🪶 THE SMOKING QUILL | May 18, 2025

Whitewashing Lequios: How Conflation Rewrote Pinto's Legacy

🔍 Introduction: Misreading Pinto Through a Colonial Lens

Some modern interpreters of Fernão Mendes Pinto’s Peregrinação have leaned heavily on the English translation by Rebecca Catz. While her edition remains a valuable contribution, it contains interpretive liberties that have led to widespread confusion—chief among them, the conflation of the Lequios Isles (clearly linked to the Philippines) with the Ryukyu chain near Japan.

This error, however well-intentioned, stems not from Pinto himself but from the choices of later editors and translators. A close reading of both the Portuguese original and Catz’s translation, with geographic, linguistic, and historical context restored, reveals the true narrative Pinto conveyed.

🔹 Section I: The Term "Lequios" vs. "Ryukyu"

• In the original Portuguese, Pinto uses terms like "Lequios" or "Lequeos" to describe a distinct region and people he encountered after a 23-day drift following a storm.

• Nowhere in the original text does Pinto use the word Ryukyu.

• Catz introduces "Ryukyu" in brackets as an interpretive tool, not as a literal translation. Her choice reflects a prevailing assumption of her time, not a linguistic or cartographic certainty.

Example: In the Japan chapter, Catz translates a reference to "gentes brancas" (white people) as "Ryukyuans," though the Portuguese only uses the descriptive term.

Conclusion: “Gentes brancas” does not equate to “Ryukyuans” any more than it equates to Spaniards, Portuguese, or Ivatans of Batanes with lighter complexions. This is not a proper noun but a general descriptor, and it is NOT the word Lequios.

📖 Section II: The Drift Account Was Suppressed

• Catz herself admits that Pinto’s coordinates, distances, and even sequence of events were frequently altered by editors prior to publication.

• The original shipwreck and typhoon account was missing entirely from the first published version of Peregrinação, suggesting intentional omission or censorship.

• Catz speculates that editorial bias may have removed sections that did not align with preferred geographies or narratives. No one cared that Ryukyu might be identified as Lequios (Ophir) because they knew it was not true. They cared immensely about concealing the Spanish-conquered Philippines as that existence. 

"The Peregrinação had an extremely corrupt text... [and] editors took considerable liberties with the narrative" — Catz, Introduction

📊 Section III: Currents, Coordinates, and Colonial Mistakes

Critics often cherry-pick Pinto’s coordinates or vague geographical descriptions as "proof" of a Ryukyu landing, ignoring:

• Pinto’s repeated acknowledgments that his ship was adrift, disabled, and unable to chart accurately.

• The direction of oceanic currents during typhoon season, which push southwest from China toward Batanes (not northeast to Ryukyu). Understand the typhoon current leads to a Southwestward trajectory ultimately in which Pinto would be sailing against the prevailing current fighting his way to Batanes which remains within that flow logically. Ryukyu does not in any sense. This was never a point, just rambling in ignorance.

• Historical typhoon cases (e.g., Typhoon Wayne 1986, 1927 Manila Bay event) show 15-21 day drifts consistent with Pinto’s 23-day passage ending in Batanes, not Ryukyu.

Thus, rather than navigating to Ryukyu, the evidence suggests Pinto was blown to Northern Luzon and nearby isles, which were known as Lequios. That is confirmed by a host of maps that say so and those that specify Pinto's 5 Islands as West of Batanes on their maps implicitly. One can not debate that.

📃 Section IV: Islam in the Philippines — Truth and Nuance

Some have weaponized Pinto’s references to Muslim figures as proof that the Philippines was a Muslim nation in his time. This is both ahistorical and dishonest.

• Yes, there were Muslim communities in the Philippines before the Spanish arrived, particularly in the south (Mindanao, Sulu), and even in trade-linked coastal cities like Manila.

• Pinto dealt heavily with Muslim traders from Malaysia and Indonesia, where Islam had been dominant for centuries.

• Pigafetta mentions Hindu and Moorish rulers as well.

But these references do not mean the Philippines was predominantly Muslim then—nor now (still under 5%).

Just as today, Islam existed in pockets of a pluralistic society with Hindu, Buddhist, Animist, and early Christian traditions. Pinto’s Muslim interactions reflect the trade routes, not the majority demographic. Such assumption in weaponized ignorance used with the intent to defame is criminal.

🗰️ Section V: Lequios ≠ Manila

Another flawed assumption made by critics: the idea that Lequios equals Manila. This is categorically false and a misrepresentation of our position yet again.

• Lequios is Northern Luzon, including the Zambales coast, Ilocos (likely named for the Lequios and its population of Iloconos), and the islands extending to Batanes.

• Manila, which Pinto does reference separately, was a known port with different populations and rulers.

• Lequios, in his account, involved distinct peoples, often described as tall, militaristic, and horse-riding—matching Ilocano and Cordilleran traditions.

🌎 Section VI: Colonial Conflation and Modern Misuse

What we are seeing now is not a debate of evidence but the recycling of flawed assumptions.

• The Catz edition is used without understanding the editorial context, with brackets and inserted interpretations cited as absolute. They never were, and fail true testing.

• The blog critique in question hopscotches chapters, merges unrelated passages, and ignores clear textual warnings from the translator herself. That is not academic and not a debate especially when it leads to the typical defamation the blogger has admitted is his intent. This has been reported to authorities who will act soon. 

• The claim that Japan was seen from the Lequios Isles is not supported by the original Portuguese wording, but rather stems from a modern translation choice—possibly influenced by idiom, ambiguity, or postcolonial reinterpretation—rather than any explicit statement of visual proximity. It appears far later and the word Lequios is not even used but the general term for "fair-skinned people". 

To conflate all these terms and assume Pinto was confused or contradicting himself is unfair. He knew where he was. Dory may not, but Pinto did as he defined it thoroughly in which testing aligns with the Philippines 100%, and Ryukyu is an epic fail.

“Confusing 'Lequios' with a general term like 'gentes brancas' is like assuming every group of 'white people' in history must have lived in the same country — it’s historical and linguistic nonsense.”

🔒 A Note on Intent and Abuse

Let it be known: we will no longer respond directly to personal attacks, fabricated clown imagery, or defamation thinly veiled as critique. This is illegal and not academic discourse. 

It is clear from public statements that the opposing blogger's intent is not honest academic discussion, but personal harassment based on theological disagreement (e.g., our teachings on the Sabbath). This was written by him in admission, yet we did not even teach the Sabbath at the time he began attacking, (so, still not even genuine). 

He has admitted his purpose is to target our leadership personally, who is involved but does not even write all blogs, has circulated defamatory photo edits of our team and family, and has engaged in activities that constitute cyber libel on a gross scale. 

Let this be entered into public and legal record.

🔢 Final Thought:

Catz's translation, while significant, does not override the historical maps, maritime logic, and linguistic detail that point to Luzon as Pinto's Lequios. (We defined Luzon earlier as Northern, not Manila, as we have consistently said).

Conflating "white people" with one singular region is not scholarship.

It is narrative control through semantic sleight-of-hand. Witchcraft!

The Lequios were never Ryukyu. The record is now clear.

And the Colonial Trail of Tears follows...

Yah Bless.

— The God Culture Team

📜 Addendum: Clarifying the “Ryukyu” Conflation in Pinto

As part of our continuing review of primary source material, we are compelled to clarify a major point of confusion being publicly exploited by a blogger attempting to conflate two distinct portions of Fernão Mendes Pinto’s account—his shipwreck narrative and the later Japan chapter—under the erroneous assumption that both refer to Ryukyu. Here are the facts:

🔍 1. "Lequios" is a Specific Ethnonym or Toponym

In Pinto’s shipwreck account, the original Portuguese uses a clear variant of “Lequios” (also spelled Lequeos, Luquios, etc.).

• This term appears consistently in early Portuguese records (Barbosa, Rodrigues, Galvão) and maps, referring specifically to a region or people—notably tied to Luzon, including Zambales and Ilocos.

• Catz retains “Lequios” in her English translation in this section, faithfully reflecting the Portuguese source.

• This is not an ambiguous term — it is well-attested and distinct.

🔍 2. In the Japan Chapter, There Is No “Ryukyu” in the Portuguese

In contrast, in the Japan chapter, Catz inserts the term “Ryukyus” in brackets in English. However:

• The original Portuguese does not contain the word “Ryukyu.”

• Instead, the source text uses a phrase like “gentes brancas” — literally meaning “white people” or “fair-skinned people.”

• This phrase is generic and commonly applied to a variety of fair-complexioned Asian groups, including Japanese, Chinese, Ryukyuans, or Ilocanos.

🔍 3. Conflating “Gentes Brancas” with Ryukyu Is Inaccurate

The blogger claims Pinto meant “Ryukyu” when using “gentes brancas,” but:

• That is interpretation, not translation.

• Catz herself does not indicate that she is departing from the original term when inserting “Ryukyus” in brackets.

• There is no linguistic or historical basis to equate “gentes brancas” with “Ryukyu” in Pinto’s usage.

🔍 4. The Blogger’s Argument Collapses

The blogger has built his entire “Pinto was in Ryukyu” case on the claim that:

• Pinto saw Japan “from the Lequios Isles,” (a passage from a far later section not related to the shipwreck)

• And that “Ryukyu” is mentioned as the location. (It is not!)

However:

• The shipwreck chapter uses “Lequios” (a specific term).

• The Japan chapter does not use “Lequios” or “Ryukyu” in the Portuguese.

• The only connection between the chapters is Catz’s bracketed interpretation of “gentes brancas” as “Ryukyus” — which is not sourced from Pinto’s actual words.

✅ Conclusion: Two Terms, Two Locations

• “Lequios” is a specific term used in Pinto’s shipwreck narrative, strongly aligned with Northern Luzon and Batanes.

• “Gentes brancas” in the Japan chapter is a general descriptor, not a geographic marker, and does not equate to “Lequios.” This is also evidenced in the use of this term "white people" to refer to Jews, one from the Mt. Sinai area, etc. which were not Ryukyuans.
  

• The blogger’s conflation is invalid. It does not reflect the Portuguese original and relies on bracketed interpretive insertions, not source fidelity. He rails about that when someone else even uses a secondary source, this proves he is just looking for canon fodder to commit his defamation campaign resulting in hollow useless conjecture of the immoral.
  

Therefore, the claim that Pinto was in Ryukyu during the shipwreck — or that both chapters refer to the same location — is historically and linguistically unsupported.