1

and to refine the tafte; and, therefore, we turn to the confideration of them with peculiar pleasure.

To the critical parts of Greek and Roman literature there were not so many perfons devoted as could have been wished, and, indeed, as might have been expected, when we reflect upon the ardour with which the ftudy of them was · pursued abroad. But this must be ascribed to the circumftances of the times. In a fcene of great and unavoidable theological difputation, the fcholars of England were obliged to direct their principal attention to objects that were esteemed of infinite importance; and confequently they had not much leifure for refearches into the niceties of languages and learning. We have no names, in this period, that can be compared with thofe of fir John Cheke, fir Thomas Smith, and Roger Afcham, whom, in a former article, we have defcribed as eminent improvers of claffical tafte. Smith and Afcham may in part be mentioned as belonging to the prefent reign; for Smith's Treatifes, on the juft pronunciation of the Greek tongue, and on the proper mode of writing the English language, were not published till the year 1568, and Afcham's School-mafter was first printed in 1573. His Latin Epiftles did not appear till 1576; but this was eight years after his decease. We may add to thefe diftinguished names John Kaye, whom we have before fpoken of in the medical line, and who united with his kill as a phyfician the talents of a philological scholar. In 1874, not long after his death, a work was published, which he had written on the pronunciation of the Greck and Latin languages.

One of the most important effects of the revival of letters in Europe, was the giving to the world correct edi tions of ancient authors. In this the firft fcholars abroad were employed, and immenfe benefits have refulted from their labours. To the fame kind of glory it was long before England could lay any confiderable claim; nor is it difficult to account for the fact. There were not many original manufcripts of the old claffic writers in the li braries of our own country; and the accefs to foreign libraries, and efpecially to foreign manufcripts, must have

been

been peculiarly difficult. This deparment of literature, however, was not wholly neglected. It was attended to, at least, by one eminent individual, fir Henry Savile. The refult of his fkill and diligence did not, indeed, appear till the next reign; but it was through a great part of the prefent period that he was preparing his grand edition of St. Chryfoftom, which is faid to have coft him eight thoufand pounds. There were two circumftances that contributed the better to qualify him for the undertaking; which were, his having refided fone time abroad, and his ability of making fuch purchases as were adapted to his defign.

The general turn of compofition among the learned still continued to be in Latin. Nothing could be more natural than this was, at a period when the ancients were almost the only fources of knowledge, and when their beauties fo powerfully ftruck every mind as to excite a strong defire of imitation. Indeed, the Roman tongue formed a mode of conveyance which was fingularly and eminently useful, as it included the scholars of every country: and the fame mode of conveyance has not yet entirely loft its advantages, with regard to certain objects, and on fome particular occafions. What farther encouraged the cuftom of ufually writing in Latin, was the imperfect and unformed ftate of most of the vernacular languages of Europe. They had hitherto been little cultivated, the Italian excepted, which, by Dante, Petrarch, and Boccace, was carried early to a high degree of purity and elegance. The time, however, now approached for an attention's being paid to the enrichment of our native tongue. Of this, Afcham had fet an admirable example, and had recommended it to imitation: nor were his exhortations and his pattern unproductive of valuable effects; as will be feen in the course of the article.

One circumftance which contributed to the increase of knowledge in general, and to the improvement of the Englifh language in particular, was the multiplicity of tranf lations. This multiplicity conftitutes a striking feature in the literary character of the age, and therefore we fhall

it a distinct confideration. On the benefits which may be derived from translations it is needlefs to enlarge. Befides the great ftore of materials, fcientific, literary, and entertaining, which they import into a country, they promote a more accurate acquaintance with the language from which they are made, and enrich the tongue into which they are rendered. A much fuperior advantage might have been drawn from them, at the time we are treating of, if our writers had been better judges of the fubject, and if they had not, in particular, moft of them entertained an opinion, that it was neceffary for verfions to be strictly literal.

Of the Greek authors, from whom translations were made, the first place is due to Homer. Arthur Hall, a gentleman of fortune, and a member of parliament, pub. lifhed ten books of the Iliad, from a metrical French verfion of that work. Hall's tranflation is in the Alexandrine of Sternhold; and he is entitled to no other praise than that of being the first who exhibited a part of the Iliad in an English drefs. The merit of giving a complete and regular verfion of Homer belongs to George Chapman. It was done, too, from the Greek; though Chapman did not a little avail himself of the affiftance that was afforded by a Latin translation in profe. What he performed was, however, no small effort in literature for that period. He feems to have had juft fentiments concerning the nature of translation, and the manner in which it ought to be conducted, though he was not capable of reducing his fentiments fully to practice. It cannot be faid that he hath preferved either the dignity or the fimplicity of Homer. He is fometimes redundant, and fometimes defective; and he was unfortunate in the measure of his verfe, which was impofed upon him by cuftom, but which is aukward, inharmonious, and difguftful to modern ears. Nevertheless, he is not always deftitute of ftrength or fpirit; and he has enriched our language with many compound epithets, which are much in Homer's manner. Waller, it is reported, could never read Chapman's Homer without a degree of transport. Nor is it a fmall compliment that

has

has been paid him by his illuftrious fucceffor; for Pope was of opinion, that Chapman covers his defects by a daring fiery fpirit that animates his tranflation, and which is fomething like what one might imagine Homer himself would have written before he arrived to years of difcretion. It would have been well if Chapman's fire had not been darkened by bombaft. He did not finifh his verfion of the Odyffey till the next reign. The fame author tranflated Hefiod, but the publication of it, if it was ever published, did not take place till the year 1618. If credit is to be given to a poetical paffage of Drayton (and we do not fee any reason why the fact fhould be doubted), Chapman was a tranflator of Mufæus.

We find that the tranflation of Greek poetry extended to another inftance of confiderable importance. What we refer to is the Jocafta, or the Phænitiæ of Euripides, a verfion of which was made by George Gascoigne and Francis Kinwelmerth, both of them ftudents of Grays-Iun. This version, in the year 1566, was acted in the refectory of that fociety. The fecond, third, and fifth acts were tranflated by Gafcoigne, and the first and fourth by Kinwelmerth. They have not, however, given a juft or exact tranflation of the Phæniffe, their performance being partly a paraphrase, and partly an abridgment of the Greek tragedy. There are, indeed, many omiffions, retrenchments, and tranfpofitions; but, at the fame time, the chorus, the characters, and the fubftance of the story are retained, and the tenor of the dialogue is generally preferved. The beautiful odes of the Greek chorus are in fome inftances neglected, and others, written by the tranflators, are fubftituted in their ftead. In one cafe, where Gafcoigne has deferted the rich imagery of Euripides, he has in a certain degree compenfated for the defect, by an ode of his own, which is far from being deftitute of pathos or imagination. Another original ode, of which Kinwelmerth was probably the author, has great elegance of expreffion and verfification. The principal fault with which the tranflators are chargeable, is their having weakened the force and pathetic brevity of Euripides by needlefs dilata

tions and circumlocutions. On the whole, however, they are entitled to much applause for an attempt to introduce the Grecian drama to the notice of our ancestors, and their fuccefs was greatly fuperior to what might at that time have been expected. It is to be regretted that so noble an effort was not followed by other exertions of the fame kind; that Gafcoigne and Kinwelmerfh did not proceed in their career; and that their example did not excite a fpirit of emulation. We are told, indeed, that certain tragedies of Euripides were tranflated from the Greek by Thomas Key, a divine of that age, who wrote in defence of the antiquity of the univerfity of Oxford. But the tranflation was not into English, but into Latin; nor is it certain that it was ever printed, but rather probable that it existed only in manufcript fince it had not been feen by Anthony Wood.

Our language, during this period, was enriched, and the knowledge of our countrymen enlarged, by feveral tranflations of the Greek profe writers. We must not, however, under the prefent head reckon the Nicocles of Ifocrates, and Ariftotle de Mirabilibus Mundi, which works were translated from the originals by the Thomas Key juft mentioned; because these verfions appear to have been made in Latin, and there are the fame doubts concerning their having been published which attend his Euripides.---Another piece of Ariftotle's, his famous treatife on the ten categories, was rendered into English by Barnaby Googe; but whether it exifts in print, or now exifts at all, is not in our power to afcertain,Thomas Wilson, an eminent fcholar of the time, and whom we fhall foon have occafion more particularly to speak of, gave a proof of his attention to the advancement of vernacular compofition, by tranflating feven orations of Demofthenes. This work, the fubject of which was fo well chofen, was dedicated to fir William Cecil.-A tranflation of Herodian's hiftory came from the hands of a Nicholas Smyth, of whom we have no farther information. It was not from the Greek that the verfion was made, but from the Latin of Angelus Politianus, as is

ex