and by far too many profaic lines, had been admitted into it, through fear of difgufting by monotony. The principle was right and found; but it was generally thought that Cowper had carried it too far, and that his translation of Homer had materially fuffered from it. To the whole of the charge he does not plead guilty in his fecond Preface. Yet he thinks it right to comply, in fome degree, with the public tafte. " Unwilling", he fays, "to feem obftinate, I conformed myself in fome measure to thefe objections, though unconvinced of their propriety. Several of the rudett and moft unfhapely lines I compofed anew; and feveral of the paufes leaft in ufe I difplaced for the fake of an eafier enunciation.And this was the state of the work, after the revifal given it about seven years fince. Between that revifal and the prefent, a confiderable time intervened, and the effect of long difcontinuance was, that I became more diffatisfied with it myself, than the most difficult to be pleafed of all my judges. Not for the fake of a few uneven lines or unwonted pauses, but for reasons far more fub ilarial. The diction feemed to me in many paffages, either not fufficiently elevated, or deficient in the grace of cafe, and in others I found the fenfe of the original either not adequately expreffed, or misapprehended. Many elifions ttill remained unfoftened; the compound epithets I found not always happily combined, and the fame fometimes too frequently repeated." Vol. i. p. xlii. No work perhaps was ever more improved by fuch compliance with the public opinion, and employment of fecond thoughts, than the prefent; which we will endeavour in fome meafure to fhow, though it is not easy to do so within the ordinary compafs of a critique. The reader must be contented with a few fpecimens, out of multitudes which might be taken, and mult feek the reft for himself. The revifion of the Ody ffe was the work of less than eight months, the Iliad occupied the intervals of feveral years. This difference, however, arose not from the proportion of labour bestowed, but from the unfortunate interruptions which impeded the one, while the other went on fmoothly from its commence. ment. The Odyffey, by the author's account, is much more changed than the Iliad, on which fubject he speaks in the fol lowing manner: ་་ I know not that I can add any thing material on the subject of this laft revifal, unless it be proper to give the reason why the Iliad, though greatly altered, has undergone much fewer alterations than the Odyffey. The true reafon I believe is this. The Iliad demanded my utmost poffible exertions; it feemed to me like an afcent almost perpendicular, which could not be furmounted at less cost than of all the labour that I could bestow upon it. The Ody fley, on the contrary, feemed to refemble an open and level country, through which I might travel at my cafe. The latter therefore betrayed me into fome negligence, which, though though little conscious of it at the time, on an accurate search, I found bad left many difagreeable effects behind it." P. xlv. of Notwithstanding this declaration, there is hardly any part the work more improved in the second edition than the opening of the Iliad, which every critical reader will fee by comparing them. First Edition. "Achilles fing, O Goddess! Peleus' fon fent And Heroes gave (fo food the will of Jove) Who them to ftrife impell'd? What Pow'r divine? 10 His daughter, and his hands charged with the wreath Second Edition. "Sing Mufe the deadly wrath of Peleus' fon Achilles, fource of many thousand woes To the Achaian hoft, which num'rous fouls And left their bodies to devouring dogs And birds of heav'n (fo Jove his will perform'd) Who of the Gods impell'd them to contend? His captive daughter, and Apollo's wreath And golden fceptre bearing in his hand." Vol. i. p. 1. It is perfectly manifeft, that every kind of improvement has been bestowed on this opening, in the revifion. The fentences are made more compact, the lines more harmonious, and the construction, from being harsh and foreign, is rendered truly English. English. The fourteenth and fifteenth lines of the first edition are hardly intelligible to a mere English reader; and the epithet fhaft-arm'd was both injudicious in itself, and ill-placed. It is much better removed. At the fame time, in some remarkable paffages of the Iliad, no alteration has been made. We foon turned, as to a favourite, to the fine fpeech of Sarpedon to Glaucus, in the twelfth Book, but it does not exhibit a single change. No change indeed was 'neceffary. It is rendered with equal beauty and vigour, and bears reading either with the admirable original, or with the highly finifhed verfion given by Pope, which is one of the moft ftriking paffages of his wonderful work. The fpeech of Achilles to Ulyffes and Neftor, in the ninth Book, is another of thofe to which every lover of Homer will direct his early attention. Here we find alterations of importance, though not fo numerous as in the paffage juft cited. Thus, inftead of "For I abhor the man, not more the gates Of Hell itself, whose words belie his heart. Is this." We now have, "For as the gates of Ades I deteft The man, whofe heart and language difagree. The next alteration is this: I, after all my labours, who expos'd My life continual in the field, have earn'd In the fecond edition it ftands, "I, after all my toils, who have expos'd The improvement here gained is vigour. An omiffion, a few lines lower, feems rather a facrifice to delicacy. It is the rendering of the fingle word repniow; in which, perhaps, Cowper was over fcrupulous. A little lower, a line remains unaltered, which, if it had caught the tranflator's attention, he would probably have invigorated. "And my arm Efcap'd with difficulty even there". The The word even is too feeble a prop to fupport fuch a fentence. Cowper, perhaps, thought otherwife; for the fourteenth line of the Odyffey, alfo uncorrected, stands, "As it may please thee even in our ears". The remainder of the fpeech is unchanged. An examination fo minute as this cannot be very far continued; but we muft take a specimen or two from the Odyssey. The opening of this poem, contrary to what we observed in the Iliad, exhibits no corrections; nor do we alledge that they were neceffary. The commencement is fimple, yet dignified; and, except the fourteenth line juft mentioned, not liable to objection. The first changes of any confequence appear in the fpeech of Jupiter, 1. 41 of that Book. This before ftood thus: "Alas! how prone are human kind to blame The Pow'rs of Heav'n! From us, they fay, proceed By us; for we commanded Hermes down The watchful Argicide, who bade him fear", &c. Thus far, almost every thing is altered in the new edition, and furely with acceffion of terfeness and vigour. The rest of the fpeech remains as at firft. Second Edition. "How rash are human-kind! who charge on us Their fufferings, far more truly the refult Of their own folly, than of our decrees. So now gifthus, under no constraint Of deftiny, hath ta'en Atrides' wife The watchful Argicide, who bade him fear Alike to flay the King or woo the Queen", &c. T. 3, P. 2. A tranfition line frequently introduced in this Book is im proved greatly at prefent, by being changed from "Whom answer'd then Pallas cærulean-eyed", Y y BRIT. CRIT. VOL. XXIII. JUNE, 1804.. to to the following line, which also had been used before, but not fo frequently, "To whom Minerva, Goddess azure-eyed”. The opening of the fpeech of Telemachus to Antinous, in the fecond Book, is much amended. First Edition. "Him prudent, then, anfwer'd Telemachus. That I fhould thruft her forth against her will Second Edition. "Then prudent, thus Telemachus replied. Who gave me birth and rear'd me, were a deed Alive or dead, my Sire is far remote." P. 34. The fpeech of Penelope, when informed of the departure of Telemachus, in Book 4, may exhibit the correcting care of the tranflator once more, and to advantage. First Edition. "Hear me, ye maidens! for of woman bora may feek |