But we have concluded that Tirant lo Blanch was originally written in Catalan. Consequently it is not the question: What part did de Galba translate? but, What part did he write? It is not a difficult matter to see why de Galba states that he translated the fourth part. Martorell had called his book a translation and consequently de Galba was obliged to do the same. But the assumption that the latter wrote a part of considerable importance can hardly be maintained. We have already remarked that there is no appreciable difference in vocabulary and style in any part. Moreover, we find throughout the work a marked similarity in the manner of observation and description. The author has certain favorite expressions which he uses again and again, and these are not confined to any special parts. The same method of composing the book is followed from beginning to end. The same mind and the same heart are always in evidence. The different characters, when laboring under intense emotion, speak and act in practically the same way. Martorell has stamped his work with a strong individuality, and his characteristics are revealed throughout. All these facts tend to indicate that Tirant lo Blanch is the work of one author and one only. If it were not for the statement to the contrary, we feel certain that no one would ever doubt that the whole book was written by Martorell.
But if we conclude that de Galba neither translated nor wrote a considerable part of the work, what did he do that would give him any right to claim part of the honor in the production? Perhaps Givanel Mas is right when he hints that de Galba’s rôle was limited to the preparation of the manuscript for publication. We are rather inclined to accept that suggestion. We are, however, disposed to add that probably de Galba did contribute something to the story. Perhaps he wrote the very last chapter, which consists of about three hundred words. We suggest this probability, because the reading of that chapter leaves the impression that the ending of the story is overdone. It may be that he wrote it for no other reason than to be able to say that he “translated” the fourth part, “la fi del libre.” In this chapter we are told that under the rule of Hypolite the empire was prosperous and extended its limits. After the death of the empress, according to the same chapter, he married a daughter of the King of England, who bore him three sons and two daughters. The eldest of these sons was named after his father and performed great deeds of prowess. The emperor and the empress reached a very advanced age, and they died on the same day. Their rule was so excellent, and their lives were so good and virtuous, that we may feel assured that they are now enjoying the glory of heaven.
We have not been able to find anything in the style and language of this last chapter that would indicate that it was written by any other than Martorell, and we confess that our suggestion is based almost exclusively upon the fact that it might very well have been omitted. In the chapters immediately preceding this one, Tirant and Carmesina are placed in their tomb, Hypolite marries the empress, rewards his friends, and marries them to ladies of the imperial court. The closing words of the next to the last chapter are:
“Apres dona a tots aquells qui se eren casats ab les criades de la Emperadriu e de la Princessa bones heretats, quen podien molt be viure a lur honor, e cascu segons son grau, que tots nestauen molt contents. E apres per temps casa totes les altres axi com de bon senyor se pertanyia.”[31]
[31] Afterwards, to all those who had married the maids of the empress and of the princess, he gave generous gifts, so that they could live well and in honor, and each one according to his rank. As a result all were very happy. And in time, as a worthy lord ought, he gave all the others maids in marriage.
The passage just quoted seems to have been intended for the conclusion of Tirant lo Blanch. This indication, together with the fact that the last chapter seems unnecessary and superfluous, surely justifies the suggestion that probably de Galba wrote “la fi del libre,” but not the fourth part, unless he called these last few lines “la quarta part.”
The best explanation that we can suggest in regard to de Galba’s statement is, that on account of preparing the manuscript for the printer, he considered himself entitled to some credit in the production of this book. Why he claims to have translated the fourth part can only be a matter of conjecture. Perhaps that part was in special need of revision. He may have made some changes or additions, but we cannot admit that he wrote or translated the whole or a considerable portion of it.