nominatim we may readily infer that the 'other critics and commentators' were not likely to be very important authorities. Indeed, we have every reason to believe that these meant only such annotations as had been gathered from other sources in Clarke, and the translators of the Iliad. We know none of Cowper's observations which can be properly termed valuable. Pope's æsthetical remarks are, indeed, well worthy of consideration, but the rest are entitled to small respect. We have one illustration of this in the note, adopted from him, on the golden chain in the passage above. Pope, and with him Mr. Munford, conjectures that this indicated, according to the Egyptian astronomers, the sun's attractive force. This is mere niaiserieeven if there had been any foundation for such an hypothesis, Jupiter is allegorically put for the air, never for the sun. Heyne alludes to the conjecture, and characterizes it as more acute than sensible.* There was a disposition in the Alexandrine school to interpret Homer and all the ancients allegorically,ta folly which too many of the moderns have been disposed to imitate. It was a ridiculous fancy of exactly the same kind as that which afterwards led the English Dominican, Thomas Wallis, to explain the Metamorphoses of Ovid by the Bible. We regret that Mr. Munford should have been led into this snare by following Pope. But this is the necessary consequence of relying on ignorant or insufficient authorities. "If the blind lead the blind, shall they not both of them fall into the ditch ?" Several of the notes, perhaps a tithe of them, may render some assistance to the mere English scholar by the explanation of allusions, or may afford some gratification by the apposite citation of parallel passages from Scripture. Mr. Munford frequently uses Homer as a text for the introduction of religious reflections. These are very genteel twaddling. We cannot ourselves see much propriety in forcing such moral homilies into the translation of a heathen poet, though we would pass no censure upon it, as it may be a question of taste; and even if they are strangely out of place, yet we have not the heart to condemn them, for they evince * 'Acutius'-too acutely-says Heyne. ad. Il. viii. 18. vol. v. p. 415. q. v. + Heyne ad II. xiv. 205. Jacob, Bibliophile on Rabelais, Pref. liv. i. Hallam, as usual, is entirely ignorant of it. invariably the gentle and amiable disposition of the translator, aud his earnest and sincere zeal in the cause of morality and religion. We read with a smile Mr. Munford's labored efforts to prove that the study of the classics is in no wise prejudicial. to the interests of Christianity or to the development of religious feeilngs. The attempt to refute such foolish asservations shows his good will. But we think that this was a needless exhibition of it. It will never do to answer a fool according to his folly-both time and labor are squandered without benefit, in any such endeavor. Those who may be so ignorant, so weak-minded, or so fanatical as to adduce any such objections, are to be received with the smile of derision, and classed with the persecutors of Capnio, and the "viri obscuri" of the close of the mediæval ages-they do not merit a reply. It would scarcely be either generous or just to enter into any minute criticism of the mistakes, into which Mr. Munford may have been led by his want of books of reference. It is always an invidious task to be fault-finding; and after having made the remarks which we have done upon the assistance within his reach, it would be unfair to bring against him the learning of those commentators, with whom he was wholly unacquainted, as a test of his critical accuracy. Wherever we may note palpable mistakes in the text, and we remember but few at present, we shall point them out; but there are few passages of Homer, which are not plain and easy, and capable of a satisfactory translation without any very profound or recondite learning. Immense disputation has, indeed, been raised as to the peculiar force of individual words as any one may satisfy himself by casting his eye over Buttmann's Mythologus. Sir Daniel Sandford was wont to say that the epithet xogudafokos was only incapable of any sufficient translation. Of course the application of any such learning as would be requisite to discuss such points as to the employment of phrases in the text would only transfer the controversies which they have originated in the Greek, to the English version. The present translation therefore loses but little by the absence of such erudition. Mr. Munford seems to have been a better scholar than Pope, and fully as good as Cowper. He was fully competent to translate Homer in a manner sufficiently accurate for any one who can derive satisfaction from a translation. If the scholar finds reason to be dissatisfied with a few phrases here and there-and they are such as would attract the attention of the scholar only-he can have recourse to the original. Instead, therefore of ungraciously cavilling over Mr. Munford's notes, we will give him all honor for having been able to achieve so much, and to do it so well, with no better assistance than the old Lexicon of Schrevelius and the copy of Clarke's Homer, into which he had thumbed his way into Greek at school and at College, and which continued to be the revered and affectionately beloved companions of his maturer years, even to the end of his days. It does great credit to him that with such scanty help he should have been able to produce a version of the Iliad, which, in fidelity, as in smoothness and grace, is infinitely before Cowper's, and with which, for truthfulness and accuracy, Pope's beautiful poem is not for one instant to be compared. We have already detained our readers so long that we will tax their good nature with but very few additional remarks, and devote our remaining pages almost entirely to quotations from Mr. Munford's Homer. They will thus be enabled to judge for themselves of the general merits of its execution. The first passage, which we shall cite, on this our return to our text, will be one requiring great vigor and energy of expression to do justice to the ponderous phrases of Homer. It is the description of Hector breaking down the gates of the Greeks. The translation is written with great fire and boldness. With loud, tremendous shout, He called his Trojan heroes. Sons of Troy, Equestrian warriors to the onset come! Break now the Grecian wall, and on the ships Throw flaming brands, like thunderbolts of Jove! With transport heard throughout that numerous host! Arm'd with keen spears, before them held erect, Toss it with ease, so light Saturnian Jove Terrific; in his hands two javelins keen! And surely no one could have checked him then, Except the gods, when through those gates he sprang! To pass the barrier. They that call obey'd. Some clamber'd o'er the wall, while others through Munford, B. xii. 594-638. This is admirable; there are some few feeble lines in it, but the translation altogether is plain, manly, and strong. It is Homer in his majesty and simplicity. It may appear too simple to those whose ideas of Homer have been formed upon Pope, or the vicious taste of the present age, but the version throughout breathes of the antique, and must afford pleasure to those who are anxious to form some conception of Homer such as he actually was, not such as they may themselves fancy or wish him to be. The description of Neptune's descent to the battle at the ships is equally fine. He had been watching the fight from the hills of Samos, and had noticed the undue intervention of Jupiter in behalf of the Trojans. Fierce wrath and indignation fir'd his breast Of that huge mountain! Trembled all the woods, And cliffs abrupt, beneath th' immortal feet Of mighty Neptune! Three prodigious strides He harness'd to his car his brass-hoof'd steeds, The splendid whip, and mounts the seat sublime. He bound their feet, that fix'd they should abide Munford. B. xiii. 26-57. Our next specimen is in a more tender strain; it is the application of a beautiful simile, on the death of Euphorbus. We will, however, ere we pass, make one observation on the original of the passage above. The dactyl is a rapid foot, more rapid than even Horace's celeres iambi. Accordingly, the hurry of Neptune and the speed of his divine. horses, as he rushes furiously from the Samian heights to the plains of Troy, are indicated by the copious use of dactyls. The lines leap forward with rapid bounds; the rhythmical beats fall like the quick clatter of galloping horses strained to their utmost speed. These verses are almost purely dactylic. In the four lines describing the descent of Neptune to the sea only a single spondee occurs-excepting of course the final feet of the hexameters, and there is not a single hiatus to cause delay. Αὐτίκα δ' ἐξ ὅρεος κατεβήσετο παιπαλόεντος, Κραιπνά ποσὶ προβιβας τρέμε δ' ούρεα μακρά και ὕλη Τρὶς μὲν ὀρεξατ' ἰὼν τὸ δὲ τέτρατον, ἵκετο τεκμως, Lib. xiii. 17-21. |