The original MS. of this document is badly worn, in places; and the words enclosed in brackets, in the two following paragraphs, indicate the con
1
According to the Diary of Richard Cocks, this prince was the father-in-law of Calsa Sama, the youngest son of the shogun Hidétada.
2
Pedro de Avila joined the Franciscan missions in the Philippines in 1616, and immediately requested from his superiors permission to go to Japan. This was finally granted; he went there in 1619, but was imprisoned for preaching the faith, in 1620, and, after nearly two years of most painful and wretched imprisonment, was burned at the stake at Nangasaqui, on September 10, 1622, at the age of thirty years.
3
The original MS. of this document is badly worn, in places; and the words enclosed in brackets, in the two following paragraphs, indicate the conjectures of the transcriber.
4
These priests were Pedro de Zuñiga, an Augustinian, and Luis Flores, a Dominican. In 1622, they, with the Japanese captain of the vessel, were burned to death by a slow fire, and the crew were beheaded. The Japanese shogun appropriated the cargo of the ship, leaving only the empty hull for the Dutch and English. (See Cocks’s Diary, i, pp. xxxvi and xxxvii.)
5
As a result of this alliance, the English and the Dutch East India Companies were united; “a combined fleet of English and Dutch ships, sailing under the modest name of the Fleet of Defence, was equipped for the purpose of endamaging the common enemy and diverting the trade of China from the Philippine Islands to the Dutch and English settlements; in other words, to blockade the Spanish and Portuguese ports and seize as many of the Chinese trading junks as possible. In the two expeditions to the Philippines undertaken by the fleet before the English and Dutch again separated, they captured many prizes.” (See E.M. Thompson’s preface to Cocks’s Diary, i, pp. xxxi–xxxvi.)
6
La Concepción (v, pp. 106, 107), in reporting this incident says that the amour of the governor’s wife was with a “distinguished subject of this community,” that is, Manila, and that the latter was not killed but escaped across seas. Montero y Vidal (Historia, i, pp. 177, 179), who had evidently not seen the documents of the text, and partially following La Conceptión’s error and improving on it, lays the time of Fajardo’s vengeance in 1624, and says that the paramour was unknown and escaped by jumping from a window, later probably finding means to get to America. Montero y Vidal is usually more careful of his dates.
7
i.e., for prayers or works for the benefit of the souls in purgatory.
8
Serrano apparently overlooks the diocesan council convened in 1600 by Bishop Agurto at Cibú (see Vol. XIII, pp. 133–135). Addis and Arnold’s Catholic Dictionary says (p. 46): “Provincial councils, owing to the difficulties of the times, have been less frequent in recent times than formerly; but, by the Council of Trent, metropolitans are bound to convene them, every three years.”
9
The ecclesiastical judge to whom the bishop delegates his authority and jurisdiction for the determination of the suits and causes pertaining to his jurisdiction; and hence a synonym for vicar-general.
Rev. T.C. Middleton, in a recent communication, says that the term “provisor” was apparently used only by the Spanish and Spanish colonies. It is not to be found in Ferrario, Moroni, or Soglia, and has no legal equivalent in English. It generally appears linked with another term as “provisor y vicario capitular” or “provisor y vicario general.” An archbishop or bishop usually had his “provisor” whose powers were apparently the same as a vicar-general’s or a vicar-capitular’s. The nomination, or creation, of a vicar-general is in the hands of an archbishop or bishop; whereas a vicar-capitular is chosen only when a see becomes vacant, the cathedral chapter naming the person, who is to rule (during the said vacancy) with title of “vicar-capitular.” In the United States, since there are no cathedral chapters, there are in consequence no vicars-capitular, their place, etc., being taken by an administrator, who is chosen by the metropolitan, unless already named by the former occupant of the vacant see.
The ecclesiastical judge to whom the bishop delegates his authority and jurisdiction for the determination of the suits and causes pertaining to his jurisdiction; and hence a synonym for vicar-general.
Rev. T.C. Middleton, in a recent communication, says that the term “provisor” was apparently used only by the Spanish and Spanish colonies. It is not to be found in Ferrario, Moroni, or Soglia, and has no legal equivalent in English. It generally appears linked with another term as “provisor y vicario capitular” or “provisor y vicario general.” An archbishop or bishop usually had his “provisor” whose powers were apparently the same as a vicar-general’s or a vicar-capitular’s. The nomination, or creation, of a vicar-general is in the hands of an archbishop or bishop; whereas a vicar-capitular is chosen only when a see becomes vacant, the cathedral chapter naming the person, who is to rule (during the said vacancy) with title of “vicar-capitular.” In the United States, since there are no cathedral chapters, there are in consequence no vicars-capitular, their place, etc., being taken by an administrator, who is chosen by the metropolitan, unless already named by the former occupant of the vacant see.
