Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/286

276 H. I'lguMid cumscribe within closer limits the period within which Columbus must have been born. Quite clearly, if on October 31, 1470, he was more than nineteen years old, and if on August 25, 1479, he was more than twenty-seven and less than twenty-eight, he must first have seen the light of day within the two months and five days comprised between Aurust 26 and October 31, 1451. ' The deed of 1479 therefore definitely settles the question of the date of the birth of Columbus. From whatever point of view we may consider the matter, it is impossible to deny the conclusion to which this deed leads when it is placed beside the deed of 1470, and we may now set forth with full assurance that it was only during either the month of September or that of October, 145 1, that Columbus was born. Without dwelling upon this point, it is well to observe that this important date in the life of Columbus is not the only point which modern criticism has successfully determined. Since 1892, thanks to Salvagnini's researches, we also know that it was only in 1476 that Columbus first landed in Portugal, and to this information we may now add that he was then twenty-five years of age. We know also from his own notes and from Las Casas that it was in the be- ginning of 1485 that he passed into Spain, and we have the proof that he quitted no more the Spanish peninsula until he set sail in 1492 from the port of Palos. All these facts, henceforth indisputable, are very suggestive ; but this is not the occasion to point out the conclusions which may be drawn from them, and we shall merely ask the careful and un- prejudiced reader if they can be reconciled with Columbus's re- peated assertions that he had sailed for twenty-three years'; that he had crossed all the known seas ^; and that for over forty years he had studied the secrets of nature.* We shall furthermore ask him if it be not permitted to say from all this that Columbus had a personal interest in pretending to be older than he was, and also if we do not find here a natural explanation of the fact, otherwise so extra- ordinary, that he who was so prolix and so fond of talking about himself never mentioned the date of his birth; that all his state- ments bearing upon his age are contradictory ; that his son who ' As we do not wish to expose ourselves to the reproach of failing to render to M. Assereto the credit due to him, we think it right to say that he has drawn the same conclusions as we have ourselves from the two deeds in question ; in- deed no other alternative was possible. Ihid. 2 The Log-Book, December 21, 1492. 3 Ibid. « Letter of 1501 quoted by Ferdinand Columbus, Historic (Venice, 1571), p. 8, and by Las Casas, Hisldria (Madrid, 1875-1876), L, chap. 3. p. 4;.