x, _Histoire de l'isle Espagnole, ou de
St. Domingue_, Paris, 1730, liv. ii.; Munoz, _Historia de las
Indias o Nuevo Mundo_, Madrid, 1793, lib. iv. Sec. 14.]

[Footnote 527: He was also allowed to quarter the royal arms
with his own, "which consisted of a group of golden islands
amid azure billows. To these were afterwards added five
anchors, with the celebrated motto, well known as being carved
on his sepulchre." Prescott's _Ferdinand and Isabella_, pt. i.
chap. vii. This statement about the motto is erroneous. See
below, p. 514. Considering the splendour of the reception given
to Columbus, and the great interest felt in his achievement,
Mr. Prescott is surprised at finding no mention of this
occasion in the local annals of Barcelona, or in the royal
archives of Aragon. He conjectures, with some probability, that
the cause of the omission may have been what an American would
call "sectional" jealousy. This Cathay and Cipango business was
an affair of Castile's, and, as such, quite beneath the notice
of patriotic Aragonese archivists! That is the way history has
too often been treated. With most people it is only a kind of
ancestor worship.]

[Footnote 528: The unique copy of this first edition of this
Spanish letter is a small folio of two leaves, or four pages.
It was announced for sale in Quaritch's Catalogue, April 16,
1891, No. 111, p. 47, for L1,750. Evidently most book-lovers
will have to content themselves with the facsimile published in
London, 1891, price two guineas. A unique copy of a Spanish
reprint in small quarto, made in 1493, is preserved in the
Ambrosian library at Milan. In 1889 Messrs. Ellis & Elvey, of
London, published a facsimile _alleged_ to have been made from
an edition of about the same date as the Ambrosian quarto; but
there are good reasons for believing that these highly
respectable publishers have been imposed upon. It is a time
just now when fictitious literary discoveries of this sort may
command a high price, and the dealer in early Americana must
keep his eyes open. See Quaritch's note, _op. cit._ p. 49; and
Justin Winsor's letter in _The Nation_, April 9, 1891, vol.