[!--Note--] 93 ([return])
Iti, an old Italian word for "gone"—"Dipoi che fumo iti circa di una legua."
[!--Note--] 94 ([return])
The island of Curaçoa.
[!--Note--] 95 ([return])
This is untrue, as Las Casas has proved.
[!--Note--] 96 ([return])
It should be 13°. The coast explored by Hojeda is, in no part, north of 13°.
[!--Note--] 97 ([return])
Conta, a Portuguese word.
[!--Note--] 98 ([return])
The island of Española, so called by the Portuguese.
[!--Note--] 99 ([return])
September 5th, 1499, to November 22nd, 1499.
[!--Note--] 100 ([return])
A false date. It should be November 22nd. He gives the day correctly.
[!--Note--] 101 ([return])
These dates are shown by Las Casas to be false. Amerigo does not give any year; but the date of arrival at Cadiz was really about February 1500. Varnhagen (p. 107 n.) suggested that Hojeda and La Cosa arrived first at Española, while Vespucci remained on the coast of the mainland for some months. He refers to the evidence of one Cristobal Garcia of Palos, given on October 1st, 1515, to the effect that, he being at San Domingo, Hojeda and La Cosa arrived there in a small bark, having lost their ships, and with only fifteen or twenty men, the rest being dead (Nav., iii, 544). But this cannot refer to the voyage of 1499, when Hojeda had not lost his ships, and did not go to San Domingo. The evidence, of course, relates to his disastrous second voyage. The narrative of Roldan, quoted by Las Casas, proves that Hojeda came to Española with all his ships, that Vespucci was not left behind on the coast of the mainland, and that the dates given by Vespucci are false, either through carelessness or design.
[!--Note--] 102 ([return])
Nav., iii, 544.