The nationality of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo (João Rodrigues Cabrilho as he is called in Portuguese) has usually been readily accepted as having been Portuguese; however, an analysis of sixteenth and seventeenth century manuscripts and imprints, as well as modern works, tends to indicate the contrary. The purpose of this essay is to present this analysis in accordance with modern historical methodology and, free from nationalistic chauvinism, to arrive at an objective conclusion relative to the national origin of the discoverer of Alta California.
Prior to examining the individual case of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo it would be well to note the differences in Iberian practices regarding family names. In Spain the usual procedure in determining the family name of an individual is to employ the first name following Christian or given names, thus the patronym or family name of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo would be Rodríguez, with Cabrillo being the matronym (segundo apellido) or mother’s maiden name, which is used to facilitate identification of the individual as well as to perpetuate family names of importance. The general practice in Portugal is the reverse, that is, the second family name (Cabrillo) is the patronym, while the first family name (Rodríguez) is the matronym. Our subject would thus be known as Juan Cabrillo were he Portuguese, and Juan Rodríguez were he Spanish.
Unfortunately, the name “Juan Rodríguez” is, in the Iberian world, the equivalent of “John Jones” in the Anglo-American world. The contemporary expression employed in Spain to indicate a man whose family is out of town and is temporarily a “bachelor” is estar de Rodríguez (“to be Rodríguez), indicating the alias usually assumed during extra-marital relationships, such as “Jones” or “Smith” would be used in similar situations in the United States. John or Juan is of course, an extremely common Christian name in both nations. Thus, despite the many published and manuscript lists of immigrants to the New World in the early sixteenth century, many of which fail to give the individual’s highly important segundo apellido, we find 124 persons with the name Juan Rodríguez as having immigrated to the Americas between 1493 and 1542, and no references to Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, Juan Cabrillo, or its Portuguese equivalent João Rodrigues Cabrilho.
Confronted with this problem of identification, we may then accept the well-documented fact that Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo migrated to the New World prior to 1520, and in that year joined the forces of Pánfilo de Narváez who, under orders of Diego de Velásquez, governor of Cuba, was ordered to Veracruz to forcibly return Fernando Cortés to that island.2 The acceptance of these facts has only a minor effect upon the determination of the subject’s nationality for no mention of his being Portuguese is made in these early documents nor is his segundo apellido, Cabrillo, used in the extant lists of immigrants to the New World.
Following the defeat of Narváez by Cortés in May, 1520, the activities of Rodríguez Cabrillo are well documented. As was the case of many of Narváez’ men, following the victory of Cortés, Rodríguez Cabrillo joined the forces of the conquistador and, in 1521, was employed at Tlaxcala under the command of Juan Rodríguez Villafuerte in the construction of the thirteen brigantines used in the conquest of Tenochtitlan in August of that year. His meritorious action in the conquest caused his rapid rise among his compatriots, and in 1522 and 1523 he accompanied Francisco de Orozco in the conquest of Oaxaca, and Pedro de Alvarado in the conquest of Guatemala as a captain and commander of crossbowmen.3
This latter action earned Rodríguez Cabrillo the position of being one of the conquistadores of Guatemala, and, on 12 August 1524, he was received by the cabildo of Santiago de Guatemala as a resident of that city.4 As a conquistador and established colonizer of Guatemala, Rodríguez Cabrillo returned to Spain in 1524 and [in] 1525 and married Beatriz Sánchez de Ortega, sister of a companion-in-arms, Diego Sánchez de Ortega. Upon his return in 1529 Rodríguez Cabrillo was granted an encomienda (Concession of Indian labor) in Coban where he exploited mines near the Uzpantlan and Tequiziztlan rivers with his brother-in-law.5 Service in the conquest was further recognized in 1536 when, on 20 July, Pedro de Alvarado granted the encomiendas of Teoata and Cotela to his captain, then a resident of Gracias a Díos.6 This friendship with Alvarado was further reflected by the placing of Rodríguez Cabrillo in command of the former’s shipyards at Acajutla where twelve vessels were under construction for exploration and discovery in the Pacific Ocean.7
By 1540 the twelve ships were completed as was another, the San Salvador, constructed by Rodríguez Cabrillo at his own expense.8 The fleet thus prepared, Alvarado, with Rodríguez Cabrillo as his admiral, sailed to the Colima coast of New Spain to join forces with his partner in the enterprise. Viceroy Antonio de Mendoza. During this period Rodríguez Cabrillo was further honored by his commander with a concession of encomiendas at Tacuba and Jumaitepeque.9
The situation in New Spain at the time of Alvarado’s arrival in Colima did not permit the immediate initiation of exploration, for a general Indian rebellion, the Mixtón War, in the western regions (Nueva Galicia) required all available troops. Unable to proceed, Alvarado marched inland to join in battle, leaving Rodríguez Cabrillo in command of the fleet at Colima. The death of Alvarado in the summer of 1541 placed Rodríguez Cabrillo in full command of the fleet and in direct contact with Mendoza, who, desirous of continuing his plans for exploration, took charge of Alvarado’s vessels and prepared them for sailing.10
As a result of his experience and the high esteem in which he was held by Alvarado, Rodríguez Cabrillo was confirmed in his command by Mendoza and was ordered to prepare the San Salvador and Victoria for exploration northward along the Pacific Coast. Sailing from Navidad on 27 June 1542, Rodríguez Cabrillo began his historic voyage to Alta California; a voyage from which he would not return. On 23 November of that year he was injured by a fall on San Miguel Island, yet continued to explore the north coast of California. Upon his return to San Miguel he died of his injury on 3 January 1543, after conceding command to his pilot, Bartolome’ Ferrer, a Levantine (Valencian).11
From the above clearly documented sketch of the major activities of Rodríguez Cabrillo, several conclusions may be reached:
1?Many Iberians named Juan Rodríguez migrated to the Americas in the early sixteenth century without annotation as to their having been Portuguese, or of any nationality other than that of Castilian. It was, however, a general practice to denote those migrants who were not Castilian (ie. Aragonese, Valencian, Basque, Portuguese, Gallician, etc.) as was the case of a later explorer on the California coast, Sebastián Rodríguez Cermeño, of whom Viceroy Luis de Velasco wrote on 4 April 1594: “… he is an experienced man in navigation, reliable and promising, although he is Portuguese, for there are no Castilians of this profession available…”12
Although at the date of Velasco’s writing, Portugal was a part of the Spanish monarchy, the Viceroy followed the well-established precedent of distinguishing non-Castilians in the Americas. Prior to 1580 Portugal was an entirely separate monarchy and Portuguese subjects were so identified (e.g. Fernando Magalhães or Magellan). It is further evident that positions of responsibility such as those granted to Rodríguez Cabrillo were only granted to non-Castilians in cases of extreme urgency and with great reluctance.
2?It is evident that Rodríguez Cabrillo was a competent and highly esteemed conquistador who rapidly rose to positions of command and wealth. These positions placed him in personal contact with such direct representatives of the Spanish Crown as Pedro de Alvarado, Captain General of Guatemala, and Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. It is most unlikely that Rodríguez Cabrillo would have succeeded in concealing his nationality from such officials during over two decades of service, and it is yet more unlikely that such officials would make no mention of his having been non-Castilian.
The documents of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century New Spain contain many reports of non-Castilians illegally involved in strategic positions in the viceroyalty. Relative to California, the case of Francisco Esteban Carbonel may be cited. Hopeful of leading a pearl fishing expedition to the Gulf of California in 1635, Carbonel established a shipyard on the coast of Nayarit. There he was overheard speaking a language which was not Castilian and, although evidence indicated that he was Valencian, he was tried as a foreigner (Frenchman) and was prohibited from further expeditionary activities.13
3?The documents relative to Rodríguez Cabrillo’s voyage to Alta California, unfortunately few and sketchy, make no reference to his nationality. Rather, he is referred to simply as Juan Rodríguez, the name by which he was known, and which makes no use of the family name Cabrillo. Very specific reference however, is made to the Valencian origin of Bartolome’ Ferrer in these same documents.14
Following his death, the heirs of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo became involved in extensive litigation to retain and recover his various encomiendas and other holdings, as well as to acquire a royal pension based upon his services to the Crown. This litigation was begun in 1560 and terminated in 1617 and, typical of Spanish attention to documentary detail, comprises several hundred pages of exhibits, testimony and judicial decrees. Throughout this documentation, which includes Royal Grants and the testimony of leading figures in the early history of Guatemala, such as the renowned chronicler Bernal Díaz del Castillo, all personal acquaintances of the deceased, no mention of Rodríguez Cabrillo’s nationality is made, rather he is referred to continually as Juan Rodríguez or Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, the Castilian form of his name. Although the witnesses had no direct knowledge of his forebears, it is most unlikely that throughout such lengthy hearings adverse witnesses would not have made mention of any apparent non-Castilian traits, cultural or linguistic.15
Thus, with the foregoing indications of the Castilian origins of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, as reflected by contemporary documentation, it would be well to analyze the bases used to support the conclusion that he was, in fact, Portuguese. The earliest mention of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo’s nationality having been Portuguese was made by Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas, Royal Chronicler of Castile, in his Historia general de los hechos de los castellanos en las islas y tierra firme del mar océano, Década 7a libro V, page 113 published in Madrid by Juan de la Cuesta in 1615.16 A general chronicle of Spanish expansion in the New World during the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, Herrera has served as a basic authority for the writing of countless histories of that era during the more than three centuries since its publication.
As Royal Chronicler, Herrera had at his disposal the majority of documentation relative to Spain’s overseas activities, and it is reasonable to suppose that in the intervening years, documents consulted by Herrera have been lost or destroyed; it is even reasonable to suppose that such lost documents might have included data relative to Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo. By the same token, it is equally reasonable to assume that, writing after the fact and as a non-participant, Herrera was subject to error, particularly on minor points of fact such as the nationality of a relatively minor historical figure. Even Bernal Díaz, a participant in the conquest of Mexico, is often vague as to details in his Historia Verdadera de la Conquista de México.17
Be that as it may, the single mention by Herrera that Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo was Portuguese has served as the sole cornerstone upon which historians have based their conclusions concerning his nationality, nations have built monuments, and a multitude of place names have been given. Hubert Howe Bancroft in his History of the North Mexican States and Texas,18 Herbert Eugene Bolton in his Spanish Explorers in the Southwest,19 Charles Edward Chapman in his A History of California: The Spanish Period,20 following Bolton, to cite but a few of the more eminent historians of Spanish California, all accepted Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo as having been Portuguese without question, basing this assumption upon Herrera. The great historian of maritime expansion to California, Henry Raup Wagner in his Spanish Voyages to the Northwest Coast of America in the Sixteenth Century,21 conceding the fact that Herrera was the sole positive source for Rodríguez Cabrillo’s Portuguese nationality, nevertheless held that the “failure to say anything about his antecedents” by Rodríguez Cabrillo’s son in the hearings cited above, confirmed his nationality, for “when individuals made no references to the services which their ancestors had rendered to the Spanish Crown, they were usually Portuguese.”22 This is, however, but one explanation, for it may be argued with equal validity that the failure to mention antecedents could just as easily indicate that they had not performed any services to the crown, that they were of humble, illegitimate or non-Christian origins, or that they were merely non-Castilian but not necessarily Portuguese. Unfortunately Wagner does not document a single case which supports his conclusion.
While professional historians perpetuated the statement of Herrera, popular activities also furthered the belief in the Portuguese origins of Rodríguez Cabrillo. The quarto-centennial of the discovery of the New World celebrated in 1892 gave rise to discussions relative to the discoverer of Alta California. Anglophylic sentiments granting this honor to Francis Drake, who landed on the coast in 1579, were overcome by the arguments of the Native Sons and Daughters of the Golden West who, with several Portuguese societies in California, obtained official sanction of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo as the European discoverer of California. This success led to a simulated arrival ceremony at Point Loma in San Diego on 29 September 1892 by Portuguese groups in San Diego, and the initiation of plans for the construction of a monument at Point Loma.23 These activities were followed by various programs during the succeeding decades which served to perpetuate Herrera’s statement. In 1913 Charles Fletcher Lummis proposed a monument to Rodríguez Cabrillo at Point Loma, calling for the aid of Portugal, “the country of his birth,” to search for data on his birth and lineage, as well as locate his gave on San Miguel Island.24 Lummis’ proposal was accepted by the United States Government, and on 14 October 1913 by Presidential Proclamation the Cabrillo National Monument was created at Point Loma.25 The State of California followed suit twenty-two years later, and on 24 January 1935 declared 28 September as “Cabrillo Day” thus “officially confirming” Herrera.26
The “awakening” of California to the historical existence of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, and the activities of California’s Portuguese community stimulated similar activity within Portugal designed to substantiate Herrera. The first of these efforts was by the former Portuguese Consul in San Francisco, Euclides Goulard da Costa in his Portugal Desobridor (Lisbon, 1928).27 Stating that the possession of California was taken by “João Rodrigues Cabrilho” in Portuguese, and quoting the act of possession in that language, he cited as his source for such statements Buckingham Smith, Colección de varios documentos para la historia de la Florida y tierras adyacentes.28 This work, reproducing the brief diary of Juan Páez of the 1542-43 expedition, is written entirely in Castilian and contains no act of possession! Fortunately, Goulart da Costa did not claim knowledge of the place and date of Rodríguez Cabrillo’s birth, although he did state that “Cabrilho” was a common name in the north of Portugal.
In 1939, Celestino Soares published his California and the Portuguese in Lisbon.29 While stating that no positive data relative to the place of birth of “João Rodrigues Cabrilho” was known, “contemporaries and historians … declare that he was Portuguese by birth.”30 Furthermore, he states that while the “surname of Cabrilho is not known in Portugal” it is probably a corruption of the surname “Cabrilha which still exists in Portugal.”31 Were it not difficult enough to establish Rodríguez Cabrillo’s nationality, Soares claims that Ferrer, Antonio Correa (“Correia”) and Juan Páez (“Juao Pais”), members of the 1542 expedition were also Portuguese, but cites no evidence to support this claim.
Somewhat more objective, but without presenting new evidence, Alves de Azevedo published “Cabrilho e a sua viagem” in 1944.32 This article concedes to Herrera the sole basis for Rodríguez Cabrillo’s nationality and states that “No one has ever impugned the affirmation of Herrera for he had, without a doubt, free access to all of the documents in the royal archives.”33 Admitting conjecture and the need for documentary proof, Alves de Alzevedo suggests that “Cabrilho” was perhaps a matronym, but then confuses Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo with his contemporary in New Spain, Juan Rodríguez Villafuerte, stating that this was an alias used to prevent detection by Spanish officials.34 For Alves de Alzevedo the use of “João Rodrigues Cabrilho” was not sufficient, for he refers to the later explorer of California, Sebastián Vizcaíno, as “Viscainho!”
Portuguese investigation into the national origins of Rodríguez Cabrillo reached its height in 1957 with the publication in Lisbon of João Rodrigues Cabrilho by the Visconde de Lagoa.35 Although similar to the previously cited works in that Spanish names are given Portuguese spelling, it is the first of such studies to employ archival sources. The author states that he searched the principal Portuguese archives of the Torre do Tombo, Biblioteca Nacional and Biblioteca de Ajuda, as well as Portuguese genealogies and encyclopedias for the name “Rodrigues Cabrilho” but to no avail, speculating that documents relative to him were lost in the great Lisbon earthquake and tidal wave of 175536 In examining the documents relative to the claims of Rodríguez Cabrillo’s heirs housed in the Archivo General de Indias, Sevilla, the Visconde de Lagoa states that they are entirely “based on hearsay and not on a direct knowledge of the facts” and that they cannot take preference over the “documented information” of Herrera due to the time elapsed between the arrival of Rodríguez Cabrillo in Guatemala and the opening of the hearings.37 He further states that the name Cabrillo is absent from the A.G.I. documents and that the idea that these documents predate Herrera is “farfetched.”38 Furthermore, it is suggested that because Bernal Díaz could not recall everyone mentioned in his Historia Verdadera, his omission of Rodríguez Cabrillo’s nationality invalidates his work in comparison with that of Herrera, and that because Herrera mentions Rodríguez Cabrillo as being an experienced navigator, he was probably the João Roiz or João Rodrigues mentioned in documents relative to the Carreira da India (India Trade) in 1513-1516.39 Finally, after stating on several occasions that Rodríguez Cabrillo concealed his nationality to avoid prosecution and to gain position, the Vizconde de Lagoa states that in 1636 he admitted his Portuguese nationality when reporting upon the state of his encomiendas in Teoata and Cotela. No such admission was made, however.40
In considering the evidence favoring the Portuguese nationality of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo as presented by United States and Portuguese historians, several conclusions may be reached.
1?All contemporary historians have based their argument upon the single statement by Antonio de Herrera that Rodríguez Cabrillo was Portuguese, and have failed to introduce new positive evidence supporting this statement or providing a place and date of birth.
2?Speculation and extreme nationalism have been the primary bases for granting credence to Herrera in preference to far more extensive documentation. The absurdity that the testimony both favorable and adverse given by leading citizens of Guatemala from 1560 to 1617 was “hearsay” and post-dated Herrera, published in 1615, is self-evident. It is equally absurd to suggest the destruction of documents, without evidence to support their ever having existed.
Furthermore, misrepresentation of the facts such as the statements that the name Cabrillo is absent from litigation documents in the A.G.I., that Rodríguez Cabrillo signed himself as Portuguese, that Bernal Díaz was incompetent to discuss a man he knew personally as a companion in arms and friend, and that Rodríguez Cabrillo must have gained his navigational experience in the Carreira da India with no consideration of his service in New Spain and Guatemala simply reflect a desperate attempt to prove a thesis rather than present objective evidence.
3?Portuguese writers are at best vague as to the name Cabrilho, and several admit that it does not exist in Portugal. A complete search of the Lista de Assinantes da Rede Telefonica Nacional41 (Portuguese telephone directories) fails to reveal a single subscriber with the family name of Cabrillo or Cabrilho, and only three subscribers with the family name of Cabrilha.42 In the town of Cabril (Zona Aveiro)43 no persons with telephones have family names even similar to the town’s name, as suggested by Portuguese writers as the source of the name Cabrilho. On the other hand, the Guía Telefónica de Madrid44 (Madrid telephone directory) reveals seven subscribers with the patronym Cabrillo.
From the material presented herein, it is apparent that there exists considerable doubt as to the nationality of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo and, in fact, there is much to indicate that he was not Portuguese but Castilian. The mere fact that he served the Spanish crown for over two decades without a single mention during his lifetime that he was Portuguese should be sufficient to negate Herrera. The single statement by Herrera versus contemporary documentation and in light of the norms of national identity at the time would appear to have the same force had he stated that Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo was Italian or French. Unfortunately no new evidence conclusively supporting or refuting Herrera has yet come to light;45 it is hoped that this essay will stimulate the search for such evidence and that it will appear in a scholarly and objective manner. Furthermore, it is not expected that all monuments to “Cabrillo” will be renamed “Rodríguez” nor is it desired that Portugal’s legacy from Prince Henry, The Navigator, and her historic role as a great maritime power in the Age of Discovery be diminished.
1. Ministerio de Trabajo y Previsión. Catálogo de Pasajeros a Indias durante los siglos XVI, XVII y XVIII. Volume I (1509-1533) (Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1930): Cristóbal Bermúdez Plata, ed. Catálogo de Pasajeros a Indias durante los siglos XVI, XVII, XVIII. (Sevilla: C.S.I.C., 1940); Francisco A. de Icaza. Diccionario Autobiográfico de Conquistadores y Pobladores de Nueva España. 2 vols. (Guadalajara: Edmundo Aviña Levy, 1969); Peter Boyd-Bowman. Indice Geobiográfico de Cuarenta Mil Pobladores Españoles de América. Tomo I (1493-1519) (Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo, 1964.), Tomo II (1520-1539) (Mexico: Jus,1968).
2. Archivo General de Indias, Sevilla. (A.G.I.) Sección Patronato, leg. 87, n 2, R 4. Información de los Servicios del General Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, 1617.
3. Ibid. Also, A.G.I., Sección Justicia, leg. 290.
4. Libro viejo de la funcadión de Guatemala y papeles relativos a D. Pedro de Alvarado. Bibliotheca Goathemala, VII (Guatemala: Sociedad de Geografia e Historia, 1934), p.7.
5. A.G.I., Justicia, leg. 290.
6. A.G.I., Justicia, leg. 280. See also, Colección de Documentos Inéditos Relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y organización de las Antiguas posesiones espanolas de America y Oceania (Madrid: Frias y Cía., 1864-84), XV, 18.
7. A.G.I., Justicia, leg. 280. See also: Díaz del Castillo, Bernal. Historia Verdadera de la Conquista de Mexico (Mexico: Pedro Robredo, 1939), II, 131.
9. A.G.I., Justicia, leg. 280.
10. A.G.I., Justicia, leg. 290; A.G.I., Patronato, leg. 87, n 2, R 4.
11. A.G.I., Patronato, leg. 20, R 14. Relación de Juan Pãez. For secondary material regarding Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo see: Henry Raup Wagner. Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo (San Francisco: California Historical Society, 1941), and Maurice G. Holmes. From New Spain by Sea to the Californias, 1519-1668 (Glendale: Arthur H. Clark, 1963).
12. A.G.I., Sección Audiencia de México, leg. 22. See also: W. Michael Mathes, ed. Californiana I. Documentos para la historia de la demarcación comercial de California: 1583-1632 (Madrid: José Porrúa Turanzas, 1965), I, 118-19.
13. A.G.I., Patronato, leg. 31. See also: W. Michael Mathes. ed. Californiana II. Documentos para la historia de la explotación comercial de California: 1611-1679 (Madrid: José Porrúa Turanzas, 1970), 1, 551-614.
14. A.G.I., Patronato, leg. 20, R 14.
15. A.G.I., Justicia, leg. 290. The certified copy of receipt of a Royal Order dated 31 March 1540 shows the signature Jhoan R s Cabrillo. A. G.I., Patronato, leg. 87, n 2, R 4. The name is shown as: Ju R Cabrillo, Juan R Cabrillo, Juan Rrodriguez Cabrillo, and Juan Rrodriguez. See also: A.G.I., Justicia, legs. 280, 286.
16. First edition. The best modern edition is published by the Real Academia de la Historia (Madrid: 1935-1957), 17 vols.
17. The best modern edition is published in Mexico in 1939 by Pedro Robredo, 3 vols.
18. (San Francisco: The History Company, 1886), I, 133.
19. (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1908), p. 5.
20. (New York: Macmillan, 1921), pp. 76-77.
21. (San Francisco: California Historical Society, 1929), pp. 72, 73, 426.
22. Ibid., p. 426.
23. Goulart da Costa, Euclides. Portugal Descobridor, Apontamentos Respetantes á Descoberta da California (Lisboa: Tip. da Manutenção Military, 1928), pp. 36-37.
24. Lummis, Charles Fletcher. In Memory of Juan Rodrigues Cabrillo Who gave the World California (Chula Vista: Denrich Press, 1913).
25. United States Department of the Interior. Cabrillo National Monument, California (Washington: G.P.O., 1949).
26. California. Senate Concurrent Resolution 15. Sacramento: 1935; California. Senate Concurrent Resolution 44. Sacramento: 1935. See also: Ivan R. Waterman. John Rodrigues Cabrillo (Sacramento: California State Department of Education, 1935).
27. Tip. da Manutenção Militar. pp. 24, 25.
28. (London: Trubner, 1857).
29. SPN Books.
30. Soares, op. cit., p. 38.
31. Ibid., p. 39.
32. Boletim da Sociedade de Geografia de Lisboa, LXII (Julho a Agosto, 1944), pp. 512-20.
33. Azevedo, op. cit., p. 519.
34. Ibid., pp. 517, 519.
35. Agencia Geral do Ultramar. Recently the Portuguese community of California reaffirmed their belief in the Portuguese nationality of Rodríguez Cabrillo. See: Noticias de Portugal, XXIII (10 de Maio de 1969).
36. Lagoa, op. cit., pp. 9, 10, 17, 19. He suggests that Cabrillo was a “nickname” used to distinguish from other “Rodríguez” and had its origin in the name of the town of Cabril.
37. Supra, notes 5, 6. Lagoa, op. cit., p. 21.
38. Supra, note 15. Lagoa, op. cit, p. 22.
39. Lagoa, op. cit., p. 26.
40. Supra, note 6. Lagoa, op. cit., p. 44.
41. Lista de Assinantes da Rede Telefonica Nacional. Zona Norte (1966); Zona Centro (1966); Zona Sul (1966); Zona de Lisboa e Arredores (1966); Zona do Porto e Arredores (1966).
42. Zona de Lisboa e Arredores (1966).
43. Zona Centro (1966).
44. Guía Telefónica de Madrid. Sección Alfabética. Tomo T. (Enero, 1971).
45. The recent recovery from storage at the Lowie Museum, University of California, Berkeley, of a stone slab found on Santa Rosa Island in 1901 may well open some new investigation. Professor Robert Heizer has produced evidence that this stone, carved with the monogram J Rs, may well have been the grave marker of Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo. San Francisco Chronicle, 21 December 1972. It is significant that no letter “C” appears on the stone, and that the monogram J Rs (Juan Rodríguez) is in conformity with Castilian and not Portuguese usage, the standard sixteenth century Castilian abbreviations for Rodríguez being Rs, R ., R , R s. See: Supra, note 15.
W. Michael Mathes, Associate Professor of History, University of San Francisco and an editorial consultant for the Journal of San Diego History, specializes in the field of Colonial Mexico and Spanish California history. He is the author of a documentary series (8 projected volumes, 4 volumes published) on Spanish California, Vizcaino and Spanish Expansion in the Pacific Ocean, 1580-1630 and volumes in the Baja California Travels Series published by Dawson Book Shop, Los Angeles. A volume entitled The Conquistador in California, documents relating to Cortés’ voyage to La Paz in 1535, will be published soon by Dawson. Dr. Mathes is in La Paz, Baja California this summer directing the microfilming of the historical archives there. His article entitled “Sebastián Vizcaíno and San Diego Bay” appeared in the Journal of San Diego History, Vol. XVII, No. 2 (Spring, 1972).