PREFACE.

THE translation of Longinus on the Sublime in Writing, here submitted to the Public, is the result of a long, if not an accurate acquaintance with what has been well designated as the "vere aureus libellus," the truly precious treatise of that great critic. It was originally undertaken, and prosecuted from time to time, in a manner, perhaps, too desultory, by way of relaxation from the labours of a very arduous and exhausting employment. As the work of one of the two celebrated philosophical critics of the Greeks* was already presented, in so becoming a dress, to the English reader, it was my ambition to place that of the other, at however humble a distance, on the same shelf.

I have endeavoured to render the book altogether as little unworthy of patronage, as was consistent with my residence in a remote angle of the kingdom, far from such aids as are usually derived from large libraries and learned associates. Having been thus compelled to rely on my own scanty resources, and to fight the battle "proprio Marte," should I be so fortunate as to come

* Twining's Translation of Aristotle's Poetic.

off without dishonour, my success will not be diminished by the claims of importunate allies; nor, on the other hand, how complete so ever may be my failure, shall I feel the mortification of having involved a friend in my disgrace.

If it should be enquired, What occasion there was for a new Translation of Longinus? I answer that the only translation in English, at all deserving of mention, does not appear to stand very high, at present, in the estimation of scholars. It was executed almost a century ago by Dr. William Smith, Dean of Chester: and, although it is said to have had the benefit of revision by the learned Dr. Pearce, Bishop of Rochester, a distinguished Editor of the original treatise, yet the merits are not very obvious now, which elevated Dr. Smith into his Deanery, from the Mastership of a country Grammar School. Compared, however, with Welstead's wretched translation from the translation of Boileau, and with the "doings into English" so prevalent in that day, Smith's may, unquestionably, be regarded as a spirited, and even an elegant performance; as, its keeping its ground to the present time, proves it to have been a successful one.

I have, notwithstanding, persuaded myself that something might still be done in this matter. Since the Dean's translation was published, so much has been effected for elucidating the numerous obscure passages of the original work, and for restoring the text, by the collation of manuscripts, and by the critical sagacity of numerous learned commentators, that, even on this ground, there seems to have arisen sufficient occasion for a new translation.

In the execution of the present undertaking I have sought to exhibit an accurate transcript of my author's ideas; and I have adhered as closely to his expression, as the idiom of languages so dissimilar would admit. But the word idiom intimates something in a language so peculiar, as not to be rendered into another by any similar arrangement of words. In such cases I have not scrupled to be somewhat more paraphrastic, where I entertained a hope of preserving thereby a part of the spirit and elegance of the original. This, however, I am aware, is a dangerous freedom; and I trust it will be found that I have exercised it with a cautious and jealous discretion.

In a work, which has suffered so greatly in its transmission to us, I have found it a matter of no small difficulty to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion as to the real meaning of many corrupt and disputed passages. For the accomplishment of this, I have availed myself of all the assistance to be derived from various readings, different editions, and the critical remarks and conjectures of commentators. A translator into a modern language cannot betake himself to the resource so amusingly described by Boileau. "Il est aisé à un traducteur "Latin de se tirer d'affaire aux endroits même qu'il "n'entend pas. Il n'a qu'à traduire le Grec, mot pour mot, et à debiter des paroles, qu'on peut au moins soupçonner d'estre intelligibles. En effet le lecteur, "qui bien souvent n'y conçoit rien, s'en prend plûtost à "soi-mesme, qu'à l'ignorance du traducteur. Il n'en "est ainsi des traductions en langue vulgaire. Tout ce, que le lecteur n'entend point, s'apelle un galimathias,. "dont le traducteur tout seul est responsable."

Into the seductive field of conjectural criticism I have not myself often entered, and always with diffidence and reluctance. But, in a treatise, which has come down to us in so mutilated a condition, and of which there exist so few independent manuscript copies,-in which, also, we may so frequently determine with confidence, this is not what was originally written,—I have ventured to hope that a suggestion or two, if offered with modesty, might be favoured with an indulgent consideration.

In the notes on the Greek text will be found these few suggestions, combined with a rather copious selection of what appeared to me most valuable in the numerous comments on my author. This selection, may, perchance, abridge the labour of the scholar; while it may prove of more important service to such of my readers as are tyros in this branch of criticism.

I have, also, separately introduced some illustrations of my author's precepts, chiefly derived from standard writers in our own language. These are intended for the benefit of the mere English reader.

It is hardly to be expected that I shall escape the charge of pedantry, because the nature of my work has obliged me to "interlard" certain parts of it with

scraps of Greek and Latin." But there is, in good truth, a great deal of pedantry in the world, which is very innocent of either Greek or Latin. It is a charge, however, of which the translator of a Greek author needs not, I trust, to entertain any peculiar horror or apprehension.

But why, it has been asked, have you, a clergyman, withdrawn from professional occupations the time required for the present undertaking?-In answer to