described by Mr. Kohl, indicates that the name owes its origin, as
will hereafter be pointed out, to the voyages of the French
fishermen to the shores of Nova Scotia and New England. [Footnote:
Discovery of Maine, p. 202, chart XIV.] Nurumbega, as the writer
himself states, is an Indian name, which could not have been taken
from the Verrazzano account, as that does not mention a single
Indian word of any kind. The statement of the productions of the
country includes oranges, which do not belong to any portion of the
continent claimed to have been visited by Verrazzano, and plainly
indicates an entirely different authority for that portion of the
coast. It is therefore equally unaccountable why the author of the
discourse should have acknowledged the discovery by Verrazzano and,
at the same time, have passed over altogether the description in the
letter, and sought his information in regard to the country
elsewhere, when he had there such ample details, especially in
connection with the great bay.

The solution of the whole difficulty is to be found in the fact that
the clause relating to Verrazzano was not the work of the author of
the discourse, but of another person. It is not difficult to
understand how and by whom this interpolation came to be made.
Ramusio had both the letter and the discourse in his hands at the
same time, for the purpose of preparing them for publication,
recomposing the one, as has already been shown, and translating the
other from the French into the Italian, as he himself states. In the
execution of the former of these tasks, he took the liberty of
altering the letter, as has been proven, by substituting the phrase
of, THE LAND DISCOVERED BY THE BRETONS, for that of, THE COUNTRY
EXPLORED BY THE PORTUGUESE, as the northern limit of the voyage of
Verrazzano; thereby removing the objection, to which the letter was