« ForrigeFortsæt »
of Cato in 1913, by writing a narration of John Dennis's Frenzy, contrary to the wilh of Mr. Addison (who disapproved so illiberal an attack), and published it, though against his consent. And his letters to Mr. Addison in October, November, December, and January following (which must have been written after his eyes are thus faid to have been opened) are full of the arongest expressions of friendship and confidence. He then intrusted to this man (whose jealousy he perceived had been raised by the very mention of the sylphs and the goomes) his original design of trandating and commenting on Homer. Mr. Addison (who it seems did not think Achilles half so formidable as Ariel in the hands of his poetical rival) received this design with great warmth of encouragement, and he was the first whole advice determined Mr. Pope to undertake that talk p. He also presfed him to turn it to the best pecuniary advantage, and for that purpose to avoid engaging in any party disputes ; into which he feared he might be drawn by his intimacy with Dr. Swift, and the attention paid him by many of the Tory ministry. The fufpicions, if any, which Mr. Pope entertained of Mr. Addison's fincerity, from his advice about the Rape of the Lock, had surely by this time subsided ; as indeed they might well do, if nothing happened to confirm them till the publication of Mr. Tickell's Homer ; which, instead of being soon, was not till about two years after.
• In the mean time, a quarrel broke out between Mr. Pope and Ambrose Philips ; which involved Mr. Addison in its consequences, and pat a period to the cordiality of their friendship. Stung with the reputation which Philips bad acquired as a writer of paftorals, Pope wrote an ironical paper in the Guardian, April 27th, 1713, in ridicule of Philips. Mr. Addison immediately perceived the drift of it, and joined with Mr. Pope in the laugh; but Steele understood and published it as a serious panegyric apon his friend. When the jest was discovered, Philips seems to have been outrageously angry, and to have harboured a deep refentment. For in the spring of 1714, he took occasion to abofe Mr. Pope at Button's coffee-house as a Tory, and one united with Dr. Swift to write against the Whig interest, and undermine the reputation of himself, Steele, and Addison. Addison upon this came to Pope, and assured him of his disbelief of this idle story, and hoped their friendship would fill continue 1. Yet he seems to have been somewhat staggered in respect to Mr. Pope's party attachments, against which he had cautioned him more than once in the preceding year $ ; and a cool. nefs certainly ensued, which continued for several months. During this estrangement, the interview mentioned by Mr. Ruff
« Pope to Addison, 30th July, 1913. Steele to Lintot, 4th August, 1713. Additions, vol. ii. p. 104. it Preface to Pope's Iliad.
tter to the hon. , 8th June, 1714. Letter; Nov. 2, 1713. 6
head *, is more likely to have happened than at the period ia which he places it, the latter end of the year 1715; when in reality. there was no rupture between them. Mr. Pope, it is confessed by his biographer, conducted himself at this interview with great impetuolity and warmth ; and Mr. Addison, who was of a colder constitution, and much Mr. Pope's superior both in age
and station, might possibly behave with too much bauteúr and reserve. But that he harboured no malice against him, ap. pears from his subsequent conduct.
• For the sudden revolution in politics that happened at the death of queen Anne, and brought Mr. Addison and his friends into
power and office, most certainly gave him an opportunity of mortifying, if not crushing, his competitor, in cafe he had been mean enough to wish it. On the contrary, from that instant, he was inclined to forget all animosities, and offered his services, nay his interest at court to Mr. Pope of; to which he returned a very waspish and disdainful answer f: but however, in a few weeks afterwards, Pope softened his tone, and wrote a more complaisant letter to Mr. Addison himself, yet mixed with some dittrust and resentment g.
this were again renewed between them ; insomuch that, in April 1715, we find Mr. Pope going to Mr. Jervas's, on purpose to meet Mr. Addison ll; and in the same year he wrote his panegyrical epiftle in vérse, to be prefixed to Mr. Addison's Dialogues on Medals.
• At length the great and inexpiable offence was given by Mr. Addison to Mr. Pope, by permitting Mr. Tickell, his dependent, and afterwards bis under-secretary, to publish a transsation of the first Book of the Iliad in the beginning of June 1715. just at the time when the first volume of Mr. Pope's work was delivered to his subscribers. Whether this book was translated by Mr. Addison himself in his younger days, or whether he only revised and corrected - Mr. Tickell's performance, cannot be pronounced with certainty; unless the public were in posfefsion of those odd concurring circumstances which convinced Mr. Pope himself, that it was Mr. Addison's own translation ; tho' he certainly thought otherwise, when he penned the character of Atticus . To apologize for its publication at fo critical a juncture, the following advertisement was prefixed by Mr. Tickell, though that circumstance was industriously fuppressed in all Mr. Pope's publications on the subject : “I must inform the reader, that when I began this first book, I had some thoughts of translating the whole Iliad; but I had the pleature of being diverted from that design, by finding the work was
1. Page 191.
$. 10th October, 1714.
Who when two wits on rival themes contest,
fallen into a much abler hand. I would not therefore be thought to have any other view in publishing this small specimen of Homer's Iliad, than to bespeak (if possible) the favour of the public to a translation of Homer's Odyseis, wherein I have already made fome progress.
: Whether, on the supposition that the specimen was Mr. Ada dison's own (and it is not unworthy of him), he chose to indulge the vanity of an author, by shewing him how well he could have performed the whole; or whether (supposing it Mr. Tickell's, whom he loved and patronized with all the affection of a father) he really meant to have conferred on him a pecuniary obligation by promoting a subscription for his Odyssey, as he had before done * for Mr. Pope's Iliad ; it must be acknowledged, that in either case the publication was indiscreet and ill-timed. It is true, that Mr. Pope's finances could not now be materially affected, had the public decided in favour of Tickell’s translation ; for his subscription was full, and his contract with Lintot was complete. But it certainly bore too much the appearance of rivalship and competition; and was, in either light, a weakness below Mr. Addison's station and character. It is not to be wondered at therefore, that a man of so irritable a disposition as Mr. Pope is acknowledged to have been, was hurt beyond measure by this transaction; and it is probable that the character of Atticus was written in the heat of his resentment on this occasion; as he expressed the very fame sentiments to Mr. Craggs in his letter of 15th July 1715. But it does not appear (as Mr. Ruffhead afferts) that there was any open breach between Mr. Addison and Mr. Pope upon this occafion; and Pope expressly tells Craggs there was none. such happened ; and had Mr. Addison then fhewn the temper ascribed to him by Mr. Pope's biographer, he would hardly, in the Freeholder of May 7, 1916, have bestowed such encomiums on Mr. Pope's translation of the Iliad.
• Upon the whole, however Mr. Pope may be excusable for penning such a character of his friend in the first transports of poetical indignation, it reflects no great honour on his feelings to have kept it in petto for six years, till after the death of Mr. Addison, and then to permit its publication (whether by recital or copy makes no material difference) t; and at length, at the distance of 18 years, hand it down to pofterity ingrafted into one of his capital productions. Nothing surely could justify fo long and so deep a resentment, unless the story be true of the commerce between Addison and Gildon ; which will require to be very fully proved, before it can be believed of a gentleman who was so amiable in his moral character, and who (in his own cafe) had two years before expressly disapproved of a personal
• Ruffhead, p. 185.
+ Bishop Atterbury's Letter, 26 Feb. 1721-2, Vol. XLVII. fan. 1779.
abuse upon Mr. Dennis. The person indeed from whom Mr. Pope is said to have received this anecdote, about the time of his writing the character (viz. about July 1715), was no other than the earl of Warwick, son-in-law to Mr. Addison himself. And the Something about Wycherley, (in which the story supposes that Addison hired Gildon to abuse Pope and his family), is explained by a note on the Dunciad, 1. 296. to mean a pamphlet containing Mr. Wycherley's Life. Now it happens that, in July 1715, the earl of Warwick (who died at the age of twenty: three in August 1721) was only a boy of seventeen, and not likely to be entrusted with fuch a secret by a ftatesman between forty and fifty, with whom it does not appear that he was any. way connected or acquainted. For Mr. Addison was not married to his mother the countess of Warwick till the following year 1716. Nor could Gildon have been employed in July 1715 to write Mr. Wycherley's Life, who lived till the December following: As therefore so many inconsistencies are evident in the story itfelf, which never found its way into print till near fixty years after it is said to have happened, it will be no breach of charity to suppose that the whole of it was founded on fome mifapprehention in either Mr. Pope or the earl; and unless better proof can be given, we shall readily acquit Mr. Addison of this the most odious part of the charge.'
This excellent paper is said to have been written by gentleman of considerable rank ; to whom the public is obliged for works of much higher importance.'— We wil venture to afcribe it to the learned author of Commentaries on the Laws of England.
The first article in this work is the life of Aaron and Julius, who suffered martyrdom about the beginning of the fourth century. This article was in the first edition ; but ought to have been excluded. For these two faints, as they are called, were neither diftinguished by any work of learning, nor (except their sufferings) by any memorable circumstance : confequently they have no pretensions to be enrolled in the list of eminent
The Biographia Britannica is not designed for SAINTS, or PIOUS DRONES of any denomination.
We do not mention this article as a matter of importance in itself, for it is very short; but as a point, which the learned and judicious editor may hereafter consider, as he Mall fee occasion.
Isaiah. A new Translation ; with a Preliminary Disertation, and
Notes critical, philological, and explanatory. By Robert Lowth,
410. 185. boards. Cadell. [Concluded from vol. xlvi. p. 428.] IN N two former articles we have given our readers the sub
ftance of his lordship's Preliminary Differtation, containing an account of the style and character of the Hebrew poetry, the state of the Hebrew text, and other points of this nature. We now proceed to the Translation and the Commentary.
In this work the author has retained a considerable part of the vulgar translation; for which he assigns this very satisfactory reason : ' as the style of that translation is not only excellent in itself, but has taken possession of our ear, and of our taste, to have endeavoured to vary from it, with no other de. fign than that of giving something new instead of it, would
been to disgust the reader, and to represent the sense of the prophet in a more unfavourable manner : besides, that it is impoffible for a verbal translator, to follow an approved verbal translation, which has gone before him, without fréquently treading in the very footsteps of it. The most obvious, the properest, and perhaps the only terms, which the language affords, are already occupied, and without going out of his way to find worse, he cannot avoid them. Every translator has taken this liberty with his predecessors: it is no more than the laws of translation admit, nor indeed than the necefity of the case requires. And as to the turn and modification of the sentences, the translator, in this particular province of translation, is as much confined to the author's manner, as to his words: so that too great liberties taken in varying either the expression or the composition, in order to give a new air to the whole, will be apt to have a very baŭ effect.'
For these reasons, he says, whenever it shall he thought proper to set forth the holy scriptures for the public use of our church, to better advantage than as they appear in the prefent English translation, the expediency of which grows every day more and more evident, a revision or correction of that translation may perhaps be more adviseable than to attempt an entirely new For as to the style and language, it admits but of little improvement ; but, in respect of the fenle and the accuracy of interpretation, the improvements of which it is capable are great and numberless.
The translation here offered is, in general, as close to the text, and as literal, as our English version. Whenever it de. paris from the Hebrew text, on account of some correction,