Filipino REPEL Spanish at Battle of Mactan (1521) - Ferdinand Magellan & Lapulapu
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 มิ.ย. 2024
- Claim your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: sponsr.is/magellantv_scholagl... and start your free trial TODAY so you can watch Medieval Lives: Birth, Marriage, Death about people in the Middle Ages: www.magellantv.com/watch/medi...
Ferdinand Magellan was one of the great explorers of the 16th century, but he died at the Battle of Mactan in 1521. Here we look at the combat, weapons and armour.
▼3 extra EXCLUSIVE videos each month on PATREON, which make this channel possible:
/ scholagladiatoria
▼Facebook & Twitter updates, info, memes and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
▼Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
▼Matt Easton's website & Pinterest:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
www.pinterest.co.uk/matt_east...
▼Easton Antique Arms - antique swords for sale:
www.antique-swords.co.uk
#filipino #magellan #battle
Claim your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: sponsr.is/magellantv_scholagladiatoria and start your free trial TODAY so you can watch Medieval Lives: Birth, Marriage, Death about people in the Middle Ages: www.magellantv.com/watch/medieval-lives-birth-marriage-death
Corselet existed since the ancients though they wore bronze armour or Linothorax as a corselet.
Corselet means all in one torso, chest & back armour with built in spaulder's/pauldron's & tasset's/skirt.
Only by the 16th century was rerebrace's, vambrace's, couter's & gauntlet's considered universal to a corselet though full arm protection existed prior to the 16th century but many went without for a multitude of reasons.
Corselet was a pretty unbroken term implying no leg or arm protection till the 16th century.
Add a shield, graves & leg protection with a corselet that is not built in one but seperate modular pieces you get a panoply basically.
I should specify a corselet may or may not have a built in gorget or neck protection.
Personally after a Helmet the maille standard or plate gorget is the most important piece of armour which it is amazing how many corselets do not have these present in museums or even period art of the 16th century unlike prior.
They added all that arm protection but often forgot about neck protection which seems like lunacy to me but hay perhaps the heat in the tropic they would rather air their neck?
Protecting the arms & legs is far down my priorities over the neck.
Never understood the 16th century obsession with arming the arms with full pieces of plate for the arms since jack chains on all 4 limbs mitigate most blows be it hacking, slashing or bludgeoning with the exception of piecing but why keep an arm or leg in the path of a thrust as you can move.
Every time Matt mentions Filipinos in his videos every Filipino telepathically hears a psychic calling to view it
Gahhhh I was wondering why I was here
Or white American that lived in the Philippines for 4 years in Punta engano area of mactan Island
🇵🇭 Philippines Mentioned
???
@@mybaddadventures144that's oddly specific
It should be mentioned that if the Mactan natives were pursuing Magellan's crew through the shallows, the rattan spears they were throwing would float and be very easy to reacquire as they move forward.
Never thought about that until you mentioned it...
Born and raised in the Philippines. The *Legend* of this battle that we were taught when I was young basically said that Lapu-Lapu faced Magellan directly during the chaos of the battle and effectively killed him in a one-on-one duel; defeating him by cutting his head off with his Kampilan or Itak. No doubt stories exaggerate for the drama lol
It is genuinely intriguing to hear the more nuanced, historically-sourced version of how it all went down!
I trained in a Filipino martial art (Eskrima) for about 12 years. My instructors, who were these two Filipino brothers, and their cousin..who owned and all taught at the school..would tell a very similar story. They would say that Lapu Lapu fought Magellan directly in single combat. They said he had an itak in one hand and rattan stick in the other, and he beat Magellan with a rattan stick until he was close to death, and then cut off his head with the itak. They always swore that was what they were always taught in school when they were younger.
I always thought that it was probably greatly exaggerated, but thinking about it now, I have no doubts that Lapu Lapu probably could have defeated Magellan fairly easily if they did actually fight each other. When I started training in HEMA fencing, I had been training in Eskrima for a dozen years, and I could easily beat all of the best fencers when I sparred against their longswords, sabers, and rapiers with my much shorter Eskrima sticks. I have really enjoyed HEMA and learning how to fence with European swords over the last 5 years or so, but the Filipinos definitely have much better, much stronger system of fighting with bladed weapons, and I use quite a few of the techniques I learned in Eskrima in my HEMA training.
@@mattjack3983 I wouldn't go so far as to say that FMA has a better system of blade combat than HEMA. I'd chalk it up to you being very good and/or your opponents not being able to adapt quickly enough to a foreign style. From the spars I've witnessed, as long as the HEMA practitioner managed the range, he was, more often than not, the victor of the bout. If the FMA fellow managed to close in, then he usually held the advantage unless the HEMA practitioner was sparring with a secondary weapon as well, but overall, the HEMA practitioner would usually win the majority of the fights thanks to being able to utilise the the range advantage well. (I personally felt more comfortable practicing HEMA, I especially recall practicing arnis in my 1st year in university and thinking to myself just how exposed I felt sans a guard on the handle and such a short weapon relying mostly on cuts; I did appreciate the lightness of it though and just how quickly it could cut and recover)
As for Lapulapu killing Magellan, it's actually highly unlikely as Lapulapu, according to research, was around 65-70 years old during the Battle of Mactan. And even if he was young enough, Magellan himself was no slouch (though I believe he had a limp from one of his old wounds which could have impaired him), being a trained nobleman, a veteran of the Portuguese campaigns in India, including Cannanore and Diu, and was no doubt dressed in an extensive suit of armour (mail and plate, most likely) as befitting his status of Captain of the expedition (and as nobleman as I stated before) which would have rendered him nigh invulnerable against most native weapons (save for his legs) as stated by Matt, himself.
Overall, I'd say it depends really on the environment, skill, and experience of the practitioner (as it usually does), rather than one system being outright better than the other.
(Open to correction, though)
We have to remember that Magellan team is not soldiers but explorers, priest and priests assistants ,diplomats , translators ,prospectors, navigators, botanists philosophers scholars scientists of the day and sailors. Probably only 10 per ship were soldiers or mercenaries.
Magellan was a middle aged noble man nerd who probably wore fancy clothing not armor during those times. Probably exhausted for years exploring. Even a street gang member today can slay him with itak.
Against a real warrior say an Armored Granadier 6ft 4" 200+lbs Lapulapu probably won't stand a chance like feather😅weight vs Heavyweight in UFC and a professional fighter whose practicing how to kill since a child.
Spanish journal by his cousin and
Antonio Pigafetta, a Venetian scholar who was born in Vincenza, Italy, around 1490 and who accompanied Magellan on the voyage. Pigafetta kept a detailed journal, the original of which is lost.
The scholar not even Spanish but venetian. Magellan is not also Spanish but Portuguese. Accurate version could probably be Vatican explorers not Spanish ordered by Christindom.
Qouted by Google (Victoria alone returned to Spain in September 1522, carrying twenty-six tons of cloves in its hold, worth more than twice the cost of the whole Magellan expedition. There were only 18 survivors from the original five-ship roster of 237 men. After the voyage, the battered vessel was repaired and sold to a merchant.) ships probably decayed in years exploring not in battlefield.
When the European return with the real war ship and soldiers well..... Of course vengeance. The Spanish Armada was scary 150 war ships with 18,000 people mostly soldiers.
They also employed slave fighters like Aztec, native Americans, mexicans around half like 50% who fought were colonized soldiers.
In Philippines they used tagalog to fight other ethics, Cebuano and so on.
Don't believe martial arts mostly are debunked as a fraud. As they're being debunked in Russia, Japan, USA, Europe and China. Only the real deal will remain like Judo, muay Thai , Sanda , Bjj most are useless in real fight and in UFC and other MMA. As for sword play rapier was a duel sword ment to settle matters outside Judicial means it's only meant to hurt bleed enemy to submission it cannot cut your head. Although it can kill with many slashes It's not a war sword or war weapon. Real weapons were pole arm , flint lock pistols, musket, crossbow ,cannon probably grape shot shotgun for personnel.
Real war sword used by Spanish is a sabre with a small metal buckler.
Unless Magellan requested a duel to settle the matter.
Even street gang member can beat a middle aged noble laki sa ginhawa nerd.
Not pro Spain also Filipino but speaking in reality.
If Arnis challenge a real swords man it wouldn't be challenge because of the reach even a kendo pro athlete can beat them reach advantage. Double swords , double swords or say itak are proven not effective but disadvantage in real war. You can search Google and watch in TH-cam the real studies.
Arnis is not even on same level they're not in Olympics or applied in MMA. Similar to Wing Chun as it's really not a combat sports.
Filipinos in the comment section: my grandfather fought in the battle.
nah, my grandfather was in the spanish armada (he actually said this lmao)
Juan Ponce Enrile witnessed the battle first hand. 😂
Bro did he saw queen elizabeth do the griddy on the spanish armada.
😆
I have a feeling Matt got it wrong about the boats, The boats were probably the largest of the ships' boat, each armed with a smallish mortar. The three ships would have been armed with cannons, probably bronze, & probably capable of hurling shot a thousand metres or so (not necessarily effectively against ships at that range, but more than effective against unarmoured people). Larger ship's boats of the era were often quite solidly built & would draw more than two feet of water, especially if loaded down by a heavy lump of metal, like a mortar. Plus, the source does mention Magellan taking three boat-loads of troops, which would have been about 20 per boat (+/-), rather than three ship-loads.
From the wording of the text around Magellan's inability to draw his sword, & the fact that he was able to thrust a "lance" through an opponent moments earlier, there is also a fairly good chance that he was hit in his arm whilst trying to draw his sword, which would have prevented him completing the action.
Yes, the ships stayed at Cebu and they used boats for the short trip to Mactan.
About the sword that dealt the killing blow, the original Italian (from Wikisource) says "un gran terciado (che è como una scimitarra, ma più grosso)" which doesn't really clear things out that much. "Terciado" is a Spanish word for a shorter and broader sword than usual (the name is said to mean that it was one third shorter than the legal maximum length of a sword blade, which in 1564 was around 104 cm, so around 69 cm for the terciado). And this is "a great terciado" so maybe even broader than usual. It's not generally specified in most sources if it was straight or curved, but considering Pigafetta adds "like a scimitar but bigger" (so at least to him a scimitar is even smaller or maybe thinner than a terciado), we can fairly confidently assume it was curved and broadly equivalent to a falchion, hanger or cutlass. What native weapon he meant by that, I'll let you to guess.
Spot on! Another thing to mention is that, while we have set ideas on how a kampilan or a kris should look, it is in record that some words we have now as specific "types" of swords were in fact generic words for "sword." In a lot of indigenous languages in Mindanao (south of Cebu and Mactan), the generic word for sword is still kampilan (or a close term thereof), but the profiles and looks of what they would call a kampilan are all very different: from long straight ones which widen at the tip, to a shorter sword made for one-handed use, to a longer sword which curves but doesn't widen at the tip. Not to mention that the "kampilan" from Luzon would look very differently from the "kampilan" from Visayas and also those from Mindanao, in the same way that a spanish rapier would look different from an Italian rapier and a German rapier.
Nowadays, the modern image of the large, 2-handed Kampilan is derived from the indigenous and islamized peoples from Mindano, who were never really conquered by the Spanish. That is to say, that the "kampilan" known to the internet today may not have been the same "kampilan" that was carried by Lapulapu's troops.
Let's assume that we can say that Lapulapu and his troops may have been armed with kampilans and the like (which is how the warriors of Mactan are often depicted in art), but that doesn't narrow it down at all really.
Are you talking about a hand and a half sword?
@@andretorres8452 What do you mean? Neither a terciado nor a "scimitar" would be generally hand and a half. If you mean the maximum blade length of 104 cm, that's from and ordinance in 1560 where the predominant swords are sidesword or early reapiers, both one-handed. But a longsword could be of a similar length, yes.
A Pira comes to mind!
You actually made me laugh out loud when you said who the sponsor was
I'm very happy that someone big is talking about The Battle of Mactan without bias.
for all we know they cowardly abandoned Magellan to his death, then cooked up a story how he bravely and selfishly made a last stand to allow them to escape, and now we can never know what really happened.
They even kept knocking his hat off. It was like saying, "Hey, THIS guy's Magellan!"
Matt, love the video! I learned so much. I do think you are wrong about the interpretation that Magellan had the large ships with him. The biggest reason is that it would be nearly impossible to operate large ocean going sailing ships in the waters around Mactan Island. There are coral reefs everywhere and if the wind was even slightly against him, Magellan would be risking being trapped. I have spent a decent amount of time in those water and flown over them dozens of times. I sincerely believe that the author is referring to large ships boats that would be able to navigate those waters
Yeah, the original text calls them "battelli" (boats), while for the main ships he uses "navi" (ships). So they were big shallops equipped with small bombards and the proper ships were further away still.
Time to call the horde (watch as a bazillion filipinose swarm to view the video because it says filipino)
Oh, and also a few hours right after the independence day! Great timing Mr. Easton 😏
Kami ay naipatawag
When was the last time?
Did someone say Filipino? I felt a tingling sensation and came right away.
I used to be an explorer, just like you, then I took an arrow to the knee ...
Though Magellan was no doubt an experienced leader and skilled navigator, especially with his feat of managing 5 ships (with occasionally mutinous crews) all the way to the Philippines through the then uncharted Pacific Ocean, he was also a notable soldier.
As a nobleman, it's more than likely that he would have been trained to handle a sword, not to mention, he was already a veteran sailor and soldier by the time he set sail for the spice islands. He fought extensively in the Portuguese campaigns in India, being involved in several major battles such as Cannanore, where he was wounded, and Diu, where has wounded again and spent 4 months recovering. He also fought alongside Alfonso de Albuquerque, participating in the attacks on Calicut and Goa. Magellan spent some time sailing around the coast of Africa as well, building forts and fighting against African warriors.
He also suffered a leg wound in a battle in Morocco in 1513 against the Wattasid dynasty, the battle of Azemmour which resulted in a Portuguese victory.
Thank you for bring this out
Very interesting history! So I presume that Filipino martial arts got partially influenced by Spanish fencing?
I’ve wondered about that as well.
The Spaniards banned Indios learning martial arts and carrying weapons. So no
Some people say so, but honestly I think FMA are pretty much native and relatively separate to the Spanish systems we know about. If there was some cross-pollination, it is difficult to see in what has survived.
There was some cross pollination, if I remember correctly (don't have the source handy) the Spanish took some inspiration from the Filipino stick and dagger and incorporated it into their rapier and dagger.
Most of my sources are Filipino, so if anyone has recommendations for Spanish treatises I'm interested
Well, this presentation was certainly more interesting than the one we received back in junior high school.
Thanks for the video and information
Quite the banger video! Cheers 🫡
The "20 or 30 balangay" doesn't refer to the moros themselves but to the boats they used, so there was a considerable number of native warriors standing by.
One of your best informative video's Matt . Thank you.
Fascinating. Also nice to learn the additional context of Magellan basically acting as the hired mercenary for the guy who was making a bid to be the chief king of all the islands, rather than the idea that he was just opportunistically raiding and had conquered everyone else but this one guy was strong enough and brave enough to beat him. It makes much more sense that he didn't really have to fight at all to that point and was involved in a local power struggle rather than just charging against natives like an idiot, which is kinda how it's portrayed.
That's pretty much how most of the Spanish conquering used to go.
really puts into context how colonization worked
Well spanish colonization rarely had actual major battles or skirmishes, it was more of a i come here with better tech lets make a deal in which my king offers u help and tech against ur rivals and in turn u become catholic and accept him as ur king
@@HoJu1989no it isn't. The primary strategy for spanish colonization was seizing the leaders and attempting to rule with them as puppets, gathering allies and then if necessary, defeat the enemy in battle. The portuguese typically brute forced their way through the east with their superior navy and rarely fought non naval battles. No conquistadors charged into the enemy because they weren't soldiers and they didn't wanna die. If they did charge they would LOSE.
Lol Magellan TV. Perfect sponsor!
this was amazing video , love to see more of decribed battle
Sorry Matt but the Philippines has incredible diversity of armour, several of which existed in Magellan's time, from the simple double shirt of rope like cordage right up to forms of Lamellar. Pigafetta writes about some of these himself. We really have no way to tell how much they may have been armoured, but the naked savage is a colonial trope. In the days before guns became prolific armour was much more common then people realize in most continents.
Also I will just add that mail was still in use at least at the time of the conquest of Mexico and there are several accounts of arrows passing entirely through the wearers body. Perhaps they were unluck but I just want to provide context.
In the VIsayas the most common sword at this time looked a lot like a Hellenic xiphos, though there were others too.
I was thinking about this as well, perhaps the European eyewitness accounts couldn't identify that a certain article of clothing was, in fact, armour because it didn't look metallic? What were the materials used to make the rigid armours specifically?
I know in the americas an armour very similar to a gambeson was successfully used for protection against firearms. The difference being that they wouldn't put a second layer of armour on top of it.
He did say *almost all the natives , probably meaning only the wealthy or higher status phillipino wore armour around this time
I love History with Matt!
Very interesting topic! I remember learning back in the day at school that Magellan had been eaten by cannibals in the Philippines while attempting the first ever made circumnavigation. Quite a different story... So thank you for enlightening me there!
Captain Cook was eaten in Hawaii, so the two may be conflated
@@Jza_Dragon Apparently that's a common misconception, Cook wasn't eaten. They just cooked (heh) his flesh to get it off the bones, which were sacred to them (despite them killing him, he was highly respected).
Imperialists demonizing the people they invade to excuse their imperialism.
Philippines had no cannibal groups or tribes in its entire history. Sure there were headhunters but it was more ceremonial in nature.
We didn't eat him! We simply decorated the village with him. We're not savages.
I didn't know a lot about Magellan and I definitely didn't know this story so thank you
The Philippino were already familiar to firearms and armour through the Japanese and Muslims
They were primitive firearms. The Japanese themselves didn't get to the stage of matchlocks until the Portuguese arrived in the 1540s.
@@KeyserSoze23Yep, but a vaguely gun-shaped object that goes boom isn’t going to faze someone as much as those who’ve never seen a gun
@@KeyserSoze23 But the Philippino were already acquainted with India and the muslim world that are much closer than Europe. Plul a matchlock musquet is not a grear weapon, specially in a skirmish like that, they woul have only a handful and obviously they didn't even have a psichological effect.
Forget about the firearms as a factor. And stell and armor weren't any surprise.
To top the matter, the Spaniards got political control of the Philippines very quickly by peaceful menas and that lasted until the 1898 war with thwe US.
Main cause of the expediction problems was the lack of command virtues by Magellan and his personality. He allways disdained more quealified advice, sotle command from the desiganted head of teh expedition and killed anybody perceived as critical with his command. Proof of that is the wonderful retur of El Cano and the feat of Urdanete findingthe way back to Amrica.
Matt is wrong in descibing how they found the Magellan straits. Tehre had been previous expeditions, so they weren't blind and Magellan mistook a river for the actual passage to teh Pacific Ocean.
He also disdained the best consel of his own men by choossing to foolishy attack that tribe going away from the expedition's goal and doing it in such an unfavorable way.
He wasn't a good commander, nor a good sailor, and that probably explained his lack of promotion in Portugal. Again, the Spaniards accepted his services because he was familiar with Portugal's Asia domains, but was put under anoter person authority that he nanaged to get rid of.
Mabuhay ka Matt!!❤
The Japanese vs the Filipinos/Indonesians/Malaysians tactics during WW2 would be a really interesting video!!
Oh and Lapu-Lapu in some accounts was from Indonesia, a brigand leader who settled in Mactan and was subordinated by the Raja to keep him in check and restrained, he was given his fief, but he was still a trouble maker even at his old age, so when the Europeans appeared, the Raja felt that it was a good opportunity to rid himself of the unwarranted raiding of Lapu-Lapu.
Thank you for this presentation. My north American education usually said "Magellan died in a battle with Philippian natives" No discussion of how and why was ever offered. You have provided a very interesting history lesson. One of the many reasons I follow you.
A lot of common education is very shallow.
The fine details don't really matter all that much in the grand scope of history, especially for a general education. The important details really are just that: They fought. and Magellan died. If every historical subject during primary schooling was dealt with in as much detail as presented here, there would literally be no time to learn anything else.
@@Turigamot - There is a lot of time in the life time of common folks. When a person is ignorant of something, he can acknowledge his ignorance, or learn more. Every detail is useful. Some play rough. And some enjoy fine details in which the gods dwell.
@@MtRevDr None of what you said changes the fact that he should not blame his "North American" education for not being aware of fine details, because not being aware of such details has nothing to do with being North American. The vast majority of Europeans, Asians, South Americans, Africans, Australians, and people from outer space are also unaware of the full narrative, because the full narrative is not important enough to spend excess amount of time teaching in the standard classroom. Such details matter for people who are particularly interested in them, or people who wish to/need to specialize in such knowledge, and nobody else.
@@Turigamot The lack of enough detail in historical incidents helps create a sense of European inevitable superiority which supports the notion of colonial justification.
Keen to hear about slings and rocks later Matt. 👍
We loved this! This was such a great video 👏
Glad you enjoyed it!
@@scholagladiatoria Very much so!
A good lesson here: even when you have a decisive advantage, don't rely on it too much, for it will be your peril at some point.
What's interesting about this though, is that it mentions battling against 1.5k-ish natives. Keep in mind that barangays, the community units of that time, barely reach a hundred. And a hundred people in a barangay is already considered a huge number. So I'm not sure where the rest came from.
Probably yet another made up fact by the conquistadors to make themselves look like heroes fighting against all odds, which was pretty typical of them.
I dont know anything about the history of the place so please excuse my question. How do you know the community numbers of the time? I ask because some other colonial communities had much larger numbers than supposed. This may partly be because sometimes up to 50% even 90% of people died to foreign diseases.
This story always reminds me of the first time i ever ran across a Filipino on the internet. He was insistent that his country had won a war against my country because 1500 Filipino dudes killed 1 Portuguese dude.
Correction
Lapulapu was not against alliance with Spain per se and converting, he objected to alliance where he was under raja Humabon. Magellan insisted on lapulapu being inferior to humabon... and so conflict started...
Out of interest, how could we know that? There are no Filipino written sources from the time. We have a handful of European sources and they all vary somewhat.
@@scholagladiatoria it's in the oral history regarding the battle as well as findings by Filipino historians over the years. Basically, Lapulapu was a "pirate king" based on Mactan island who raided trade going into the Cebu mainland. "Mactan" supposedly is Pigafetta transcribing the word "Mangatang" which means "to lie in wait/ambush" which is a reflection of Lapulapu's activities, but this most probably is folk etymology. However, if you ask locals of Mactan, they would tell you that the old, indigenous name for Mactan island is Opon/Opong, which lends some credence to the "Mactan came from Mangatang" idea. His objection with being "under" Humabon's rule is because of their rivalry in trade and piracy.
The source for this is the "Aginid" epic which traces the genealogies and histories of various leaders in Cebu. If the Aginid is to be believed, it is a piece of oral history that is contemporary to Pigafetta's own accounts. However, some parts of the transcribed epic are verifiable by archaeological findings, but some parts of it can't also be verified. Sadly, the account regarding the life of Lapulapu and the happenings before and after Battle of Mactan are not verifiable.
@@scholagladiatoria There is transcribed epic called "Aginid" which is supposedly a record of the life of Lapulapu. It has records of the happenings before and after the Battle of Mactan. HOWEVER, while parts of the epic have been verified by archaeology, some parts are not verifiable or are contrary to current opinion of Filipino academics. If it is true, then it may be a contemporary to Pigafetta's account.
@@JunelieArthur111Before anyone else jumps in being an asshole about it, many indigenous history studies must rely in oral history and as time wears on we see many details of oral traditions being proven true.
It's a very colonial and privileged perspective to demand written sources alone for many colonized people's histories. In part due to the knowledge that Europeans actively destroyed many artifacts that may have had more concrete information.
Assuming that the indigenous oral history is inaccurate and therefore we must only rely on colonial sources. How very convenient for the continuing dominance of colonial rhetoric...
@@Primalintent I agree with your point. The Catch-22 is that, at least in Filipino historiography which I am more familiar with, the production of a more "practical and tangible" history requires archaeological evidence which agrees with oral tradition. Sad thing is, as you've said, oral and material records have been destroyed in the enforcement of colonialism. An ugly after effect to this is that, in the Philippines today, we are faced with transcriptions, records, and mentions of historical documents which are fabrications. The biggest of these fabrications is the "Code of Kalantiaw" which supposedly was a record of laws from Panay island written in the 1400s. This was supposedly "discovered" in 1913, and it took 80 years of study and research to find that it was actually a fabricated artifact/document. With the lives of indigenous peoples in the Philippines being more at risk as the years go by, and urbanization destroying known pre-colonial settlements, the verification oral histories are becoming more and more difficult to do.
Europeans were looking for a sea route to the Spice Islands because the land route had been effectively closed to them, or demanded too steep a price to be THAT profitable. The Portuguese sailed East and reached the Moluccas. The Spanish chose the westward route. Columbus reached the Americas, thought he had reached Asia, and thus, by mistake, lent the name of India to a lot of New World things (Indians[Indios], the Indies, etc.). Balboa reached the West shore of Panama and sighted the Pacific. Finally, Magellan got past the Americas, crossed the Pacific, and, intent on reaching the Moluccas, stumbled upon [what would become] the Philippines, meddled in local politics, and died there.
Ironically, much later, another great explorer, James Cook, also died on an island.
History!
Yeah!
Some Spanish likely wore kettle helmets similar in style to morions, but with a lower crest.
24:03 This practice is now relevant today with modern body armor. I'm a big fan of pelvic shots.
The "standing apart and shooting at each other" reminds me of the Iliad, where they are basically just throwing spears at each other for quite a while.
Lets goo!
Studying armor gives such historical studies much more elements to consider.
Seems like Magellan got cocky and chose his ground really poorly. If they'd have fought somewhere they could bring the ships' guns to bear (or waited for the tide to be high enough to get closer to shore) that would have been a different story.
It's the early 16th century, their canons would have been of poor quality and more than likely they wouldn't have been fully armoured and armed like is usually portrayed in films.
Like you say, the crew was probably sick and tired already of the long and perilous voyage. They just wanted to go home!
@@tatumergo3931 Even in the early 16th century cannons were already pretty decent. Certainly good enough to cause a lot of consternation amongst the enemy forces if deployed.
@@adamtennant4936 . Sure in the late 16th century metallurgy had improved enough to make decent canons. In the earlier 16th century not so much, they were still using 15th century technology.
The problem has always been about range and muzzle velocity, these early canon types were just a little better than a catapult or and onager. Just like crossbows tended to replace longbows because of easier use, so did canons replaced catapults and ballistas/onagers.
There are Spanish records that mention how in some encounters with the American natives, the bombards they were using were completely ineffective against them.
The present account here confirms it, a mere 600 to 800 yards was enough of a distance for the canons aboard to be ineffective. Eight hundred yards is about four American football fields, almost a kilometre.
As a former artillery man it must have been frustrating to have such a short range, considering that today's artillery howitzers can put a round 30 kilometres away. About some 18 miles from target, and if you're using RAP ammunition even a little bit further.
Great video, Matt! Being Mexican I would vote for the Mesoamerican video idea, would be interesting to know your thoughts and comments.
17:27 - It is commonly understood that Pigafetta meant the shots dind't had enough power to kill them after passing through their shields. So apparently shields were in practice effective against firearms and crossbows.
You should make a video about the sources on the house to house fighting at the battle of Monterrey. There's probably some usage of the saber against bayonet there, seeing as the Mexican officer's liked brawling alongside their troops.
That would be amazing, as a saber enthusiast. The most convenient ideas I have of saber on bayonet is from Quora. Seeing as how Mr. Matt also loves sabers (if I remember correctly it's his favorite?), this might be a really good video idea!
@@beafraidofinsectattack Then Mexico should be on his top priority of sources, Mexican Cavalry constantly bested both French and American Cavarly, and we Mexicans used sabers.
You should also consider studying the famous battle of puebla, which is why we Mexicans celebrate 5 de Mayo.
@@iantheduellist I'm not sure, but surely he has videos on Mexican treatises idk, which ones are your favorites btw? (I might as well ask which sabers you prefer lol).
I have heard and read a little about both Monterrey and Puebla, which I am planning to read more into.
I think Filipinos also celebrate Cinco de Mayo, I think nearly all Latino cultures celebrate it as well.
@@beafraidofinsectattack I haven't found any videos on Mexican treatises. 🥲 Also, most of Mexican sabers are modeled after the french.
@@iantheduellist A video on interesting notes about the different styles and saber designs would be cool. Other youtubers have made some short overviews on Mexican saber at least, but I think Matt himself would have a lot of insight on it.
I speculate the development of sabers copied from the French are in line with the politics of the time, as swords like the rapier and smallsword are then favoured along with French (among others) fighting styles. Cheers, mi amigo 🫡 May you become a Destreza maestro
@scholagladiatora this might be important, so I hope you read this.
We've discussed this in our Filipino Blades group [we're Filipinos in the Philippines]
And everyone seems to focus on the word "Scimitar" which is not a native word in the language of those who wrote it, and not enough on the other descriptive words.
Yes, a Scimitar is a curved weapon. But also the people who saw Scimitars firsthand were not the same people in that voyage. In our discussion, we also took into account some depictions of Scimitars in 1500s spain, which are a lot straighter and wider, so we think those depictions probably influenced what they imagine a "scimitar" to be, and might not have been using the term Scimitar accurately at the time. They also used the terms cutlass and terciado, which are not curved.
But like I said, widening the perspective a bit, they also mention its size. They specifically mention it to be "a large terciado, which is like a scimitar, but bigger"
"Big" is not something one could use to describe a lot of ancient Filipino blades. The only blade with a significant enough size to be specifically mentioned "big" would be, yes, the Moro Kampilan.
And while the other specimens of blade you showed could very well be closer to what he did use, the Moro Kampilan still has a significantly larger profile and looks enough like a 1500s depiction of a Scimitar--more so than other blades--to be described as one, so a lot of us think it was the Moro Kampilan.
might there not have been contact between, prior to Magellan, pirates from the entire coastline of the Indian Ocean and Filipinos that may have introduce "scimitar" to the culture?
@@deltabravo2678 If we were to use the term accuartely, actual Scimitars are curved blades used in the Middle East and surrounding countries/cultures, and we dont have them in the Philippines. We do have curved blades, but not exactly like those.
But more importantly, that's not really the point of the context. The context here is that Pigafetta recorded [translated to english] “When they saw this, they all came upon him: one with a large terciado (which is like a scimitar, but bigger), gave them a wound in the left leg, which which he fell with his face forward,”
describing the weapon as a "large Terciado , which is LIKE a scimitar, but BIGGER." Researchers often focus on the word "scimitar" in this record because it references a specific blade, but Pigafetta doesn't even directly compare it to one. He compares it to a "terciado" (a blade that's a 1/3 shorter than the length of a longsword, IIRC), and then describes THAT as a Scimitar, but larger.
The issue her is that we believe Pigafetta may have been using the term "scimitar" inaccurately or loosely. At the time (1500s), the depictions (or at least some) of Muslims and Scimitars in artwork are inaccurate and were most likely based on verbal descriptions. Some (if not most) of the scimitars are depicted with relatively straighter and thicker blades than actual Scimitars wielded by Muslims during the Crusades.
@@quintusix7315The terciado was one third shorter than the legal maximum length for a (one handed) sword blade which by 1564 was around 104 cm, making the terciado 69 cm. Presumably broader too and quite possibly curved. I think you are probably right in that by scimitar Pigafetta meant a short falchion or storta as commonly depicted in Renaissance art, so the terciado would be a bigger version of that, ie similar to a cutlass or hanger. So yeah a kampilan sounds like the closest native equivalent, as the other blades Matt showed are definitely smaller than what the text seems to imply.
Interesting and thanks for that post. I feel that an educated Italian would know very well what a scimitar was, as would a Portuguese Knight. However I can accept that trying to describe a weapon you have never seen before in a few words by comparing it to something slightly similar is problematic.
@Reginaldesq i wouldn't say "problematic", just that it wouldn't be as accurate as how it would be done now. An educated italian and a portugese knight might know about scimitars from artwork rather than from actually seeing one. This was 1521, the Crusades where they would have seen Muslin warriors were 1000s - 1290s. That's 200-something years part. At most they could have seen an artifact, but still there were lots of depictions of Mulsims ans Scimitars in artwork that don't really reflect them properly.
Nice. A bit late but yesterday was Philippine Independence Day so... almost perfect timing
Amazing analysis as usual; thank you for being unbearably interesting!🙏🤍😎
I really appreciate your time and research here. Ive been teaching FMA since 2003 in 3 different systems, and NOBODY can agree on anything...the FMA "heritage" community will beef on just about anything and anybody if the subject isnt dramatic enough, or you left out the part where the Moro Princess invented the art of swordsmanship, etc. The hardest battle ever seen in FMA was likely over who's turn it was at karaoke, almost got outta hand, but then somebody's mom who had to work at 4 am laid into everybody with her freakin cork sandal, and everybody ran like hell for open ground.
Sir, a great fan of your program here....
I suggest you make an episode about the Spanish conquest of Mindanao, Philippines.
The time of of Sultan Kudarat as the leader who opposed the Spanish forces led by Governor General Sebastian Hurtado de Corcuera, with his army predominantly composed of christianized Filipinos, with Jesuit priests as commanders, and a few Spanish regulars.
This was said to be the time when Sultan Kudarat ordered to make full-size Kris Sword.
Spanish conscripted Filipinos were generally armed with spear and bolo. This was also the time when the Filipino Martial Arts (FMA) was invented as the primary training to the Spanish forces.
two crossbow shots is an interesting measure... odd he didn't use "cable", a common unit of measure (about 200m) for the nautical-types
Bro "Treaty of tordesillas" got me nostalgic!
I think the tactic was to retreat orderly so the ships could provide covering fire, but the men were too panicked at this point.
In the Shaka Zulu TV series episode 5 there is a scene where tribal warfare is conducted in Africa - they just stand in a line opposite each other and throw long hunting spears with very little effect as the range is extreme.
Generations of Filipino school kids know of this and have portrayed it in little skits during class reporting. He has been vilified here that it seems to be forgotten that his fight with Lapu-Lapu is as support with an ally, Raja Humabon (8:45). It's a bit jarring to go abroad and see Magellan honored in other countries. I remember eating in Tokyo Disney Sea at a retaurant named Magellan.
I'm starting my text at the beginning of the video, but if I remember, this was were the knife art of Kali came into fame.
8:24 I thought raja from the sub continent the Datu were the title for chiefs, sovereign kings leaders etc. for the people's the Visayas and Mindanao Regions of the Philippines ...👍Bayang Magiliw👍🙏💪
This story has a lot of myths associated with it. Like the idea that Lapulapu was a young brave warrior fighting in the front lines when he's really an old leader that was probably at the back lines. The idea that the filipino natives were *severely* less well equipped than the spanish when filipinos likely had gunpowder weapons before the spanish arrived in the country and filipinos had steel armor similar to other southeast asian cultures at the time. Filipinos likely acquired guns around the same time that the Japanese did, and they likely gunpowder weapons before that because of extensive trade with China. Though we don't know if the Cebuanos(the Filipinos that Magellan fought) specifically had them. There's a decent chance that Cebuanos would've encountered them from skirmishes against the Tagalogs, and the Tagalogs are confirmed to have had gunpowder weapons via archeological evidence & we also know from spanish records at the time that filipino groups that had cannons used cannons on their ships. However, I'm pretty sure Cebuanos didn't have gunpowder weapons at all.
Many art depictions even go so far as to shown native filipinos wearing nothing but loinclothes. The only people that wore only loinclothes were slaves. Of course, most filipinos during the *colonial* era were essentially slaves of the spanish; so if the art is portraying the colonial period, everyone wearing only loinclothes would make sense. However, during *pre-colonial* times, most filipinos would have worn a lot more than just loinclothes. Only slaves were *that* naked. And Lapulapu, who is often portrayed wearing nothing but loinclothes, was certainly not a slave.
There's also the idea that filipinos got killed by spanish diseases, even though unlike native americans, the Philippines is part of the old world & is right next to the biggest trade route both in history & today(south china sea), plus they were known to trade with and pillage and send mercenaries to surrounding countries, so it's very unlikely that they wouldn't be immune to old world diseases.
So many myths, both coming from spanish/colonial historians wanting to portray filipinos as lowly stupid barbarians, as well as present day filipino politicians wanting to take advantage of the lack of concrete records to create fictitious filipino empires to legitimize their rule or second generation filipino immigrants in other countries letting biases & fictions from their personal identity issues seep into their research about their own culture & history.
Filipino history is fascinating because of how many different cultures it was in contact with for hundreds of years, yet it's also very mysterious because pretty much all native written records were destroyed during the spanish colonial era & during bombings in WW2 (and we know there must have been written records given that the archipelago had 16 different writing scripts, and the traditional writing process for them (using banana leaves) is extremely similar to Indonesia's & Malaysia's traditional writing processes).
In many ways, Filipino history is a fascinating, mysterious cautionary tale about what happens when history is literally forgotten; fictions are born. Fiction that was born less from fact & more from personal biases & agendas, confusing a culture & a people about their own identity and the identity of the world around them.
There's people in the Philippines that genuinely think Filipinos didn't know how to use fire until the Spanish came. Meanwhile there are other people in the Philippines that genuinely think it was the richest empire in the world for hundreds of years. All born from half-truths (filipinos did learn lots of tech from spanish, philippines did & still has a lot of gold resources) taken to their logical extreme.
This tribal warfare style where people get prepared first before a formal battle is similar to early Japanese warfare which is quite ceremonial as well, even if Japan had heavy Continental/Chinese influences, probably due to their archipelagic lands, tend to stick with a form of tribal mentality similar to their southern neighbours in the Philippines who were the most primitive societally/politically among the Southeast Asian polities, as a Filipino, I find this interesting, the dichotomy of how Continentals like the Europeans/Chinese conduct themselves compared to how Islanders like the Filipinos/Japanese would is eye opening.
Good video. I think you are wrong about the 1 kilometre being no big deal. Thats a hell of a long way to go in knee to thigh deep water on uneven footing. They would have been exhausted and from the account it seems it was a tactical blunder.
I can’t imagine trying to operate a matchlock in the surf.
When they mention mortars, they're probably referring to Bombards which would have been more suitable for siege warfare, and not the battlefield.
how many shots the arquebusiers fired, we'll never know. Those matchlocks sure took a lot of steps to reload, the match itself had to be taken off to prevent an accident during reload, then put on again and tested for proper contact, on a closed pan, before the actual firing. and this was in leg deep water. Some of the Spanish gunners probably reloaded, but they would have realized quickly enough that their locks could get wet. So the Spanish may have engaged the Mactan natives at range using crossbows only for most of the battle. And crossbows took a lot of time and energy to reload.
5:48 yup, the treaty of Tordesillas. Shogun (Disney+) fans know this when Anjin is drawing the map of the world.
Nahh! The treaty of tordesillas remained in my head ever since 5th grade (somehow)
Check out Magellan's cross.
Aaahh cool, that Kris looks very similar to the ones that are found in Indonesia.
They had shipboard mortars? How interesting!
I always heard elders says that it was a bolo that killed him. I guess thats like a wide heavyer scimitar. Theres many variations and people in general always get names of different filipino blades wrong but theres something called a condor engineers bolo, a well known american army jungle knife, very curved like a cresent moon, wide and heavy. Couldve been that. Always heard the kriss was a high status weapon and usually reserved for execution by plunging between the clavicle and shoulder rather than beheading.
I am so investing in some chauses after that cautionary tale.
Actually a lot of his crew were poisoned and killed by Humabon because when Magellan and his officers went out his crew went wild and assaulted women and more or less being abusive to the people. (Majority of the crew were not really of decent background)
They were tragically outnumbered..
13:20 - That was a ruse to attract the spanish forces to an ambush. Pigafetta himself understood it that way.
Yet the guns and crossbows weren't working. In what sense weren't they working? Were they missing? Misfiring? Not causing much damage when they hit? Or were the Filipino fighters simply not intimidated by/were prepared for the casualties?
Also, I would guess the mortars couldn't help because the Spanish and Filipinos were too close to each orher.
Possibly issue on the hardware, but could also be that Lapulapu's troops were familiar with ranged weaponry. Although not as extensive as the European powers at the time, many precolonial Filipino warriors would be familiar with gunpowder weapons, either as an export from mainland Asia or as local production (lantaka), so they would probably be familiar with the limitations of around just 50 men shooting not so accurate firearms.
Additionally, oral tradition suggests that Lapulapu is something like a "pirate king" in the region. As such, the warrior class under bis command are probably exposed to lots of violence and as such not as fazed by European weaponry and armors.
Philippine tribal leaders like Lapulapu are expected to be as much traders as they are warriors and raiders. There have been records of his contemporaries going to China and mainland South-East Asia to trade AND raid. The extent of their battles in the mainland, as well as with other south-east asian groups (some of which have been Islamized generations prior due to trade with the Middle East) probably meant that they are not only familiar to firearms but also to metal armor.
Possibly in terms of being soaking wet in the surf.
Magellan's men were ambushed in knee deep water. Wet powder and bowstrings wouldn't be much use.
Probably a mix of all. They were possibly rather small calibre guns ("escopetas", even smaller than an arquebus), together with potentially wet powder and the natives not being terrified by the fire, that may explain why they were pretty useless
My guess, smallish guns and probably smallish crossbows. The crossbows would have to be hand load bows otherwise they could not be loaded in water (same for the guns?). Such low power at range, you could see the bolts and just move out of the way. He mention the shot going through the shield and just hitting their arms. Makes me wonder if they lacked penetrating power by the time they reached them.
Gotta commend those guys, standing with their captain even while facing more than a thousand opponents 🗿
I very much suspect that the number of Filipinos was very much smaller than what he claimed.
This was typical of that time and we even see it today how people make the enemy look stronger and more in numbers to make themselves look better and braver.
Yes, I very much think they were rather much outnumbered, but I VERY much doubt that they were anywhere close to be 1000 Filipino warriors or more.
The different Islands of the Philippines were not heavily populated at that time and all.
Now the island of Mactan is VERY densely populated with more than 500.000 people, but in 1990 was it only 9.642 people living on the island and you can be totally sure it was even less and maybe much less people living on the island at the time of the battle.
@@The_Judge300 Yes. This is also what I have in mind, jokes aside. Thanks for the helpful reminder, in case anyone might take the comment free of salt. This was also explained in the video.
Sadly, it is difficult to conclude the details of the battle with the lack of sources, especially on the Philippine side, if any. We can speculate further that they might have rallied a portion of those who didn't agree with Humabon's conversion, or those who saw the opportunity to halt Spanish influence then and there.
@@The_Judge300 Archaeology is these days revealing that many of the historical accounts written by European "recorders" were actually very accurate. For example. A priest aboard a ship that travelled the length of the Amazon river. He reported frequent piers witch led to roads that became massive boulevards that led to massive cities with 50,000 people in them. Modern historians, not seeing any piers or cities thought he was exaggerating. Modern satellite and lydar have now revealed that most of the Amazon was covered in cities and suburbs, with plantations etc. The forest grew so fast it covered it all up.
10:42 As a literatute student, I find it quite curious how a pre-Catholicism native uses a shepherd analogy, which is usually a pastoral/Christian thing.
There is a tendency in the West to falsely conflate the experience of Native Americans with the Filipinos. Filipinos were seafaring people who had contact with the wider world for hundreds, if not thousands of years. They traded with both India and the Tang Dynasty in China. Hand cannons and Islam arrived roughly 50 years before this incident. They had indigenous books, written language and actual institutions of learning. It's highly probable that Filipino nobility, who were educated, would have some knowledge of Christianity. (Here is some food for thought, while the Europeans would have been completely ignorant of the Filipinos, the Filipinos probably had some knowledge of the Europeans.)
Magellan et al: 'Give up your self-determination or die!
Lapu Lapu et al: 'That's... a bit unreasonable, don't you think?'
About the uselessness of the Spanish missiles, I'm also confused, the original text really says that the shots were useless because they passed through the shields and arms of the natives which sounds like exactly what they were supposed to do.
It may be worth noting that the soldiers with firearms are called "schiopetteri", an Italianization of the Spanish "escopeteros", that's soldiers armed with "escopetas". In modern Spanish, escopeta means shotgun, but in the early 16th century, they were early firearms of a smaller calibre than the arquebus (which is already generally of a smaller calibre than the later musket). So it's possible the firearms were fairly puny and that may help to explain their limited usefulness, maybe they had just enough force to punch through the shields but not enough to seriously injure the warriors behind the shields.
This video has really spurred me to delve into the original. It was surprisingly easy to understand considering I don't even speak Italian. The style is very straightforward.
The spear to the throat, being the killing blow, could have happened after the leg wound. The stories are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
I suspect that the account from the soldier may be fictitious because, if he was not near Magellan when he died then that meant he had run. I'm not sure but I imagine that would be an executable offense.
The indigenous people of the future Philippines lead by Lapulapu in the battle of Mactan made sure that it was Sir Francis Drake, and _not_ Magellan, to be the first Captain ever to circumnavigate the planet while retaining leadership from beginning to completion of the expedition.
Am I the only one who, reading between the lines, pictures about a hundred and fifty pissed of natives pushing the crew back out to sea once they ran out of powder. Being injured, and falling behind, Magellan was abandoned by his crew who were running for their lives from an extremely motivated crowd who did in the stragglers?
If there was only a few hundred the Spanish would not have stopped in the water but would have pushed forward and slaughtered them. My take is that Magellan made a massive blunder taking his poorly disciplined force through a kilometre of water (very tiring). Lapu Lapu played his hand well, only pushing forward once the Spanish were exhausted and demoralised.
@Reginaldesq, That’s a good point. Some 600m-1km through thigh and knee deep water in armor is a brutal march.
Boy! Look at the size of the thumb-ring on that there rapier!
>:-[
@@scholagladiatoria sorry. couldn't resist
WOOHOO PHILIPPINES MENTIONED
These little expeditions are not invincible. There is a whole bunch of smaller river expeditions and ship crews who get whacked when they meet an operational local troop.
Are there comparable accounts of Spanish soldiers, to the ones you sometime read from british sources? I would really be interested in those.
"Lives of soliders" were a well known genre in the 16th and 17th centurries, some of them as embellished service records soldiers used to curry favours or claim unpaid rewards, some of them proper autobiographies, some of them chronicles, many of them more or less fictionalized with popular tropes of the era, akin to picaresque novels. Some come to mind:
Bernal Díaz del Castillo (one of Cortes' soldiers), Captain Alonso de Contreras, Catalina de Eraúso (the Ensign Nun) or Captain Francisco de Cuéllar (survivor of the Spanish Armada who wrote a letter to king Phillip II). I'm sure there are English versions of all of these. Others that aren't likely to be accessible in English are: Diego Duque de Estrada, Domingo de Toral y Valdés, Jerónimo de Psamonte... A later example I stumbled upon and was a very interesting read was Rafael de Llanza y Vals, a Spanish officer forced to fight for the French in the Russian campaign of the Napoleonic Wars
Maybe take a look at this: "Front Lines: Soldiers' Writing in the Early Modern Hispanic World", by Miguel Martínez. From what I can find out, it looks more like an analysis of the military literary scene rather than an actual anthology of the primary texts themselves, but it will contains many references to them.
Hey, thanks for this very interesting video. I have a question very unrelated to it. I am reading a historical fiction series that's placed in medieval England. The idea of the series is too follow the fictional dynasty of the earls of Waringham. In every newer boom we follow a new generation of the fictional family and in every book it is somewhere mentioned, how the heritage is given the family sword and how it is a great honor and a great weapon. But the story starts in the 1300 and ends around 1500. My question is. Can a sword survive that Kong and would anyone use a 200 year old sword in warfare or praise it's quality?
If well cared for, I'd say it's definitely possible it could last that long, probably with periodical regrindings if it was actually used and suffered battle damage. The hilt could possibly be replaced aswell at some point.
were 2 handed swords (great swords, Grossmesser) used in European colonial warfare?
Unlikely as they were primarily used against formations of armoured troops using weapons like pikes. Colonial enemies were generally using a spear, as in this battle, and shield or a sword and shield with light or no armour so large two handers would have been of limited use. The colonisers generally tried to make as much use of firearms as possible.
In the conquest of the mexica there are accounts of two montantes(grateswords): a first owned by one of Cortez's officers and a second in the hands of Pánfilo de Narváez.
For more details check Bernal Díaz del Castillo's first hand accounts.
you could use the greatsword to defend certain ships - Diogo Gomes de Figuyeredo includes the scenario of a montantero defending a galley along its gangway in 1651.
th-cam.com/video/cFKbb57jlXQ/w-d-xo.html
however, ships entirely reliant on large sails would not have the room for the horizontal cuts of this play. boarding pikes (a type of half-pike of ‘regular’ spear length) would be more likely on a ship so rigged with sails, because the thrust can drive back boarders and retract much more quickly than the greatsword.
hey it's the Philippines' independence day today too! (at least probably in your timezone)
I'm a little disappointed in the lack of acknowledgement in the innate bias of the primary source. How would the author know of the poison if the body wasn't recovered? We could assume that potentially some of the crew had poison arrow wounds that survived. The author obviously liked Magellan and expected his work to be read. Most likely the Spanish engaged a larger force of Filipino's. They skirmished for awhile where the Spanish armor protected the Spanish and some sort of mix of mobility and dummy shields or smoke screens to draw the Spanish fire on the Filipino side. The 2 sides engaged with each other in the village where the Spanish routed.
They were looking for species. Magellan was out in command because he was familiar with portuguese territories and waters around Molucan Islands.
Also, when the Pope divided the world in the Tordesilla's treaty, nobody was sure about the world's actual size, so there were grounds for limit disputes.
Was there not a practice in the Philippines to wrap the limbs with cord, the big push for the US army to go from the .38 to .45 was in part because of this practice 300 years later.
Still in the Philippine islands, but an entirely different tribe from what Magellan faced
I think it was more the ferocity of Muslim Filipinos who would not go down to .38.
The Spanish were maybe lulled into a false sense of security by their encounters with Native Americans, and assumed the Filipinos would be similarly a walkover.
I am more worried about the spears tipped in 'mud'.
300 meter that'd in a modern firearms range. DID cross bows have that range? Though a hundred and half max.
Yes crossbows can easily shoot out to 300 yards. More specialised ones can shoot twice that. A .303 Lee Enfield can shoot targets out at 1000 yards, and will travel considerably further without accuracy being a factor.
@@scholagladiatoria Really? I was thinking that to be loaded in water (ie cant rest the bow on the ground) the bows would have to be low power (hand load). EDIT: I just watched Todd cutler loading a few of his crossbows. Seems to be that for bows of that period max lbs for held reload (assisted with implements) would be about 500lbs (which is lowish), above that weight apparently requires implements (such as windlass) where the bow is loaded braced against the ground.
👍
Is it possible that the sword that killed Magellan was picked off one of his soldiers?
Yes, theres a myth that natives somehow never learned or used european weapons, one of the first things europeans did when meeting a tribe or a local group was to show off their weapons and how to use them in order to trade them for other goods
The expedition never intended to circumnavegate the world because theTordesillas treaty banned Spaniards to enter Portuguese domains. They did it out of desperation as the way back to America wasn't found until 40 years later, incidentaly by a survivior of El Cano´'S crew that by then was a monk, named Urdaneta. The way back goes by the Aleutian islands.
Incidentally, the portuguese tried to kill Magellan and sent two fleyets to try to inmpede his voyage as the didn't want competition in the species trade. However they foolishy handed it over to the Dutch later on.