Note 145 — Chapter CXL

(return) So in the Latin edition. In the Italian version L is substituted for P, and b for s, making Lariab. This may be a misprint, but in the absence of the manuscript it is not possible to be sure whether the original word was Parias, or Lariab, or something else. Las Casas bases part of his argument on the use of the word Paria by Vespucci; but the case against the Florentine's alleged first voyage is quite conclusive, without this fact. If Vespucci did use the word Lariab, it must have been invented by him, like Iti. It is in favour of Lariab that the Italian version only passed from manuscript to print, while the Latin version was translated first into French, and thence into Latin, before it was printed. On the other hand, there is evidence that the editors of the Latin version were unacquainted with the details of the third voyage of Columbus, in which the word Paria first occurs. It, therefore, is not possible that the word can have been inserted mistakenly by them. It seems, therefore, that Lariab is a misprint of the Italian compositors, and that Parias was the word in the manuscript of Vespucci.