Exercise LIX.

The danger of relying on Latin Translations
of Greek Authors.

13

I WAS lately giving public lectures' on Seneca's treatise, in which that religious philosopher inquires why misfortunes happen to good men, notwithstanding there is a Providence." And when we came to the passage where the writer severely inveighs against the luxury of his own times, it so happened that I too, in discussing the passage, enumerated many kinds of foreign birds, which the ancient Romans used to import from the most distant parts of the wide world, and bring to table.1 Three days afterwards there came to me one of those who had been present, a man of the highest scholarship in his own opinion, and, as I thought, not unlearned." And when he saw that some of my friends were with me,' covertly, but still so that his design" was apparent, he began to busy himself so that our conversation, which had commenced 10 on other subjects, might gradually glide" into a mention of the discussion 12 which I had held three days before. Then,13 as though he had got an opportunity of showing off his learning, he said: 'I am sorry1 you omitted to mention one bird, from which alone, more than from any other, 15 we may learn the insatiable greediness of the ancients in seeking out exquisite dainties.'16 Which, pray?' said I, The Phoenix,' said he. Eh! did they make a practice of eating" the phoenix?' Undoubtedly,' said he. 'Neither many,' I replied, could do this, nor could they do it often. For we are told that only one specimen of this bird is found1s in the whole world, and, I believe, it lives 660 years, and when it has constructed a funeral pile, and burned itself," it is then born again from its own ashes. But I took all this for poetical invention. Do you, however, who, as they took pleasure in dainties hard to find, are delighted with all that is rare and exquisite in learning,20 tell us the name of that gourmand, who thought it so important to gratify his palate, that he has

18

21

for ever removed from the world such a beautiful bird. For, of course, as it was a solitary specimen in the whole world, and was only born again from itself, the whole species was destroyed when one was made away with." And perhaps this is the reason why no phoenix has been found for this long time.' 23

26

'You are joking,' said he, 'and are indulging in that habitual irony of yours; but if you had looked into Plutarch's book concerning the preservation of health,25 you would have learned from it, that the brain of the bird, which you do not believe to have existed, is sweet, but causes head-ache," a fact which an author so much to be depended on 28 would not have mentioned had he not heard it from those who had tasted the thing.' 'What you say,'" I replied, 'must be still more surprising, that those who had once tasted that food, and they could not have done so more than once,should have been able to perceive its nature so speedily and so distinctly. For I had learned from Aristotle that, from the recollection of that which had often happened in the same way experience arose, and that from many experiences 30 art was made up.' 'On that point," he rejoined, 'satisfy yourself. 32 It will be sufficient for me to have shown you the passage in Thereupon he pulled from under his coat a volume which contained among other things the vyvà of Plutarch, I suppose according to the translation of Erasmus, for the name was only so far obliterated that it could still be made out from the traces of the letters. In it, however, we plainly read: nam phænicis cerebrum cum sit admodum dulce, tamen aiunt capitis dolorem parere. The good man, who had come for this one reason, and had this business only, had no sooner said this than he took himself off, scarcely wishing us good morning, on the pretext that he had something to do.36

Plutarch.'

34

33

35

When he was gone, those who were there determined to look into Xylander's translation also. He had rendered the passage thus:-Cerebrum phoenicis dulce admodum est, sed dolores capitis inducere fertur. Thereupon I remarked,'See how great an error the somewhat careless 39 translation of one Greek word has occasioned both to our friend who is just gone, and perhaps to others too. For point is Greek

for a palm, a tree of which not only the fruit, but also the pith” is eatable,“ and this is called ¿yképadov in Greek, and cerebrum, i. e., brain, in Latin. Plutarch, however, is speaking of this, and not of the brain of the fabulous 42 bird phoenix. What he says in this passage he of course took from Xenophon, in whom the statement is found in the Second Book of the Anabasis.'

Exercise LX.

On narrow-minded views of Ancient Literature.

PEDANTIC Scholars,' having neglected that part of ancient literature, which is of extensive utility, occupy themselves with light and trifling inquiries. They will sooner explain to you what kind of God was Aius Locutius, what goddess Cunina, or Cloacina, than what is the difference between the franchise of Rome, or Latium, or Italy. They will sooner tell you what the Romans used to eat and drink, than how they managed the state. Accordingly, if you wish to know the causes of the rise and fall of the Roman empire, you will be satisfied by Montesquieu, but sent empty away by these notable antiquaries. There existed formerly Aristotle's books on constitutions," in which he explained the origin and laws of 158 commonwealths, a splendid and admirable work, which I would gladly redeem by the sacrifice of several other books which have come down to our time. There are many to deplore this heavy loss, no one to attempt to make it good." Here is a subject worthy of a scholar and student of antiquity, by the proper treatment of which he would deserve well of political economy," and, indeed, of the human race. On the other hand, we should resign to the genius of pedagogues those tasteless compilations about the shoes, rings, clasps, and cloaks of the ancients. But, some one may be supposed to have objected, if these spiritless bats" seek nothing in the books of the ancients except rites and formulas, and do not perceive or understand their innate power and excellence, how does it happen that they so ostentatiously praise the classic

10

12

authors, as we call them, everlastingly prating" about the divine genius of Plato, the Attic wit of Aristophanes, the wonderful eloquence of Cicero, the rich and copious diction of Livy? We have not far to seek1 for an answer to this. I deny that they judge thus from their own feelings and from any real conviction in their own minds;15 all must deny it who have perceived their stupidity and silliness. What is the fact?16 Like parrots they repeat the words which they have learned from the chief authorities, hoping to persuade the ignorant that they understand the excellence of these great writers quite as well as the Scaligers and Casaubons. I am not sure whether it is not an insult to the ancient writers to be praised by these men. For those who have not studied classics,18 when they hear Demosthenes or Cicero, to take this example," celebrated in the encomiums of such masters, immediately imagine to themselves a grovelling, abject, and purblind writer, like those who extol them. Hence it appears that many, measuring the best writers by the barrenness of these pedants, reject and despise even the liberal studies which they have derived from that source. Assuredly we must not involve those master minds in the ignominy of the pedagogues.20 Let these petty masters" lie in neglect; let the old heroes be exalted to the skies. Let the system "2 of pedagogues be laughed to scorn; let us honour the accomplishments which have descended to us from the genius of the ancients. But it is not enough for these crazy teachers 23 to praise the ancients with an earnestness intended for display, unless they can connect this praise with a bitter censure of the men of genius whom modern times have produced. In fact, they think that the age in which they live has so reached its dotage that it produces nothing in any department of learning which it is worth while to read. They are disgusted 25 by the eloquence of Bossuet and Fenelon; they call the wit of Molière vulgar; Corneille, as compared with Sophocles, Racine, as compared with Euripides, are worthless in their eyes.26 When, however, they hear La Fontaine placed before Phædrus, they think they are going out of their mind."7 For our own part, although we are of opinion that the ancients so excelled in

22

all those acquirements which depend on genius, that they seem to have left posterity no hope of rivalling them, still we entertain no doubt that it belongs to a stupid or envious detractor to deprive our age of the praise which belongs to it. Besides, it is not only a work of the highest practical usefulness, but also one most conducive to the intellectual gratification of a cultivated mind,28 to compare the noblest intellects of antiquity with the great lights of modern literature, and to examine carefully the successful zeal with which the latter have imitated the former. In truth, what else do these grammarians, pale with envy, effect by their violent hatred of modern literature, except to become themselves a subject of ridicule and raillery to men of enlightened minds, or, what is most unfair, to blow up the flame of envy" against the ancients. For such is the folly of some writers now-a-days, that they do not think they have repelled with sufficient spirit the scorn heaped upon themselves, until they have poured forth on ancient literature the indignation and wrath which should be showered down on the heads of these pedagogues.

30

Exercise LXI.

An Editor's Explanations.

It is now thirty-six years since I began to write some commentaries on the Orations of Cicero. With the greatest haste, which in this department of learning is unfavourable to good plans and careful execution,' I completed seven volumes. Nearly half of the seventh was printed, when accidental hindrances prevented the bookseller from prosecuting this long and expensive undertaking. Accordingly, the publication was stopped for seven years. Not that I desisted from my labours; I completed the commentaries on the twenty-five remaining speeches, and then returned to the earlier parts, in order that I might discover and remove the defects resulting from my original precipitation. Having by this time obtained additional help, and being more accustomed to the work, I had

2