Narrative and Critical History of America, Vol. 2 (of 8): Spanish Explorations and Settlements in America from the Fifteenth to the Seventeenth Century
History
Narrative and Critical History of America, Vol. 2 (of 8): Spanish Explorations and Settlements in America from the Fifteenth to the Seventeenth Century
America -- Discovery and exploration; America -- History; United States -- History
Soon after his return from this, the last of the _Navigationes_ of
which he himself, so far as is known, gave any account, he went
back, in 1505, to Spain. It is conjectured that he made other
voyages; but whether he did or did not, no absolute evidence has
ever been found.[469] We know almost nothing of him up to that time
except what is told by himself. When he ceased writing of his own
exploits, then also the exploits ceased so far as can be learned from
contemporary authors, who hitherto also had been silent about him. In
1508 (March 22) Ferdinand of Spain appointed him pilot-major of the
kingdom,[470]—an office of dignity and importance, which probably he
retained till he died (Feb. 22, 1512). His fame was largely posthumous;
but a hemisphere is his monument. If not among the greatest of the
world’s great men, he is among the happiest of those on whom good
fortune has bestowed renown.
[Illustration]
During recent years (1892-3) John Fiske, in his _Discovery of
America_, vol. ii., has reinforced the argument of Varnhagen in favor
of the disputed (1497) voyage of Vespucius; Henry Harrisse, in his
_Discovery of North America_, rejects his own earlier arguments in
its favor; Clements R. Markham, in _Christopher Columbus_, totally
discredits the theory, and Justin Winsor, in his _Christopher
Columbus_, has considered the proposition not proven.
CRITICAL AND BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES ON VESPUCIUS AND THE NAMING OF
AMERICA.
BY THE EDITOR.
WHILE Vespucius never once clearly affirms that he discovered the main,
such an inference may be drawn from what he says. Peter Martyr gives
no date at all for the voyage of Pinzon and Solis to the Honduras
coast, which was later claimed by Oviedo and Gomara to have preceded
that of Columbus to the main. Navarrete has pointed out the varied
inconsistencies of the Vespucius narrative,[471] as well as the changes
of the dates of the setting out and the return, as given in the various
editions.[472] All of them give a period of twenty-nine months for a
voyage which Vespucius says only took eighteen,—a difficulty Canovai
and others have tried to get over by changing the date of return to
1498; and some such change was necessary to enable Vespucius to be
in Spain to start again with Ojeda in May, 1499. Humboldt further
instances a great variety of obvious typographical errors in the
publications of that day,—as, for instance, where Oviedo says Columbus
made his first voyage in 1491.[473] But, as shown in the preceding
narrative, an allowance for errors of the press is not sufficient. In
regard to the proof of an _alibi_ which Humboldt brought forward from
documents said to have been collected by Muñoz from the archives of the
Casa de la Contratacion, it is unfortunate that Muñoz himself did not
complete that part of his work which was to pertain to Vespucius, and
that the documents as he collated them have not been published. In the
absence of such textual demonstration, the inference which Humboldt
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account