io, come giovane, molto lontano da cotal pensiero." _Vita dell'
Ammiraglio_, cap. iv.]

[Footnote 404: Twenty years ago M. Harrisse published in
Spanish and French a critical essay maintaining that the _Vita
dell' Ammiraglio_ was not written by Ferdinand Columbus, but
probably by the famous scholar Perez de Oliva, professor in the
university of Salamanca, who died in 1530 (_D. Fernando Colon,
historiador de su padre_, Seville, 1871; _Fernand Colomb: sa
vie, ses oeuvres_, Paris, 1872). The Spanish manuscript of the
book had quite a career. As already observed, it is clear that
Las Casas used it, probably between 1552 and 1561. From
Ferdinand's nephew, Luis Columbus, it seems to have passed in
1568 into the hands of Baliano di Fornari, a prominent citizen
of Genoa, who sent it to Venice with the intention of having it
edited and published with Latin and Italian versions. All that
ever appeared, however, was the Italian version made by Ulloa
and published in 1571. Harrisse supposes that the Spanish
manuscript, written by Oliva, was taken to Genoa by some
adventurer and palmed off upon Baliano di Fornari as the work
of Ferdinand Columbus. But inasmuch as Harrisse also supposes
that Oliva probably wrote the book (about 1525) at Seville,
under Ferdinand's eyes and with documents furnished by him, it
becomes a question, in such case, how far was Oliva anything
more than an amanuensis to Ferdinand? and there seems really to
be precious little wool after so much loud crying. If the
manuscript was actually written "sous les yeux de Fernand et
avec documents fournis par lui," most of the arguments alleged
to prove that it could not have emanated from the son of
Columbus fall to the ground. It becomes simply a question
whether Ulloa may have here and there tampered with the text,
or made additions of his own. To some extent he seems to have
done so, but wherever the Italian version is corroborated by
the Spanish extracts in Las Casas, we are on solid ground, for
Las Casas died five years before the Italian version was
published. M. Harrisse does not seem as yet to have convinced
many scholars. His arguments have been jus