were blocking the decision.
The Portuguese deputies said it was quite late, and they would give their answer on the next day.
May 27. Ibid. The judges for Portugal asserted in regard to the location of the Cabo Verde islands: "We locate the island of Santiago in five and one-fourth degrees of longitude from Cape Verde; the islands of La Sal and Buena Vista in four; Sant Anton in eight; and San Nicolas in five and one-half."
The judges for Castilla gave immediately as their opinion that the island of Santiago was in five and two-thirds of longitude distant from the meridian of Cape Verde; those of La Sal and Buena Vista four and two-thirds; that of Sant Anton nine, being in eighteen degrees of latitude. [The original signatures of Colon, Duran, Salaya, Villegas, Alcaraz, and Cano follow.]
May 28. By common consent both sides presented globes showing the whole world, where each nation had placed the distances to suit themselves. The measurements were taken and the secretaries ordered to set them down.
The measurements followed in the afternoon. Numberless differences were found, such that the globe of the Portuguese deputies showed one hundred and thirty-seven degrees of longitude from the meridian of the islands of La Sal and Buenavista to the meridian passing through the Malucos; while that of the Castilians showed one hundred and eighty-three. Both were measured eastward with a difference of forty-six degrees.
At adjournment of this meeting they agreed to meet upon the thirtieth upon the bridge of Caya to discuss and examine everything needful for the negotiations.
May 30. Monday, on the said bridge. The judges for Portugal presented the following notification, read by Francisco de Melo: that because of the differences in the globes they believed it necessary to investigate and make certain of the longitudes in question. For this they proposed four methods, namely: The first, on land by taking distances from the moon to some fixed star, as might be agreed upon; the second, to take the distances of the sun and moon in their risings and settings, and this upon land having its horizon above the water; the third by taking a degree of the sky without any limit for sea and land; and the fourth, by lunar eclipses. "Let us examine the method that we must use," they say, "and let us consider how to end the negotiation. If the time remaining seems short, it should be prorogued as long as may be necessary and for such prorogation we notify," etc., and they did notify Acuña and Acevedo to prorogue it for all of June.
Acevedo gave his vote [the same as in the records of possession]. Acuña said that he heard it, and Don Fernando Colon read immediately the following writ, which in brief showed the subterfuges of the judges for Portugal, the differences between the said judges and the globes which they presented concerning the distance from the meridian of La Sal eastward to Maluco, for they say it is one hundred and thirty-seven degrees but in one globe there were one hundred and thirty-four degrees and in another one hundred and thirty-three, a difference which proved falsehood; that both word and drawing showed their [the Castilians'] truth, and reasons and experience proves the said distance to one hundred and eighty-three degrees, and by way of the west one hundred and seventy-seven. The principal matter could have been determined in the time set; and this proposition of methods, which would require a long time, proved that they wished to delay matters. Neither was one month sufficient for the examination by these methods foreign to the spirit of the treaty, and they were opposed to this thing. They notified the Portuguese deputies to vote definitely on the demarcation and ownership at four o'clock in the afternoon on the following and last day of the time set. If they did not do so they would be to blame . . . we protest that we shall vote, etc.
The licentiate Acuña immediately handed in a negative vote on the question of continuation, as is seen in the Records of Possession. The notification of Acevedo and the confirmation of Acuña are also the same as in the said Records.
May 31. Ibid. In reply to the deputies of Castilla, those of Portugal presented a writ to the following effect: that the case was far from being in a state to pass a definitive sentence upon it. Only three preliminary points had been touched upon, and discussion of the principal things passed by. Therefore they were to agree upon the distances by virtue of certain observations; to place, by common consent, the lands and seas on a blank globe; and to draw the line of demarcation. The difference in our globes proved nothing. Also they [the Castilians] had altered their only globe and map, based on the voyages of Juan Sebastian del Cano. Therefore believing that all the globes and maps were in error, we have proposed certain astrological methods. Meanwhile we cannot vote, etc. Don Fernando Colon read immediately the following vote and opinion of the Castilian deputies:
The first thing required and presupposed in this matter of defining and determining the present case of the ownership of the Malucos is to ascertain where the divisional line passes; and secondly the location of the above-mentioned Malucos. As to the first—the location of the said line—we their Majesties' deputies declare: We have voted already for many reasons and causes that this line must pass west of the island of Sant Antonio, the measurement commencing from this place, as we have demonstrated by our words and drawings during the procedure of this case; and we declare the same now by our vote and decision. As to the second, we assert that the Malucos fall many degrees within their Majesties' demarcation. In verification of this assertion it is to be noted, that, since the sphere has a circumference of three hundred and sixty degrees, this number should, of necessity, correspond to the distance, demonstrated by the deputies of the King of Portugal, to be comprised between the meridian of the island of La Sal and the Malucos, plus our assertion of the distance westward to the same Malucos. And as this number of degrees not only is not attained in the said navigation, but the latter rather falls short of it by about fifty degrees, no other reason can be assigned for the shortage, except that it arises from the distance eastward being greater than they have shown it to be; and the error consists in their having shortened the said journey, which is suspected and proved conclusively according to the following.
First, because it is sufficiently clear evidence to note that, in the prosecution of this case, they attempted to make use of ends which were manifestly unjustifiable, and wished to delay and not arrive at a conclusion. This was quite apparent when they immediately refused to admit Simon de Alcazaba, because he had voyaged in those seas and lands with the Portuguese, and knew the truth concerning their distances, and the places where they shortened the distances; and because some days must pass before their Majesties' commission to elect another judge, could arrive from Búrgos. Item: because on Saturday, April 23, we [the Castilian deputies] voted upon the order of investigating the three points necessary in the prosecution of this case, namely, in what manner we should determine the demarcation,—whether on a plane or spherical surface,—what location we should assign to the Cabo Verde islands, and from which one of them we should commence to measure the three hundred and seventy leagues; they in a matter so apparent, and of so little inconvenience or room for speculation, would not vote until Wednesday, May 4, a space of eleven days, and in order to cause confusion they voted that the first thing to determine was from what island the three hundred and seventy leagues to the line were to be measured, it being beyond the bounds of reason to discuss such a thing before investigating or ascertaining the relative locations of these islands with regard to each other, examining them in some manner, in order afterwards to enable us to determine from which one such measurement should be made. This we showed most conclusively by the reasons brought forward in this case. But wishing the verification of the truth, we consented to proceed in the matter as they elected.
Item: when it came to a vote as to the island from which the three hundred and seventy leagues was to be measured, they voted for the islands of La Sal and Buena Vista. This was quite contrary to justice, inasmuch as the measurement should begin at the island of Sant Antonio, the most westerly of the Cabo Verde islands, as is apparent from reasons adduced by us. It is apparent also from these reasons that, at our last meeting in Yelves, they brought in a globe upon which the line of demarcation had been drawn by them twenty-one and one-half degrees west of the said island of Sant Antonio. This they tried to disavow so that the notaries could give no testimony regarding it, telling them they could give no other testimony than that they saw a reddish band just like many others on the globe. Nevertheless in downright truth, in a globe marked with the points of the compass as it was, on which the principal winds were shown in black, the mid winds in green, and the quadrants in lines of a reddish hue, there could not be a quadrant or colored band passing from pole to pole—especially since there was but one, all the others being black—which they were substituting for the north and south wind, blowing from one pole to the other, and which is placed on such globes instead of the wind or meridian line.
Therefore it is apparent from the above that they had drawn this line long before they voted for the line of demarcation, by the sphere which they showed to have been made long before; and which if it had other reddish lines girdling the sphere, these latter did not pass through the poles as this line did, but started from the center of the compasses placed on the equinoctial, and were in proportion to other circular lines. But this line was in proportion to no other line, saving one corresponding to the number of the three hundred and seventy leagues reckoned from the island of Sant Antonio, just as we voted it must be located. Therefore it is proved by this line and globe that the said line was in harmony with our vote in regard to the distance it must have from the said island of Sant Antonio and in regard to its passing from one pole to the other, according to the stipulation of the first treaty negotiated between the Catholic sovereigns and King Don Juan (may they rest in peace), and not in harmony with it, in regard to the other things maintained on this point in the said globe. Therefore it results that they voted contrary to justice, with intent to show that they had navigated a shorter distance, and to delay and cause disagreement in these negotiations because of this point. All the above is apparent and is proved by the records of this assembly, and it is inferred therefrom that they did not consider or regard as true the few degrees they had given out.
Item: having agreed that we should bring good maps on which we would show our voyages westward, and they theirs eastward, they produced a map, upon which were shown only a few points and principal capes, and those lately inserted thereon; so that their voyages could not be ascertained. Neither was it possible to verify in such a map what they compressed in it. As the said distance of degrees given by them was not true, as would be quite apparent if they brought a good map, and one made some time before, in which their said navigation should be contained, and as they had no just excuse to palliate such contention, they said that they brought the said maps only to locate the Cabo Verde islands, which by the very same map was proved to be contrary to the truth and was not a sufficient excuse, since the said islands were not located on this map, as is evident from the judicial records. Therefore because of all the above reasons, and because it might not be possible to verify later what had passed, they would not permit the judges and notaries of the case to examine the said map. More than this, having decided afterwards upon the location of the said islands, we were in agreement with a map on which they had located them. As the decision was not unanimous they locked up the said map and would not produce it again, although they were requested to do so by us. And therefore, they voted afterwards upon the location of the said islands contrary to their own determination of them in the said map, and contrary to what we voted in the said case. They did this contrary to all reason and right, as was proved afterwards by a globe that they showed, on which both the island of Sant Antonio and that of La Sal were exactly where we located them, as is evident from the judicial records of this case. Consequently they acted contrary to what they had declared and voted. In the same way it was proved by the said globe [the first one] that the voyage eastward from the said island of La Sal to the Malucos, was greater than they had declared at first; and the said globe did not conform with the map they had shown first, nor even with another globe they produced. It is adduced from all the above by, evidence and clear demonstration, that the said distance of degrees asserted by them is untrue. Therefore they sought and tried to delay these negotiations, alleging that maps and globes were insufficient instruments from which to ascertain the truth, and that the demarcation could not be determined by them. They begged insistently that other methods of eclipses and fixed stars be sought, not taking into account, as we have said, that these are causes for great delay; for the consideration of such eclipses, and the movement of the moon, and its visual conjunction with any fixed star, and all other like mathematical considerations can at present be of no advantage to us, because of our being limited to such a brief period as two months, in examining and determining this matter. From this [the short time] it is seen that it was not the intention of those sending us that such expedients should be sought or pursued. It can be well said from the above that he who has a poor proof, shows in detail the witnesses to that fact, and therefore, we shall demonstrate in the following more fully and specifically that the said distance is not what they assert, and that all reason, every document, and all experience contradict it.
First it is proved that they have on their part, lessened the number of degrees, for the voyage from Guinea to Calicut is shown to be greater than they assert or show, because from the time those lands were discovered until now, the said Portuguese have been shortening and lessening the said distance. [This assertion is proved by the various discoveries eastward made by the Portuguese navigators from the time of the Infante Don Enrique, (Prince Henry the Navigator) namely, Cadamosto, the Venetian; Antonieto, the Genoese; Pedro Zinzio; Diego Cano; Bartolomé Diaz; and Vasco da Gama.[7] The distances navigated by these men are given as they themselves recorded them.] Therefore with apparent reason the Itinerario Portugallensium, translated from Portuguese into Latin by Archangelo Madrignano, and which was printed in 1508[8] in chapter sixty, reckons a distance of three thousand eight hundred leagues, or fifteen thousand miles from Lisbona to Calicut, and declares in the last chapter that it is a three months' voyage from Calicut to Zamotra.
Item: the said distance is proved to be much greater, as we assert, because of certain persons who traveled through and navigated the lands and seas eastward from the sea Rojo [Red Sea] and recorded their voyages at a time when there was no suspicion of a discussion like the present. [Gerónimo de Santisteban, a Genoese, is given as an example. He sailed from Aden to Calicut in thirty days, and in eighty-three days from Calicut to Zaumotra (Sumatra), a distance of about fourteen hundred leagues. "with this number agree Marco Paulo (Marco Polo) and Juan de Mandevilla (John Mandeville) in the selfsame voyages and travels made by them, as is stated very diffusely in their books." The three-year voyage of King Solomon's ships, as recorded in "the third book of the Kings"[9] to "Ofir and Zetin whence they brought the gold to build the Temple," and which places "all writers upon the sacred scriptures assert" to be toward the most eastern part of India," agree with the same figures.] From all the above, therefore it is inferred that the navigation from the said Mar Rubro [Red Sea] to the eastern part of India is a much greater distance than the Portuguese say.
Item: it is well-known that the Portuguese themselves confessed that the said Maluco islands were so far to the eastward that they fell within their Majesties' territories. And this was so apparent that one of the deputies acting now in this cause for the said King, by name Master Margallo, in a philosophical book written by him, and but lately out of press, in showing the division between Castilla and Portugal, proves that the said Malucos fall and are within their Majesties' limits. And too, when they were discovered by the Castilian fleet, the King of Portugal desiring to have information regarding their location and boundary, considered himself perfectly assured when all those whom he ordered to assemble for this purpose concluded that they lay within the Castilian boundaries. And therefore the more than great caution exercised up to that time in not permitting sea charts to be taken from his realms was thereafter observed much more strictly, and many maps were burned, destroyed, and seized, and an order was sent forth that the routes in all maps should be shortened. And those maps they do give out for purposes of navigation, to those who must sail toward India, they give on account, so that they must be returned to the treasury in order that there might be no information in other places as to the longitude of this route. And all the abovesaid is confirmed more clearly, because, notwithstanding the great caution exercised in Portugal in not allowing maps to be taken outside of the kingdom, certain Portuguese and Castilians have taken and possessed some maps. We, the said deputies of their Majesties, wishing to become better informed concerning these maps, in order to pronounce better and more truly upon this case, for the greater assurance of our consciences, and for the purpose of securing the most indubitable knowledge in regard to this matter, summoned before us certain pilots and men, skilled both in navigation and in making maps, globes, and mappamundos. These men have always tried to inform themselves with great care, concerning the distances and routes of the said voyage, both of those who made the voyage, and of those who delineated and located the lands comprehended in the voyage. They stated under oath and before two notaries and the secretary of this case, that they knew that the said navigation and the location of these lands comprised more degrees than was declared and demonstrated by the said deputies of the King of Portugal, by their globes and maps. So much greater was the distance that it was evident they were now trying to shorten the said voyage again by more than twenty-five degrees of longitude of the distance until now declared by them.
Therefore, as is apparent from the said information of modern navigators and cosmographers, both Portuguese and those of other nations, and from the relation of the said pilots and sailors, it has been proved completely that the said distances and routes, declared by the said deputies of Portugal, are neither just nor true, and that the deputies have reported them much shorter than, in sober truth, they are. From this it can be presumed, that inasmuch as they shorten the said route each day, the said mistake of fifty degrees proceeds doubtless from their eastern part and not from our western part.
Item: it is to be observed that, notwithstanding the said distances, expressed, as is shown by the said pilots who determined them, as they should, on a spherical body, the said Malucos fall many degrees within the limits of our lord, the Emperor, and that they lie a much greater number of degrees east of the island of La Sal, than they had declared, inasmuch as, according to geometrical reasoning, the lands situated along the said eastern voyage, placed on a plane surface, and the number of leagues being reckoned by equinoctial degrees, are not in their proper location as regards the number and quantity of their degrees, for it is well known in cosmography that a lesser number of leagues along parallels other than the equinoctial, occupy a greater quantity of degrees. Now then as almost all the lands from the Cabo Verde islands to the Malucos, are, for the most part quite distinct from the equinoctial, it will take a much greater number of degrees when they are transferred and drawn on the spherical body. Calculating by geometrical proportion, with the arc and chord, whereby we pass from a plane to a spherical surface, so that each parallel is just so much less as its distance from the equinoctial is increased, the number of degrees in the said maps is much greater than the said pilots confess, and consequently these lands fall by a greater number of degrees inside their Majesties' limits. In order to verify the above we must examine the itineraries and navigation routes, and the angles and intersections made by the routes with the meridians and parallels encountered, which are styled angles positionis among cosmographers. This is the most certain method of determining lands on a spherical body, when calculating them from the plane surface, as the following will show.
[The distances of these itineraries are shown in evidence of the preceding. Maps of India made in Portugal "at the time when there was no suspicion that so great a number of leagues was to be subtracted as is proved now to have been the case," are cited and distances taken therefrom in proof of the assertions made by the Castilian deputies. As a result of these distances it is shown that the distance between the Moluccas and the island of Sant Antonio would be one hundred and eighty-four degrees to the eastward, to which number "must be added the degrees contained in the said three hundred and seventy leagues from the island of Sant Antonio to the line of demarcation." The following deductions are made:]
It is quite evident from the above that the distance of the navigation eastward assigned by the Portuguese in the proceedings is short by more than fifty degrees, being proved by the said old Portuguese relations and maps, which are not to be doubted. And it is evident that our calculation is true, both eastward and westward, and that from the said divisional line commencing from the island of Sant Antonio, the distance westward to the Malucos is not more than the said one hundred and fifty degrees.
[At this point the aid of the old authors, Ptolemæus and Plinius, is invoked to prove more conclusively that the distance was shortened by the Portuguese. The summary of the document is as follows:]
Therefore in concluding, we assert, both on account of the reasons abovesaid, and for many others which incite us to this decision, that we find the location of the Malucos not to lie in the longitude declared by the deputies of the King of Portugal, but where we claim and prove by our sea chart. Consequently we assert that they lie and are situated a distance of one hundred and fifty degrees west of the divisional line, as we have shown in these discussions. It results then that the distance eastward from the said line to the said Malucos is two hundred and ten degrees, and according to this the ownership and seigniory of the Malucos pertain to their Majesties. This is our vote and decision, and thus we declare to and notify the said deputies of the King of Portugal, that since our vote is just and in accordance with right, they conform to the same. Don Hernando Colon, Fray Tomás Duran, Doctor Zalaya, Pero Ruiz de Villegas, Master Alcarez, Juan Sebastian del Cano.
I have read the above vote and decision of their Majesties' said deputies in the presence of the deputies of the said King of Portugal. Thereupon the said deputies of their Majesties and their secretary all said for themselves that their opinion is in accordance with the above, and they ordered us, the said secretaries to set it down in the records. Then the said deputies of the said King of Portugal declared that they were opposed to the said vote and adhered to the writ presented by them yesterday, and to the one presented at this meeting today before the reading of the vote in question. They said they had other reasons to offer, which they would not give today for lack of time, but would present tomorrow, Wednesday, the first of June. They ordered us, the said secretaries to set it down thus in this record. And we, the said secretaries being present at this declaration, set it down in this record, and sign it with our names. Bartolomé Ruiz de Castañeda.
The Portuguese deputies answered that they adhered to their proposition. The formalities follow and the junta was adjourned, as was certified in the records by the secretaries Bartolomé Ruiz de Castafieda acting for Spain, and Gomez Yañes Freytas for Portugal.[10]
Don Hernando Colon declares that, at the first meeting of the deputies who were to confer regarding the question of ownership, when discussing the method of procedure, it was his opinion that each one should set down in writing what he knew of this matter, thus furnishing reasons and information upon which to base his Majesty's right, and also material wherewith to answer the arguments, to which he thought they might be opposed ex adverso. Although this method was not approved by the said deputies, considering that it could not but result in some good to his Majesty's service, he presented his opinion in writing after the following Saturday, wherein he showed their Majesties' right not only to the Malucos, but also to all of Persia, Arabia, and India. [Thereupon it was decided that each one should present his opinion, "especially as each one will incite and spur on his fellows, and in case of any sickness or absence, what such and such a deputy knew of the matter would be known, and if we should decide upon nothing definite at this time, we shall leave a record of the truth for a future time." Colon says:]
First, inasmuch as the division of the sphere, which is an unknown quantity, is to be determined, we must determine and verify its size. This must be done by one of two methods, namely, by measuring the entire globe or body to be divided; or by ascertaining exactly the proportional relation between one portion of it and the corresponding portion of another body, whose size is known to us, as for instance the heavens, which learned men have divided into three hundred and sixty parts or degrees.
As to the first method of measuring the earth, besides being very difficult, it becomes also arbitrary unless measurements were always made by line. Much uncertainty is occasioned by this method, because, as we hear and say continually such and such leagues are very long, while others speak of them as small, each one judging according to his own opinion, and taking into consideration the time and rapidity it took him to walk them. On this account a much greater difference will result when the said leagues are measured by sea, for there are many more obstacles that alter or impede the correct calculation of them, such as, for instance, currents, tides, the ship's loss of speed, because of its meeting with strong head winds, or because of heavy seas coming athwart the bows, or from other directions. In addition to all these one may be deceived by the ship's burden and bulk; or by reason of the ship's bottom being cleaner or dirtier at one time than another; or whether it is towed or sailing alone; or whether it carries new or old sails and whether they are of good or ill pattern, and wet or dry; whether the day's run is estimated from the poop, prow, or amidships; and other special considerations that I pass by, such as the heaviness or lightness of the winds, the differences in compasses, etc. From the above then, I infer that it is difficult and unsatisfactory to determine the size of the earth by means of measuring it by traveling or sailing, and the same was maintained by Ptolemæus and other erudite men by actual test.
As to the second method, namely, by determining what portion of the earth corresponds to another known part of the heavens, it is more probabile etiam per demonstrationem. But the difficulty of this method lies in the fact that this proof or demonstration has been made by many learned and experienced men, and we discover a great diversity in their results, as I pointed out in my opinion when it was agreed that every one should commit in scriptis the number of leagues corresponding to each degree, of which the following is a copy.
[Here follow the different calculations of the length of a degree and the circumference of the earth, beginning with Aristotle. Briefly these are as follows: Aristotle, 800 stadia to a degree, making the terrestial circumference, 12,500 leagues; Strabo, Ambrosius, Theodosius, Macrobius,[11] and Eratosthenes, each 700 stadia to the degree, and a circumference of 7,875 leagues; Marinus and Ptolemæus, 500 stadia to the degree, and a circumference of 5,625 leagues; Tebit, Almeon, Alfragano, Pedro de Aliaco[12] "in the tenth chapter of De imagine mundi and the author of the sphere in the division of the zones," Fray Juan de Pecan "in the fourth chapter of the treatise of the sphere," and the "first Admiral of the Indies,[13] as is evident from many papers made by him," each "fifty-six and two-thirds miles" or "fourteen leagues and two-thirds of a mile" to a degree, and a circumference of 5,100 leagues. "If no opposition is given to this latter ex adverso mere voluntarie," continues Colon, "then necessarily we must have recourse to verify it by experience, which is hindered by many obstacles." In further reasoning he says:]
It is clear from the above, that, supposing the measurement of the degrees to be conclusive, it is not reduced to such practical form that the place where such and such a number of leagues correspond to a degree can be told, nor is it easy to determine this; so that it will be necessary, both sides concurring, to select persons and instruments and the place for making the test. After these men had been ordered to proceed, instruction and advice must be given them, which being a huge matter and outside of the present discussion, I shall not dwell upon. If such practical experience is not acquired, then rightly and quite reasonably the measurement or size of degrees used by the authors of tables, or of almanacs and daily calculations of the stars, should be accepted; and such a view seems quite conclusive to whomever is not obstinate, since it is proved that the diversity of the relative positions of the superior bodies proceeds from the difference between the places of observation.
Supposing that the number of miles or leagues corresponding to each degree were to be verified by the care and skill of the men abovesaid, then another very long and difficult calculation would be necessary, namely, the appointment of experienced men to measure and determine the number of measures or degrees from one continent or province to another. And when they shall reach the half [one hundred and eighty degrees] counting from the line passing at the end of the three hundred and seventy leagues, at that place they shall establish a point or mark to show what pertains to each side. But as this manner of measuring degrees may be difficult from east to west, although easy from north to south, recourse must be had to certain fine and subtile methods, of which, although everybody is well informed concerning them, I shall not hesitate to state a few facts I have been able to acquire, in order to give these other deputies an opportunity to explain those facts of which I am ignorant.
[Various methods for estimating the length of a degree follow. Colon concludes thus:]
But inasmuch as the determination of the above methods seems to be and is difficult, each one of them must be employed, and each one put into execution, so long as one does not conflict with the other. Furthermore the day's run must conform to these methods, and pilots of great experience and judgment chosen. In this way it might be hoped to determine a division in which neither part would suffer any great loss or inconvenience. Inasmuch as, in another form, rebus stantibus ut nunc, I consider it impossible that one side can succeed in convincing the other by demonstrating that the Malucos fall within his territory, although one might show that it is more in accordance with equity and reason, and thus obtain his object, if the judges imagine that they could determine it according to rigorous and absolute judgment; therefore in order to accomplish my utmost as well as to do everything that I think can be of use in this question, upon the day determined by the assembly I shall present in writing all the evidences, documents, and drawings bearing upon this case that, to my mind, might prove useful.
Now to sum up in conclusion of the above, neither side can convince the other that he is trying to shift his ground; and therefore, I say, no sentence can at the present time be passed upon this case, except that it will be necessary to agree upon an expedition to compute the size of the degrees; and this done, ships and men must be chosen, for the purpose of measuring the longitude by one or the other of the various methods found to be best, and for definitely determining and marking the beginning and end of the said demarcation, and the lands falling in each part or hemisphere. [His signature and the notarial countersignature follow. The date of this document is April 13, 1524.]
Inasmuch as you wish, it appearing to have some value, that each one should set down in writing his opinion regarding the demarcation that his Majesty commended to us, we, Fray Tomás Duran, Sebastian Caboto, captain and pilot, and Juan Vespuchi, pilot, concert together in setting down and explaining our opinion regarding this demarcation.
First we must calculate the leagues, giving as few as possible to the celestial degree, because giving fewer leagues [to the celestial degree] there will be fewer throughout the earth, which suffices quite well for their Majesties' service. However, as we pointed out formerly, it seems to us that we must employ the number used commonly by sailors both in Portugal and Castilla. These men assign to each heavenly degree seventeen and one-half leagues, to the first following point of the compass from the north [north by east] eighteen and one-half, to the northeast by north twenty, etc. The second fundamental is that we must conform ourselves to that most grave and practical astrologer Ptolemæus, who, writing later than Pomponius, Marinus, Plinius, and Strabo, calculated sixty-two and one-half miles to each degree.
Thirdly we declare that there are two methods of procedure in this demarcation. The first is according to the conjectures and experiments made during many repeated voyages by skilled pilots. This method has been followed by all the writers on
- ↑ Bartulo was an Italian jurisconsult, born (1313) at Sasso-Ferrato, in Umbria; he died at Perusa in 1356. He was entrusted with several important political commissions and wrote upon various points of civil law; some of his works were used as text books in the most famous universities. He has been styled "the first and most thorough of the interpreters of law."Baldo is evidently one of the two brothers Pietro and Angelo Baldo de Ubaldis, both eminent Italian jurisconsults. The former was born at Perusa, in 1324, and died at Pavia, April 28, 1406. He was a man of vast erudition, and held many important posts—his influence extending so far that Charles VI of France implored his aid at the Roman court for convening a general council. He was the author of a number of commentaries and other works. Angelo was born in 1328, and died in 1407; he was (at the same time with his brother) professor of civil law at Perusa, and wrote several commentaries and monographs.
- ↑ Original in folio bound in parchment. It has forty-three good sheets. — Note by Muñoz. (Cited by Navarrete).
- ↑ The matter in brackets in these proceedings is evidently notes made by Muñoz, although they may have been made by the Castilian secretary.
- ↑ The number acting for Portugal was not greater than for Spain, as Gomara points out and whom Herrera copies, but the same on either side, only while Portugal had two attorneys, Spain had one attorney and one advocate.—Navarrete.
- ↑ This date should be June 7, 1494. The Spanish letter of authorization was dated June 5.
- ↑ Original in handwriting of Don Hernando Colon. (Navarrete, tomo iv, no. xxvii, pp. 343-355.)
- ↑ Of these navigators, Aloysius (Luigi) da Ca da Mosto made a voyage to Cape Verde and Senegal, in 1454-55; Antonio de Noly, to the Cape Verde Islands, in 1462; Pedro de Cintra (Italianized as Piero d'Sinzia), to Senegal, in 1462; Diego Cano, to the Congo River and inland, in 1484; Bartolomé Diaz discovered the Cape of Good Hope in i486; and Vasco da Gama made several voyages to India, the first in 1497.
- ↑ This is a Latin translation of Paesi nouamente retronati (Vicenza, 1507)—the earliest known collection of voyages. It is supposed to have been compiled by Alessandro Zorzi, a Venetian cosmographer (according to Bartlett); but Fracanzio di Montalboddo, according to Quaritch (Catalogue No. 362, 1885). Facsimiles of the titles of both books are given in Bartlett's Bibliotheca Americana, part i, p. 40.
- ↑ This is the book called today "the first book of the Kings."
- ↑ The original is in folio bound in parchment, with ninety-five good sheets.—Note by Muñoz (cited by Navarrete).
- ↑ The original is "Ambrosio y Teodosio y Macrobio." The same error was made by Jaime Ferrer, who likewise gives these names as those of three distinct men instead of one, his true name being "Aurelius Theodosius Macrobius." See Dawson's Lines of Demarcation, 1899, p. 510.
- ↑ Referring to the Ymago Mundi (1483?) of Pierre d'Ailly, archbishop of Cambray, and cardinal; regarding this book, see Bartlett's Bibl. Americana, part i, pp. 3–5.
- ↑ This was the title conferred on Christopher Columbus by the Catholic sovereigns.