THE CRITICAL REVIEW. For DECEMBER, 1785. The Satires of Juvenal, translated into English Verfe, with a Correct Copy of the original Latin on the oppofite Page: cleared of all the most exceptionable Paffages, and illuftrated with Marginal Notes from the best Commentators. Alfo Dr. Brewfter's Perfius: with the Original on the oppofite Page, and Notes from Cafaubon, to illuftrate the Defign and Method, as well as the Senfe, of his feveral Satires. By E. Owen, M. A. Two Vols. 12mo. 75. Lowndes. THE HE author afferts, in his Preface, that if he excels not his rambling predeceffors in fidelity, fometimes perhaps in eafe and fpirit (not excepting the great and mafculine but flovenly Dryden him felf), writing, as he does, under great advantages in an improved ftate of talle, of claffical knowlege, and of English verfification; he will freely acknowlege him. felf to be justly chargeable with great prefumption.' To the justice of this obfervation we have nothing to object, but we cannot pay an equal compliment to the policy, perhaps the modefty of it. Every fubfequent writer may undoubtedly benefit by the labours of his predeceffors in the fame line; but by fuch a declaration he voluntarily, if not oftentatiously, difclaims the advantages of his fituation. He challenges cen, fure inflead of conciliating favour.. If he fucceeds, he leffens his own merit by proclaiming the facility of his undertaking; and if he fails from the fame caufe, aggravates his defects. Mr. Owen, however, proceeds to foften his pretenfions, which a thorough conviction of fuperior talents only could entirely juftify, by affuting the reader that He means not by this to challenge the fevere eye of rigid. criticism. On the contrary, he has many explanations to make, many indulgences to request. Juvenal is a very unequal writer. In fome whole fatires, and in fome parts of his belt fatires (i. e. as his translator con#3 Voc. LX. Dec. 1785. D d ceives, ceives, the third, fourth, fixth, feventh, eighth, tenth, thirteenth, and fourteenth,) he feems, as Mr. Pope fpeaks of Shakfpeare," to have grown immortal in his own despite ;” in plain, language, to have written carelefly. And if the tranflator has confulted his own ease a little upon these occafions, he has erred in good company his great master's. For, though no tranflator can equal this author in his beauties, this is no reason why a falfe glare fhould be thrown over his imperfections. In this, perhaps, the tranflator errs from laziness: but in the two following particulars, he errs rather from choice. Triplets, which are confidered, perhaps justly, as blemishes in modern poetry, are fometimes to be found in this work. The reafon is, they are sometimes ufeful in translation to prevent diffufion.' This vindication is by no means happily conceived or ex-、 preffed. To take the author literally, he fometimes errs through choice, and sometimes through negligence.' But if triplets are useful,' and certainly in a long performance they are at least allowable, there is no error,' and confequently no apology is requifite for their introduction. But the plea of la zinefs' is not fo excufeable. If Mr. Owen tranflates carelefsly,' he overthrows his claim to fidelity. The original being carelessly written, is nothing to the purpose. It is the limner's duty to reprefent a defective feature, as well as to delineate the more pleafing lineaments of those whofe likeness he is engaged to copy. He, as well as the translator, will feldom be cenfured for foftening a harfhnefs; but totally to neglect it, is equally blameable in either. A fimilitude is expected no lefs by the admirers of the one than the friends of the other. We fhall turn from the Preface, where the author's ideas are not in general developed with fo much precision as we could with, to the tranflation itself. In the Fourth Satire Juvenal gives us a ludicrous anecdote of Domitian. He introduces it by invoking the heroic muse; affures us that res vera agitur,' and preferves a tumid dignity of ftyle through the whole ftory, to make the burlesque more confpicuous. Cum jam femianimum laceraret Flavius orbem Incidit Adriaci fpacium admirabile rhombi, • When When the last chief of Flavian birth When Rome crouch'd to the bald-pate hero, A turbot of a fize portentous (By fome ftrange fate or fortune fent us) Ne'er pour'd one of a larger make : When, thaw'd, they fend their monftrous growth, The tranflator obferves that the poet is going here into the mock-heroic, which is fupported in Latin principally by extravagant exaggeration. In English we have a higher advantage. The cast of Hudibrastic verse and language is peculiarly adapted to this species of poetry.' This is an affertion without proof; as the Splendid Shilling of Phillips, and many other performances of a fimilar kind in our language, fufficiently evince. Either style, indeed, may be used to advantage in heightening the ridiculous; but here the Hudibrastic is undoubtedly improper. Instead of resembling the original, it forms a contraft to it, and the spirit of Juvenal is totally mifreprefented. The note on the following well-known line is not more happy than the preceding granflation. • O fortunatam natam me confule Romam !' Dryden makes the great Cicero speak arrant nonfenfe here; "Fortune foretun'd the dying notes of Rome, 'Till I, thy conful fole, confol'd thy doom." It was the writer's vanity, that gave moft offence at Rome. Si milar founds were tolerated, if not admired, in that age. The phrase itself is pure and elegant.' In what its purity or elegance confifts we know not.Cicero, and many other celebrated writers of antiquity, were exceedingly fond of a pun; but that, in this refpect at least, Juvenal had a better taste, is evident from his contemptuous comment on the above paffage. He does not intimate, that if the Roman orator had possessed lefs vanity, he would have escaped from the fury of his enemies, but that if he had only written fuch filly lines, his infignificance would have protected him.` Antoni gladios potuit contemnere, fi fic What is rather extraordinary, confidering the note, the tranf lation fairly reprefents the original fenfe. Many feeble lines, Ddz and and vulgar expreffions, that bear little refemblance to the eloquent flow and energetic majefty of Juvenal, to whom, as well as the Grecian bards, ' dedit ore rotundo Mufa loqui,' f might be felected. But in a work of fome length and difficulty, fuch exceptions would be rather invidious. As a fair fpecimen, we shall give an extract from part of the tenth Satire, which Dryden has diftinguished by the title of divine; and which Johnfon has equalled, if not excelled, in his admirable imitation, particularly of the firft part of our quotation, in which Charles the Twelfth of Sweden is fubftituted for Hannibal. 1 In the juft fcale put Hannibal: ah! fee, How light this conqueror's duft!-yet this is he, But this contents not: wid'ning ftill arife Still grander profpects: "nothing yet (he cries) But what's th' event? blush, glory, at the tale, Go, madman, Alps' tremendous fummits fcale ş A • One world the boy of Fella can't content; He pants for breath: the earth, with all its fkies, The The tranflator intends his performance for the ufe of fchools; and has omitted two hundred lines of the original, on account of their indelicacy: for the fame reafon he should have expunged many more, if he had adhered ftrictly to the well-known precept of Juvenal, but which his example fo little tends to enforce no bavad rgant ⚫ Maxima debetur puero reverentia." Of Mr. Owen'sreformed and correct text,' the following paffage is bata Badofpecimen. fubig. Si magni Arturius cecidit domus.' We defy the best scholar of Warrington free-fchool to conftrue thefe words as they ftand in the Delphin edition they cannot be mistaken,!! bank • Si magna Arturii cecidit domus.? We find, however, not many faults of a fimilar nature: and "though we often look in vain for the dignity and animation of the original, the fidelity and accuracy of the tranflator, in general, entitle him to our commendation.-Dr. Brewster's version of Perfius amply deferves the compliment paid to it in the Preface. silivionu to etablint u so m quauiogiai bus jugzi “Letters of Literature By Robert Hèron, Esq. 8vo. 65. in hom tu ybalam Boards.Robinfon. b duw bar giesmo. LIKE fome literary adventurers, our prefent author, probably, not having profited by fwimming with the ftream, now endeavours to oppofe it, and boldly feeks the most rapid and continued currents, to render the conteft more famous, or the victory more glorious. But we muft confefs that, though $1 he often parts from vulgar rules with a brave disorder, we do not frequently find him fnatching a grace, or stepping, in real knowlege, beyond the boundaries of fcience already explored. On what has been done, he fometimes decides with judgment, in ftrong energetic language; fometimes he feems to oppose with petulance, for, the fake of oppofition. Virgil is an infamous plagiarift; little Horace, a Sabine puppy';' Blair, the ape of the French critics; Ariftotle, filly and vain' Boileau, a poor copyift, a writer of the meaneft ta lents." It requires no great abilities to call names; and the lowest nymph of Billingfgate might exceed him in this quali fication: : we are forry to fee real talents debased by fuch indecencies. Mr. Heron tells us, f that the fame perfections which have fecured to an author of three thousand years ftanding his due applaufe, will most infallibly effect the fame end to a modern writer.' We might quibble, in the language of Dd3 Horace, 23 |