It would appear from the last line that this document is rather the confirmation of an old grant than the gift of something new, but it has been interpreted to mean that Azurara had been receiving the money from the King's privy purse, and was henceforth to have it out of the public treasury. There can be no dispute that the recipient merited the gift for his past literary services, which were an earnest of the work he was to accomplish in the future, and the value of the latter will presently appear.
We possess the copy of one certificate issued by the Chronicler in the following year, together with the record of another, their respective dates being June 27th and October 22nd, 1460. The former, dated from Lisbon, was granted in answer to the petition of the inhabitants of Nogueira, who felt uncertain about the dues they were bound to pay the Bishop of Coimbra;44 the latter is mentioned by J. P. Ribeiro, but seems to have disappeared from the Torre do Tombo.
In 1461 there occurred an event, simple enough on its face, but one which Azurara's biographers have regarded as the mystery of his life, or else employed as a weapon wherewith to smite their hero—his adoption by Maria Eannes. In the king's confirmation of this, dated from Evora, February 6th, 1461, we are told that "Maria Eannes, a Lisbon tanner—considering the love and friendship that Johane añnes dazurara, erstwhile Canon of Evora and Coimbra, had always shown to her mother, Maria Vicente, as well as to herself and her husband, and the many good deeds she herself had received at his hands, being his godchild and friend, and considering that she had no children and was no longer of an age to have any, and also the love and friendship she had felt for Gomez Eannes dazurara, ever since his father's death, and the services he had rendered her—thereby adopted him as her son and heir to succeed to her real and personal property, including her country house at Valbom, in the Ribatejo, and a house she possessed in the Parish of S. Julião in Lisbon".45 Such is the substance of this document, over the explanation of which some controversy has taken place, because of the social gulf that separated the parties to it. The true motive for the adoption, as hints Senhor Rodriguez d'Azevedo, would seem to have been the existence of some near relationship between Maria Eannes and the Chronicler which it was not expedient to disclose; but whether this opinion find acceptance or no, there is nothing to pg xxxiii]justify the old view which regarded the grant as a proof of Azurara's avarice and unscrupulousness: since, on the contrary, the preamble reveals a lively sense of gratitude in the donor for real benefits conferred by the donee. If, however, the above theory be worked out, the most plausible conclusion to arrive at is, either that Maria Eannes and Gomes Eannes de Azurara were brother and sister, both being children of the Canon and Maria Vicente, or that the Chronicler was half-brother to Maria Eannes, i.e., had the same father but not the same mother. It seems at least a fair inference to draw from the wording that the Canon and Maria Vicente were of a similar age, and the same may be said of the other pair, because at this time the Chronicler would count nearly sixty years, and his benefactress could not be much less, seeing that all possibility of her bearing children had passed by. Either of these hypotheses would account for the name Eannes being common to the lady and Azurara. The Canon would then have left his property between his two children, and as Maria Eannes was childless, it would be natural for her to bequeath her share of her fathers property to her brother. But be this as it may, we know from an independent source that Azurara had a sister, for she is mentioned in the letter which Affonso V wrote him whilst he was living in Africa and engaged on historical investigations. The fact, recorded by Pisano, that the Chronicler began his studies relatively late in life, unless it be ascribed to his adoption of a military career at first, seems to show that he had passed his early years under a cloud, and that his father, from one cause or another, lacked the power to provide him with an education at the customary age. It is, however, impossible to proceed beyond conjectures, and since the matter cannot claim to be one of historical moment, we may leave it unsolved without much regret.
On June 14th, 1463, Azurara issued a certificate of documents in the Torre do Tombo relating to land of one D. Pedro de Castro,46 while yet another proof of the influence he possessed with his royal master is afforded by two grants, dated respectively June 22nd and 23rd of the same year. By the first of these the office of Judge of Excise in the town of Almada was conferred on a certain Pero d'Almada, servant of Gomes Eannes, and the grant is expressed to be made at the latter's request. The second appoints the same individual Judge and Steward of the gold-diggers at Adiça, near that town.47
The Chronica de D. Pedro de Menezes, which had been commenced by Azurara in or about the year 1458, was finished on St. John the Baptist's Eve, June 23rd, 1463, at his Commenda of Pinheiro Grande. It relates the history of Ceuta, from the capture of the city in 1415 until the death of D. Pedro de Menezes, the first governor, in 1437, and gives evidence of the author's progress in historical methods.48 While it contains less moralising and more matter than any of his previous works, at the same time he appears surer of his own powers, and no longer feels the same need of supporting every remark by a citation. Of course this Chronicle has not as deep an interest for us as that of Guinea, but this is due to the subject, not to any shortcomings in the narrator, whose contemporaries were probably of a different opinion, for many of them looked askance at the voyages of discovery, though there were few that doubted the importance of the possession of Ceuta.
Azurara confesses that he felt at first somewhat diffident of putting pen to paper, so marvellous seemed the deeds he was called on to relate; and he would never have persevered with his task had he learnt them on hearsay evidence, or from the mouths of one or two witnesses; but he found their truth confirmed on a perusal of the official reports sent to the King from Ceuta, and this encouraged him to proceed. He appears to have been assisted in his task by D. Pedro himself during his lifetime,49 and to have written out the book twice, while his impartiality and the care he took to arrive at the truth are everywhere visible.50 Of course he cannot abstain altogether from citations, and these have an interest as showing the measure of his literary knowledge: witness his mention of Dante's Divina Commedia, Cinó da Pistoia and The Book of Amadis, which he ascribes to "Vasco Lobeira, who lived in the time of D. Fernando."51
For three years contemporary records are silent respecting the Chronicler, and it is not until 1466 that he comes before us again. On June 11th of that year, D. Pedro,52 King of Aragon, son of him who was Regent in the minority of Affonso V, and fell at Alfarrobeira, wrote Azurara a short but familiar autograph letter, which affords another proof of the intimate relations that existed between the Chronicler and the great personages of the age. In this letter, which is in response to one sent by Azurara, D. Pedro addresses him as "friend", refers to his "old kindness and sweet nature", and goes on to accept his offer to keep him informed of the progress of events in Portugal. He then takes pg xxxvii]the Chronicler into his confidence, and complains of the difficulties of his position as King of Aragon—difficulties which were aggravated by an illness that ended in his death less than a month after he had penned this epistle.53
On July 27th, 1467, in answer to a petition of the inhabitants, Azurara issued a certificate54 of the "foral" of Azere (Azár), virtute officii, and on the very next day he met with another piece of good fortune. From the deed of grant it appears that, some ninety years previously, a certain Gonçalo Estevez of Cintra had died, after having built a chapel in honour of