with fuch a cuftom as we profefs ourselves to be. It is fingular that Mr. T. cannot diftinguifh between a literal and metaphorical expreffion: by polo Maximus wifhes to mark extravagance of conduct. In order to have conveyed his meaning to the English reader, Mr. T. fhould have expreffed himself fomewhat after this manner." But here, thefe fober orators of ours being abridged by no law, of the full liberty of fpeech, are guilty of more extravagance in thefe affemblies than any intoxication would produce." Ενταῦθα δὲ, οἱ νήφονίες οὗτοι δημαγωγοί, μηδενὸς αὐτοῖς ἐφεςῶτος νόμου, κυλάζοντος τὴν ἐξουσίαν τῶν λόγων, ἐξωρχουνῖο ἐν τᾶις ἐκκλησίαις πάσης μέθης ακολαςότερον. Ρ. 337. δ'. Ed. Dav.

Perhaps Mr. T. will tell us that he has tranflated, with literal exaftnefs, the words of his original. In the above inftance he has done fo, at the expence of common fenfe: but what will he fay to the paffage which we fhall, in the next place, notice; and where did he learn that avxoos fignified a hearer, and sides a fpectator?

In short, hiftorical narrations are, to the hearer, most delightful with respect to pleajure, and to the spectator moft alluring with reSpect to recollection. What banquet then can be more agreeable to the foul than fuch relations as thefe? It is difficult, indeed, to oppofe many, and thefe illuftrious hiftorians, but at the fame time we muft fay," &c.

The words of the original author are Συνελόντι δὲ ἐἰπεῖν, οἱ καθ ̓ ἱςορίαν λόγοι τῶ μὲν ἀνηκόῳ τερπνότατον καθ ̓ ἡδονὴν, τῷ δὲ ειδότι ἐπαγωγότατον κατὰ ἀνάμνησιν. Τίς ἂν οὖν γένοιτο ψυχαῖς εὐωχία λόγων ταυτης προσηνεςέρα; Χαλεπὸν μὲν ἐιπεῖν καὶ ἀντίταξασθαι πολλά και γεννάίῳ λογοποιῷ ρητέον δὲ ὅμως. P. 341. s'.

That is, hiftorical relations are moft delightful to those who have never heard them before, in confequence of the pleasure they afford and are moft foothing to fuch as are already acquainted with them, by the recollection they produce. We think alfo, that the latter part of the fentence has a different meaning from that which has been affixed to it by its tranflators. We fufpect it to fignify, It is difficult, indeed, for a skilful and experienced writer to name any thing that can be put in competition with it: yet we muft nevertheless declaré, c.

66

We cannot but object also to the manner in which Mr. Τ. tranflates the word γενεαλογεί. Genealogizes" is barbarous; its place fhould have been fupplied by points out the defcent of again, a a fedition which no crier has proclaimed,' is by no means the fenfe of Στάσιν πικρὰν καὶ ἀκήρυκίον. There

words

words fignify, as any lexicon would have informed Mr. T., a bitter and implacable contention. So allo εφήμερα, which he has tranflated diurnal, means things which last but for a day. The laft miftake which we fhall notice in the extract that we have made, occurs at the conclufion of the dialogue.

"But Homer afcribes these things to Apollo, obfcurely fignifying the folar rays which pervade the air fwifter than any ar. row, and are far more unmingled than the fymmetry of bodies."

If Mr. T. Taylor would have condefcended to profit by the labours of verbalifts, he would not have given us a tranflation which, to fay the beft of it, approaches near to nonfenfe. The words of Maximus are thefe, "Ounços dè αυτῷ προσεθήκε τὴν φήμην, αἰνιπτόμενος τὴν ἡλίου ἀκτῖνα δι' αέρος χωροῦσαν δϊςοῦ θάλτον, ἀκρατωτέραν τῆς τῶν σωμάτων συμμετρίας. 343. ad im.

The author is explaining the reafon of Homer's attributing to Apollo the infliction of peftilence. The above paffage hould, therefore, have been rendered thus.

"Homer attributes thefe to him, obfcurely fignifying thereby, that the rays of the fun pervade the air more swiftly than an arrow, and are more powerful than the materials of which bodies are compofed."

In giving this explanation, we have the fupport of that able fcholar Markland, whofe note we fubjoin.

« Dubitavi an fcribendum effet κραταιοτέραν ; vel ἀκμαιοτέραν, ex Luciano Dipfad. p. 482. ὁ ἥλιος—ΑΚΜΑΙΟΤΕΡΑΝ τὴν ΑΚΤΙΝΑ προσβαλών. Sed nihil mutandum effe vides, ex Suida in V. ἄκρατος hov axis, vehemens foliis radius. anpalaripar eft potentiorem, validiorem: cui cedit corporis humani compofitio."

It is probable that the word obtained this fenfe from the circumftance of its being applied to wine unmixed with water, and therefore fignifying strong wine. From this it might, by an eafy tranfition, come to denote ftrength or power in other things.

After having noticed fo many blunders, in a space fo comparatively fmall, we fhall eafily be credited in our affertion, that they are fcattered over every part of the work with the moft liberal hand. Let the public bear with us. while we draw a few from these copious ftores; this done, and Mr. T.'s obligations to Heinfius noticed, we shall take our leave of this dull and incorrect production.

In

In vol. 2. p. 150. this fentence occurs. "But I who am defirous of liberty have need of law, have need of reafon: thefe will preferve for me felicity, erect, unfhaken, unattended with fear, and felf-fufficient; and which is not groveling and fubject to fervile arts; through which being impoverished I collect the mighty emolument pleasure."

The original of the latter part is, if av spanyoMEVOS ἀθροίσω τὸ μέγα τουλο ὄφελος ήδονην : i. e. from where fcanty contributions I thall collect that mighty advantage pleature." Not a fyllable is faid in the original about being impoverished. pavilona, the middle verb, as grammarians term it, fignifies colligere vel aucupari aliquid. If Mr. T. had followed his friend Heinfius in this inftance, he would have avoided this miftake; but, by a fingular infelicity, he follows him in his errors only.

Every fchool-boy we had fuppofed to be acquainted with that part of Grecian hiftory which is diftinguifhed by the retreat of the ten thousand, as they are called. Yet Mr. T. appears to know nothing about it. As the following paffage will fhow.

"When, however, war came to him from the fea, myriads of Greeks and fkilful generals, being vanquifhed, he fled to a little hill," &c.

It is not poffible that this fhould be an error of the pen, as the fame blunder is committed in another place. Let us, therefore, inform Mr. T., that upio always means ten thousand or one myriad, whereas the manner in which he tranflates it, implies that there were two myriads or twenty thousand at the leaft. The fentence is alfo badly arranged. On a firft perufal, one would imagine that the Greeks were the vanquished inflead of the victors.

Turn to any part of these volumes, and you cannot proceed far without difcovering marks of ignorance or hafte. Maximus attempts to prove that pain and pleasure are not the ftandard by which we muft diftinguifh a friend from a foe: and in proof of it obferves φιλοῦσι δέ που καὶ παῖδας παλέξες, καὶ διδάσκαλοι μαθητάς. Καὶ τὶ αν εἴη ανιαρότερον ἡ παιδι παιὴς, καὶ μαθητῇ διδάσκαλος; “ Parents love their children and inftructors their pupils. And yet, what occafions greater pain than a parent to the child, an inftructor to the pupil." But Mr. T. is fo carelefs as to tranflate it, "Fathers alfo love their children, and difciples their preceptors." Vol. I. Vol. I. p. 43.

Again," the third form of polity, which is fpeciously denominated a democracy, but is in reality an ochlocracy, or go

vernment

vernment of a mob, resembles the Attic, or Syracufan, or Milefian, or fome other republic, which is ftrong in the multitude.” Vol. I. p. 69.

It would afford us fome fatisfaction to know what fenfe Mr. T. affixes to ftrong in the multitude; we can affix but one, that of a country being populous, but this will not ac cord with the meaning of Maximus, who is fpeaking of the perfons in whofe hands the fupreme power is placed. The fact is, Mr. T. has moft miferably miftaken the paffage; and it fhould have been tranflated thus. The third kind of government is that which is called by the fpecious name of a democracy, but whofe true appellation is an ochlocracy, or mob-rule. Such is the conftitution of Athens, Syracufe, Milefia, and any other place in which fovereign power is vefted in the multitude. Τρίτον δ ̓ αὖ πολιτείας γένος ᾧ ὄνομα μὲν εὔφημον δημοκρατία, τὸ δὲ ἀληθὲς ὀχλοκρατία, κατά τὴν Ἀττικὴν ἢ Συρακουσίαν, ἢ Μιλησίαν, ἤ τινα άλλην πλήθους loxiv. Our tranflator does not appear to have discovered that the grammatical order of the words is κατα τὴν Ἀττικὴν ἰσχὺν—ἤ τινα ἄλλην πλήθους. By the way, we do not know whether the old reading, which Davies rejected, is not the preferable one, ή τινος ἄλλου πληθοὺς ἰσχὺν. Both, however, convey the fame meaning.

We fhall give one example more of Mr. T.'s very imperfect knowledge of the Greek language, and then proceed to prove that he frequently copied from the Latin verfion of Heinfius, without troubling himself to confult the original.

"A fhepherd and a cook travelling the fame road faw a well fed lamb, wandering from the flock, and abandoning his affociates. Both, on feeing this, ran to the lamb. And because at that time, there was a communion of fpeech between men and brutes, the lamb enquired which would be willing to take charge of him and be his condu&tor.” Vol. 1. p. 96.

We have no hesitation in pronouncing that Mr. T. here betrays the most lamentable ignorance of the idiom of that tongue in which he would pals for a perfect mafter. The words, which he has rendered as above, most unqueftionably mean " the lamb enquired who each of them was that wifhed to take charge of him and be his conductor." is av ἑκάτερος ἐθέλει αυτὸν μεταχειρίσασθαι καὶ ἄγειν. p. 301. If the original had been doubtful, as it is not, the fubfequent words would have decided the queftion. But as foon as the lamb difcovered the truth, and what was the trade of both, be entrusted himself to the fhepherd. We may further obferve, that uyepos means a butcher in this place, not a cook,

and

and that movla means being left by his companions, not leaving them.

There cannot be a ftronger proof that a work which profelles to be a tranflation from an original is derived, in part at leaft, through the medium of a third language, than the difcovery, that a word which in the original is not ambiguous, has been expreffed in that third language by a word which confifts of the fame letters as fome word, totally diflinct from it in meaning; and that the latter word has been erroneoufly expreffed in the tranflation, when the former alone conveys the idea of the original. This is a propofition felf-evident, and on it we ground our charge, that Mr. T. has occafionally tranflated from Heinfius, inftead of having recourfe to Maximus himself. In Vol. I. p. 138. thefe words occur Boeotia, however, abounds in PEOPLE."-" At POPULIS abundat Boeotia," fays Heinfius," anλ' dyeipopópos Bowlix is the original!" Here we have the ftrongeft of all poflible proof that Mr. T. T. the Grecian, confounding populus, which means a poplar tree, with populus, which means people, never once caft his eye upon the original, the expreflion in which is in not degree ambiguous, and can only mean abounding with poplars. We might reft fatisfied with this fingle proof, which no fophiftry can eclude, and no excufes can palliate. But we fhall give a few more. In page 58 we meet with the subjoined paffage:

"Vice may by all fpontaneously be gain'd;

Sweat before virtue ftands, fo Heav'n ordain'd,

Says the Baotian poet, unless fome one should praise a wrestler who is unwilling to be crowned without fweat."

So fays Mr. T.-Heinfius has the very fame words. "Nifi quis athletam laudet, qui ante fudorem coronam pof

tulat.

66

The Greek, however, gives a very different turn to the pafage. Καλός γε ὁ ἀγωνιςὴς ἡμῖν ἀνδρωῖὶ ςεφανούσθαι ἐθελων ; 1. e. A fine wrefler truly would he be who should wish to gain the crown without toil. Such a deviation from the Greek, and fuch an exact and fingular agreement with the Latin, could only have proceeded from a fervile tranflation of the latter. The fame want of correfpondence with the original, and the fame unaccountable adherence to the Latin (unaccountable we incan except on our hypothefis) is exhibited in the following fentence.

❝ Can