Part 7

Another remarkable Observation of Dr. _Felton_'s is, that the _best Performers are the best Judges_. He has only _Horace_ against him of the Antients, and _Dacier_ of the Moderns, as is already observed in this Essay. I believe no Body will deny, but Mr. _Walsh_ before-mentioned was one of our best Judges of Regularity and Wit, yet hardly any Body will say he was one of our best Performers. There's nothing more common with small Genius's and small Judges, than to demand of all Criticks _to write themselves_ before they criticise upon others Writings. They would stare if it should be said, that _Dursey_ knew no more of Poetry than he did of Philosophy, nor of _English_ than of _Hebrew_; though it is very true, if it be understood of the Art of Poetry, and the Beauty of Language; yet, that he was a Performer, is I doubt not well known to the Doctor, and well approved of. To teach us good Language by Example, Dr. _Felton_ expresses himself thus elegantly and unaffectedly. _When I wrote these Sheets, my Lord_ Landsdown_'s Poems lay dispersed up and down in the Miscellanies; but some kind Hand_, as for Instance the Bookseller, upon a very laudable Motive, _hath assembled those scattered Stars, and added another Lyre to the Constellation_; which, though it is meant, to do singular Honour to those Poems, must have an ill Effect in astronomical Observations; it makes thirteen to the Dozen in the twelve Houses, and must cause as much Confusion, as two Signs of the Harp in a short Lane. The Modesty of the following Passage adds as much to its Merit as to the Truth of it: _If I offered any Thing which is not commonly observed, I hope it will not be interpreted any Singularity, but such as may render your Lordship more eminent and distinguished in the World_; and having taught his noble Pupil what he should imitate, he gives him warning what he should avoid, and that is the Reading any Thing written by a _Presbyterian_: _What crude indigested Volumes! How many tedious Sheets without Argument or Consistency, are the Writings of some of the_ Dissenters! whom does he mean, such as _Bates_, _Manton_, _How_, _Pool_, _Clarkson_, _Alsop_, &c. He and some other good Church-Criticks make _Presbyterianism_ to be a Sort of _Hellebore_, if you do but snuff it up in your Nose you run mad immediately. Thence it is, that the _Presbyterians_ are termed _Fanatici_, by the learned and sober Writers of our two famous Universities. Is it expected, that every Orthodox Doctor should know as much as Bishop _Stillingfleet_, or write as well as Archbishop _Tillotson_? Where is the Reason or Justice of censuring a Body of Men for the Enthusiasm and Ignorance of a few? Would this Doctor suffer the Tables to be turn'd, and a Judgement to be made of the Writings of good Church-men, by the Argument and Consistency of the Works, with which the learned World are obliged by those of the Country Clergy, whose Pieces can crawl to the Press, whether in Prose or Verse, Meditations or Hymns. I do verily believe he did not think of Dr. _Bates_, when he fell thus furiously on Dissenters, or had ever seen any of his Writings, which are as polite as the Politest of our Age; the Sentiments as pious, as great, as noble, and as just, according to the Subject, and the Language as pure and as harmonious. What can be more so, than this Passage of his _Harmony of the divine Attributes_, speaking of the Fall of _Adam_: _Prodigious Pride! He was scarce out of the State of Nothing, no sooner created but he aspired to be as God; not content with his Image, he would rob God of his Eternity to live without End; of his Sovereignty to command without Dependance; of his Wisdom to know all Things without Reserve. Infinite Insolence! that Man the Son of Earth, forgetful of his Original, should usurp the Prerogatives, which are essential to the Deity, and set himself up a real Idol, was a Strain of the same Arrogancy which corrupted the Angels._ This is what Dr. _Felton_ calls _Presbyterian Crudity_. It is strange, but it is true, that there is a Narrowness of Soul, and a Conceit in some of our Ecclesiasticks founded on the Establishment which we do not meet with in others; nay, not in those who pretend to Supremacy and Infallibility. Father _Bouhours_, though as zealous a Jesuit as any in _France_, yet had so just a Notion of every one's Merit in polite Learning, that he freely owns the Refinement of the _French_ Tongue, and the _French_ Manners was owing to those of the reformed Religion, even to _Presbyterians_. _Nous devons aux dernieres Heresies une partie de l'Embellissement de notre Langue, & de la politesse de notre Siecle._

And another _French_ Bigot tells us; _One of their Historians has observed, that the pretended Reformers began to speak well and write well, and were the First that shewed their Way to others_. They were all of them _Presbyterians_:

Parvos femando libellos Sucratis populumq; rudem amorcando parolis.

Our _Staunch_ Criticks will not allow, that a _Presbyterian_ ever had or could have any Wit or any Eloquence, though it was only to make an ill Use of it. No, no Body must be well-born or well-bred, that is without the Pale. No Man must be brave, nor Woman beautiful. The Men are all painted with cropt Hair, and the Women with Forehead-Cloaths, unless they assent and consent. No Wit, no Language, no Honour, nor any Thing that's good, is to be had any more than Matrimony without a Licence. _Vide Grand Rebellion_, and Mr. _Echard_'s _History of England_.

I am so very well entertain'd with _Dryden_'s _Virgil_, that I am glad to meet with any Excuse for his Translation; and would allow Dr. _Felton_'s, that _the Faults are to be ascribed partly to some Defects of our Language_; if the Doctor himself, a few Lines before, had not said of the same Language, _that it is capable of all the Beauty, Strength, and Significancy of the_ Greek _and_ Latin. The Faults which have been generally found with _Dryden_ as to _Virgil_, have been his mistaking or altering the Sense of the Original, and turning the _Epick_ Stile into _Elegiack_. I doubt not but the _English_ Tongue has Expression for _English_ Sentiments, let them be ever so great and sublime; but I may very well doubt whether it has Diction equal to the Strength and Dignity of the _Ilias_, without the Helps _Milton_ made use of, as compounding of Words and reviving some old Teutonicks, which would look very uncouthly among the Softnesses and Gingles of our fine Writers of late.

I wish the Doctor had explain'd how he would have us to understand him, when he informs us, that to translate well is more difficult than to write well; by which he intimates, that to form a Fable for a great and important Action, to mark the Characters with suitable Sentiments, to conduct the One and maintain the Other with Art and Elevation diversify'd with proper Episodes; through such a Work as the _Ilias_, is so far from being the principal Part of an _Epick_ Poem that it is no Part at all; for with all this the Translator has nothing to do. The Labour and Merit of it, according to Dr. _Felton_, consist in the Language and Verses, in finding Words to express the Action and Sentiments, and to adorn those Words with Numbers and Harmony. This is all that is necessary in a Translation; and being also but some Parts of the Original, it cannot be more difficult to do a Part than to do the Whole. Can one suppose, that to write such a History as Mr. _Echard_'s from printed Books, written Books, from the Hearsay and Report of Men, Women and Children, is more difficult than to contrive and write such a One as the _Cassandra_ of _Calprenade_? or in plain _English_, that to invent and tell a Story, is much easier than the bare telling it only? It needs no Reflection. If the Version of _Homer_ had been born when he wrote, he must of Consequence have preferr'd it to the _Ilias_, which would have cost the Translator's Modesty, as much as Sir _Richard Steele_'s to be put upon a Comment on _Homer_ and _Virgil_. My Lord _Roscommon_ has explain'd this Matter to us sufficiently:

_Though Composition is the nobler Part, Yet good Translation is no easy Art._

Monsieur _Maucroix_, who translated _Cicero_ into _French_, writes thus of translating to Monsieur _Boileau_: _You have told me more than once, that Translation is not the Way to Immortality_; and he excuses his meddling with it, on Account of his Want of Application and Knowledge: As to Immortality it is to be question'd, whether that was the main Thing our Translators had in View. It will not be deny'd, but that _Dryden_'s Bookseller put him upon translating _Virgil_, by the Temptation of so much a Line. And other Undertakers pay well enough to make a mortal Life a little comfortable, it is not much Matter whether the Work be immortal or not. _Ogilby_ however is sure of Immortality; for though his Translations are as dead as his Carcass, yet he will be remember'd in good Satyr for the Badness of them. _My Author_, says Monsieur _Maucroix_, _is learned for me, the Topicks are all digested, the Inventing and Disposing are none of my Business; I have nothing to do but to utter my self_. Which Utterance is much more difficult, as Dr. _Felton_ will have it, than to study, to digest, to invent, to dispose, and to utter too. I do not suppose, that a Man ever applied himself to Translation, if he felt in himself any of the heavenly Fire which animates a great Genius, or was ambitious of Fame by the Merit of an Epick Poem. It must be own'd, that Judgement is requisite in Translation as well as Composition, not only to preserve the Spirit of the Original, but also to make Choice of such a One as the Translator may be best able to manage. Mr. _Charles Hopkins_ was Master of this Secret; and instead of attempting _Homer_ or _Virgil_, he contented himself with _Ovid_, and succeeded to Admiration. _Hopkins_ knew, that the Manners and Sentiments in _Ovid_ were natural and universal, which must please in all Ages; whereas, but a very few can relish the Quarrels and Battles, which are the main Subject of the _Ilias_. The Learned have explained to us, for what it is that our Adoration is due to _Homer_: For the Unity and Greatness of his Fable, the Variety and Dignity of his Characters, and his sublime Thought and Expression; I dare not say Diction and Sentiments, because the _Spectator_ has disgraced the Use of technical Terms, by calling it Cant; and supposing, that those who use them, do it to disguise their Ignorance, and shew their Vanity in critical Phrase.

I should be glad to know, which it is of all _Homer_'s before-mention'd Excellencies, that has so delighted the Ladies, and the Gentlemen who judge like Ladies; or whether ever a One of those Excellencies has been at all distinguished from the Other; or whether there is any Possibility of expressing the Sublime of the _Greek_ Tongue in our Language. As to the Sentiments, which are a principal Part of Epick Poetry, they may be translated; we very probably think much after the same Manner the _Greeks_ did, though we do not speak so. The Passions are the same in all humane Nature; and probably the Expression of them, by so great a Master of our Tongue as the Translator of _Homer_, may gain as much as it may lose by the Translation. But the Mischief of it is, these Sentiments are that Part of the _Ilias_ which the Criticks have made most bold with:

_For who, without a Qualm, hath ever look'd On holy Garbage, though by_ Homer _cook'd? Whose railing Heroes, and whose wounded gods, Make some suspect he snores as well as nods. But I offend_-------- Roscom.

_Dormitat Homerus_; that _Homer_ sometimes sleeps, was said before by _Horace_. The _Spectator_ informs us, that _Homer_ is censured by the Criticks, for his Defect as to the Sentiments in several Parts of the _Ilias_ and _Odysses_. However, it is most certain, that the Translation of _Homer_ must have pleased Ladies and Gentlemen by these very Sentiments, or by the Translator's beautiful Diction and Versification. But then all the great Parts of Epick Poetry are lost to them, especially those that depend on the Dignity and Strength of Expression, which will not be pretended to be entirely preserved in the _English_ Version.

Reading _Dacier_ a few Days since, I was extreamly surprised at a Criticism of his on a Translation of _Homer_, by a much greater Critick than himself, even _Horace_ his Master, who has thus translated the Beginning of the _Odyssey_:

Dic mihi, Musa, virum, captæ post tempora Trojæ, Qui mores Hominum Multorum vidit & Urbes.

_Muse, sing the Man, who after_ Troy _was taken The Manners of many Men and Cities saw._

I have aimed to be literal here, the better to explain _Dacier_'s Remarks. _There are considerable Faults in this Translation_, says Monsieur _Dacier_, _he has forgotten the Epithet [Greek: polytropon], which marks_ Ulysses_'s Character; he neglects the Circumstance that makes us most concern'd for him, [Greek: hos mala planchthê], who wandered a long Time, he says in a loose Way, after the Taking of_ Troy; _whereas, it is in_ Homer _after having ruined_ Troy. Now, if _Horace_, who had studied and admired _Homer_ so much, as to make him a Pattern for all future Writers of _Heroick_ Poems, could mistake three Times in translating two Lines, what a Discouragement must it have been to those who knew how he had succeeded in attempting it? 'Tis true, no Poet will ever undertake a Translation with more Advantage than the last Translator of _Homer_ had; for besides Eight or Ten Versions in _Latin_, _Italian_, _French_, &c. there are Three or Four in _English_; a Prose Translation by Madam _Dacier_, and a Cart-load of Comments in all Languages. I am satisfy'd so good a Versifyer as the Translator of the _Ilias_ might with those Helps, have made a very good Translation, without understanding any more _Greek_ than my self; and nothing in the World could have been more easy, than out of one Commentator to have corrected another, and to have alter'd and amended the Reading in the Name of any of the Criticks, from _Eustathius_ down to _Dacier_. I do not boast of being Master of _Greek_ enough to read _Homer_ with so much Pleasure in the Original as I could do in a good Version, and it is much to be question'd, whether every one that can read him in the Original do understand what they read: Several Ladies and Gentlemen have subscribed for _Chaucer_ of the _Christ-Church_ Edition, but I doubt very much whether they understand him or not, and whether a great many, who can read _Greek_, do really know what they read. One of the greatest Masters of the _Greek Tongue_, in our Time, has often question'd whether there were Twenty Men in _England_ who understood the Strength, Beauty, and Elegance of that Language, tho' there are a Thousand that pretend to it. He represented it as a Study for a Man's Life, and I am confirm'd in this Judgement by what _Menage_ tells us of himself, and others upon this Subject. 'Tis well known _Menage_ wrote several Things in _Greek_, particularly some Odes in Imitation of _Anacreon_, which are not thought inferiour to the _Teian_ Poet's; _J'ay toujours fait beaucoup de cas de ceux qui savent le grec_, &c. _He always highly valued those that understood_ Greek. He does not mean to construe and parse it as Boys do at School, which is the most of what we find in those who pretend to be Masters of it. _Without this Language_, continues he, _a Man can't be said to be more than half Learned: Monsieur_ Cotelier, _Monsieur de_ Treville, _and Monsieur_ Bigot, _are the only Men in_ France, _who can read the_ Greek _Fathers in the Original._ I suppose the Fathers are not so difficult as _Homer_ with respect to the Tongue at least; for the Language of Poetry is peculiar to it, a made Language compounded and metaphorical. If it be so, the Translation of the _Ilias_, from the _Greek_ of _Homer_, must shew the Translator to be a greater Master of the _Greek_ Language than all the Learned Men in _France_ except Three, and all the Learned Men in _England_ except about Twenty. For my own Part, I confess, I make bold with all Kinds of Versions to help me out in Originals, and am not asham'd to do as _Menage_ did; _I own I do not understand_ Pindar _enough_, says he, _to take Pleasure in him_. I have heard _Pindar_ quoted a Hundred Times by Persons who were very far from being so modest as _Menage_, and fully satisfy'd themselves that they understood him as well as the _Græcians_, to whom he read his _Odes_, tho' I suspected the contrary. _Menage_, again; _I never read a_ Greek _Author without having before read the Translation_.

I do not insinuate any thing to depreciate the Translator of _Homer_'s excellent Performance, which, as I have observ'd, has the Merit of the most pure and harmonious Diction and Versification; but to hint a little of the Confusion of our Taste, and the Irregularity of our Judgement, which like Things for Beauties which they have not, and not for those which they have. Thus the Version of _Homer_ is lik'd as a Translation of the best _Epick_ Poem that ever was written, and not for the Softness and Sweetness of the Elegy, which are every where to be met with, as where the God _Apollo_ appears in the Shape of _Agenor_:

_Flies from the furious Chief in this Disguise, The furious Chief still follows as he flies._

This is what the _French_ call _Jeu des Mots_, playing upon Words, and what _Dryden_'s _Virgil_ is full of, tho' he knew as well as any Body that it was a Fault: _The Turn of Thoughts, and Words_, says he, _is the chief Talent of the_ French; _but the_ Epick _Poem is too stately to receive such little Ornaments_, which would have been in Perfection in a Version of _Ovid_, and very little agrees with _Waller_ in his Epistle to my Lord _Roscommon_;

_Well sounding Verses are the Charm we use, Heroick Thoughts, and Virtue to infuse: Things of deep Sense, we may in Prose unfold, But they move more, in lofty Numbers told: By the loud Trumpet, which our Courage aids, We learn that Sound, as well as Sense, perswades._

In these Things our Taste is strangely confin'd: provided the Verses run smoothly, and the Language is soft and harmonious, we think it is fine: Let the Subject be a _Boreas_, or a _Zephyr_: Nay, I do not question but the Couplet I quoted out of the _English_ _Homer_ is reckon'd one of the finest of the Version by Ladies, and Gentleman who judge like Ladies, and who are the Nine in Ten of all Readers of Poetry. I confess, I am much more pleas'd with the following Verses, as rough and rumbling as they are, because they participate of the Roughness of the Thing which is imag'd to us,

_Jumping high o'er the Shrubs of the rough Ground, Rattle the clattering Cars, and the shockt Axles bound._

When such assimilating the Sound to the Sense is not affected 'tis very agreeable; but when there is any Force or Affectation in it, 'tis puerile and distasteful.

The following Description of the Poetical Fire, which several Poets were enflam'd with, seems to be somewhat deficient, and to want farther Explanation; especially where the Translator tells us, MILTON's Fire _is like a Furnace, but_ Shakespear_'s like a Fire from Heaven_: VIRGIL's like a _Kenning-Glass_, and _Lucan_'s and _Statius_'s like _Lightning_. The _Kenning-Glass_ should have given me no Manner of Disturbance: But why is _Milton_'s _Celestial Fire_ compar'd to that which destroy'd the _Three Children_; the Fire of a Furnace is boisterous and voracious, consuming whatever is within its Reach. _Milton_'s Fire, like that of the Sun, warms and enlivens; and if ever any was fetch'd from Heaven, 'twas that, which shines with so much radiant Brightness throughout his whole Poem. I was the more shockt with this Misrepresentation of _Milton_'s Fire, for that there's something burlesque in the very Expression, a _Furnace_, and one can't help being jealous that this Passage of _Hudibras_ might give the Hint for it.

Talgol, _who had long possest Enflamed Rage in glowing Breast, Which now began to rage, and burn as Implacably as Flame in Furnace._

Tho' I am very far from taking _Dryden_ to be a perfect Master of Criticism, yet I do not think his Deficiency proceeded from Want of Judgement so much as from Inconsistency and Vanity, and an Opinion that he was Tyrant of _Parnassus_, and might govern by Will and Pleasure instead of Law and Reason. I have observed elsewhere that he adapts his Prefaces to the Circumstances of every Play and Poem, and very often contradicts in one what he had said in another: Nay, in his Essay on _Dramatick Poetry_, the Contradiction is within a few Lines of the Assertion, as thus; _There is no Theater in the World has any Thing so absurd as the_ English Tragi-Comedy, which he confirms by this Verse;

_Atq; ursem & Pugiles media inter Carmina poscunt_.

And a little after; _I cannot but conclude, to the Honour of our Nation, that we have invented, encreased, and perfected, a more pleasant Way of Writing than was ever known to the Antients or Moderns of any Nation, which is_ Tragi-Comedy. _One of the most monstrous Inventions_, says the _Spectator_, _that ever enter'd into the Poet's Thought. An Author might as well think of weaving the Adventures of_ Æneas _and_ Hudibras _into one Poem, as of writing such a motley Piece of Mirth and Sorrow_. Whatever others thought of Mr. _Dryden_'s Criticisms, he did himself full Justice, and seem'd to despise all other Criticks at the same Time that he laid himself most open to them. _These little Criticks do not well consider what the Work of the Poet is, and what the Graces of a Poem; the Story is the least Part of either._ Pref. to _Moch-Astrol._ Against him is every Critick, ancient and modern, from _Aristotle_ to _Rimer_, and more than all of them against him is his own self. In another Place he writes thus; _The Fable is without doubt the chief Part of a Tragedy, because it contains the Action, and the Action contains the Happiness or Misery, which is the End of Tragedy. Without the Fable the Poet, who had otherwise good Manners, Sentiments, and Diction, would no more have made a regular Poem, than a Painter would have made a good Picture that had mingled Blue, Yellow, Red, and other Colours confusedly together._ I do not mention these Things to lessen Mr. _Dryden_'s great Character as a Poet; but to shew how well Dr. _Felton_ could judge of it, when he recommended him to us as a Critick. Against Mr. _Dryden_, as to the _Story_, _is Rapin_, who he assures us would _be alone sufficient, were all other Criticks lost, to teach a-new the Rules of Writing_. Against his _Rapin_ we find the Translator of _Homer_ in an extraordinary Manner in his Notes on the Fifth _Iliad_. I hope it did not arise from any Resentment for that Jesuit's reflecting on those Poets who seem to place the Essence of Poetry in fine Language, and smooth Verse, to which he ascribes its present Decay. _As if the Art consisted only in Purity and Exactness of Language: This indeed pleased well, and was much to the Advantage of Women that had a Mind to be tampering in Writing Verse: They found it their Concern to give Vogue to this Kind of Writing, of which they were as capable as the most Part of Men: For all the Secret was no more than to make some little easy Verses, in which they were content if they cou'd dress some soft passionate Thoughts_, &c. The most of our modern Poets being interested in this Affair, I shall say no more of it.