language. I believe fuch fhould be retained as flide eafily of themselves into an English compound, without violence to the ear or to the received rules of compofition; as well as those which have received a fanction from the authority of our best Poets, and are become familiar thro' their ufe of them; fuch as the cloud-compelling Jove, etc. As for the reft, whenever any can be as fully and fignificantly exprest in a fingle word as in a compounded one, the course to be taken is obvious.

Some that cannot be fo turned as to preferve their full image by one or two words, may have juftice done them by circumlocution; as the epithet eivocipuaλos to a mountain, would appear little or ridiculous tranflated literally leafShaking, but affords a majestic idea in the periphrafis: The lofty mountain Jhakes 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, incóxos, or far-fhooting, 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 reprefented 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 fentences, and of one verse 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 ungraceful in those fpeeches where the dignity of the fpeaker 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 nearness, or distance, at which the repetitions are placed in the original: When they follow too clofe, one may vary the expreffion, but it is a question whether a profeffed tranflator be authorized to omit any: If they be tedious, the author is to anfwer for it,

It only remains to speak of the Verfification. Homer (as has been faid) is perpetually applying the found to the fenfe, 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 senfible it is what may fometimes happen by chance, when a writer is warm, and fully poffeffed of his image however it may be reasonably believed they defigned this, in whose verse 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 endeavoured at this beauty.

Upon the whole, I must confess myself utterly incapable of doing juftice to Homer. I attempt him 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 those of Chapman, Hobbes, and Ogilby. Chapman has taken the advantage of an immeasurable length of verfe, notwithstanding which, there is scarce any paraphrafe more loofe and rambling than his. He has frequent interpolations of four or fix lines, and I remember one in the thirteenth book of the Odyssey, ver. 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 purpose, 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 fenfe 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 turn, and an enthusiast in poetry. His own boast of having finished half the Iliad in less than fifteen weeks, fhews with what negligence his version 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 animates 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 sense in general, but for particulars and circumstances he continually lops them, and often omits the most beautiful. As for its being efteemed a close translation, I doubt not many have been led into that error by the shortness 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 through carelessness. His poetry, as well as Ogilby's, is too mean for criticifm.

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 small

part of the fixth; in which if he has in fome places not truly interpreted the fense, or preferved the antiquities, it ought to be excused on account of the hafte he was obliged to write in. He seems to have had too much regard to Chapman, whose 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 some human errors) is the most noble and spirited tranflation I know in any language. But the fate of great geniufes is like that of great minifters, though they are confeffedly the first in the commonwealth of letters, they must be envied 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 spirit and fire which makes his chief character: In particular places, where the fenfe 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 style, and the different modulations of his numbers; to preserve, 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 fullnefs and perfpicuity; in the fentences, a fhortnefs and gravity: Not to neglect even the little figures and turns on the words, nor fometimes