صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

of the language. There is no better reason, that we perceive, for putting beginners in Latin and in Greek into the classical authors, to be read entire, over and over again, than there would be for putting the English beginner into Hume's England, or Milton's Paradise Lost, for the same purpose. There is undoubtedly a preliminary and elementary study of any language, which must precede the study of its classical authors; and this preliminary study can more conveniently be had upon compends, prepared for the purpose, than upon entire authors.

If the work of a classical author be put into the school-boy's hands, as the basis of the elementary study of the language, it is applied to a use for which it was not intended. We do not now call to mind a single Greek book, intended to be put to such a use, by its author. Does any one suppose that if Plato, by prophetic forecast, understanding that some of his works would be used as text books in the schools and colleges of a distant posterity, had taken in hand to write books appropriate to that object, he would have written precisely the same as he wrote for totally different uses? It is exceedingly difficult, as it is, out of all the remains of the literature of an ancient language, to compile a compendium perfectly well adapted to the use of schools. Who can suppose, that any one book, written with no such object in view, two thousand years ago, can be free from the objections which it is found difficult to avoid, even when, from the best existing materials, the effort is made by judicious teachers, to prepare, out of many authors, a manual suited to modern schools and a modern state of society.

The incongruousness of the supposition will further appear, from another view. The Editor of the Journal recommends the reading of single authors throughout, in preference to compends, or books of selections. Now there are very few ancient authors, which have come down to us entire; and a very capricious chance has determined how much of each should perish, and how much should be preserved. By what reason can it be inculcated on us, that seven plays of Eschylus, seven of Sophocles, and eighteen or twenty of Euripides, are precisely the quantity of these authors that ought to be read. If the object be to study authors as authors, and not the language in which they wrote, then, of course, all that has come down of any particular author must be read. But on what philosophical principle can it be made to appear, that from the student of the Greek tongue, who pursues that study as part of a liberal education, Euripides is entitled to twice as much attention, as either Eschylus or Sopho

1

cles? As the inferior genius, he is manifestly less important than either.

We do not believe, that the practice of reading entire authors throughout was ever adopted in any school in the world, as the first exercise in learning the language. If the teacher does not use a selection made to his hands, he virtually makes his own. Professor Long recommends Xenophon's Anabasis, one or two plays of Euripides, two or three books of Herodotus, and Homer's Iliad. We do not say positively, that a book containing precisely those extracts from Greek authors would not be better than any other that has been made. We cannot undertake to pronounce on what does not exist. When Professor Long will present the public with the volume containing the portions of Greek authors which he recommends, and with such notes as he approves, we can then compare it with other works. Meantime, however, we do not perceive how a recommendation of one or two plays of Euripides and two or three books of Herodotus is to be reconciled with the imperious necessity of reading single authors throughout.

We differ in toto from Professor Long, in his objection to small lexicons, if intended to be applied to that kind of works; for of the two which he names we know nothing. But to put into the hands of a school-boy an entire lexicon of the Greek language, such as Schneider, for instance, which is much the best, is not to aid but to mock him. Profound scholars are too apt to forget the difficulties which they encountered as learners of the rudiments; and of these difficulties, we believe, none are more disheartening, than that of sifting out of the whole vocabulary of a language the individual word in the particular signification wanted by the beginner. In addition to this, it was impossible, till very lately, to get a dictionary which comprised all the words in the classical authors. It can now only be done by the purchase of a dearer book than an elementary school-book ought to be. The same objection, till very lately, existed against the use of entire classical authors. They were not to be had in cheap and correct editions.

For the zeal and good offices of the Journal of Education and the gentleman repeatedly named in this article, in the cause in which they are engaged, they are entitled to the public thanks. In many excellent suggestions made by them we heartily concur. But no good can come from setting the standard too high, or from recommendations decidedly beyond the capacity and wants of society. To tell our teachers and school-boys that nothing

valuable is done, unless they " read authors singly, read them throughout, read them over and over again, till the spirit of the writer is transfused into the mind of the pupil," is to hold a language, which, if it meet with belief, will have no effect but to dishearten. Not one individual in a hundred relishes writings like those of Hume, or the prose writings of Milton, till he has grown up to man's estate. Not one in ten, of all to whom the English language is vernacular, possesses that knowledge of Shakspeare, which is here enjoined of Homer, on the part of "our youth." The school-boy has done well, who, by diligent use of grammar and dictionary, can construe, parse, and scan his author. To enter into his spirit and relish his beauties, to their full extent, is the attainment of mature years and mature studies.

Matins and Vespers with Hymns and Occasional Devotional Pieces. By JOHN BOWRING. First American from the second London edition. Boston. Hilliard, Gray, Little, and Wilkins. 1827.

MR. BOWRING's poetical career has been peculiar and remarkable; and although he has not attained a name that will stand with those of Byron and Cowper, he has yet gained an honorable distinction and deserves to be gratefully remembered. Occupied as he has been in active life, busy in the bustling and confounding scenes of the world, he has yet, by the force of an indefatigable ardor and uninterrupted industry, accomplished as much in the walk of letters, as could be reasonably expected of a retired scholar with full leisure. That he has done it all as well as under other circumstances he might have done, we do not say. It would have been a miracle if he had. It is a wonder, and no small one, that his labors have been so excellent in execution as they are. If he had written less, he would doubtless have attained a higher eminence as an author; and yet it is almost unfair to say this, when it is remembered how popular and beautiful, how finished too, are his "Specimens of the Russian Poets,"with what a variety of diction, what a choice and felicity of metre ; and how successfully he has thrown over those charming compositions the air of originality, while yet he evidently preserves not only the measure, but the characteristic spirit of the native verse.

This is no slight praise. It implies talent and merit of a high order. And it may be extended-hardly, we think, in equal degree-but with very little qualification, to his various translations from various languages. He has gone from nation to nation, and collected ballads and poems of most diverse and opposite genius, and transferred them with their own peculiarities of form, feeling, and the je ne sais quoi which makes them what they are, into his own tongue; so that in reading them, we seem less to be studying a translation than perusing an original. We are not looking at what has been called the wrong side of the tapestry, but at a beautiful imitation by the hand of a master, who has so caught the nice traits of the work and wrought them into his own tissue, that, although we know the contrary, we yet can hardly persuade ourselves that they have appeared in any other previous form.

And

There is another department which Mr. Bowring has almost appropriated to himself; and in which, although he has not reached the excellence which distinguishes some of his versions, he has yet been more successful than a great majority of those who have attempted the same walk. It is a department which is embarrassed by great and peculiar difficulties, and many have expressed the opinion that excellence in it is unattainable. undoubtedly the vast quantity of miserable rhyme which has been sent forth under the name of devotional poetry, might seem at first view to give the warrant of experience to such an opinion. Yet perhaps when the matter is fairly examined, it will be found that if the greater difficulties of the subject be considered, there is not less of good religious poetry in proportion to the whole quantity, than of any other description. If we should take into account all which might under a liberal construction be fairly called religious poetry, we think the proportion would even be greater; for we should then cite not a little from Milton, Young, Cowper, Southey, Wordsworth, whose works have not only a prevailing complexion of moral purity and religious faith, but are, in much of their essential character, directly religious and devotional. But independently of this, it must be remembered of the expressly sacred poetry, that we have the whole mass of it, good and bad, directly before our eyes, and are able to compare at a glance the quantity of the excellent with the quantity of the bad. While the immense body of poor verse on other subjects, never comes within our notice, nor is brought into comparison with the standard works which we know and admire. Thus, we know that the "Psalms and Hymns" of Watts form a large propor

tion of English sacred verse, and that of these, while about fifty, to speak loosely, are the finest in the language, the remainder are of very inferior merit, and many have no pretension whatever to be called poetical. We thus have a visible and painful demonstration before our eyes, that the proportion of excellent devotional poetry to the whole mass is extremely small; a demonstration made more sure, if possible, by the circumstance, that when careful selections from the whole mass are made by men of taste and industry, with a view to arranging under one cover all the best specimens which may be used in public worship, they have never been able to produce a collection sufficiently large and various, without admitting some of confessedly second-rate character. Hence, when there are seen at the same time volumes after volumes of what is called fine poetry on other subjects published and circulated, it is easily inferred that the sacred department exhibits an unexampled scantiness. But the comparison is not fairly made, so as to warrant this conclusion. In order to do it, we should first bring together all the poems which have been published, and set by their side the standard works, and observe how small a pile they make. Then of those standard works we should consider how large a proportion is of indifferent quality; that of such great names as Dryden the eighteen volumes dwindle down to a few short pieces, and that even of the greater Milton, there are whole books not to be numbered in the first class of the good. This will make a very considerable deduction; we may judge how great, by taking up any good selection from the poets, which professes to cull and arrange the best passages from the best writers ;-it will lead us to the same conclusion respecting poetry in general, to which we are brought respecting sacred poetry by a survey of the selections for public worship. We shall be satisfied that excellence is as rare in every other department of the muse as in this, and shall be very unwilling to take up the opinion that the highest and most interesting of topics, associated beyond all others with the intensest feelings, and exciting the imagination, are yet, merely because so sublime and familiar, unfit to be expressed in man's choicest and most charming language. It is true, that with most men both fancy and language would sink under the subject, and fall far short of its highest feelings and best conceptions. But then this is equally true of every high topic of poetry; and we believe that upon no subject whatever, however within the grasp of common minds, has gifted fancy been more entirely successful, than in the pictures of invisible things drawn by Milton and Dante,

[blocks in formation]
« السابقةمتابعة »