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.