Abstract
Using unpublished documentation collected from Spanish archives located in Seville, this article establishes the Basque origin of the Victoria, protagonist of the first circumnavigation of the globe. The article also assesses the suitability for transoceanic voyages of a Basque vessel of the early sixteenth century through a comparative analysis of the five ships that participated in the expedition.
As the 500th anniversary of the first circumnavigation of the globe approaches, many aspects of that epic journey remain unknown, particularly those related to the key contribution made by Basques. This is the case with the origin of the Victoria; that is, with the origin of the technology that made this key feat in the history of humankind possible.
Over the centuries, many treatises have tried to turn the Victoria’s name, origin and final fate into a legend, often comparing it with the Argos from Greek mythology. Its name has been linked to the triumph of successfully completing its journey, and with regard to its fate, some authors have claimed that, following the journey undertaken upon Charles V’s orders, it was preserved for posterity at the Seville shipyards. 1 As far as its origins are concerned, a number of different places have claimed to be the vessel’s birthplace, from the small coastal town of Zarautz, in the Basque province of Gipuzkoa, 2 to the city of Seville itself. 3
Surprisingly, Spanish historiography has never shown much interest in establishing the true origins of this historic vessel. It is simply accepted that it was a Spanish-built ship, with the question of its precise regional site of construction being deemed of little consequence or interest. The effects of this indifference are extremely negative. Firstly, we still do not know the origin of the maritime technology that made the first circumnavigation of the globe possible, despite this question being one of vital importance for universal maritime history. And secondly, our lack of knowledge has enabled the proliferation of many different historiographic myths and traditions surrounding this issue. Recently, however, in light of the discovery of a document in the Archivo General de Andalucía, some authors have forwarded the hypothesis that the Victoria was originally the Santa María, a vessel belonging to two inhabitants of Ondarroa (Biscay, the Basque Country): Domingo de Apallua and his son, Pedro de Arysmendi. 4
The aim of this paper is to establish the veracity of this claim and hence the true origins of this historic ship. To this end, the authors examined a collection of unpublished documents stored in a range of different archives, most particularly the Archivo General de Indias and the Archivo General de Andalucía, both located in Seville.
In essence, this article aims to banish existing myths and finally begin to acknowledge the key contribution made by the Basques to questions such as the development of the maritime technology that made it possible for European seafarers to sail all the oceans of the world, eventually resulting in the first circumnavigation of the globe. Moreover, as we shall show, the preparation and provisioning of both this vessel and the other four that originally set out on the expedition constituted one of the main contributions made by the Basque lobby in Seville, a lobby consisting of seafarers, shipbuilders, traders, administrators and cosmographers.
The Basque origins of the Victoria
Let us begin by analysing the plausibility of the hypothesis that states that the Santa Maria, which belonged to the aforementioned Domingo de Apallua and Pedro de Arismendi, was renamed the Victoria after being purchased by the Casa de Contratación, a government agency of the Spanish Empire that, from the sixteenth to eighteenth century, controlled all Spanish exploration and colonisation activities. The sole piece of documentary evidence upon which this hypothesis rests is a declaration recorded by the Seville notary Bernal Gonzales de Vallesillo on 12 September 1518, in which the two owners state that their vessel was requisitioned by Ferdinand Magellan’s navy in exchange for 800 ducats. 5
In relation to the origin of the vessels making up the expedition, the documents issued by the Seville Casa de Contratación, kept at the Archivo General de Indias, raise a number of key questions. Firstly, the document entitled Relaçion del coste de la armada de las çinco naos que ban al descubrimiento de la espeçieria (List of costs associated with the armada of five vessels sent to discover a sea route to the Spice Islands) includes references to the tonnage and the sums for which each of the five vessels were purchased. 6 However, nothing is said of their origin, or their original names, only that they were acquired in Cadiz by Juan de Aranda, factor of the Casa de Contratación. However, the use of a ship, called Santiago Bretona, is mentioned in the transport of ship’s biscuits for the expedition in the same document. The hypothesis that it refers to the Santiago can be considered. In that case and, judging by its name, it is very likely that it constituted a vessel from Brittany. Moreover, the value assigned to the Victoria contradicts the exact relationship between size and price recorded for the other four ships, since despite being the second smallest of the five vessels, it stands out also as being the second most expensive (see Table 1).
Official value and capacity of the five vessels in the expedition.
Secondly, the document entitled Relaçion del gasto que se a fecho en el armada (List of expenses incurred for the armada), which has only been preserved in fragmented form, mentions the acquisition of three vessels: the Santa María from Pedro de Arismendi, inhabitant of Ondarroa, for the sum of 800 ducats; the Gallega (Galician) vessel from Juan Montero for the sum of 600 ducats; and the Santa Catalina de Siena from Captain Juan Nicolás de Artieta, for the sum of 720 ducats. 7 It is worth noting that Juan Nicolás de Artieta, inhabitant of Lekeitio (Biscay, the Basque Country), was a purveyor for both the Navy and the Casa de Contratación, and was the person charged with purchasing in Bilbao (Biscay, the Basque Country) the majority of the supplies required for the Magellan-Elcano expedition. In short, this last list of expenditures corroborates the fact that the original names of the vessels that made up the expedition were not San Antonio, Trinidad, Concepción, Victoria and Santiago. Rather, they were renamed after being acquired by the Casa de Contratación. Nevertheless, it does not establish correlations between the original names and those they were given after being acquired for the expedition.
Returning to the question of the equivalences between the vessels featured in the two lists, and as a possible means of offering a solution, it is important to compare the prices recorded in the two documents. The sums paid for the Santa María (800 ducats – 299,200 maravedis 8 ), the Santa Catalina de Siena (720 ducats – 269,280 maravedis) and the Gallega (600 ducats – 224,400 maravedis), outlined in the Relaçion del gasto (List of expenses), do not correspond exactly to any of the quantities assigned to the five vessels in the Relaçion del coste (List of costs) (See Table 1). However, they are fairly similar to those paid for the Victoria (300,000 maravedis), the Trinidad (270,000 maravedis) and the Concepción (228,000 maravedis).
In light of these differences and bearing in mind that the cost of the San Antonio was only 80 ducats more than that of the Victoria, it is not yet possible to link unequivocally the latter vessel with the Santa María, purchased from Apallua and Arismendy. Consequently, we proceeded to research the notary deeds kept in the Archivo General de Andalucía. The search revealed new documents that enable us to answer the majority of the questions posed and to corroborate, beyond any shadow of a doubt, the origin of the Victoria. The following is a list of events, according to the documentary sequence identified from our examination of the archives.
On 17 September 1518, Domingo de Apallua granted power of attorney to his son in the presence of the Seville notary Bernal Gonzales de Vallesillo. In this document, the shipowner claimed that he had been forced to sell his vessel, the Santa María, against his will, and empowered his son to demand the sum corresponding to its value from the officials at the Casa de Contratación. 9 It is striking that Domingo de Apallua does not specify the exact sum corresponding to the vessel’s value. By contrast, the declaration mentioned earlier, which was made in conjunction with his son, Pedro de Arismendy, in the presence of the same notary on 23 September, does indeed state the exact price, which was 800 ducats. 10 It is likely that, during the six intervening days, Pedro de Arismendy, having been granted power of attorney by his father, had negotiated this sum with the officials at the Casa de Contratación. As analysed in section 2 of this paper, this negotiation was a lucrative one for the two inhabitants of Ondarroa.
While these negotiations were taking place, the notary Bernal Gonzales de Vallesillo witnessed another declaration linked to the forced sale of another vessel. On 20 September 1518, Diego de Asua, inhabitant of Erandio (Biscay, the Basque Country), declared that, against his will, the officials of the Casa de Contratación of Seville had requisitioned his vessel, the Santa María, for Ferdinand Magellan’s navy, for the sum of 880 ducats. 11
This last document is of vital importance for establishing definitive correspondences between the vessels acquired by the Casa de Contratación and the five vessels that set sail on the expedition. Firstly, we know that the Santa María, belonging to Diego de Asua (880 ducats) was valued at 80 ducats more than the vessel belonging to Domingo de Apallua and Pedro de Arismendy (800 ducats); this difference is identical to the one observed between this latter vessel and the Santa Catalina de Siena belonging to Juan Nicolás de Artieta (720 ducats), and one which also corresponds to the price difference observed between the San Antonio (330,000 maravedis), the Victoria (300,000 maravedis) and the Trinidad (270,000 maravedis). Secondly, the price difference between the Santa Catalina de Siena and the fourth vessel acquired from private owners, the Gallega (600 ducats) is 120 ducats, which corresponds to that existing between the Trinidad and the Concepción (228,000 maravedis).
In sum, it is possible to establish a definitive correspondence between the vessels of the Magellan-Elcano expedition and those acquired from private owners (see Table 2). Thus, we can definitively establish the Basque origin of the Victoria, the first ship to sail right the way round the world.
Correspondence between the five vessels of the expedition and those acquired from private owners.
The expedition to find a sea route to the Spice Islands and the Basque lobby in Seville
The presence of powerful lobbies of Basque traders, shipowners and seafarers in the governing bodies of the royal oceanic exploration and trade policy, located in Seville, was a key factor in the process of selecting and acquiring the vessels required for the Magellan-Elcano expedition. The intervention of some members of this lobby in the process of acquiring the vessels for the expedition is a first-order factor that should be taken into account when attempting to answer some of the questions posed in the previous section regarding the price for which the ships were purchased.
The power and influence of the Basque lobby within the institutions responsible for expanding Spain’s influence on the high seas, most of which, at the beginning of the sixteenth century at least, were located in Seville, is evident in the fact that the main positions of power within the Casa de Contratación were held by men of Basque origin. The men in the prominent posts at the Casa de Contratación were responsible for organising the Magellan-Elcano expedition, and it was the same institution that, as mentioned earlier, charged the Purveyor Juan Nicolás de Artieta with acquiring and storing in Bilbao many of the supplies needed for the long voyage. 12
Artieta’s role as Purveyor did not prevent the naval authorities and the Seville Casa de Contratación from requisitioning a number of his own vessels. In addition to the Trinidad (previously the Santa Catalina de Siena), purchased in 1518 for the Magellan-Elcano expedition, 13 in 1503 another of his ships was requisitioned for Great Italian Wars (1501–1504) in exchange for the sum of 255,583 maravedis. 14 Similarly, for the expedition to the Moluccas, preparations for which took place between 1521 and 1522, the Navy requisitioned the 250-ton San Pedro. 15 As we shall see, Juan Nicolás de Artieta’s dedication to the Crown was, without doubt, the principal reason for the Santa Catalina de Siena being the cheapest of the five vessels that set sail on the Magellan-Elcano expedition.
As shown in Table 3, the value of each ton of the Victoria was substantially higher than that of the other four vessels, for which the figures are practically identical (see Table 3). Some authors have tried to justify this difference by hypothesising that the Victoria was the newest of the five ships purchased. 16 This hypothesis, however, is far from consistent, since it fails to explain Magellan’s choice of the cheaper Trinidad, rather than the more expensive and larger San Antonio, as the flagship for the expedition. It is evident that other factors need to be taken into account to explain the differences observed in the value assigned to the vessels.
Official value of each of the five vessels in the expedition.
The first factor to be considered is the circumstances of the vessels at the time of their acquisition by the Navy. While nothing is known of the actual circumstances of either the Santiago or the Concepción, some information, albeit sparse, is available about the other three vessels. In the case of Santiago, if accepting the hypothesis that it was originally the Santiago Bretona, evidently it served the Casa de la Contratación by transporting food supplies for the expedition. 17 In relation to the Trinidad (originally the Santa Catalina de Siena), prior to being purchased it was in the service of the Casa de Contratación. On 10 September 1518, the Treasurer Sancho de Matienzo paid Juan Ochoa de Hiriondo (Juan Nicolás de Artieta’s proxy) the sum of 41,250 maravedis (110.30 ducats) as payment for the vessel’s services. This operation was subsequently cancelled when the Casa de Contratación acquired the ship. 18
As regards the San Antonio and the Victoria (both originally called Santa María), the first, which was formerly the property of Diego de Asua, was chartered to sail to Flanders, 19 while the second, property of Domingo de Apallua, was chartered for both the outward voyage to London and the return voyage to Castile. 20 The fact that both ships were previously chartered is probably a large part of the reason why they were also the most expensive. Indeed, the owners of both vessels made separate written declarations in which they expressed their disagreement over the seizure of their vessels, as well as, most particularly, the sale price paid. They declared themselves to be in disagreement over the sums offered by the Casa de Contratación for two main reasons. Firstly, they claimed that they had originally paid more for their vessels, and secondly, they highlighted the fact that they were already chartered, i.e. on the verge of generating profits. These were the reasons given in the negotiations with the Casa de Contratación to try and raise the possible sale price. In this sense, the fact that the Victoria (formerly the Santa María) had also been chartered for a return voyage may explain its higher value, although, by itself, it is insufficient to justify the fact that the difference in the value per ton of this vessel was 3.6 times higher than the difference of 295.46 maravedis between the price per ton of the San Antonio and that of the Trinidad (see Table 3).
The second factor that should be taken into consideration when attempting to explain the differences observed in the price of the vessels is the economic, social and political position of the original owners. The documents analysed above reveal that the five vessels were not all purchased at once, in a single transaction. The Trinidad (formerly the Santa Catalina de Siena) had entered the service of the Casa de Contratación one month prior to being purchased from its owner, the Purveyor Juan Nicolas de Artieta. 21 The close and intense relationship that existed between Juan Nicolas de Artieta and the officials of the Casa de Contratación of Seville, many of whom were fellow countrymen, was probably the reason for this vessel being the cheapest of the five (see Table 3).
This hypothesis may be contradictory. In theory, being part of a network that linked those with maritime interests to the highest echelons governing the Crown’s overseas policy was supposed to help increase both the income and socio-economic position of all concerned. Therefore, we should question the validity of the hypothesis outlined above, which explains the depreciation in value of several vessels belonging to Juan Nicolas de Artieta, which were acquired by the Casa de Contratación, in terms of the close relationship which existed between the parties. It is evident that the benefits the members of these networks aspired to, and indeed reaped, in return for their services were not merely of the material kind. They would often be linked to their desire to further their good name, prestige, credit, honour and influence. Indeed, throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, it was common in the Basque Country to offer one’s services (such as the construction of warships, etc.) to the King in return for political advantages and honorary titles. 22
Nevertheless, an important part of the benefits gained from these economic and political networks, which were closely linked to the members of the Basque lobby in Seville, were economic in nature. Thus, the fact that the original proprietors of the San Antonio and the Victoria and the members of the Basque lobby were fellow countrymen, possibly even bound by blood ties, is a key factor in explaining why a higher price was paid for the vessels. For instance, Domingo de Apallua, owner of the vessel that would later be renamed the Victoria, and which was the most highly valued or expensive of the five ships that together set out on the expedition, may have been the husband of one of Juan Nicolas de Artieta’s cousins, although this has not been definitively proven. 23
Whatever the case, it is evident that both Domingo de Apallua and Diego de Asua (original owners of the Victoria and the San Antonio, respectively) were members of the same network of relations, since they both had recourse to the same Seville-based notary’s office, i.e. that belonging to Bernal Gonzales de Vallesillo, in order to issue the deeds related to the requisitioning of their respective vessels. This coincidence indicates that both owners conducted their respective businesses in a coordinated manner.
In short, the available evidence indicates that the networks of relationships that linked businessmen from the Basque Country to key figures governing the institutions responsible for transoceanic trade in Seville had a major influence on the selection of the vessels engaged in the expedition.
How did Basque vessels perform during the expedition?
The previous section has shown the importance of the ties and bonds existing between the former owners of the vessels and the members of the Basque lobby in Seville when seeking to understand the reasons behind the dominant presence of Basque trading ships in transoceanic expeditions. That said, it is also evident that the characteristics of Basque vessels were ideal for the voyages of discovery organised from Seville. Throughout the late Middle Ages, the Basque transport fleet was a key player in the exchanges which took place between the European Atlantic seaboard and the western Mediterranean. Basque ships, perfectly designed for transporting large volumes, soon demonstrated their worth also for the oceanic voyages undertaken by fishermen to waters off the British Isles and Iceland, and even the Atlantic fishing grounds off North Africa. 24
The need to respond effectively to these demands fostered increasingly advanced designs and construction techniques, giving rise to vessels that proved eminently suitable for transoceanic voyages, which were often beset by unforeseen circumstances and events and all kinds of harsh weather conditions. Consequently, by the early sixteenth century, Basque shipbuilders had developed a special kind of ocean-faring vessel, which became the undisputed king of trade relations between the old and new worlds, and was a precursor of the evolutionary chain that would eventually give rise to the large vessels and galleons of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Evidence of this, as Pierre Chaunu has shown, is that 80 per cent of the vessels that sailed between Seville and America from 1520 to 1580 were of Basque construction. 25 The huge undertaking represented by the first attempt to circumnavigate the globe was the acid test for demonstrating the unbeatable quality of both the design and construction of the vessels built in the Basque Country, as well as their general seaworthiness. 26
Comparative analysis of the performance of the five ships during the circumnavigation
The Basque origin of three of the five vessels that made up the Magellan-Elcano expedition –Victoria (formerly the Santa María); Trinidad (formerly the Santa Catalina de Siena); San Antonio (formerly the Santa María) – has been established. We know very little about the origin of the other two vessels; in relation to the Santiago, its original name might had been Santiago Bretona, and of the Concepción, all we know is that it was formerly called the Gallega and was owned by Juan Montero. Given the names of both vessels themselves and the owner of the second, we can deduce that neither was likely to have been Basque. Based on the hypothesis that the expedition was made up by vessels of different origins, the voyage itself offers an excellent opportunity to conduct a comparative analysis of how each ship held up during those gruelling days on the high seas.
Firstly, the choice of the Trinidad as the flagship for the expedition is extremely significant. As the largest vessel, it was the San Antonio, not the Trinidad, which would have offered the greatest degree of comfort for the crew. Nevertheless, Magellan chose to sail in the Trinidad, which suggests that it had other advantages not reflected in surviving documents. It is likely that Magellan’s choice was dictated by quality of construction, which was better in the Trinidad. This hypothesis is plausible in light of the fact that the vessel’s previous owner, the Purveyor Juan Nicolas de Artieta, was a wealthy gentleman with plentiful resources. It is also possible that Magellan chose the Trinidad for the simple reason that its original owner was a solvent individual who enjoyed the trust and credit of the authorities at the Casa de Contratación.
Secondly, we can deduce very little about the seaworthiness of the Santiago, beyond the fact that it was wrecked while performing tasks inherent to a vessel of its category, while searching for the sea passage today known as the Strait of Magellan. It is true that on all expeditions of discovery, due to their shallower draft and greater manoeuvrability, the smallest vessels were usually the ones charged with exploring potentially dangerous areas for navigation. However, according to Pigafetta, during the five months or so that the fleet overwintered in Puerto San Julián (Patagonia, Argentina), the Santiago had run ashore 24 leagues to the south while exploring the coastline.
Thirdly, the process of discovering the Strait of Magellan offers a good basis for drawing comparisons, particularly between the San Antonio and the Concepción. Upon their arrival at the Cape of the Eleven Thousand Virgins, at the eastern mouth of the Strait, Magellan charged these two vessels with the task of exploring ahead. Since the smallest surviving vessel was the Victoria, followed by the Concepción, it is striking that Magellan would assign this mission to the San Antonio, the largest vessel of them all. This decision may be indicative of the San Antonio’s excellent navigability and manoeuvrability. Indeed, despite being caught by a sudden storm, a typical occurrence at these latitudes, both vessels managed to discover the way through.
After sailing along part of the strait, they discovered that it split into two separate channels. Again, Magellan trusted the task of exploring one of the channels to the San Antonio and the Concepción, issuing orders for them to return by the fourth day. During this exploration, the two ships became separated and the San Antonio deserted and headed back to Spain. Whatever the reasons behind this desertion, it was clear that the Basque-built vessel far outstripped the Concepción in terms of speed. Pigafetta recounts that ‘the ship San Antonio would not wait for the Concepción’ and that the latter, ‘as it was unable to keep up with that ship, waited for it, sailing about here and there’. Indeed, the events that took place around the time of the San Antonio’s desertion culminated in one last act that clearly indicates its greater seaworthiness in comparison with the Concepción, or perhaps the fact that the latter was less suited to the task than the other three remaining ships. According to Pigafetta, when the rest of the fleet returned to the arranged meeting point and discovered that the San Antonio had departed, Magellan sent one of the ships to the Atlantic mouth of the strait to look for it, a solitary mission of exploration which was assigned to the Victoria, rather than the Concepción.
In short, it appears that, during the voyage, the Concepción was never chosen for solitary missions. These tasks were assigned to the smaller vessels, first the Santiago and, later on, the Victoria. Indeed, on those missions of exploration in which it participated, the Concepción always served as a support vessel for the San Antonio, as can be deduced from various statements made by Pigafetta in his chronicles; for example, that in order to explore the entrance to the Strait of Magellan, the Captain General ‘sent two ships, the San Antonio and the Concepción’ and that to explore one of its channels ‘the Captain General sent the ship San Antonio, together with the Concepción’.
Fourthly, the events that occurred in the Philippines, after crossing the Pacific Ocean, and the death of Ferdinand Magellan, constitute key points in the comparative analysis of the three surviving vessels: the Trinidad, Concepción and Victoria. In addition to the eight men who died with Magellan on the island of Mactan on 1 May 1521, 24 further crew members met their fate on the island of Cebu. The survivors fled the island with all three vessels and took refuge on Bohol, where they decided to rid themselves of one of them: the Concepción. Both Pigafetta and Albo state that the reason for getting rid of one of the vessels was that there were not enough crew members to man all three ships.
In short, the high number of deaths forced the remaining sailors to make the difficult decision to destroy one of the three vessels that had so far survived the voyage. The situation must have been truly desperate. Bearing in mind that the expedition still had not reached its destination in the Moluccas, and that the remaining crew members still faced the long and arduous journey home, the drastic decision to burn one of the three remaining vessels is indicative of a genuinely critical situation. However, two important conclusions can be drawn from this decision. Firstly, they clearly had to decide to burn the least suitable of the three ships. Whether it was due to its lower quality of construction and solidity, which would undoubtedly have taken its toll on the ship’s state of conservation and repair, or was a result of the fact that it was less seaworthy, owing to an inferior design, the final result was that the vessel chosen for destruction was the Concepción. And secondly, bearing in mind the enormity of the voyage yet to be completed, the decision to proceed with just the Trinidad and the Victoria clearly demonstrates the surviving crew members’ trust in the seaworthiness and quality of the two Basque vessels. This last consideration becomes even more relevant when we take into account the fact that the Victoria was the smallest of the three ships, and even so, was selected above the Concepción. It was a choice in which, at this stage of the voyage and given the desperate nature of the situation, factors such as the prestige of the original owners or their connections with leading members of the Casa de Contratación of Seville would have had no weight whatsoever.
The voyages of the three Basque vessels
Comparative analysis of the performance of the vessels during the expedition reveals the superior faculties of the San Antonio, the Trinidad and the Victoria, all three of which were built in the Basque Country, which in turn indicates the advanced development of the naval construction industry in that region. All that is left in order to definitively establish the fact that the products of Basque shipyards during the early sixteenth century were of exceptional seaworthiness is to analyse the individual voyages made by these three vessels. They were ships that revolutionised Renaissance navigation and laid the groundwork for Europe’s expansion across all the oceans and continents of the planet.
The San Antonio/Santa María
Originally the property of Diego de Asua, from Erandio, a town located along the Bilbao estuary (Biscay), the Santa Maria was a modest-sized vessel (120 tons) designed, like so many other Basque ships before it, to transport goods between the main trading ports on the European Atlantic seaboard, the Basque Country and the Mediterranean. Indeed, in September 1518, the month in which it was requisitioned by the Casa de Contratación of Seville, the Santa María had been charted for a commercial voyage to Flanders.
Renamed the San Antonio, it set sail from Sanlúcar on 20 September 1519, with the other four vessels of the expedition. After a seven-day stopover on the island of Tenerife, on 3 October it continued its voyage to the south, following the African coastline as far as Sierra Leone, from where it turned west and crossed the Atlantic Ocean to Brazil. It was not a simple crossing. Before reaching the Equator the expedition suffered 60 days of continuous rain, as well as sudden gusts of strong wind, headwinds and days of constant rain with no wind whatsoever. After remaining for 13 days in Brazil (Cape St. Augustine), the expedition continued south down the South American coast with the aim of finding the strait that would enable them to cross from the Atlantic to the Pacific. On 2 April 1520, they stopped at Puerto San Julián (Patagonia, Argentina), where they overwintered for almost five months.
They resumed their voyage, sailing down to 51º latitude before stopping at the Santa Cruz River, where they were buffeted by terrible winds. They spent another two months there before continuing on their quest to find the strait. Finally, on 21 October, they reached the Cape of the Eleven Thousand Virgins, which marked the eastern entrance to what is now known as the Strait of Magellan. The San Antonio was sent with the Concepción to locate the access point to the strait, while the Trinidad and the Victoria remained anchored in the shelter provided by the cape. That same night a violent storm blew up. Against all odds, both vessels somehow managed to survive and returned from their mission crowned with the success of having discovered the channel leading into the strait. They sailed in, and soon found that it split into two channels. Once again, the San Antonio and the Concepción were sent to investigate. It was during the course of this exploration that the crew of the San Antonio decided to desert and return to Spain.
On 17 November 1520, the San Antonio therefore set sail on its lonely voyage home. It was a long trip across the Atlantic that took over five and a half months. On the way, provisions ran out and the ship was forced to put in at the Azores to stock up. The vessel finally made it back to Seville on 8 May 1521. 27 Despite this most gruelling of trials, the San Antonio arrived back in Spain in fairly good condition. In June 1521, it was given to the galley squadron commanded by General Don Juan de Velasco, charged with protecting the Granada coast from attacks by Moorish and Turkish pirates. Before the transaction could take place, the vessel was inspected and its value set at 294,257 maravedis. 28 In other words, from the original price of 330,000 maravedis paid by its first owner, the value of the vessel had only dropped by 35,743 maravedis (95.50 ducats), an insignificant depreciation, especially bearing in mind the circumstances of the voyage from which it had recently returned. Indeed, the value per ton of the San Antonio following the voyage (2,452 maravedis/ton) was almost identical to the price per ton of the Trinidad when it was acquired for the expedition (2,454.54 maravedis/ton).
The Trinidad/Santa Catalina de Siena
The Santa Catalina de Siena, a modest 110-ton vessel originally belonging to the Navy Purveyor Juan Nicolás de Artieta, was already in the service of the Casa de Contratación, performing tasks related to preparations for the Magellan-Elcano expedition, when, at some point between September and October 1518, it was requisitioned by that same entity for the expedition itself. Rechristened the Trinidad, it was the flagship of the expedition, carrying on board Captain-General Ferdinand Magellan.
After the desertion of the San Antonio, the expedition continued through the strait until, on 28 November 1520, it reached the Pacific Ocean. It then proceeded to cross this ocean, travelling for three months and 20 days until it reached the Mariana Islands. Although fairly calm, the crossing itself was terrible, since provisions were running very low and many crew members died from scurvy. After arriving in the Philippines (16 March 1521), and following the death of Magellan himself (27 April) and the burning of the Concepción (2 May), the remaining two ships set sail for Borneo.
On weighing anchor in Brunei, they realised that both vessels were taking on water and needed to be caulked. According to Pigafetta the reasons for the leak in one of the ships was: ‘. . .and one of them, through the negligence of the pilot, struck on a shoal near an island named Bibalon; but, by the help of God, we got her off’. The two ships were careened for 42 days in a cove along the strait that separates Borneo from Palawan. The length of this period was due to the fact that they lacked the necessary elements for caulking the vessels. After setting out once again, they put in at Butuan (the Philippines) to caulk the ships once again, although since the winds were favourable, they decided to interrupt the operation and venture forth for their objective. Despite not having been properly caulked, both vessels survived the heavy storm that hit them on the night of 26 October. Finally, on 6 November, they arrived in the Moluccas, and two days later dropped anchor just off the island of Tidore.
By this time, after having suffered the inclemency of the weather for so long in poorly-caulked ships, the crew was well aware that their vessels were in no state to continue their voyage. Indeed, they were concerned that firing the larger bombards would cause irrevocable damage. Despite this, however, and showing surprising faith in the soundness of their vessels, they did not hesitate to fill up the holds with cloves and fire off a round of shots. But there were more problems to come. On 18 December 1521, soon after setting sail from Tidore, they realised that the Trinidad was taking on water. After trying without success to locate the leak, they decided to send the Victoria on alone, while the Trinidad stayed in Tidore for repairs. It took four months to unload, repair and reload the Trinidad. They finally set sail for America on 6 April 1522. They sailed to 42º north where, for 12 days, they were buffeted by a storm that forced them to cut loose their fore- and after-castles and awnings. Suffering from both hunger and cold, many crew members became ill, and after fighting for five months against contrary winds and currents, Captain Gonzalo Gómez de Espinosa decided to return to the Moluccas.
Despite all the damage it had sustained, the vessel remained seaworthy and sailed for two further months until it finally arrived at its destination. After seven months at sea with no fresh supplies, the crew was exhausted and forced to request aid from some Portuguese who were building a fort on the island of Ternate. Their response was to take both the ship itself and the last surviving 22 crew members prisoner. 29 The Trinidad was partly dismantled and its parts used to help build the fort. Finally, its hull sunk just off Ternate. 30
The Victoria/Santa María
The Santa María, a modest 85-ton vessel, was formerly the property of Domingo de Apallua and had been chartered for a return trip to London when it was requisitioned by the Casa de Contratación of Seville in September 1518. Renamed the Victoria, it set sail from Sanlúcar along with the other four vessels in the expedition on 20 September 1519.
After the burning of the Concepción and the arrival of the two remaining ships in Borneo, when an attempt was made to continue their voyage it was noticed that both vessels, the Trinidad and the Victoria, were taking on water and needed to be caulked. After another stopover to caulk the ships a second time (an operation that was prematurely cut short), and following another storm, they finally arrived in the Moluccas, specifically the island of Tidore, where they took on full cargoes of cloves. When the Trinidad was found to be leaking once again, probably due to a cargo that was too large for its weakened condition, the decision was made to unload 60 hundredweights of cloves from the Victoria as a precautionary measure, since its condition was far from optimum. It was under these circumstances that the Victoria set sail from Tidore on 21 December 1521, under the command of Juan Sebastián de Elcano. After hitting another fierce storm, on 11 January 1522 the ship took refuge on the island of Malua, where it remained for 15 days, making major repairs to its gunwale.
After leaving Malua, the vessel put in at Timor on 25 January to take on fresh provisions. On 11 February, they weighed anchor again and headed out into the Indian Ocean, sailing for over five months until they reached the Cape of Good Hope. To avoid the Portuguese, they sailed south to 42º latitude, where their progress was halted by strong headwinds and they were forced to ride out stormy conditions with their sails struck. However, despite losing their foremast and taking on large quantities of water, they finally managed to sail round the Cape on 19 May 1522. They sailed for a further two months with supplies running very low. Twenty-two crew members died and eventually they were forced to put in at the Cape Verde Islands on 9 July. Discovered by the Portuguese, they fled back to sea and continued sailing north until they reached Sanlúcar Bay on 6 September 1522.
Despite all the hardships and difficulties of the voyage, and all the damage it had sustained, the Victoria became the first ship ever to sail all the way round the world. And what is more, true to the purpose for which it had originally been designed, the vessel also managed to return with a full cargo of spices, which it had transported half way around the globe. Several months after its return, the Crown ordered the Casa de Contratación of Seville to sell the ship at auction. 31 Although it may seem incredible, after that gruelling three-year voyage, during which it faced untold hardships and extremely difficult environmental conditions of all kinds, the Victoria continued to be seaworthy and more than capable of sailing on the high seas. It was as if the vessel, a striking embodiment of the advantages offered by Basque maritime technology, was determined to show that its feat was not the result of mere chance, and so returned to the tasks for which it had originally been designed.
The ship was purchased on 26 February 1523 by Esteban Centurión, a prominent Genoese merchant, for the sum of 285 ducats (one third of its original value). Although the scars of its earlier voyage must have been more than evident, it was once again put into service on the high seas, this time destined for America. Records show that, in 1525, its owner, María Centurión (the daughter and heiress of Esteban Centurión), prepared it for a new trip to the city of Santo Domingo, in the modern-day Dominican Republic. 32 In a work published in 1547, Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo claimed that the Victoria finally met its fate on one of these transoceanic voyages, being lost during its return to Seville from the Caribbean islands. 33
Conclusions
Our research definitively establishes the Basque origin of the Victoria, which originally hailed from Ondarroa (Biscay, the Basque Country). Moreover, the expedition that discovered the Strait of Magellan and resulted in the first circumnavigation of the globe, relied partly on Basque maritime technology. This historic feat constitutes an unbeatable piece of historiographic evidence attesting to the excellent seaworthiness of the vessels built in the Basque Country. What is more, this piece of research also serves to highlight just how important this technology is to understanding the evolution of international maritime history, particularly from the end of the fifteenth century onwards. This importance has already been underscored by various other historical and archaeological studies, such as those of Chaunu and Canada. This modest contribution serves to corroborate their findings.
By the early sixteenth century, Basque maritime technology was relatively advanced in a European context. Its designs, originally conceived for transporting goods between northern Europe and the Mediterranean, soon began to develop and evolve to enable transoceanic voyages. This evolution was most likely prompted also by the fishing expeditions undertaken from the late Middle Ages. Whatever the reason behind their advanced design, however, one thing is clear – the Basque vessels that participated in the Magellan-Elcano expedition were of first-rate quality, and were:
able to successfully withstand all types of inclement weather and harsh conditions on any ocean in the world;
capable of transporting large cargoes and a full crew during transoceanic voyages lasting months at a time;
solidly built and extremely manoeuvrable, capable of coping with any eventuality;
resilient in managing to cope with the inexorable wear resulting from constant exposure to the elements, coupled with inadequate maintenance.
We would like to conclude with an appeal to historians to explore in more detail this maritime technology, which is of such historical importance. In order to further our knowledge of European maritime history during the early modern era, we believe it is of vital importance to consider the shipbuilding and maritime activities carried out in the Basque Country on an individual basis. In other words, it is important to focus specifically on the technological and economic circumstances that prompted the Magellan-Elcano expedition (and many others organised by the Casa de Contratación of Seville) to rely on Basque ships and Basque maritime technology.
Footnotes
Authors’ Note
Xabier Alberdi Lonbide and Iosu Etxezarraga Ortuondo now affliated with Basque Maritime Museum, Euskal Itsas Museoa, San Sebastián, Spain, and Albaola Basque Maritime Heritage Asociation, Pasaia, Spain, respectively.
1.
Lorenzo Hervás Panduro, Viaje estático al mundo planetario (Madrid, 1793), 27; Abraham Ortelius, ‘Maris Pacifici (quod vulgo Mar del Zur)’, in Theatrum Orbis Terrarum (Amberes, 1589); Jobani Baptista Riccioli, Geographiae et hydrographiae reformatae libri duodecim (Bononiae, 1661), 541; Antonio Torquemada, Jardín de flores curiosas (Salamanca, 1575), 428.
2.
José de Arteche, Elcano (Madrid, 1972), 57–8; Nicolás Soraluce Zubizarreta, Historia General de Guipúzcoa (Vitoria, 1870), I, 237.
3.
Ignacio Fernández Vial and Guadalupe Fernández Morente, La primera vuelta al mundo. La nao Victoria (Brenes, 2001), 39.
4.
Fernando Agirre Aramaio, ‘Nao Victoria’, Hondarroa (2014), 18–33; Juan Gil, El exilio portugués en Sevilla. De los Braganza a Magallanes (Seville, 2009), 274–5.
5.
Archivo General de Andalucía (AGA), Oficio XV, Libro II, escribanía Bernal G Vallesillo, 316 f.–317 f.
6.
Archivo General de Indias (AGI), Patronato, 34, R.10.
7.
AGI, Contratación, 3255, L.1.
8.
The official value of 1 ducat was 11 reales, with each real being worth 34 maravedis. In sum, 1 ducat = 374 maravedis.
9.
AGA, Oficio XV, Libro II, escribanía Bernal G Vallesillo, 328 f.–329 f.
10.
AGA, Oficio XV, Libro II, escribanía Bernal G Vallesillo, 316 f.–317 f.
11.
AGA, Oficio XV, Libro II, escribanía Bernal G Vallesillo, 139 f and b.
12.
AGI, Contratación, 5090, L.4, pages 8 f. –10 b.
13.
AGI, Contratación, 3255, L.1.
14.
General Archives of Simancas (Archivo General de Simancas), CCA, CED, 7, 209, 5.
15.
AGI, Contaduria, 425, N.2, R.2.
16.
Ignacio Fernández Vial and Guadalupe Fernández Morente, La primera vuelta al mundo. La nao Victoria (Brenes, 2001), 72, 74–5.
17.
AGI, Patronato, 34, R.10.
18.
AGI, Contratación, 3255, L.1.
19.
AGA, Oficio XV, Libro II, escribanía Bernal G Vallesillo, 139 f. and b.
20.
AGA, Oficio XV, Libro II, escribanía Bernal G Vallesillo, 316 f.–317 f.
21.
AGI, Contratación, 3255, L.1.
22.
23.
Fernando Agirre Aramaio, ‘Nao Victoria’, Hondarroa (2014), 18–33.
24.
25.
Pierre Chaunu, Sevilla y América siglos XVI y XVII (Sevilla, 1983), 210–30.
26.
The sources of the data on the voyage are the chronicle written by Antonio de Pigafetta. See Juan Sebastián de Elcano, et al, La primera vuelta al mundo (Madrid, 2012).
27.
AGI, Patronato, 34, R.14
28.
AGI, Contratación 5090, legajo 4, 65 f. – 68 f.
29.
AGI, Indiferente, 1528, N.2.
30.
AGI, Patronato, 34.
31.
AGI, Contaduría, 2.
32.
Ignacio Fernández Vial and Guadalupe Fernández Morente, La primera vuelta al mundo: La nao Victoria (Brenes, 2001), 247–8.
33.
Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, Historia general y natural de las Indias, islas y tierra firme del mar océano (Sevilla, 1547).