17 Alonso Fernández, Historia Eclesiastica de Nvestros Tiempos, Toledo, 1611, pp. 303–4. The book referred to here is called De los mysterios del Rosario de nuestra Señora by Jacques Quétif and Jacques Echard, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum, Paris, 1719, II, p. 390; and Devotion del Santisimo Rosario de la Bienaventurada Virgen by Vicente Maria Fontana, Monvmenta Dominicana, Rome, 1675, p. 586.
18 Fernández, Historia de los insignes Milagros qve la Magestad Diuina ha obrado por el Rosario santissimo de la Virgen soberana, su Madre, Madrid, 1613, f. 216. I have been unable to locate a copy of this book in the United States, but the passage is printedin Retana, Aparato Bibliográfico de la Historia General de Filipinas, Madrid, 1906, I, pp. 64–5. It was first cited in modern times by Pedro Vindel, Catálogo, Madrid, 1903, III, no. 2631.
19 A sketch of the life of Aduarte was added to his history by Gonçalez, II, pp. 376–81, and a notice also appears in Ramon Martínez-Vigil, La Orden de Predicadores ... seguidas del Ensayo de una Bibliotheca de Dominicos Españoles, Madrid, 1884, p. 229.
20 Aduarte, II, pp. 15–18.
21 Artigas, op. cit. , pp. 3–22, stresses the part played by him in establishing printing and gives much information regarding this father. There,referring to the Acta Capitulorum Provincialium provinciae Sanctissimi Rosarii Philippinarum, Manila, 1874–77, Artigas traces the career of Blancas de San José as follows: in Abucay from May 24, 1598 until April 27,1602; at San Gabriel in Binondo from April 27, 1602 until May 4, 1604; as Preacher-General of the order at the Convent ofSanto Domingo in Manila from 1604 to 1608; back at Abucay from April 26, 1608 until May 8, 1610; and at San Gabriel againfrom May 8, 1610 until May 4, 1614.
22 Medina, no. 8, p. 7. A copy of this book and an unique copy of the recently discovered Ordinationes of 1604, see note 127, are in the Library of Congress. Both books are entirely typographical, and the Tagalog in the 1610volume has been transliterated. These two and the present Doctrina are, so far as I have been able to find out, the only Philippineimprints before 1613 in the United States.
23 Medina, no. 14, p. 11. The text was written by Thomas Pinpin, who appears as the printer of the former book, and a confessionaryby Blancas de San José, who probably edited the volume, is included.
24 Juan Lopez, Quinta Parte de la Historia de San Domingo, Valladolid, 1621, ff. 246–51.
25 Quétif and Echard, op. cit. , II, p. 390. This same statement was made in Antonio de León Pinelo, Epitome de la Biblioteca Oriental y Occidental, Nautica, y Geografica (ed. Antonio González de Barcia), Madrid, 1737–38, col. 737, and was reprinted almost word for word by José Mariano Beristainy Sousa, Bibliotheca Hispano-Americana Septentrional, Mexico, 1883–97, I, p. 177.
26 A fairly complete biography is given by Viñaza, pp. 112–7, where he points out that several of the major Jesuit biographershave erroneously stated that Hervas went to America some time before 1767.
27 Lorenzo Hervas y Panduro, Origine, formazione, meccanismo, ed armonia degli’ idiomi, Cesena, 1785, p. 88.
28 Hervas, Saggio Pratico delle lingue, Con prolegomeni, e una raccolta di orazioni Dominicali in più di trecento lingue, e dialetti, Cesena, 1787, pp. 128–9. Although Schilling, p. 208, says that Hervas had a copy of the 1593 Doctrina before him, which―had been lent or given‖ by Bernardo de la Fuente, Hervas merely says that he took his information ―from the best documents,which showed the grammar; and the Tagalog and Visayan dictionary were given me by Messrs. D.
Antonio Tornos and D. Bernardode la Fuente.‖ There is no doubt, however, but that Hervas had a copy of the Doctrina, or accurate and extensive transcriptsfrom a copy known to one of his friends.
29 Franz Carl Alter, Ueber die Tagalische Sprache, Vienna, 1803, p. vii. Alter speaks of having had extensive correspondence with Hervas.
30 Johann Christoph Adelung, Mithridates oder allgemeine Sprachenkunde mit dem Vater Unser als Sprach probe in beynahe fünfhundert Sprachen und Mundarten, Berlin, 1806, I, pp. 608–9.
31 Beristain, op. cit. , II, p. 464. The first edition was published in 1819–21, but we have used the second for our quotations.
32 Juan de Grijalva, Cronica de la orden de N.P.S. Augustin de Nueva Espana, Mexico, 1624, f. 199v.
33 Nicolás Antonio, Bibliotheca Hispana Nova, Madrid, 1783, I, p. 764. The first edition was Rome, 1672, but I could locate no copy in this country.
34 San Agustin, p. 352. On pp. 443–4 referring to Grijalva and Herrera, he says merely that Quiñones ―was very learned in theTagalog language, and wrote a grammar and dictionary of it.‖
35 ―He succeeded in learning that language with such perfection that he composed a treatise, as a light and guide for the newmissionaries, and a vocabulary, with which in a short time they could instruct those islanders in the mysteries of the faith,‖Medina, p. xxvii, assumed that this referred to José Sicardo, La Cristiandad del Japon, Madrid, 1698, where he could find nothing about Quiñones, but Beristain cited specifically his Historias de Filipinas y Japon, which Santiago Vela, VI, p. 441, thinks must be his additions to Grijalva, including a life of Quiñones, which San Agustinused and quoted from. The quotation here is from San Agustin, p. 442, where Sicardo is given as the source.
36 Tomas de Herrera, Alphabetvm Avgvstinianvm, Madrid, 1644, I, p. 406, according to P. & G., p. xxiv.
37 Schilling, p. 204.
38 Pedro Bello, Noticia de los escritores y sus obras impresas y manuscritas en diferentes idiomas por los religiosos agustinos calzados hasta1801, unpublished MS., from which the citation is given by Santiago Vela, VI, p. 441.
39 P. & G., pp. xxv–xxvi.
40 Medina, p. xxviii, who gives as source the A. of I. and Libro de provisiones reales, Madrid, 1596, I, p. 231. In his note Medina says that this cedula was not in the Recopilacion, but referring back to the note on p. xxiv, we find that he there prints a law of the same content and date, cited as Law3, Title XXIV, Book 1 of the Recopilacion, where we have seen it, with the extremely significant addition, ―it shall not be published, or printed, or used.‖ If this phrase was not included in the original cedula sent to Manila, but added when printed as applying to allthe Indies, it is important evidence that the King felt an admonition against printing unnecessary where no facilities forprinting existed.
41 Retana, col. 10, cited from the original MS. in the A. of I. (68–1–42), Torres, II, no. 3211, p. 150.
42 San Antonio, II, p. 297. This work, treated at length by San Antonio, is proof of the high esteem in which Plasencia was heldas a Tagalist. It was incorporated in a document of Governor Francisco Tello, dated July 13, 1599, now in the A. of I.
(67–6–18),and first printed in the appendix to Santa Inés, II, pp. 592–603, and translated in B. & R., VII, pp. 173–96.
43 Santiago Vela, VI, pp. 442–3. His study of the questionable Arte of 1581 is the most thorough and detailed yet written.
44 Schilling, p. 205.
45 Pardo de Tavera, op. cit. , pp. 8–9. After quoting the latter part of this passage, Medina, p. xviii, adds a quizzical note, ―I want to cite the opinionof so distinguished a student of the Philippines because it shows how tangled and confused is the information concerning theprimitive Philippine press, even among men best informed on the subject.‖
46 Medina, nos. 1 and 2, p. [3].
47 Medina, p. xix.
48 Retana had published many of his findings in La Politico de España en Filipinas, Madrid, 1891–98; in his edition of Joaquín Martínez de Zuñiga, Estadismo de las Islas Filipinas, Madrid, 1893; and in the Archivo del Bibliófilo Filipino, Madrid, 1895–97.
49 Retana, cols. 7–8. We shall speak of Juan de Vera later.
50 Thomas Cooke Middleton, Some Notes on the Bibliography of the Philippines, Philadelphia, 1900, pp. 32–33.
51 Pardo de Tavera, Biblioteca Filipina, Washington, 1903, pp. 9–10.
52 Medina, La Imprenta en Manila desde sus Orígenes hasta 1810 Adiciones y Ampliacones, Santiago de Chile, 1904.
53 P. & G., pp. xxi–xxvi.
54 B. & R., LIII, p. 11.
55 Artigas, op. cit. He admitted that the celebration should have been held in 1902.
56 Retana, Orígenes de la Imprenta Filipina, Madrid, 1911. Retana had also published between 1897 and 1911 several other books which contained some information aboutthe early Philippine press, the Aparato Bibliográfico in 1906 and his edition of Morga in 1909, both of which have already been cited.
57 Antonio Palau y Dulcet, Manuel del Librero Hispano-Americano, Barcelona, 1923–37, III, p. 72.
58 Schilling, op. cit.
59 Chirino, p. 3, writes that he was ―the first who made converts to Christianity in the Philippines, preaching to them of JesusChrist in their own tongue—of which he made the first vocabulary, which I have seen and studied;‖ and Juan de Medina (whooriginally wrote his history in 1630), p. 54, says that in visiting Cebú in 1612 he ―saw a lexicon there, compiled by FatherFray Martin de Rada, which contained a great number of words.‖ Grijalva, op. cit. , f. 124V, writes that Rada ―by the force of his imaginative and excellent ability learned the Visayan language, as he hadlearned the Otomi in this land [Mexico], so that he could preach in it in five months.‖
60 Pérez, p. 5.
61 Juan González de Mendoza, The Historie of the great and mightie kingdom of China ... Translated out of Spanish by R.
Parke, London, 1588, p. 138. The original edition of 1585 said he made an ―arte y vocabulario.‖ We must take the phrase
―in fewdaies‖ in a comparative sense, but that an Augustinian, probably Rada, knew some Chinese as early as July 30, 1574 is shownby a letter from Governor Lavezaris to the King from Manila, sending him ―a map of the whole land of China, with an explanationwhich I had some Chinese interpreters make through the aid of an Augustinian religious who is acquainted with the elementsof the Chinese language,‖ B. & R., III, p. 284, from the original MS. in the A. of I. (67–6–6), Torres, II, no. 1868, p. 10–11.Antonio de León Pinelo, Epitome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Nautica i Geographica, Madrid, 1629, p. 31, also records Rada‘s Chinese grammar and dictionary. Santiago Vela, VI, pp. 444–60, gives a full historyof Rada and his writings. He went to China a second time in May 1576, and in 1578 accompanied La Sande on his expedition toBorneo, dying on the way back to Manila in June of that year.
62 González de Mendoza, op. cit. , pp. 103–5.
63 Diego Ordoñez Vivar came to the Philippines in 1570, filled various ministries there, and according to Agustin Maria de Castrowas in Japan in 1597, where he witnessed the martyrdom of the Franciscans; he died in 1603, Pérez, p. 10. Juan de Medina,p. 74, says, ―Father Diego de Ordoñez learned this language [Tagalog] very quickly.‖ Alonso Alvatado had been on the unsuccessful1542 expedition of Villalobos, and returned to the Philippines in 1571. Pérez, p. 11, records that he became familiar withthe Tagalog language, was the first prior of Tondo, ministered to the Chinese there, and was the first Spaniard to learn theMandarin dialect. He was elected provincial in 1575, and died at Manila the following year. Jéronimo Marín came to the islandswith Alvarado, acquired skill in the Visayan, Tagalog and Chinese languages, accompanied Rada on his first expedition to China,was in Tondo in 1578, and later returned to Spain to recruit new missionaries for the province, dying in Mexico in 1606, Pérez,pp. 11–12.
64 Cano, p. 12. Santiago Vela, I, p. 85, expresses the opinion that Cano‘s statement was an overenthusiasm, and is not valid.
65 Retana, col. 9.
66 Juan de Medina, p. 156.
67 Santiago Vela, I, p. 85, where he cites the first book of the Gobierno of the Augustinian province.
68 Santiago Vela, I, pp. 84–6 treats of the whole question in detail.
69 A Doctrina in Tagalog, attributed to Alburquerque by Agustin Maria de Castro in his unpublished Osario, is said by Santiago Vela, I, p. 85, to have been arranged and perfected by Quiñones, and was probably that presented byhim to the Synod of 1582, if indeed he did present such a work then. For an account of the MS. Osario, see Schilling, p. 205n.
70 Pérez, p. 20n, quotes Vicente Barrantes, El teatro tagalo, Madrid, 1890, p. 170, as saying that ―according to the Augustinian writers‖ Alburquerque compiled an Arte de la Lengua Tagala between 1570 and 1580, the manuscript of which disappeared when the English sacked Manila in 1762. It may be that Barrantesreferred to Cano or possibly Castro, but it must be emphasized that no contemporary historian, as far as has been discoveredup to this time, has made such a statement.
71 Quiñones came to the Philippines in 1577 and spent his time in missions in and about Manila. He was named prior of Manilain 1586, and provincial vicar in 1587 in which year he died, Pérez, p. 19, and Santiago Vela, VI, pp. 433–4.
72 Again Castro, as cited by Santiago Vela, VI, p. 435, is the only authority for this, although San Agustin, p. 391, lists Quiñones‘name among those present at the Synod.
73 San Agustin, p. 381. It should be noted that this statement is in direct contradiction to those we shall cite later in connectionwith the controversy between the Augustinians and Dominicans over the Chinese ministry. The convent at Tondo had been foundedin 1571, so San Agustin here must refer specifically to the Chinese mission.
74 Pérez, p. 22.
75 Pérez, p. 29.
76 Huerta, pp. 443 & 500–01. In 1580, under the influence of Plasencia, Talavera took the habit of the Franciscan order and preachedthroughout the Philippines until his death in 1616. Huerta lists six works in Tagalog by him, all of them devotionary tracts,the last of which he notes was printed at Manila in 1617, and is listed by Medina, no. 20, pp. 14–5. His works are also recordedby Leon Pinelo, op. cit. , 1737–38, II, f. 919r.
77 Santa Inés (written originally in 1676), p. 211. Virtually the same information is given by San Antonio, I, pp. 532–3 & 563.
78 Juan de la Concepcion, Historia general de Philipinas, Manila, 1788–92, II, pp. 45–6. Schilling, p. 203n, maintains that the early writers were mistaken in believing that theSynod was held in 1581. On October 16, 1581 the Bishop called a meeting of ten priests at the Convent of Tondo to discussthe execution of the decree about slaves, Torres, II, pp. cxliv–v.
No laymen were present and no other topic was discussed.The decisions of this meeting were sent in a letter from Salazar to the King, dated from Tondo, October 17, 1581, translatedin B. & R., XXXIV, pp. 325–31, from the original MS. in the A. of I. (68–1–42), Torres, II, no. 2686, p. 95. The followingyear a real Synod was held, this time including lay government officials as well as priests, at which was discussed a varietyof subjects. Robert Streit, Bibliotheca Missionum, Aachen, 1928, IV, pp. 327–31, cites a MS. account of it by the Jesuit father Sanchez who was present; and Valentín Marín, Ensayo de una Síntesis de los trabajos realizados por las Corporaciones Religiosas Españoles de Filipinas, Manila, 1901, I, pp. 192 et seqq., cites another MS., then in the Archives of the Archiepiscopal Palace of Manila, Memoria de una junta que se hizo a manera de concilio el año de 1582, para dar asiento a las cosas tocantes al aumento dela fe, y justificacíon de las conquistas hechas y que adelante se hicieron por los espanoles, from which he quotes extensively. With reference to the Synod see further Lorenzo Pérez, Origen de las Misiones Franciscanas en el extremo oriente, in Archivo Ibero-Americano, 1915, III, pp. 386–400.
79 Santa Inés, p. 212. Again similar accounts are to be found in San Antonio, I, pp. 563–6, in far more detail and phrased ineven more laudatory terms, and the fullest early biography of Plasencia is given by San Antonio, II, pp. 512–79. Modern surveysappear in Marín, op. cit. , II, pp. 573–82, and Lorenzo Pérez, op. cit. , pp. 378 et seqq.
80 Chirino, Primera parte, quoted by Retana, col. 24, implied that Quiñones and Plasencia wrote at about the same time:
―The first who wrote in theselanguages were, in Visayan, P. Fr. Martin de Rada, and in Tagalog, Fr. Juan de Quiñones, both of the Order of St. Augustine,and at the same time Fr. Juan de Oliver and Fr. Juan de Plasencia of the Order of St.
Francis, of whom the latter began first,but the former [wrote] many more things and very useful ones.‖ However, San Antonio, I, p. 532, wrote perhaps with bias infavor of his own order, ―Although the Augustinian fathers had come earlier and did not lack priests fluent in the idiom, thelanguage had not yet been reduced to a grammar, so that it could be learned by common grammatical rules, nor was there a generalvocabulary of speech; except that each one had his own notes, to make himself understood, and everything was unsystematized.‖
81 Entrada de la seraphica Religion de nuestro P. S. Francisco en las Islas Philipinas, MS. of 1649, first published in Retana, Archivo, I, no. III, translated in B. & R., XXXV, p. 311.
82 Medina, p. 15, quoting from Martínez whom we are unable to trace.
83 Huerta, pp. 492–3. Oliver died in 1599. San Antonio, II, p. 531, says that Plasencia was the first to write a catechism (calledin Tagalog ―Tocsohan‖), and Oliver was the first to translate the explanation of the Doctrina. Oliver‘s works are noted byLeón Pinelo, op. cit. , 1737–38, II, col. 730, and Barrantes, op. cit. , p. 187.
84 Sebastian de Totanes, Arte de la Lengua Tagala, Manila, 1850, p. v, (first edition printed in 1745) says of Oliver that
―up to the present day our province reveres himas the first master of this idiom.‖
85 See note 42.
86 Huerta, p. 517. Nothing is known of Diego de la Asuncion except that he wrote five works in Tagalog including an Arte and Diccionario. Huerta was unable to find any record of him in the mission lists, the capitularies or the death records, but that he wasin the Philippines before 1649 we can be sure of from the notice of him in the manuscript of that date.
87 Huerta, p. 495. Montes y Escamilla came to the islands in 1583 and remained there until his death in 1610. Five works in Tagalogare attributed to him, an Arte, Diccionario, Confesionario, Devocional tagalog, and a Guia de Pecadores. The Devocional is listed by Medina, no. 16, p. 12.
88 Pablo Rojo, Fr. Juan de Plasencia, Escritor, Appendix 3 of Santa Inés, II, p. 590. An early reference by Fernández, Historia Eclesiastica, p. 300, speaking of the Franciscan missionary successes among the natives, says, ―They learned the Doctrina Christiana whichthe priests translated into Tagalog.‖
89 Rojo, in Santa Inés, II, pp. 590–1, says that the Doctrina then being used among the Tagalogs was the same as that writtenby Plasencia except for modernization in accordance with the changes which had taken place in the language since his time.
90 Medina, no. 15, p. 11.
91 Chirino, p. 14.
92 Colin, II, p. 325.
93 Chirino, p. 27.
94 Chirino, chaps. XV–XVII, pp. 34–41.
95 On May 13, 1579, Philip II wrote to the Governor of the Philippines, ―Fray Domingo de Salazar, of the Dominican order, andbishop of the said islands, has reported to us that he is going to reside in these islands; and that he will take with himreligious of his order to found monasteries, and to take charge of the conversion and instruction of the natives,‖ B. & R.,IV, p. 141, translated from the original MS. in the Archivo-Historico Nacional, Cedulario indico, t. 31, f. 132V, no.
135. Twelve of the twenty who set out from Europe with Salazar died before reaching Mexico, and theothers were so sick that all but one remained there, so when Salazar landed at Manila in March 1581 he was accompanied bytwenty Augustinians, eight Franciscans, and only one Dominican, Christoval de Salvatierra.
96 For these and other general facts I have used Aduarte and Remesal where they are supported by the other historians, Juan dela Concepcion, San Antonio, San Agustin, Juan de Medina and Santa Inés. It should be noted that Remesal acknowledged as hissource for much of the material on the Philippines the unpublished MS. history of the Franciscan, Francisco de Montilla. Thefifteen Dominicans were Juan de Castro, Alonso Ximenez, Miguel de Benavides, Pedro Bolaños, Bernardo Navarro, Diego de Soria,Juan de Castro the younger, Marcos Soria de San Antonio, Juan de San Pedro Martyr (or Maldonado), Juan Ormaza de Santo Tomás,Pedro de Soto, Juan de la Cruz, Gregorio de Ochoa, Domingo de Nieva, and Pedro Rodriguez.
97 By a bull of October 20, 1582 Pope Gregory XIII confirmed the appointment already obtained from Pablo Constable de Ferrara,General of the Dominican Order, making Juan Chrisóstomo vicar-general of the Philippine Islands and China, and giving himauthority to establish a province there, B. & R., V, pp. 199—200, translated from Hernaez, Coleccion de bulas, Brussels, 1879, I, p. 527, where it is printed from the original MS. in the Vatican, Bular. Dom., t. 15, p. 412.
98 In 1580 the Dominicans of Mexico had begun plans for the establishment of a province in the Orient, and sent Juan Chrisóstomoto Europe to obtain the necessary permission from lay and ecclesiastical authorities. The Jesuit Alonso Sanchez, who had beensent to Spain to explain the situation in the Philippines, was at court, and told the King and Council of the Indies—quitesubverting his mission—that there was no need for more priests and particularly no need for a new order there. Chrisóstomowas discouraged, but the scheme was revivified by Juan de Castro who finally secured a letter from Philip II on September20, 1585 endorsing the plan. Twenty-two volunteers sailed from Spain on July 17, 1586.
In Mexico the Dominicans again foundSanchez propagandizing against the mission and also encountered the efforts of the Viceroy to persuade the friars to remainthere. Notwithstanding, twenty friars subscribed to a set of ordinances at the Convent of Santo Domingo in Mexico on December17, 1586. Of the twenty, fifteen went to the Philippines, three went directly to China, and Juan Chrisóstomo, who was illand weak, and Juan Cobo, who had business there, stayed behind in Mexico.
99 Aduarte, I, p. 9.
100 Aduarte, I, p. 70.
101 Juan Cobo had stayed behind in Mexico on business, and during his stay had been so moved by the scandals of the governmentthere that he preached publicly against them, as a result of which he was banished by the Viceroy. He brought with him fromMexico a fellow-reformer and exile, Luis Gandullo, and four other recruits for the Philippine mission.
102 These are printed in the Ordinationes of 1604, see note 127, and by Remesal, pp. 677—8, who says that ―these ordinances were printed in as fine characters andas correctly as if in Rome or Lyon, by Francisco de Vera, a Chinese Christian, in the town of Binondo in the year 1604 throughthe diligence of Fr. Miguel Martin.‖
103 Sangley, a term used by the natives to designate Chinese, was derived from the Cantonese hiang (or xiang) and ley meaning a ―travelling merchant.‖ It was adopted by the Spaniards and in most instances used interchangeably with Chinese.If any distinction existed it was that a Sangley was a permanent resident of the Philippines—quite contrary to the derivationof the word—or a Chinese of partially native blood. See San Agustin, p. 253.
104 Particularly the Memorial to the Council of the Indies sent with Sanchez, April 20, 1586, translated in B. & R., VI, pp.
167–8,from the original MS. in the A. of I. (1–1–2/24), Torres, II, no. 3289, p. 159.
105 B. & R., VII, pp. 130–1, translated from the original MS. in the A. of I. (67–6–18), Torres, III, no. 3556, pp. 15–6.
Seethe statement of San Agustin quoted on p. 22, which gives the irreconciled Augustinian view. Most of the contemporary witnesses,however, seem to agree with the Dominicans.
106 B. & R., VII, pp. 220–3, translated from Retana, Archivo, III, pp. 47–80, and there printed from the original MS. in the A. of I. (68–1–32), Torres, III, no. 3698, p. 32.
107 Remesal, pp. 681–2.
108 B. & R., VII, pp. 223–5, as in note 106.
109 Martínez-Vigil, op. cit. , p. 246, lists as written by Benavides a Vocabularium sinense facillimum, and Vinaza, p. 17, cites his entry.
110 Schilling, p. 210, says that in his letter Cobo himself recorded that ―Benavides wrote the first Chinese catechism in thePhilippines.‖ He does not however differentiate between writing in Chinese characters and writing transliterated Chinese,and moreover ―hizo doctrina‖ may only mean that he taught the doctrine, not necessarily that he wrote one.
111 B. & R., VII, p. 238, as in note 106.
112 Aduarte, I, p. 140.
113 Aduarte, I, p. 140, says, before the previously quoted passage, that Cobo ―put the Doctrina Christiana in the Chinese language,‖and Viñaza, pp. 17–23, lists seven books by him, including the famous translation of the Chinese classic, Beng-Sim-Po-Cam, the original MS. of which, with an introductory epistle by Benavides, dated from Madrid, December 23, 1595, is in the BibliotecaNacional at Madrid; an Arte de las letras chinas; Vocabulario chino; Catecismo o doctrina christiana en chino; (cited from León Pinelo, op. cit. , 1737–38, I, col. 142); Tratado de astronomia en chino; Linguae sinica ad certam revocata methodum (called by Martinez-Vigil, op. cit. , p. 263, ―the first works or work on the Chinese language‖); and Sententiae plures, excerpted from various Chinese books. See also Beristain, op. cit. , I, p. 316, and Quétif and Echard, op. cit. , II, pp. 306–7.
114 Aduarte, I, p. 122.
115 Fernandez, Historia Eclesiastica, p. 304, ―In the Chinese language and letters, P. Fr. Domingo de Nieva, of San Pablo of Valladolid, printed a memorial ofthe Christian life; and P. Fray Tomas Mayor, of the province of Aragon, from the Convent and College of Orihuela, the Symbolof Faith.‖ In his Historia de los Insignes Milagros, f. 217, Fernández states that both these works were printed at Bataan. Since Mayor did not arrive in the islands until 1602his work is not pertinent to the present discussion. Mayor‘s book was seen but inadequately described by Jose Rodriguez, Biblioteca Valentina, 1747, p. 406, from a copy then in the Library of the Dominican Convent at Valencia, but now lost. Medina records it underthe year 1607, no. 6, p. 6. See also León Pinelo, op. cit. , 1737—38, II, f. 919r, and Antonio, op. cit. , I, p. 330.
116 Aduarte, I, p. 3