The Greeks for a time travelled into Egypt, but they tranflated no books from the Egyptian language; and when the Macedonians had overthrown the empire of Perfia, the countries that became fubject to the Grecian dominion studied only the Grecian literature. The books of the conquered nations, if they had any among them, funk in oblivion; Greece confidered herself as the mistress, if not as the parent of arts, her language contained all that was fuppofed to be known, and, except the facred writings of the Old Teftament, I know not that the library of Alexandria adopted any thing from a foreign tongue. The Romans confeffed themselves the scholars of the Greeks, and do not appear to have expected, what has fince happened, that the ignorance of fucceeding ages would prefer them to their teachers. Every man who in Rome afpired to the praise of literature, thought it neceffary to learn Greek, and had no need of versions when they could ftudy the originals. Tranflation, however, was not wholly neglected. Dramatic poems could be underflood by the people in no language but their own, and the Romans were fometimes entertained with the tragedies of Euripides and the comedies of Menander. Other works were fometimes attempted; in an old fcholiaft there is mention of a Latin Iliad, and we have not wholly loft Tully's verfion of the poem of Aratus; but it does not appear that any man grew eminent by interpreting another, and perhaps it was more frequent to tranflate for exercise or amufement than for fame. The Arabs were the first nation who felt the ardour of tranflation: when they had subdued the eastern provinces of the Greek empire, they found their captives wifer than themselves, and made hafte to relieve their wants by imparted knowledge. They difcovered that many might grow wife by the labour of a few, and that improvements might be made with fpeed, when they had the knowledge of former ages in their own language. They therefore made hafte to lay hold on medicine and philofophy, and turned their chief authors into Arabic. Whether they attempted the poets is not known; their literary zeal was vehement, but it was fort, and probably expired before they had time to add the arts of elegance to thofe of neceffity. The study of ancient literature was interrupted in Europe by the irruption of the northern nations, who fubverted the Roman empire, and erected new kingdoms with new languages. It is not ftrange, that fuch confufion fhould fufpend literary attention: those who loft, and those who gained dominion, had immediate difficulties to encounter and immediate miferies to redress, and had little leisure, amidft the violence of war, the trepidation of flight, the diftreffes of forced migration, or the tumults of unfettled conqueft, to enquire after speculative truth, to enjoy the amufement of imaginary adventures, to know the hiftory of former ages, or study the events of any other lives. But no fooner had this chaos of dominion funk into order, than learning began again to flourish in the calm of peace. When life and poffeffions were fecure, convenience and enjoyment were foon fought, learning was found the highest gratification of the mind, and tranflation became one of the means by which it was imparted. At last, by a concurrence of many causes, the European world was roufed from its lethargy; thofe arts which had been long obfcurely ftudied in the gloom of monafteries became the general favourites of mankind; every nation vied with its neighbour for the prize of learning; the epide mical emulation spread from fouth to north, and curiofity and tranflation found their way to Britain. He that reviews the progrefs of English literature, will find that tranflation was very early cultivated among us, but that fome principles, either wholly erroneous, or too far extended, hindered our fuccefs from being always equal to our diligence. Chaucer, who is generally confidered as the father of our poetry, has left a verfion of Boetius on the Comforts of Philofophy, the book which feems to have been the favourite of middle ages, which had been tranflated into Saxon by king Alfred, and illuftrated with a copious comment afcribed to Aquinas. It may be supposed that Chaucer would apply more than common attention to an author of fo much celebrity, yet he has attempted nothing higher than a verfion ftrictly literal, and has degraded the poetical parts to profe, that the constraint of verfification might not obftruct his zeal for fidelity. Caxton taught us typography about the year 1490. The first book printed in English was a tranflation, Caxton was both the tranflator and printer of the Detruccion of Troye, a book which, in that infancy infancy of learning, was confidered as the beft account of the fabulous ages, and which, though now driven out of notice by authors of no greater use or value, ftill continued to be read in Caxton's English to the beginning of the prefent century. Caxton proceeded as he began, and, except the poems of Gower and Chaucer, printed nothing but tranflations from the French, in which the original is fo fcrupulously followed, that they afford us little knowledge of our own language; though the words are English, the phrafe is foreign. As learning advanced, new works were adopted into our language, but I think with little improvement of the art of tranflation, though foreign nations and other languages offered us models of a better method; till in the age of Elizabeth we began to find that greater liberty was neceffary to elegance, and that elegance was neceffary to general reception; fome effays were then made upon the Italian poets, which deferve the praise and gratitude of pofterity. But the old practice was not fuddenly forfaken; Holland filled the nation with literal tranflation, and, what is yet more ftrange, the fame exactness was obftinately practifed in the versions of the poets. This abfurd labour of conftruing into rhyme was countenanced by Jonfon, in his verfion of Horace; and, whether it be that more men have learning than genius, or that the endeavours of that time were more directed towards knowledge than delight, the accuracy of Jonfon found more imitators than the elegance of Fairfax; and May, Sandys, and Holiday, confined them felves to the toil of rendering line for line, not indeed with equal felicity, for May and Sandys were poets, and Holiday only a scholar and a critic. Feltham appears to confider it as the eftablished law of poetical tranflation, that the lines thould be neither more nor fewer than thofe of the original; and fo long had this prejudice prevailed, that Denham praifes Fanthaw's verfion of Guarini as the example of a "new and noble way," as the first attempt to break the boundaries of cuftom, and affert the natural freedom of the mufe. In the general emulation of wit and genius which the feflivity of the Reftoration produced, the poets fhook off their conflraint, and confidered tranflation as no longer confined to ferviie clofenefs. But reformation is feldom the work of pure virtue or unaffifted reafon. Tranflation was improved more by accident than conviction. The writers of the foregoing age had at leaft learning equal to their genius, and, being often more able to explain the fentiments or illuftrate the allufions of the ancients, than to exhibit their graces and transfufe their fpirit, were perhaps willing fometimes to conceal their want of poetry by profufion of literature, and therefore tranflated literally, that their fidelity might fhelter their infipidity or harfhnefs. The wits of Charles's time had feldom more than flight and fuperficial views, and their care was to hide their want of learning behind the colours of a gay imagination; they therefore tranflated always with freedom, fometimes with licentioufnefs, and perhaps expected that their readers should accept fprightlinefs for knowledge, and confider ignorance and mistake as the impatience and negligence of a mind too rapid to ftop at difficulties, and too elevated to defcend to minuteness. Thus was tranflation made more easy to the writer, and more delightful to the reader; and there is no wonder if ease and pleasure have found their advocates. The paraphraftic liberties have been almost univerfally admitted; and Sherbourn, whofe learning was eminent, and who had no need of any excufe to pafs flightly over obfcurities, is the only writer who, in later times, has attempted to juftify or revive the ancient severity. There is undoubtedly a mean to be obferved. Dryden faw very early that closenefs beft preferved an author's fenfe, and that freedom beft exhibited his fpirit; he therefore will deferve the highest praise who can give a reprefentation at once faithful and pleafing, who can convey the fame thoughts with the fame graces, and who, when he tranflates, changes nothing but the language. Idler. 96. What Talents are requifite to form a good Tranflator. After all, a tranflator is to make his author appear as charming as poffibly he can, provided he maintains his character, and makes him not unlike himself. Translation is a kind of drawing after the life; where every one will acknowledge there is a double fort of likenefs, a good one and a bad. "Tis one thing to draw the outlines true, the features like, the proportions exact, the colouring itfelf perhaps tolerable; and another thing to make all thefe grace 3 F 4 fal, ful, by the pofture, the fhadowings, and chiefly by the fpirit which animates the whole. I cannot without fome indignation look on an ill copy of an excellent original; much less can I behold with patience Virgil, Homer, and fome others, whofe beauties I have been endeavouring all my life to imitate, so abused, as I may fay, to their faces, by a botching interpreter. What English readers, unacquainted with Greek or Latin, will believe me, or any other man, when we commend thofe authors, and confefs we derive all that is pardonable in us from their fountains, if they take thofe to be the fame poets whom our Ogilbys have tranflated? But I dare affure them, that a good poet is no more like himself in a dull translation, than a carcafe would be to his living body. There are many who understand Greek and Latin, and yet are ignorant of their mother tongue. The proprieties and delicacies of the English are known to few: 'tis impoffible even for a good wit to understand and practife them, without the help of a liberal education, long reading, and digefting of thofe few good authors we have amongst us; the knowledge of men and manners; the freedom of habitudes and converfation with the best of company of both fexes; and, in fhort, without wearing off the ruft which he contracted, while he was laying in a flock of learning. Thus difficult it is to understand the purity of English, and critically to difcern not only good writers from bad, and a proper ftyle from a corrupt, but also to distinguish that which is pure in a good author, from that which is vicious and corrupt in him. And for want of all thefe requifites, or the greatest part of them, moft of our ingenious young men take up fome cry'd-up English poet for their model, adore him, and imitate him, as they think, without knowing wherein he is defective, where he is boyish and trifling, wherein either his thoughts are improper to his fubject, or his expreflions unworthy of his thoughts, or the turn of both is unharmonious. Thus it appears neceffary, that a man fhould be a nice critic in his mother-tongue, before he attempts to tranflate a foreign language. Neither is it fufficient that he be able to judge of words and ftyle; but he must be a mafter of them too: he muft perfectly understand his author's tongue, and abfolutely command his own: fo that, to be a thorough tranflator, he must be a thorough poet. Neither is it enough to give his au And thor's fenfe in good English, in poetical expreffions, and in mufical numbers: for, though all thofe are exceeding difficult to perform, there yet remains an harder task; and 'tis a fecret of which few tranflators have fufficiently thought. I have already hinted a word or two concerning it; that is, the maintaining the character of an author, which diftinguishes him from all others, and makes him appear that individual poet whom you would interpret. For example, not only the thoughts, but the ftyle and verfification of Virgil and Ovid are very different. Yet I fee even in our beft poets, who have tranflated some parts of them, that they have confounded their feveral talents; and by endeavouring only at the sweetness and harmony of numbers, have made them both fo much alike, that if I did not know the originals, I should never be able to judge by the copies, which was Virgil and which was Ovid. It was objected against a late noble painter (Sir P. Lely) that he drew many graceful pictures, but few of them were alike. this happened to him because he always ftudied himself more than thofe who fat to him. In fuch tranflators I can easily dif tinguish the hand which performed the work, but I cannot diftinguith their poet from another. Suppofe two authors are equally fweet, yet there is a great diftinction to be made in fweetnefs; as in that of fugar and in that of honey. I can make the difference more plain, by giving you (if it be worth knowing) my own method of proceeding in my tranflations out of four feveral poets; Virgil, Theocritus, Lucretius, and Horace. In each of thefe, before I undertook them, I confidered the genius and diftinguishing character of my author. I looked on Virgil as a fuccinct, grave, and majestic writer; one who weighed, not only every thought, but every word and fyllable; who was fill aiming to crowd his fenfe into as narrow a compafs as poffibly he could; for which reafon he is fo very figurative, that he requires (I may almoft fay) a grammar apart to conftrue him. His verfe is every where founding the very thing in your ears whofe fenfe it bears; yet the numbers are perpetually varied, to encrease the delight of the reader; fo that the fame founds are never repeated twice together. On the contrary, Ovid and Claudian, though they write in ftyles differing from each other, yet have each of them but one fort of mufic in their veries. All the verification and little variety of Claudian his character; and to translate him line for line is impoffible, because the Latin is naturally a more fuccinct language than either the Italian, Spanish, French, or even than the English, which, by reason of its monofyllables, is far the most compendious of them. Virgil is much the closest of any Roman poet, and the Latin hexameter has more fect than the English heroic. Dryden. Claudian is included within the compafs $97. The Nature of Wit in Writing. The compofition of all poems is, or ought to be, of wit; and wit in poetry, or wit-writing (if you will give me leave to ufe a fchool-diftinction) is no other than the faculty of imagination in the writer, which, like a nimble fpaniel, beats over and ranges through the field of memory, till it fprings the quarry it hunted after; or, without a metaphor, which fearches over all the memory for the fpecies or ideas of thofe things which it defigns to reprefent. Wit written is that which is well defined, the happy refult of thought, or product of imagination. But to proceed from wit, in the general notion of it, to the proper wit of an heroic or hiftorical poem; I judge it chiefly to confift in the delightful imagination of perfons, actions, pallions, or things. 'Tis not the jerk or fting of an epigram, nor the feeming contradiction of a poor antithefis (the delight of an ill-judging audience in a play of rhyme) nor the jingle of a more poor paranomafia; neither is it fo much the morality of a grave fentence, affected by Lucan, but more fparingly ufed by Virgil; but it is fome lively and apt defcription, dreffed in fuch colours of fpeech that it fets before your eyes the abfent object as perfectly and more delightfully than nature. So then the firit happinefs of a poet's imagination, is properly invention, or finding of the thought; the fecond is fancy, or the variation, dreffing or moulding of that thought, as the judgment reprefents it, proper to the fubject; the third is elocution, or the art of cloathing and adorning that thought, fo found and varied in apt, fignificant, and founding words: the quickness of the imagination is feen in the invention, the fertility in the fancy, and accuracy in the expreflion. For the firft of thefe, Ovid is famous amongst the poets; for the latter, Virgil. Ovid images more often the movements and affections of the mind, either combating between two contrary passions, or the battle of the bulls, the labour of the Dixeris egregiè notum fi callida verbum or extremely discomposed by one. His words therefore are the leaft part of his care; for he pictures nature in diforder, with which the study and choice of words is inconfiftent. This is the proper wit of dialogue or difcourfe, and confequently of the drama, where all that is faid is to be fuppofed the effect of fudden thought; which though it excludes not the quicknefs of wit in repartees, yet admits not a too curious election of words, too frequent allufions, or use of tropes, or, in fine, any thing that fhews remoteness of thought or labour in the writer. On the other fide, Virgil speaks not fo often to us in the perfon of another, like Ovid, but in his own: he relates almoft all things as from himself, and thereby gains more liberty than the other to exprefs his thoughts with all the graces of elocution, to write more figuratively, and to confefs as well the labour as the force of his imagination. Though he defcribes his Dido well and naturally, in § 98. Examples that Words may affe3 the violence of her paflions, yet he must yield in that to the Myrrha, the Biblis, the Althea, of Ovid; for as great an admirer of him as I am, I must acknowledge, that if I fee not more of their fouls than I fee of Dido's, at least I have a greater concernment for them: and that convinces me, that Ovid has touched those tender strokes more delicately than Virgil could. But when actions or perfons are to be defcribed, when any such image is to be set before us, how bold, how mafterly are the ftrokes of Virgil! We fee the objects he prefents us with in their native figures, in their proper motions; but fo we see them, as our own eyes could never have beheld them fo beautiful in themselves. We fee the foul of the poet, like that univerfal one of which he fpeaks, informing and moving through all his pictures: without raifing Images. Dryden. I find it very hard to perfuade feveral that their paffions are affected by words from whence they have no ideas; and yet harder to convince them, that in the ordinary course of converfation we are fufficiently understood without raifing any images of the things concerning which we speak. It feems to be an odd fubject of difpute with any man, whether he has ideas in his mind or not. Of this at first view, every man, in his own forum, ought to judge without appeal. But ftrange as it may ap pear, we are often at a lofs to know what ideas we have of things, or whether we have any ideas at all upon fome subjects. It even requires fome attention to be thoroughly fatisfied on this head. Since I wrote thefe papers I found two very striking inftances of the poffibility there is that a man may hear words without having any idea of the things which they reprefent, and yet afterothers, combined in a new way, and with wards be capable of returning them to great propriety, energy, and inftruction. The firft inftance is that of Mr. Blacklock, a poet blind from his birth. Few men bleffed with the most perfect fight can defcribe vifual objects with more spirit and juftnefs than this blind man; which cannot poffibly be owing to his having a clearer conception of the things he defcribes than is common to other perfons. Mr. Spence, in an elegant preface which |