. I have likewise been in the Portuguese fort of St
George del Mina, under the equinoctial, and can witness that it is not
uninhabitable, as some have supposed." In his book respecting his first
voyage, he says that he saw some mermaids on the coast of _Menegueta_, but
that they were not by any means so like ladies as represented in paintings.
In another place he says, that, in several voyages between Lisbon and
Guinea, he had observed that a degree on the earth corresponds to 56 miles
and two thirds. He notices having seen mastick drawn from some trees in
the island of Scio, one of the isles in the Greek Archipelago.

In one place of his own writings he says that he had been at sea during
twenty-three years, without being on shore for any length of time; and had
seen all the countries of the east and west, and towards the north,
particularly England and Guinea; yet had never seen any harbours that
could be compared for goodness with those which he had discovered in the
West Indies. He says farther, "I went first to sea at fourteen years of
age, and have followed that profession ever since." In his note book of
his second voyage he says, "I had two ships, one of which I left at Porto
Sancto, for a certain reason, where it continued one day; and on the day
following, I rejoined it at Lisbon[5]; because I encountered a storm, and
had contrary winds at south-west, and the other ship had contrary winds at
south-east." From these instances it may be inferred that he had great
experience in sea affairs, and that he had visited many countries and
places, before he undertook his great discovery.

[1] This must be understood as referring to voyages in the Mediterranean,
in respect of the port of Genoa.--E.

[2] Supposing Columbus to have been 14 years of age on first going to sea,
it may be concluded that he was born in 1447. He must therefore have
been 45 years old when he set out in 1492 for the discovery of America;
and 59 years old at his death, in 1506.--E.

[3] Or rather Cape Carthago, on the coast of Barbary near Tunis.--E.

[4] It is highly probable that the original translator may have here
mistaken the braccio of 1.913 English feet, for the fathom of 6 feet.
In fathoms, this tide rises to the incredible height of 156 feet;
whereas in _braccios_, it amounts only to 49 feet: And besides there
are braccios considerably shorter than the one here assumed.--E.

[5] There is some inexpl