word as in a compounded one, the course to be taken is obvious. Some that cannot be fo turned as to preserve their full image by one or two words, may have juftice done them by circumlocution; as the epithetique to a mountain, would appear little or ridiculous tranflated literally leaf-fhaking, but affords a majestic idea in the periphrafis: The lofty = mountain shakes his waving woods. Others that admit of differing fignifications, may receive an advantage by a judicious variation, according to the occafions on which they are introduced. For example, the epithet of Apollo, ixning, or farShooting, is capable of two explications; one literal in respect of the darts and bow, the enfign of that God; the other allegorical with regard to the rays of the fun: Therefore in fuch places where Apollo is represented as a God in perfon, I would use the former interpretation; and where the effects of the fun are defcribed, I would make choice of the latter. Upon the whole, it will be neceffary to avoid that perpetual repetition of the fame epithets which we find in Homer, and which, tho' it might be accommodated (as has been already fhewn) to the ear of those times, is by no means fo to ours: But one may wait for opportunities of placing them, where they derive an additional beauty from the occafions on which they are employ'd; and in doing this properly, a tranflator may at once fhew his fancy and his judgment. As for Homer's Repetitions, we may divide them. into three forts; of whole narrations and fpeeches, of fingle sentences, and of one verfe or hemiftich. I hope it is not impoffible to have fuch a regard to thefe, as neither to lofe fo known a mark of the author on the one hand, nor to offend the reader too much on the other. The repetition is not un graceful graceful in those speeches where the dignity of the speaker renders it a fort of infolence to alter his words; as in the messages from Gods to men, or from higher powers to inferiors in concerns of ftate, or where the ceremonial of religion feems to require it, in the folemn forms of prayers, oaths, or the like. In other cafes, I believe the best rule is to be guided by the nearnefs, or diftance, at which the repetitions are placed in the original : When they follow too clofe, one may vary the expreffion, but it is a queftion whether a profeffed tranflator be authorized to omit any: If they be tedious, the author is to answer for it. It only remains to speak of the Verfification. Homer (as has been faid) is perpetually applying the found to the sense, and varying it on every new fubject. This is indeed one of the most exquifite beauties of poetry, and attainable by very few: I know only of Homer eminent for it in the Greek, and Virgil in Latin. I am fenfible it is what may fometimes happen by chance, when a writer is warm, and fully poffeft of his image: however it may be reasonably believed they defigned this, in whofe verfe it fo manifeftly appears in a fuperior degree to all others. Few readers have the ear to be judges of it; but thofe who have, will fee I have endeavour'd at this beauty. 4 Upon the whole, I must confess myself utterly incapable of doing juftice to Homer. I attempthim in no other hope but that which one may entertain without much vanity, of giving a more tolerable copy of him than any entire tranflation in verfe has yet done. We have only thofe of Chap-man, Hobbes, and Ogilby. Chapman has taken the advantage of an immeafurable length of verfe, notwithstanding which, there is fcarce any para-. phrafe more loote and rambling than his. He has frequent frequent interpolations of four or fix lines, and I remember one in the thirteenth book of the Odyssey, v. 312. where he has fpun twenty verses out of two. He is often mistaken in fo bold a manner, that one might think he deviated on pur pofe, if he did not in other places of his notes infift fo much upon verbal trifles. He appears to have had a strong affectation of extracting new meanings out of his author, infomuch as to promife in his rhyming preface, a poem of the myfteries he had revealed in Homer: and perhaps he endeavoured to strain the obvious sense to this end. His expreffion is involved in fuftian, a fault for which he was remarkable in his original writings, as in the tragedy of Buffy d'Amboife, etc. In a word, the nature of the man may account for his whole performance; for he appears from his preface and remarks to have been of an arrogant turns and an enthufiaft in poetry. His own boaft of having finifhed half the Iliad in less than fifteen weeks, fhews with what negligence his verfion was performed. But that which is to be allowed him, and which very much contributed to cover his defects, is a daring fiery spirit that animate his tranflation, which is fomething like what one might imagine Homer himself would have writ before he arrived at years of difcretion. Hobbes has given us a correct explanation of the fenfe in general, but for particulars and circumftances he continually lops them, and often omits the most beautiful. As for its being esteemed a clofe tranflation, I doubt not many have been led into that error by the fhortness of it, which proceeds not from his following the original line by line, but from the contractions above-mentioned, He fometimes omits whole fimiles and fentences, and is now and then guilty of mistakes, into which no writer of his learning could have fallen, but thro IX 2 careleffnefs. His poetry, as well as Ogilby's, is too mean for criticism. It is a great lofs to the poetical world that Mr. Dryden did not live to tranflate the Iliad. He has left us only the first book, and a fmall part of the fixth; in which if he has in fome places not truly interpreted the fenfe, or preferved the antiquities, it ought to be excused on account of the haste he was obliged to write in. He feems to have had too much regard to Chapman, whofe words he fometimes copies, and has unhappily followed him in paffages where he wanders from the original. However, had he tranflated the whole work, I would no more have attempted Homer after him than Virgil, his verfion of whom (notwithstanding fome human errors) is the most noble and spirited tranflation I know in any language. But the fate of great genius's is like that of great ministers, tho' they are confeffedly the firft in the common. wealth of letters, they must be envy'd and calumniated only for being at the head of it. That which in my opinion ought to be the endeavour of any one who tranflates Homer, is above all things to keep alive that fpirit and fire which makes his chief character: In particular places, where the sense can bear any doubt, to follow the strongest and most poetical, as most agreeing with that character; to copy him in all the variations of his ftyle, and the different modulations of his numbers; to preferve, in the more active or defcriptive parts, a warmth and elevation; in the more fedate or narrative, a plainnefs and folemnity; in the fpeeches, a fullness and perfpicuity; in the sentences, a fhortnefs and gravity: Not to neglect even the little figures and turns on the words, nor fometimes the very caft of the periods; neither to omit nor confound any rites or customs of anti quity: Perhaps too he ought to include the whole in a fhorter compass, than has hitherto been done by any translator, who has tolerably preferved either the sense or poetry. What I would further recommend to him, is to ftudy his author rather from his own text, than from any commentaries, how learned foever, or whatever figure they may make in the estimation of the world; to confider him attentively in comparison with Virgil above all the ancients, and with Milton above all the moderns. Next thefe, the Archbishop of Cambray's Telemachus may give him the truest idea of the fpirit and turn of our author, and Boflu's admirable treatise of the Epic poem the justest notion of his defign and conduct. But after all, with whatever judgment and study a man may proceed, or with whatever happiness he may perform fuch a work, he must hope to please but a few; those only who have at once a taste of poetry, and competent learning. For to fatisfy fuch as want either, is not in the nature of this undertaking; since à mere modern wit can like nothing that is not modern, and a pedant nothing that is not Greek. What I have done is fubmitted to the publick, from whose opinions I am prepared to learn; tho' I fear no judges fo little as our best poets, who are moft fenfible of the weight of this task. As for the worst, whatever they fhall pleafe to fay, they may give me fome concern as they are unhappy men, but none as they are malignant writers. I was guided in this tranflation by judgments very different from theirs, and by perfons for whom they can have no kindness, if an old obfervation be true, that the strongest antipathy in the world is that of fools to men of wit. Mr. Addifon was the first whofe advice determined me to undertake this talk, who was pleafed to write to me upon ‡Y 3 that |