In my letter (The Sunday Times, March 28) I singled out seven instances when, while one Filippo Galea was playing at Żebbuġ, another Filippo Galea, son of Maestro di Cappella Angelo Galea, was in Corfu, India or New Zealand conducting British regimental bands in the latter half of the 19th century.
That should have convinced any fair-minded person that, when in 1959 they assumed that it was Angelo's son who was playing at Żebbuġ, they were confusing one with the other. Philip Balzan, however, is still not convinced (The Sunday Times, May 2).
In his reply, Mr Balzan ignores altogether the important 1849 entry in the register Esiti del SS. Rosario: Banda a Filippo Galea. Scudi 8.4. There is no question that, as we learn from the Biografia Artistica del Maestro Filippo Galea (1889), Angelo's son Filippo Galea was in Corfu from 1848 to 1851, which makes it obvious that he was not the one playing at Żebbuġ in 1849.
Mr Balzan, very conveniently, keeps mum about this irrefutable evidence in the same way that he keeps mum about the equally irrefutable evidence provided by the two signatures shown in my March 28 letter, which proved that the Filippo Galea signing for payment for musical services during St Philip's feast was not Filippo Galea the director of the 57th Regiment, Angelo's son.
The Rosario entry also reveals that Filippo's 'band' was already in existence in 1849, so it is not true that anything was founded in 1851.
Further on, Mr Balzan tells us that Filippo Galea who performed at Żebbuġ was the one whose signature appears at the bottom of the 1857 and 1858 receipts. He is right. That signature, however, does not belong to Filippo Galea, the son of Angelo, as we have already seen.
Mr Balzan has therefore unwittingly confirmed that Filippo Galea who played at Żebbuġ was not Angelo's son. This is proved again by the fact that the 1858 receipt was signed on May 14 whereas Filippo of Angelo left Malta for India on May 11 - a fact that, not surprisingly, escapes the attention of Mr Balzan.
Mr Balzan then brings up other matters that are not really related to the subject but what he says reveal that he does not like doing his homework. For example, it is not true that Filippo Galea is often referred to as Mro in the parish archives - only once out of 29 times, in fact (Carita 1856).
From the church registers it does not emerge that Gaetano Attard and Antonio Pisani were involved with anybody else. Like others at the time, they had their own 'band', and when collecting payments these were for services rendered by their own 'band'.
And why does Mr Balzan not refer to Gazzetta di Malta of June 14, 1901, or to Philip Agius' write-up in his club's 2001 annual (page 38) to learn who played at Filippo's funeral?
And what makes him think that such self-seeking initiatives as interviews with fans and puerile attempts to link Filippo's name appearing in church registers to Angelo's son Filippo will be taken seriously?