Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/283

Proof that Columbus was Born in i^^i 273 October 31, 1451, as in that case he would not have been more than nineteen years of age at the date of the aforesaid document.

The error of this reasoning is so evident that it is simply astonishing that the argument could ever have been for a moment maintained. Had it indeed been that the laws of Genoa recognized a particular majority of nineteen years (as they did in fact admit majorities of sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, and of twenty-five years), it might have been legitimate to argue that the phrase major annis decemnovem meant what it is sought to read into it. But such is not the case, nor does any one claim that it is so; on the contrary, all the authorities are agreed upon the point that the laws of Genoa make no mention of a majority of nineteen years. It follows therefore, as clearly as day follows night, that if Columbus had then been twenty, twenty-one, twenty-two, twenty-three, or twenty-four years of age, instead of nineteen, the notary would have so stated. Why, otherwise, should he have hit upon nineteen years of age unless that was actually the age of Columbus?

We do not possess a single deed of the Genoese notaries of the time wherein mention of the age does not state the actual age of the individual mentioned therein. For instance, when one of these notaries writes in a deed, dated September 10, 1484, referring to Jacopo or Giacomo Colombo, "major annis sexdecim, juravit", it is clear he wished to make evident that this younger brother of Columbus was then fully of sixteen years of age, because he adds that he has made him swear that such is the case. Had Jacopo been