As Pinto, however, in spite of all his ill luck, found, in writing his memoirs, some topics of consolation, so also his character as an author and a narrator has by no means been left entirely in the lurch. Though little read now, he has enjoyed, in his day, a popularity such as few authors attain to. To the first edition of his “Peregrinations,” in the original Portuguese, succeeded others in 1678, 1711, and 1725; and second, third, and fourth editions are compliments which Portugal very rarely pays to her authors. A Spanish translation appeared at Madrid in 1620, in which, however, great and very unwarrantable liberties were taken by the translator. A French translation was published at Paris in 1628, and an English translation in 1663. To the Spanish and French translations defences of Pinto’s veracity are prefixed, and both passed through several editions. Purchas, who gives a synopsis of that part of Pinto’s book relating to China and Japan, strongly defends his credibility, observing that he little spares his own company and nation, but often and eagerly lays open their vices. “I find in him,” says Purchas, “little boasting, except of other nations, none at all of himself, but as if he intended to express God’s glory, and man’s merit of nothing but misery. And, however it seems incredible to remember such infinite particulars as this book is full of, yet an easy memory holdeth strong impressions of good and bad, especially new-whetted, filed, furbushed, with so many companions in misery, their best music in their chains and wanderings being the mutual recounting of things seen, done, and suffered. More marvel is it, if a liar, that he should not forget himself and contradict his own relations. “I would not have an author rejected for fit speeches framed by the writer, in which many historians have taken liberty; nor if sometimes he doth _mendacia dicere_ (say false things), so as that he doth not _mentiri_ (lie); as I will not sware but of himself he might mistake, and by others be misled. The Chinese might, in relating their rarities to him, enlarge and _de magnis majora loqui_ (exaggerate things really great), so as he still might be religious in a just and true delivery of what himself hath seen, and belei not his own eyes.... All China authors, how diversified in their lines, yet all concur in a certain centre of _Admiranda Sinarum_ (admirable things of the Chinese)[131], which if others have not so largely related as this, they may thank God they paid not so dear a price to see them; and, for me, I will rather believe, where reason evicts not, _ejectione firma_ (with a firm ejection), than seek to see at the author’s rate; and if he hath robbed the altars of truth, as he did those of the Calumplay idols, yet, in Pekin equity, we will not cut off his thumbs (according to Nanquin rigor), upon bare surmise, without any evidence against him.”