This same theory was taken up by numerous seventeenth and eighteenth century translators. Avoiding as it does the two extremes, it easily commended itself to the reason. Unfortunately it was frequently appropriated by critics who were not inclined to labor strenuously with the problems of translation. One misses in much of the later comment the vigorous thinking of the early Renaissance translators. The theory of translation was not yet regarded as "a common work of building" to which each might contribute, and much that was valuable in sixteenth-century comment was lost by forgetfulness and neglect.
FOOTNOTES:
[250] Gregory Smith, Elizabethan Critical Essays, vol. I, p. 313.
[251] Introduction, in Foster Watson, Vives and the Renaissance Education of Women, 1912.
[252] Letter prefixed to John, in Paraphrase of Erasmus on the New Testament, London, 1548.
[253] Dedication, 1588.
[254] To the Reader, in Shakespeare's Ovid, ed. W. H. D. Rouse, 1904.
[255] Bishop of London's preface To the Reader, in A Commentary of Dr. Martin Luther upon the Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians, London, 1577.
[256] Preface to The Institution of the Christian Religion, London, 1578.
[257] Preface to The Three Orations of Demosthenes, London, 1570.