Page:Tirant lo Blanch; a study of its authorship, principal sources and historical setting (IA cu31924026512263).pdf/115

 We have made endeavors to locate the fourth part, which we are told was translated by de Galba, but all our efforts have been in vain. We have carefully examined the spelling, vocabulary, and style of the whole book, but have been unable to find any part that differed sufficiently from the rest of the work to justify the assertion of even a possibility that it represents the part translated by de Galba. The statement can hardly be accepted, for we cannot find anything at all that would tend to support or corroborate it in any way.

But we have concluded that Tirant lo Blanch was originally written in Catalan. Consequently it is not the question: What part did de Galba translate? but, What part did he write? It is not a difficult matter to see why de Galba states that he translated the fourth part. Martorell had called his book a translation and consequently de Galba was obliged to do the same. But the assumption that the latter wrote a part of considerable importance can hardly be maintained. We have already remarked that there is no appreciable difference in vocabulary and style in any part. Moreover, we find throughout the work a marked similarity in the manner of observation and description. The author has certain favorite expressions which he uses again and again, and these are not confined to any special parts. The same method of composing the book is followed from beginning to end. The same mind and the same heart are always in evidence. The different characters, when laboring under intense emotion, speak and act in practically the same way. Martorell has stamped his work with a strong individuality, and his characteristics are revealed throughout. All these facts tend to indicate that Tirant lo Blanch is the work of one author and one only. If it were not for the statement to the contrary, we feel certain that no one would ever doubt that the whole book was written by Martorell.