James Alexander Robertson, The American Historical Review
“ In his painstaking labor, Professor Northup has done what few men would care to do, for this is work that demands not only a certain training and acquirement, but a certain temperament as well. This is, in fact, more than a translation. Professor Northup has done what Napione, Gustavo Hughes, and Uzielli dreamed over—constructed a critical text of this most perplexing Vespucci letter—and his work will not have to be done oyer again. ”
James Alexander Robertson, The American Historical Review
“ In the case of the most delicate differences where facts and common sense cannot come to his aid, he has frankly fallen back on subjective impression, assuming that reading to be the correct one because it seems to be correct. Obviously this is the only one of the three methods on which there can be much difference of opinion and it constitutes the only weak point in the building up of the critical text. But the original text is not reached, according to Professor Northup, by a mere comparison of the three versions. ”
James Alexander Robertson, The American Historical Review
“ The texts on which we base our judgments are vastly different from those which left the author's hand. The extant versions of these must be critically examined, collated, and classified; critical texts must be established before historians can hope to form accurate judgments based upon Vespucci's writings. There has been no attempt before to furnish something better than the confessedly erroneous texts that have been used. Professor Northup's aim is first to describe the three extant versions in which this narrative has come down to us ”
