282998

8/12/2019 282998

1/16

Two Thousand Years of Latin Translation from the Greek

Author(s): Dean P. LockwoodSource: Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 49 (1918),pp. 115-129Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/282998.

Accessed: 27/01/2014 04:45

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Johns Hopkins University Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 161.116.173.192 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:45:32 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/282998?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/282998?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup

8/12/2019 282998

2/16

8/12/2019 282998

3/16

i I6 Dean P. Lockwood [I9I8pestateforsitanaudabilerudibus ngeniis; nunc abhorrenset inconditum,i referatur. or ourselves, e may note thesimpledignity, ut absolute iteralness,f the opening ineoftheOdyssey:

Vir(um ihi,Camena, nsecevers(utumvAv8pauot 'VvEWE, Movioa,woXV6porov . .Howeverfarshort fperfectionheseversionsmay havebeen, theyhad the effect f stimulating ativeproduction,for heRomanswere gifted eoplewho were n a peculiarposition f artisticmmaturity,ut ambitious o play theirpart n the greatworld. The situation ears a certainre-semblance o the awakening f Japan in the nineteenthcentury.3

IIWe now cometo theperiod fdistinctive ationalRomanliterature,rom he secondcentury .C. throughhe thirdcentury .D. In spiteof thefact hatthe national iteratureof theRomansadhered losely o Greek tandards, ever-theless ona fide ranslationserefor everal easons lmostentirelyacking. In thefirst lace, the relation f Romanliterature o Greekwas so intimate hat adaptationand

imitationpredominated. econd, the practicalneed fortranslations hich onfrontshemodernworlddidnotthenexist. (If all availablemodern ulturewerecomprisednthekindredanguages fEnglish ndFrench, owmuchneedwould therebe forthatkindof exacttranslation hich sdesignedofamiliarizenepeoplewith hethoughtnd dealsofanother?) Third, hevery astness f the tore fGreek3Cf. W. G. Aston,JapaneseLiteratureNewYork, i899), Book the seventh,Tokio period.4The familiarity iththeGreek anguageand literature n the partof theeducated Roman public requiresno detailed demonstration. Even in thetechnical ciences whereto-daythe outcry gainsttime-consuminganguage-studyis loudest), therewas no demandfortranslation mong the Romans.The Greek anguagewas a sine qua nonforphysician, ngineer, r scientist f

This content downloaded from 161.116.173.192 on Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:45:32 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

8/12/2019 282998

4/16

Vol. lix] Latin Translationrom heGreek II7thoughtnd the impatiencef the Romansto assimilatetmilitated gainstthe slow processof complete nd exacttranslation.5Grantedhen hattranslationromhe Greekwas sporadicin the national eriod fRoman iterature,here o we runacross t? First,we find hefabric foriginal atin litera-ture hotthrough ithreminiscencesfGreek hrases, loseenough obe called ranslations.Moredefinite,ut amount-ing o aboutthe ame hingnthe nd, re thebriefuotationsfromGreek uthors enderedntoLatin in the works f theprose ssayists.6 Secondly,here xisted handfulf vowedany sort. That the Romans were not averse, however,to makingneededtranslations s proved by the memorableversion fromthe Punic of Mago'stwenty-eightookson agriculture,n accordancewith senatorialdecree.5 In philosophy,for instance,the popular appetite was satisfiedby theresumeswith whichEnnius,Lucretius,Cicero,Apuleius,and otherssuppliedtheircontemporaries.He who wishedto imbibemoredeeplycould have re-course to theoriginalswithoutunduedifficulty.It is probable also that theintensenationalconsciousnesswhich s fosteredby the ntellectual ivalry etweenmanymodem nations s a stimulus o care-ful translationwhich was inoperativen the ancientworld. In general,how-ever,the reasonswhich have enumerated re but varyingphases ofthe oneoutstanding actthat Romederivedher ntellectual ifefromGreece, nd fromGreece lone.I cannotagreewithTolkiehn Homeru. d. rom.Poesie,Leipzig, 9oo), whenhe suggests p. 78 if.) thatthechiefreasonforthemeagerness fLatin trans-lationswas the nability ftheLatin languageto express he subtleties fGreekthought. There are shadesofmeaning n every anguagewhich annotbe re-produced nothers, nd though atin wasnever s rich language s theGreek,I cannotbelievethatthe Roman translators eltthemselves eterred rfoundthemselvesundulyhandicappedby the shortcomings f theirnative tongue.No such obstaclesexisted s existto-day n translatinghe Bible intoTagalogorZulu (cf. WV. anton,TheStory ftheBibleSociety London, 9041, chap. 24).Cicero and Lucretiusfaced an initialdifficultyn expressing he conceptsofGreekphilosophy, ut surelythe creationofa technicalvocabulary n a newfield fthought s not the mostdifficultaskwhich onfrontsither ranslatororauthor.

6 It is difficulto decide where to place some of the adaptationsfrom heGreek yricpoets,in whichthe Roman imitator, houghfaithfullyranslatinga portion, t least,ofhisGreekoriginal,wanders wayfrom isborrowedhemeinto variations fhis own: cf. Hor. Odes, , 9, I4, i8, 37, and even Cat. 5I.In general he Romanswereas free nd unacademic as theGreeks,notonlyin thetranslation fforeignanguages,but in thehandling fquotations n the


8/12/2019 282998

5/16

ii8 Dean P. Lockwood [I9I8translationsof completeworksof Greek literature. Amongthe translators f completeworks the only name of firstm-portanceis that of Cicero. His versionof the great debatebetweenAeschines and Demostheneswas rated as a master-piece, but its purpose was undoubtedlyrather to displayCicero's powers than to make these works accessible to apublic ignorantof Greek. It was a stylisticexercise.7 InrenderingGreek poetry ntoLatin Cicero chose and producedonlytours eforce. Severalminorpoets also figuremong thebona fide translators: Matius rendered the Iliad; so didNinnius Crassus; what theyconceivedthe purpose of theirworkto be, we have no way ofknowing.What may we say in generalof the quality of the Romantranslations? There was no reason why Greek prose couldnot be eloquentlyparaphrasedor translated, s witnesssomeof the extractsembodied n Cicero's essays.8 In the fieldofpoetry, however, and here Homer may be taken as atypical example the Romans struggled with problemswhich have beset the translatorsof all ages. The Latinhexameter,though a formal replica of the Greek, did nothave the same cadences as the original; the epithetsgavesamelanguage, n theborrowingf thoughts rom therwriters,nd in there-production f the spokenword (for nstance n the so-calledspeecheswhichembellish hepages of the historians). Therewas not thatmeticulous tten-tionto verbal accuracyfor ts ownsake whichhas becomea fetish fmodernauthorship.

7 The translator'spreface lone is extant,and is knownas the de OptimoGenereOratorum. It is safe to assume that Cicero's youthful ranslations,particularly hat of theOeconomicusfXenophon (cf. St. Jerome, refacetoEusebius,Chron. i), werealso stylistic xercises. His Timaeus s the nearestapproach to exact translation f all his "'cr6bypa0a" fromGreekphilosophy.As forhis renderingsfexcerpts rom picurus,Chrysippus,nd Philodemus,it is not strictly o his credit s a translator o say thatthey"are in pointofstylebetter hantheoriginals" J. E. Sandys,Hist. ofClass. Schoi.2, I84).8-Twowell-knownassagesare Tusc. , 41 (= Plato, Apol. 32-33), and Sen.22 (= Xen. Cyr.VIII, 7, 17 ff.).The adherenceto Greekmetricalforms nd traditionswas perhapsthemostslavishfeature f the Latin imitation fGreek iterature. The transla-tion of the Odyssey nto native Saturniansby Andronicuswas unique; allotherverse translationswere or were ntended o be - in themetreof the


8/12/2019 282998

6/16

Vol. lix] Latin Translationrom heGreek iI9difficulty;hecharm nd naivete f thefolk-epic ereelu-sive. Of the bestLatin renderingshe same criticism anbe madeas ofPope's facilerhetoric: very pretty, utnotHomer."We may sumup the nationalRomanperiod by sayingthattherewas evidence f ability, ut no definite emandfor ranslationsnd no distinctiveevelopmentfthetrans-lator's function. mitationwas constant, araphrasefre-quent,genuine ranslationare.

IIIThe third pochwhichwe are to considermaybe calledthe Patristic eriod. More strictlyt is theperiodof thedecline f the traditional ulture a declinewhichdid notaffect hepagansor semi-pagansntil ongafter t affected

theChristians.Christian ranslationseremade nresponseto a demandwhichthepagan Romans neverfelt. I neednot enlarge ponthepurpose f thetranslationf theBible.The constant trivingfter faithfulernacular ext s at-testedby the successive ersions f thewholeor ofparts:the Itala, theRomanpsalter, heGallicanpsalter, nd theVulgate.The translationf the Scriptureswas indispensable; tcarriedwith t to a lesserdegree heneed for hetranslationof technical r professionalhristianiterature fall kinds.Except n the case oftheScriptures,owever, efind o in-crease n accuracyfor ts own sake. Paraphrasewas stillconfused ithtranslation.Numerous s werethe Christianreaders nd eagerfor he ight, heywerefor hemostpartuntrainedn critical cumen nd eitherndifferentr hostileto theembellishmentsf iterarytyle. It was thesubstanceand nottheform, hich hese eaders emanded. The laborsoriginal. Populardemand didnot ead the Romans (and probablynevercouldhave led them) to make the variedexperimentswithdifferentorms f verseand prose whichhave been made by English translators romChapman toAndrew Lang.


8/12/2019 282998

7/16

120 Dean P. Lockwood [i9i8of Rufinus,Jerome, nd other translatorsproduced a massof technical literaturewhichwas embodied indiscriminatelywiththe Latin literaturen the same fieldand passed on tomediaeval posterity. Nevertheless theological controversyoccasionallyenforced pon the translatora higherdegree ofaccuracy. Thus Jerome, o combat the heresiesof Origen,put forthbetterversionsof the suspectedGreekfather hanthoseof Rufinus.Between Christianand pagan literatureGreekphilosophywas an important ink. It is interesting herefore o findthe practical need for the translationof the Greek fathersextendingto Plato and Aristotle. It is evident, however,that the Christiantheologianswould expect, perhaps evenprefer, n this case, the freestparaphrases or compendia.Such were the pseudo-AugustinianCategories, he Analyticsof Vettius Agorius Praetextatus,and the Timaeus of Chal-cidius; and probablyofthesame characterwerethePlatonicrenderings fC. Marius Victorinus.The knowledgeof Greek among the Christianswas morepractical than literary. With the decline in the traditionaleducation in the late Roman Empire and with the changingcharacterof the spokenGreek language, t was becoming n-creasingly ifficulto acquireancientGreek n western urope.Cassiodorus"knewGreek,butpreferredo readGreek uthorsin Latin translations."10Confessions fyouthful islikeof thestudyof Greek (whichsound quite modern) come not only fromSt. Augustine,"but from hemorepagan Ausonius.12 The pagans and semi-pagans, however,maintained,aftera fashion,the nationalRoman traditions. Symmachuscould echo and paraphrasesententiaefrom the Greek authors; Ausonius perpetratedtrivialitiesof Greek translation and of macaronic verse.But there was one - the last of the Romans - to whosetranslationsposterityowed much. It is a commonplaceof

10J.E. Sandys,p. cit. , 268. 11 onfessions,, 14.12 Grammaticis raec.Burdigal.p. 57,Peiper.


8/12/2019 282998

8/16

Vol.xlix] Latin Translationrom heGreek I2Ithe criticism f Boethius to say that he stands betweentwoworlds; nowhere s this to be seen more clearlythan in histranslations. He broughtto his task an equipmentequal tothat of any Roman; his aim was trulymodern to trans-late and expoundall of Plato and Aristotle; hismotive,how-ever,was trulymediaeval toprove" their ubstantial gree-ment with each other."13 Boethiuswas thus a precursor ftheschoolmen nd ofthehumanists s well.14 His ambitiousprogramwas never completelycardied out; but certain ofhis translations fAristotlewerethefoundation fmediaevalscholasticism.The Patristicperiod,therefore,s characterizedby a greatincreasein production. The outputwas of a practicalkindtomeeta genuineand wide-spreadneed. ITe versionsoftheGreek fatherswere egion, upplemented y a discreet mountof Greek philosophy. Standards of accuracy were recog-nized,'5 but performancewas generally lax. The transla-tions and paraphrases were plain, adequate for the needswhich produced them, unembellished, for the most partunliterary.

IVThe next periodwhichwe are to considermay be roughly

designatedby the traditionalterm,the Dark Ages, althoughit actually extendsto the twelfth entury. From themiddleof the sixthto the middle of the eighth centurythe declinein culture was rapid. There was no reachingout after newlearning: how could there be, when Goths and Visigothscould barely digestthe old even in tabloidform? The studyof ancient Greek almost completely died out in westernEurope. There was, to be sure, frequentcommunication13 J.E. Sandys,op. cit. , 25I.

14 When CassiodoruseulogizesBoethius formakingPythagoras,Ptolemy,Nicomachus,Euclid, Plato, Aristotle, nd Archimedes peak the Roman lan-guage (Variae, I, 45), we seemto be in the atmosphere f the Italian Renais-sance.15Cf. St. Jerome, pislle 57.


8/12/2019 282998

9/16

1 22 Dean P. Lockwood [I9I8betweenRome and Constantinople, ven an influxof Greekchurchmennto Italy and fourGreekpopes in St. Peter's, butthe Byzantinevernacular suggestednothingto the saints ofthe West. There was absolutelyno incentivefortranslation.It mustnot be thought,however, hat therewas an absolutelack of interest n Hellenic ideas. A second-handknowledgeof Greek thought was derived from the works of Cicero,Augustine,MartianusCapella, Macrobius,Apuleius,Boethius,and otherLatin authors.There followed n the ninth century he renaissanceof theera ofCharlemagne,with ts revival of the literary raditionsof Rome; the tenth centurywas made illustriousby Odo ofCluni, Gerbert, nd othereminentLatinists,and theeleventhcenturyby the rise of scholasticphilosophy but still therewas no strong mpulseto tap afresh he ancientGreek sourcewhichhad so longremaineduntouched. The few exceptionsare ofa rather ccidentalcharacter. To take themost notableinstance: Dionysius,the martyred atronsaintofFrance,hadbecome confusedwith Dionysius theAreopagite,' hereputedauthor of the Hierarchies,and local pride spurredon thechurchmienf France to make this work accessible to theWest. It was not hard to procuremanuscriptsfromCon-stantinople,and about 850 Johnthe Scot, a representativeof the Irish school of Greek learning,undertookto producea translation. His paraphrasesatisfied he local need - andincidentallyinjected heretical ideas of Neoplatonism intomore than one Frenchman.During this period, therefore, omprising ix centuriesormorefrom he fall ofRome,' no greatadditionwas made tothetotalof Latin translations rom heGreek. The patristictranslations ufficedor ll theintellectualneedsofthe times.

VThe awakeningcame afterthe first uarterof the twelfthcentury. About the year I125 we become aware of a newspiritstirringn widely separated centresof the intellectual


8/12/2019 282998

10/16

Vol.xlix] Latin Translationrom heGreek I23lifeof Europe. We may take thisyear as the beginning fthe Mediaeval period. The movementwas a true renais-sance,butessentiallyn the field ftheprofessional isciplines,only incidentally n the field of the humanities. It was notGreek philosophyin its entirety, nd for its own sake, towhich the schoolmennow devoted their attention. Theywere eager only to acquire further aw materials fromAris-totlefor the vast structurewhichtheywereerecting ccord-ingto theirown preconceiveddesigns.

Thus there began a period of extensive translationwhichran through he twelfthnd thirteenthenturies nd died outin the fourteenth. Let us briefly urveywhat was achievedat variouscentresofintellectual ctivity.First, all of Aristotle's ogical workswere translatedfromtheGreekat Venicein II28 by JacobusClericus; and shortlyafter,at some unknownplace, the long-lostversionsof theAnalytics nd Topics by Boethius were rediscovered aboon to Abelard and his fellowschoolmen. As the twelfthcenturyprogressed, he rangeof translationfromthe Greekwas widened. At the court of the Norman kings in Sicily,from bout ii6o on, versionsof Ptolemy'sAlmagest,f twoshortdialogues of Plato, and of other workswere produceddirectlyfrom the Greek.-6 'Dionysius the Areopagite' wasretranslated before I142 by Hugo of St. Victor and againabout 1170 by Johnthe Saracen. Guillaumede Gap broughtmanuscriptsof other Greek works of the same stripe fromConstantinople o theAbbey ofSt. Denis in II67 and trans-lated them or had them translated. Burgundio of Pisa,envoyof Barbarossa in theEast, was the chiefof thosewhorendered ntoLatin manyworksofthe Greekfathers.

The next stage forms ne of the strangest hapters n thehistory f European progress: theschoolmenofEurope, whoheretofore ad been acquainted onlywith a small portionofAristotle i.e.his fivetreatiseson logic more or less), now16 Cf. C. H. Haskins and D. P. Lockwood, "The SicilianTranslators, tc.,"Harv. Stud.xxi.


8/12/2019 282998

11/16

124 Dean P. Lockwood [I9I8came into contact with a vast treasure of Aristotelianphi-losophy n the possessionof the Arabs of Spain. How was itthat the Arabs were better equipped than the occidentalscholars who gathered at the Universityof Paris? FromByzantium the study of Aristotlehad spread in the fifthcentury o Syria,and until the eighth entury yrianscholarswere engaged in translating nd commenting n the Greekmaster; then at Bagdad fromthe eighth to the tenth cen-turies the Syrianscholars had renderedntoArabic not onlyAristotle and many of his Greek commentators, ut worksof Plato, Hippocrates, and Galen as well; and finallyatIspahan in the eleventh centuryAvicenna, the greatestoftheArabs,had foundedhissystem fmedicine ndAristotelianphilosophy. It was the works of Avicenna, along with theArabic translations fthe Greekauthors,whichwerebroughtto Spain by the Moors and to whichthewestern choolmenwere ntroduced bout I I50 by learnedJewsofToledo. Thussome acquaintance with the de Anima, de Caelo, Physics,and Metaphysics egan to reach Paris in thisextraordinarilyroundaboutway. The great translatorwas Gerardof Cre-mona, who, n thelatterhalfof the twelfth entury, enderedmore than seventyworksfrom he Arabic intoLatin, includ-ing the Arabic texts of Aristotle,Hippocrates, Galen, andPtolemy. At Salerno, meanwhile,was the famousschool ofmedicine, nd here,as well as in Montpellier, efore the endof the twelfth entury,the science of medicinewas taughtfrom the Arabic-Latinversionsof Hippocrates, Galen, andAvicenna.-7Two more achievementsmustbe noted,whichmarked theculmination fthemovementn thethirteenthentury. Theconquest of Constantinopleby the Franks occurred n I204during the fourthCrusade. Immediately there began anactivitywhichresembles hat of the Italian humanistsof the

17 In fact much arlier ate - about 070 - is obtainedfor he translationsof Hippocrates nd Galenfrom he Arabicby themonkConstantine f MonteCassino.


8/12/2019 282998

12/16

Vol.xlix] Latin Translationrom heGreek I25fifteenthenturyn all save thespirit fhumanism.Greekmanuscripts erebrought o Europe; therewas an inter-changeof scholarsbetween he East and theWest; andstudents ent oGreece o learn he anguage. Translationsfrom heoriginalGreekonce moreappeared, nd rivalledthosefromheArabic. William fMoerbeke erformedhefeat of translatingperhapswiththe help of others)notonlythewholeofAristotlend manyof his commentators,butworks fProclus,Hippocrates,ndGalenas well.Meanwhile n theprevious entury he centre fArabiclearningtself adshifted rom siatoSpain,whereAverroesformulatedis system fAristotelianismlendedwithNeo-platonism. In the thirteenthentury,herefore, verroeswas includedmong heArabicphilosophers,ssociatedwithAristotle imself,n the translationsy Michaelthe Scot,HermannheGerman,ndAlfredheEnglishman.

Further etailswouldbe wearisome.The array ftrans-lations s bewildering.WhenThomasAquinassummed pscholastic hilosophy,e couldpickandchoose mongmanyavailableversions fAristotle.18It is a far ryfromhetranslationsfa Cicero r a Jerometo thesetools ofthescholasticrade. The translatorseemalmost ohaveregardedheir ask as thepiecing ogetherfa mosaic word orword ndphrase or hrase. Andwhenan occasional echnicalermwas left n itsoriginalGreekor Arabic form, no wonder hatRogerBacon couldde-nouncethe scholastic extsas barbarous nd as falling arshort fthat uciditywhich,fhe couldnotknow,he couldat leastdivine.Thus themediaeval ranslationswed their haracter o apeculiarpurpose. Theywerenot regarded s belles ettres.Theywere a meansto an end a purely rofessionalnd.Their anguagewas the argonof the schools: theological,philosophicalL,edical,mathematical.

18For examples ee the Specimina ppendedto Jourdain, echerchesur lesanciennesraductionsatines 'Aristote,aris,843.


8/12/2019 282998

13/16

I26 Dean P. Lockwood [I9I8VI

We comenow to the era of the Renaissancen Italy. Inthe atterhalfof thefourteenthenturyetrarchwas open-ingmen'seyes to the ntrinsicalueof the dealsembodiedin the iteraturef ncient ome. Ancientiteratureas nowto be studied ndadmired otwith autious eserve,ut withabandon. Petrarchonged o readHomer nd Plato in theoriginal, ut theByzantinemonkswith whomhe came incontact ouldnotor wouldnothelphim o fulfilhisdesire.To recover heknowledgeftheclassicalGreek anguageand literature,o equip teachers nd provide ext-booksnwestern urope,was a slow and painful rocess, ccupyingthewholeof the fifteenthentury.But therewas an im-mediatedemandfor a knowledgef the content f Greekliterature,denticalwiththe demandat the presentday.We are on familiar round. The demandwas metby theproductionf popularreadable translations,onformingotheliterarytandards f the classicalperiod. The existingniediaeval ranslationserescornedforstylistic easons,fforno other.. The effortoacquire atin translationsfthepaganGreekauthors begins about I360, when the Greek monk Pilatustookuphis residencenthehouseof Boccaccio ndproduceda literal ranslationfthe liad and theUlixea, s he calledthe Odyssey. t was essentiallyn 'interlinear'ranslation.Comparingt line for inewith heoriginal,ne obtained heLatin renderingf each Greekword n the sameposition.But thiswas the method f the mediaevalschoolmen; tcouldnotsatisfyheneeds fthehumanists.Attempts eremade tohave Pilatus'Homernda few ther imilarransla-tionsrewrittenn elegantLatin by trainedhumanists, hoknew ittle rnoGreek, ut thiswasa hopelessmakeshift.The genuinehumanistic ranslationsegin about I400.In ever-increasingumber he humanists mployed heirtalentsn makingvailablethemasterpiecesf Greek itera-


8/12/2019 282998

14/16

Vol.xlix] Latin Translationrom heGreek 127ture. Workingt first s scatteredndividuals,heycamegradually o be conscious f a commonmission o translatethewhole of Greek iteraturento Latin. At the courtofPope NicholasV and otherpotentates he work was en-couraged nd fosteredy patronage. It can be reasonablysaid thatpracticallyhe wholeof Greek rose iterature astranslated.Moreover churchmen f humanistic rainingtranslated vast amount f Christianiterature.Theprob-lemoftranslatinghe classicalGreek oets, uchas Homer,Pindar,and thedramatists, as on thewhole too difficultforthesepioneers. Therewas, moreover, o genuinehis-torical riticism: ate or spuriousworks fGreek iteraturewere ofteneasier to appreciatethan the classical. TheLetters fPhalariswentunchallenged; heLife ofAesopwasrevered;theLettersfPlato were dmiredyLeonardo runiabove theDialogues.

A largenumber f works fGreek iteraturettainedwidecirculationhroughouturope in the humanistic ersions,particularly lato, Aristotle, emosthenes,socrates,thehistorians,heepistolographers,esop,Lucian, ndPlutarch.Others emainednnoticednthehandsome edicationopiesin the ibraries f thegreatpatrons.At their est,thetranslations erefacile nd clear. Thegreatmajority fthem, owever, erehasty nd in a certainrespect ess scholarly han the over-literalersions f theMiddleAges. Manyoftheprofessed umanists erechar-latans. What they couldnot understandheyomitted rsupplied rom heir wn magination.Theywerefilledwiththe conceit hattheir wnworkswere n actualcontinuationof Roman iterature, revivaln thetrue enseofthe word.Theyregardedheir ranslationsfDemostheness no lessmasterpiecesf LatinliteraturehanCicero'sversion ftheOration n theCrown,whichfortunatelyorthecomparisonwasnotextantThe pretensions f the humanistswereexcessiven thewholematter fstyle. It was thestyle theeloquence


8/12/2019 282998

15/16

I28 Dean P. Lockwood [I9I8oftheGreekswhich hey ontinuallyraised, ndwhich heyprofessedo reproducen their ranslations. t is truethatthemediaeval ranslationsotallyackedliterarytyle, ndthat hehumanisticranslationsere omposednaccordancewith lassicalmodels, utwas thestyle fthe translationneverycase the styleof the Greekoriginal That was astandard f literaryrt to whichthehumanistsouldnotattain.Theres a charmndfreshnessboutmany f hehumanistictranslations,'hich s characteristicf the age, but speedyoblivionwas thefateofall. Allwerebased on insufficientequipment a defectwhichwas remediedarly n thesuc-ceeding entury.

VIIWith the sixteenth entury eginsthe Modernperiod.

Suchscholars s Victorius,tephanus,nd Erasmus t oncedid over againthemore mportant orkof thehumanists.Withvastlymprovedcholarship,nd aboveall with rintedbooksat their isposal, heyproduced eliable nd thoroughtranslationsf theGreek uthors. Thefinal estofaccuracylay in the bilingual ditions. As timewent on, however,translationsntothe vernacular onguesgradually surpedthe popular ield;Latin translationsecamemore ndmorethemarkofprofessionalcholarship.Latin of coursecon-'tinuedo be the anguage f earned ommentarynd trans-lationuntilwell into the nineteenthentury.The Berlinedition f theAristotelianommentatorss stillbeingpub-lishedwith heLatintranslationacinghe Greek ext. Butin spiteofa few urvivals he ong ifeof Latin translationfrom heGreek racticallyameto an end n theeighteenthcentury.

In follow"inghestream f Hellenic nfluenceuring womillenniumsfEuropean ivilization,e haveseen thatvary-ingneedsproduced ranslationsifferingidelyn style nd


8/12/2019 282998

16/16

Vol. lix] Latin Translationrom heGreek I29content. The sturdyfolk who conqueredCarthage; thepolishedRomanswhoruled world-empire;he men of theWest who embracedChristianity; he theologiansnd thesubtle ogicians f theMiddle Ages; theItalianhumanistsof the fifteenthentury;and theclassicists f the modernera all have been concernedn oneway or anotherwithLatin translation rom he Greek. We cannotbut marvelat the vitality fGreek hought nd the utility f theLatintongue.

282998

Documents

Transcript of 282998