son; and has built up a theory, to show why we should rejoice at the termination of Dryden's project. If a translator, (says he,*) has any characteristic and peculiar foible, it is surely unfortunate to choose an original, who may give peculiar facilities to exhibit them.' And, then, by way of illustration, Mr. Scott adduces two instances of something like conceit, from Dryden's version of Ovid; "for which,' he somewhat unfortunately adds, 'he cannot plead Ovid's authority.' He has, therefore, been betrayed into a 'peculiar foible,' in an author, who, it is confessed, does not afford peculiar facilities to exhibit it.' It was hardly logical to conclude, from such proofs, 'that the simple and rude manners described by Homer, might have seduced Dryden into coarseness both of ideas and expression, for which the studied, composed, and dignified style of the Eneid gave neither opening nor apology.' The ingenious critic subjoins, that the obscure parts of Lucretius and Ovid appear much more indecent in Dryden; and that his very specimen of the English Iliad is calculated to warrant the foregoing conjecture. It is obvious to remark, that delicate expressions in the learned languages almost necessarily become gross in correspondent English. As we have never heard those languages profaned and debased by vulgar use, and as it is absolutely impossible for us to know what words and phrases were once low or impure, and what chaste and classic,-there always appears to be a sort of sanctity and refinement about whatever is said in Greek or Latin. Expressions, which might have made an Athenian or a Roman blush, are read by a modern without the least consciousness of indelicacy. Even those passages, of which we know the sense to be obscene, acquire a degree of purity from the language in *Scott, vol. i. p. 517. which they are delivered; and, whenever a modern author is necessitated to cite a passage of this kind, he always shows his sense of decency, by leaving it in the original. Without supposing Dryden, therefore, to have been peculiarly apt to slide into obscenity, we can readily see how it is, that, 'in translating the most indelicate passage of Lucretius, he has rather enhanced than veiled its decency;' and that 'the story of Iphis in the Metamorphoses is much more bluntly told by the English poet than by Ovid.'* Mr. Scott seems to have taken it for granted, that 'rude manners' must necessarily be described in rude language; and, for this reason, he supposes, that, in translating Homer, Dryden would have been betrayed into a 'coarseness of expression,' for which the dignified style' of Virgil would have afforded neither temptation, nor opportunity. The assumption needs only to be stated, to be refuted; and Mr. Scott himself has written too many good verses, not to know, that one of the great secrets of poetry is, to express, in delicate language, what is, in reality, gross and vulgar. But here is a double assumption. Whoever heard, that the manners' of the Iliad were more simple or rude' than those of the Æneid? We have always supposed, that the two poems recounted the actions of the same heroes, and describe the manners of the same age; nor did it ever occur to us, that the language of Homer, though more simple, was less pure, than that of Virgil. What, we think, should have completely satisfied Mr. Scott, is the confession, which he makes him * Scott, vol. i. p. 519. At any rate, Dryden himself was aware of this circumstance : And at immodest writings take offence, VOL. XI. D self, in the very next page,- that, after the revo lution, Dryden's taste was improved in this, as in some other respects;' and that, 'in his translation of Juvenal, for example, the satire against women, coarse as it is, is considerably refined and softened from the grossness of the Latin poet.'* It was still subsequently to the version of Juvenal, that Dryden undertook to translate Homer. Let us hear no more, then, of the danger, he would have incurred, of lapsing into vulgarity by attempting to English the Iliad. Mr. Scott has forgotten, also, that these dead masters have some rights, as well as the living. We can hardly permit Virgil to be used only as a curb to an unruly translator; nor is it doing justice to Homer, to make him the mere instrument of spurring a genius, which is naturally too slow. It is impossible, that a translation should be what the author himself would have rendered it, unless the original be put into the hands of a man, whose genius resembles his own. In our present translations, neither the Greek nor the Roman bard is faithfully represented; and there is much truth, we think, in the quaint saying of Dennis, that the English Iliad was well called Pope's Homer,-for it is nothing like Homer's Homer. Dryden would have treated him better; though even Dryden could not have done him complete justice. But, if he did not soar so high, neither would he have crept so low. Where Homer nods, Dryden would, at all events, have kept awake; and, where Homer is sublime, Dryden could, at least, have been noble. But, instead of surmising what Dryden might have done, it is time we reverted to what he has. One of his greatest faults, in translation, was the result of carrying too far the principle of speaking such language as the author himself would probably * Vol. i. p. 520. have chosen. He does not confine the rule to the more general parts of the English language; but applies to the events and customs of antiquity the technical words and phrases, which are applicable only to modern fashions and institutions. Thus, he not only considers himself as warranted to employ all the nautical jargon of the present day,-but gives a direction, in one place, which, Mr. Scott shrewdly suspects, would have been unintelligible, not only to Palinurus, but to the best pilot in the British navy:' Laeva tibi tellus, et longo laeva petantur Tack to the larboard, and stand off to sea, Virg. Dryd So, again, though we are apt to think that shoes and shoe-buckles are among the oldest of inventions,* it is not likely they were in vogue, in the days of Æneas. Pulchra Sicyona are, in Dryden, Diamond-buckles sparkling in their shoes. The latter, we may step aside to observe, were considered as an abominable new fashion, when first introduced; and are thus hailed by a newspaper of the day: Certaine foolish young men have lately brought aboute a new change in fashione.-They have begun to fasten their shoes and knee-bands with buckles, instead of ribbons, wherewithe their fore. fathers were well content, and moreover found them more easy and convenient, and surely every reasonable man will own they are more decente and modeste, than those new fangled, unseembly clasps or buckles, as they call them, which will gall and vex the bones of these vain coxecombs, beyonde sufferance, and make them repente of their pride and felly. We hope all grave and honourable persons will withdraw their countenance from such effeminate and immodeste ornaments. It belongeth to the reverend clergy to tell these thoughtlesse youths in a solemn manner, that such things are forbidden in Scripture." If absurdity were not allowed to those, who think it worth while to declaim against fashion, we might ask, why it was necessary, to call in the aid of the 'reverend clergy' to put down a contrivance which was to gall and vex the bones of these vain coxcombs, beyond sufferance,' and, without the discountenance of Scripture, * make them repent of their pride and folly? But we talk of Adam and Eve. olus is called 'the jailor of the wind;' the palatia coeli, of Ovid, become the Louvre of the sky,' in Dryden; and, in short, we can hardly read a single page without being reminded of something, which is altogether of modern origin. Did Dryden suppose that Virgil, or his Moeris, would have spoken such English as this? Strange revolution for my farm and me! Pope, in a well known line, has been accused of putting the consequence before the cause : Shakes his ambrosial curls, and gives the nod. Dryden has committed a similar inversion of order, by making Mercury deliver his message, before he presents his wand: Soon on the Libyan shore descends the god, There was no need of presenting his rod at all. *This is an instance adduced by Mr. Scott, p. 519; and was in. tended to exemplify the observation which immediately precedes it, that the studied, composed, and dignified style' of Virgil gave Dryden no opening to coarseness of expression. It should, in jus tice, be added, that it is called an instance of transgression altoge ther gratuitous;' but Mr. Scott had the misfortune to select all his exemplifications from passages, in which there was no opening for vulgarity. The original passage is : Quod numquam veriti sumus, ut possessor agelli |