1. For details cf. Sousa, Alfredo Botelho de, Subsidios para a História Milítar Maritima da India, Vol. II, p. 476.

2. See his letter to the King dated December 31 in the Livros das Monçöes No. 12 (1613–1617), Fls. 213–214, Cartas de Dom Jerónimo de Azevedo para el-rei, No. 98. A film of this document is to be found in the Filmateca of the Centro de Estudos Historicos Ultramarinos, Lisbon, Film 115.

3. Letter from Father Juan de Ribera, Rector of the residence of the Society of Jesus at Manila, who had gone on the Spanish embassy to Goa in 1614 to request Portuguese naval assistance and was returning to Manila with de Miranda's fleet. See Blair, H.E. and Robertson, J.A., The Philippine Islands 1498–1898 Vol. XVII, pp. 266–268.Google Scholar

4. A detailed report of this battle by de Miranda himself is to be found in the Arquivo Histórico Ultramarino, Lisbon. File: India, Caixa IV. In the report, de Miranda signed himself as Frco demjranda Enrriques. The number and strength of the Achinese fleet must have been exaggerated in the report according to which it was a fleet of four hundred sail and seventy thousand men. According to Father Juan de Ribera, the strength of the Achinese is said to be one hundred and fifty sail and forty thousand men. See Blair, E.H. and Robertson, J.A., The Philippine Islands 1498–1898, Vol XVII, p. 268.Google Scholar

5. For details of the battle, cf. de Miranda's report, file: India, Caixa IV, Arquivo Histórico Ultramarino; and Steven van der Haghen's letter to the Directors of V.O.C. dated March 10, 1616 reprinted from the Oud-Koloniaal Archief by Tiele, P.A. in Bouwstoffen voor de Geschiedenis der Nederlanders in den Maleischen Archipel, Iste D1. pp. 118–130.Google Scholar

6. An account of de Miranda's expedition from the time of its departure from Goa to its utter destruction by the Dutch off Malacca and his trial in Goa is to be found in A. Bocarro, Decada 13, caps. 86, 93, 95 & 156. Bocarro was Chronicler of the Portuguese Government at Goa at that time, his account should be considered reliable.

7. Bocarro, Antonio, Decada 13 da História da India, pp. 428–430Google Scholar; Tiele, P.A., De Europeërs in den Maleischen Archipel, Bijdragen tot de Taal-Land-en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-lndië, vijde volgreeks — eerste deel, pp. 312–313Google Scholar; Alfredo Botelho de Sousa, Subsídios para a História Militar Marítima da India, Vol. II, pp. 477–479Google Scholar. Bocarro says that Don Juan left Manila in March (Decada 13, p. 428). In the Inleiding of his Bouwstoffen voor de Geschiedenis der Nederlanders in den Maleischen Archipel, Iste DI. p. XXIII, Tiele, contradicting his own work quoted above (De Europeërs, p. 312Google Scholar), says that da Silver died on the 23rd of April. Tiele must be wrong here.

8. See a letter from Jan Pietersz. Coen to the Directors of the V.O.C. dated December 25, 1615, in de Jonge, J.K.J., De Opkomst van het Nederlandsch Gezag as over Java, Eerste D1, p. 57.Google Scholar

9. It is not clear concerning the number of men on board these ships. N. MacLeod says that three companies of soldiers, altogether 146 strong, were embarked (De Oost-Indische Compagnie als Zeemogenheid in Azië, Eerste D1, p. 168), but this could not have been the total strength of the navy. We know that at Ternate the Dutch had 1,000. soldiers and sailors at their disposal. See Tiele, P.A., De Europeërs in den Maleischen ArchipelGoogle Scholar, in Bijdragen tot de Taal — Land — en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië, 5de Volgreeks, lste D1, p. 319. Lam gives the number of his own men in the battle that took place outside Manila Bay as “about 550”. See his letter to the Directors of the V.O.C: Brief van J. Dz. Lam aan Bewindhebbers der O.I. Compagnie, 10 11, 1617Google Scholar, in Tiele, P.A., Bouwstoffen voor de Geschiedenis der Nederlanders in den Maleischen Archipel, lste D1, p. 180.Google Scholar

10. Cf. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III in Blair, and Robertson, , The Philippine Islands, Vol. XVIII, p. 33.Google Scholar

11. “Outon” in Lam's letter: Brief van J. Dz. Lam, Bomvstoffen, lste Di, p. 170Google Scholar. And “Oton” by the Spaniards, an important Spanish supply base. Cf. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, in op. cit., p. 43.

12. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, Bouwstoffen, lste d1, p. 171Google Scholar, and letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, in op. cit., Vol. XVIII, p. 49.

13. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 171.Google Scholar

14. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 171.Google Scholar

15. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III in op. cit., pp. 32–34.

16. Tiele, P.A., De Europeërs in den Maleischen Archipel, Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-lndië, 5de Volgreeks, lste D1, p. 321.Google Scholar

17. N. Mac Leod (op. cit. p. 169, note 2) is probably right in locating Ilocos in Lingayen Gulf from its position in a M.S. map of 1687.

18. The ship brought more than 800,000 pesos. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, op. cit., p. 32.

19. Named after Admiral Wittert who in 1609 brought his fleet there. It was an island north of the Manila Bay, probably near the Island Silanguin. Cf. Leod, N. Mac, op. cit., p. 83Google Scholar. To this anchorage the Spaniards applied the name Playa Honda which, meaning “Low Beach”, is the name of an extensive plain in Batalan mountain on the coast of Zambales Province, Luzon, to the north-west of Manila.

20. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 173Google Scholar, cf. also a Chinese source, Tung-hsi-yang K'ao () by Chang Hsieh () etc., Chêng-chung shu-chü () edit., ch. 6, p. 14b: The Dutch “In the 45th year of Wan-li (1617) attacked and wantonly plundered Chinese merchants outside the ports of Luzon. The shipowners were distressed.” () Chang lived in the late 16lh and early 17th centuries. This source book on Southeast Asian countries and trade was prefaced in 1618 by Wang Ch'i-tsung (), chief supervising compiler of the book, and customs superintendent at Changchow (), Fukien, at that time one of China's most important ports for trade with Southeast Asia.

21. “nae rijpe deliberatie.” Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 173.Google Scholar

22. According to Alcaraz “The two vessels were carrying about three hundred thousand pesos' worth of merchandise.” Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, op. cit., p. 38.

23. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, op. cit., pp. 34–36, 39.

24. Bocarro, , op. cit., p. 663Google Scholar. According to Lam the Spanish Admiral-ship had liftyeight guns. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 18.Google Scholar

25. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, op. cit., pp. 37–38.

26. Leod, Mac, op. cit., p. 170Google Scholar. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 174.Google Scholar

27. This is according to Lam. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 174Google Scholar. Alcaraz only says that the Spanish Admiral-ship had “near it” the galleon San Juan Bautista. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, op. cit., p. 38.

28. “wear ouer ick den Vice Commandeur (die zeer nae bij ons was) toe riep, dat wij dadelijcken met al ons volck een gebedt tot Godt zouden doen, ende alsdan tot zeyn een schoot schieten ende wenden om den Spaenschen Admirael aen boort te leggen, het welck in alder ile alsoo wiert gedaen.” Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 175.Google Scholar

29. “e cada uma (Dutch ship) lhe (the Spanish Admiral-ship) foi dando a sua carga, e ela pelo consequinte a cada uma tambem deu a sua com todas as peças daquela banda, que foi um particular esforço, com que conheceram logo os holandeses a muita força dela” Bocarro, , op. cit., p. 663Google Scholar. Also Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 174.Google Scholar

30. Lam reported that the Engel “is (niettegenstaende wij naer hem toeliepen) schandelijken gaen loopen.” Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 175.Google Scholar

31. “daer toe alien de raadtspersonen zeer wel geinclineert waren, mij belovende ende de handt gevende met malcanderen te leven en te sterven, scheydende alsoo met grooter blijschap vanden anderen, elek na zijn boort varende.” Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 175.Google Scholar

32. This is the date given by Lam. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 175Google Scholar. According to the Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, (op. cit., p. 38) it is the 15th. While the first encounter between the Spanish Admiral-ship and the Dutch fleet took place the day before, thus on the 14th. I have followed Lam who was in personal command of the Dutch fleet.

33. Apparently the Engel had not joined the fleet.

34. “zijnde zulcken couragie onder tvolck van de minste tot de meest ouer de gehele vloote dat ick achte diergelijcke voor desen niet veel gesien to zijn.” Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 175.Google Scholar

35. Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 176Google Scholar. Cf. also Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, op cit., pp. 39–40.

36. One of the two ships was set fire by the San Miguel, and drifted to the other which had already surrendered to the galleon Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe under Captain Juan Bautista de Molina. The captured Dutch ship then caught fire from the drifting burning ship, which further drifted toward the galleon San Juan Bautista and the Oude Sonne, forced them to separate. The Dutch ship escaped. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, op. cit., p. 40.

37. In Lam's words: “Wij luyden, geen ander wtcomste dan doot ofte ewige ghevanckenisse voor ogen siende.” Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 176.Google Scholar

38. Letter from Alcaraz to Felipe III, op. cit., p. 41, and Brief van J. Dz. Lam, op. cit., p. 176Google Scholar. Bocarro says (op. cit., p. 664) that a Dutch ship, pursued by the caravel of André Coelho, sunk during the night. The Portuguese Chronicler in India must have been wrong; as the Dutch ships parted company, probably one of them was lost sight of by the pursuers. His statement (Loc. cit.) that another Dutch ship escaped to Jalalo where it was wrecked must be also erroneous.

39. They were sentenced on the 17th of December, 1617.