a very beneficial change might be introduced. The student who sees the description of Europe completed in a few pages, while that of England occupies ten times the space, supposes the latter the more important district. If, however, a general view of the outlines of the globe be premised, viz. a description of the two continents, and of the various islands properly grouped and distinguished,—if, then, a description, more minute and discriminated, of the old world, follow,-the geographer would facilitate his labour, by first selecting those parts which might be most conveniently detached in idea from the rest. Thus Denmark and Norway are separated by the Baltic and the Gulf of Finland; while Great-Britain and Ireland are separate portions. The Orkneys, the Shetland, and Ferro Islands, are naturally connected with the latter; the islands of the Baltic, and of the Gulf of Bothnia, and Lapland, with the former. On the south of the Baltic, the Prussian states border eastward on the Russian territories, which extend to the eastern confines of Europe. Holland, France, Germany, and Hungary, occupy a middle line. to the south of the former, in nearly the same latitudes; while the portions of Spain, Italy, Turkey, and the Crimea, projecting, on the south, into the Mediterranean, will form the southern boundary. The ideas of the geographer will, in this way, form one whole. The situation of the Baltic, and of the countries on its north and south, will connect one part of Europe; that of the Mediterranean, and its projecting points, another; while the intermediate and more important line, in the centre, will be easily fixed in the mind by its connexion with both.

(To be continued.)

ART. II.-The Satires of Decimus Junius Juvenalis, translated into English Verse, by William Gifford, Esq. With Notes and Illustrations. 4to. 17. 115. 6d. Boards. Nicol. 1802.

THE historian of declining Rome had obtained by unwearied efforts the palm of celebrity: his postumous friends, from his own records, published the memorials of an indefatigable life, and failed neither to awaken curiosity nor to remunerate attention.

The humble translator of a Roman satirist anticipates the office of his executors, and, to account for delay in his publication, announces himself, his pedigree, and pristine meanness, with a revolting self-complacence scarcely exceeded by If the only topics which can inthe luminous' Gibbon. terest the world in the life of an author be his parent, his preceptor, and his studies,' this translator has incautiously exceeded his own limit. Superior writers have struggled with

obstacles common to a degraded situation, and have endured sufferings more poignant than any which Mr. Gifford, in twenty-one quarto pages, has disclosed. He is derived from an obscure source in the town of Ashburton in Devonshire : his education was interrupted by poverty and its accompanying difficulties, but was at length regularly completed: accident procured for him friends and a noble patron, and he now enjoys competence and peace.'

Satiated with the self-importance of Mr. Gifford, we must ascend from the lowest step of the portico to examine the structure before us in its essential proportions. Our readers will first revert with us to the translator's model, that we may determine whether his imitation be faithful; or, if defective, whether its defects be attributable to failure in materials, celerity in execution, or incompetency of the artist.

The Satires of Juvenal present a pure specimen of that mode of writing which Quinctilian, in a concise and comprehensive review *, has appropriated to the Romans.

Satira tota nostra est.'-Enlightened critics do not from this passage conclude that nothing was borrowed from the Greeks, since Quinctilian was familiar with the iambics_of Archilochus and the personal invectives of Hipponax: they only infer that the ROMAN SATIRE introduced by Ennius, refined by Lucilius, and exclusively applied to censure of manners, was, in arrangement of subject and measure of verse, entirely a new construction. The word itself more probably originates, as Casaubon asserts, in Satura (an ancient Latin word implying mixture of subjects), than, as Julius Scaliger supposes, in an, or in the name of those monstrous representations, half-brutal, half-human, which the Greeks introduced to enliven by their grotesque dances the intervals of tragedy.

The origin of satire must no longer detain us. To criticism, as well as to morality the maxim may be applied—' Le plus grand inconvénient c'est l'ennui. Indisposed to consult a crowd

*Satira quidem tota nostra est, in qua primus insignem laudem adeptus est Lucilius, qui quosdam ita deditos sibi adhuc habet amatores, ut eum non ejusdem modo operis auctoribus, sed omnibus poëtis præferre non dubitent. Ego quantum ab illis tantum ab Horatio dissentio, qui Lucilium fluere lutulentum, et, ess: aliquid, quod tollere possis, putat. Nam et eruditio in eo mira, et libertas, atque inde acerbitas et abunde salis. Multo est tersior ac purus magis Horatius, et ad notandos hominum mores præcipuus. Multum et vera gloriæ, quamvis uno libro, Persius meruit. Sunt clari hodieque et qui olim nominabuntur Alterum illud est, et prius satiræ genus, quod non sola carminum varietate mixtum condidit Terentius Varvo, vir Romanorum eruditissimus. Plurimos hic libros, et doctissimos, composuit, peritissimus lingua Latina, et omnis antiquitatis, et rerum Græcarum, mostrarumque, plus tamen scientiæ collaturus quam eloquentiæ. Iambus non sane a Romanis celebratus est, ut proprium opus; a quibusdam interpositus: cujus acerbitas in Catullo, Bibaculo, Horatio: quamquam illi epodos intervenire non re periatur.'

QUINCTILIAN, lib. X. 1. p. 505, ed. Gesner. Götting. 1738.

of original commentators, if our readers yet feel their curiosity excited to investigate this subject, the dedication prefixed by Dryden to his translation of Juvenal, and the more modern Laharpe De la Satire ancienne,' will instruct their judgement and gratify their taste.

Juvenal may be accurately appreciated as a satirist, by reviewing the opinions of his panegyrists and opposers. The debate has not lost its interest; although learning and ingenuity have been repeatedly exercised in discussing, whether the manner of Juvenal or of Horace tend more directly to promote the end for which alone satire can be tolerated-the reform of manners. The eulogists of Horace are enraptured with the purity and sweetness of his morality. Never extravagant, never haughty, never austere, in him truth is felt and wisdom loved. He paints with spirit the faults of others, and frankly acknowledges his own. He avoids tediousness, by an inexhaustible variety. Episodes of every kind, dialogue, fable, diversified character, and, above all, an admirable use of the dramatic form of composition, delight the reader, and allure him to amendment.'

Juvenal is charged with pride, unceasing resentment, and unwarrantable exaggeration. He proves nothing, or proves too much he fatigues by eternal monotony. For objects of disgust and affright, he never consoles his reader by the intervention of softer images. He contemplates in nature nothing but monsters. His grandeur is declamatory; his diction, like his invective, obdurate-crowded with accumulated metaphors, and deformed by grotesque phraseology. His versification is often inflated, often rugged with Greek words and scientific epithets. Men of learning may disperse the difficulties by which his beauties are clouded; but to these his labours should be confined.' As a moralist, they assert he is not formidable to the vicious, since he exposcs manners so dreadful and excesses so monstrous, that, in modern times, characters the most depraved, after perusing his satires, may imagine themselves honest.'

This dauntless champion of virtue in a profligate age has admirers not less enthusiastic-advocates, who venerate Juvenal as a poet austere, impetuous, and incorruptible; assuming, as his subject rises, the tone of tragedy; and uniformly solemn and impressive. The spontaneous flow of his language exhibits strength and magnificence. The wit of Horace and the sublimity of Persius combine with his own stately eloquence: Più dolce di Lucilio, più piccante d'Orazio, e più chiaro di Persio.' No advocate, however, has successfully defended his unblushing indelicacy; a reproach which Mr. Gifford attempts to pallate by this ingenious apology:

I should resign him in silence to the hatred of mankind, if his aim, like that of too many others, whose works are read with delight, had been to render vice amiable, to fling his seducing colours over impurity, and inflame the passions by meretricious hints at what is only innoxious when exposed in native deformity: but when I find that his views are to render depravity loathsome; that every thing which can alarm and disgust is directed at her, in his terrible page, I forget the grossness of the execution in the excel-, lence of the design, and pay my involuntary homage to that integrity, which fearlessly calling in strong description to the aid of virtue, attempts to purify the passions at the hazard of wounding our delicacy and offending our taste. This is due to Juvenal.'

P. lix.

Of the rival satirists Dryden has said, Horace rallied, Juvenal railed. Whether the graceful rallier, or the dignified railer, have best administered to infirm morality, will remain undecided, while taste, opinions, and characters fluctuate. For slight defects we prefer the gentle probing of Horace; for inveterate vice, the tormenting caustic of Juvenal. Our parallel may be closed in favour of Juvenal with the praises which Quinctilian bestows on Lucilius: Et eruditio in eo mira, et libertas, atque inde acerbitas et abunde salis.'

Over the surface of the original fabric we have now slightly glanced. The imitation remains to be more carefully examined.

For this work abundant materials have been supplied by editors, critics, commentators, and translators. With the aid of Casaubon, Pithoeus, Grangæus, Henninius, Lipsius, Salmasius, Heinsius, Rigaltius, Julius Scaliger, Grævius, Dodwell, Warton, Gibbon, Laharpe, Rupert, Wakefield, and a multitude of inferior note, may be combined every edition and every translation, either here or abroad,' which the industry of Mr. Gifford, or that of his friends, during a long succession of years, could procure. He had access to the English translations of Holyday, Stapylton, Dryden, Owen, Harvey, Madan, and Neville; to Italian versions by Silvestri and others; to elegant translations into French prose, and manly remarks, by Dussaulx; to exquisite imitations of particularsatires, by Boileau and Johnson; to numerous and distinguished examples, in our own language, of satires, sportive and severe, by Hall, Donne, Dryden, Pope, Young, and Churchill, and to many existing writers whom we forbear to name. His situation appears to have been peculiarly propitious for accomplishing his task with finished excellence. At the age of twenty-one he had caught something of the spirit of Juvenal.' Under the eye of his preceptor, the tenth, third, fourth, twelfth, and eighth satires, during his residence at Exeter college, Oxford, the first, second, thirteenth, eleventh, and

fifteenth, in succession; and at a later period the remaining

satires were translated.

In 1781, at the age of twenty-four, he published a specimen, with proposals, and received subscriptions for an entire translation. On the death of a friend, who had revised his versions, he began to distrust the sufficiency of his literary attainments. An accidental occurrence introduced him to the late earl Grosvenor, under whose protection he continued twenty years, and prosecuted his work, until called upon to accompany the present earl in two successive tours. On his return, the undertaking was resumed. Disturbed by the ever-recurring idea that he had not yet repaid some respectable subscribers to his proposals in 1781, whose abode could not be discovered, and some on whom to press the taking back eight shillings would not be decent or respectful,'-and that these had just and forcible claims for the performance of his engagement,-he honestly proceeds, after the lapse of twenty years! to clear his conscience and complete his design. All the satires, except the third, have undergone considerable alterations; and the style has been adapted by the translator to his 'more mature ideas.'

In the relation of his adventures, we must remind Mr. Gifford, he omits to record, that, before he yielded to this necessity of acquitting his conscience, he indulged his taste for other literary occupations, and himself aspired to the character of a satirist. Many years have passed since he published a paraphrase, or travestie, of the first satire of Persius, and of the tenth of Horace, to correct the depravity of the public taste' by attacking the affectation of contemporary writers, whose names he nakedly exposed.

In his Baviad and Maviad, which displayed merit alloyed with virulence and vulgarity, he recalled to the memory of his friend, Mr. Ireland, that they had together—

traced the Aquinian through the Latine road, And trembled at the lashes he bestowed!'

But when he took a fancy to while away his time in scribbling' this commentary on The World and its rhymes, we remarked no tremor for his neglect of the stern Aquinian, no shame at having preferred the ephemeral trifles of a newspaper.

The literary treasures which Mr. Gifford rifled to adorn the object of his early choice and maturer admiration we have already unveiled. To these aids, and to long-continued correction,-if we add an assurance from himself that his translation has undergone, in every part, the strictest revision' by a friend, who, anxious for his reputation, has uniformly