Eciochefalaprima，el’altresanno，Addossandosialeis’ellas’arresta，Sempliciequete，elo’mperchenonsanno。“
Francesca’sexclamationtoDanteisthusrenderedbyMr。
Longfellow:——
“Andshetome:ThereisnogreatersorrowThantobemindfulofthehappytimeInmisery。“
“Edellaame:NessunmaggiordoloreChericordarsideltempofeliceNellamiseria。“
Inferno，V。
Thisisadmirable，——fullofthetruepoeticglow，whichwouldhavebeenutterlyquenchedifsomeRomanicequivalentofdolorehadbeenusedinsteadofourgoodSaxonsorrow。[53]So，too，the“Paradiso，“CantoI。，line100:——
“Whereuponshe，afterapityingsigh，HereyesdirectedtowardmewiththatlookAmothercastsonadeliriouschild。“[54]
Yetadmirableasitis，IamnotquitesurethatDr。
Parsons，bytakingfurtherlibertywiththeoriginal，hasnotsurpassedit:——
“Andshetome:ThemightiestofallwoesIsinthemidstofmiserytobecursedWithblissremembered。“
“Ond’ella，appressod’unpiosospiro，Gliocchidrizzovermeconquelsembiante，Chemadrefasoprafiglinoldeliro。“
And，finally，thebeginningoftheeighthcantoofthe“Purgatorio“:——
“’TwasnowthehourthatturnethbackdesireInthosewhosailthesea，andmeltstheheart，Thedaythey’vesaidtotheirsweetfriendsfarewell；
Andthenewpilgrimpenetrateswithlove，IfhedothhearfromfarawayabellThatseemethtodeplorethedyingday。“
“Eragial’orachevolgeildisioAinaviganti，eintenerisceilcoreLodich’hendettoaidolciamiciaddio；
Echelonuovoperegrind’amorePunge，seodesquilladilontano，Chepaiailgiornopiangerchesimore。“
Thispassageaffordsanexcellentexampleofwhatthemethodofliteraltranslationcandoatitsbest。Exceptinthesecondline，where“thosewhosailthesea“iswiselypreferredtoanyRomanicequivalentofnavigantitheversionisutterlyliteral；
asliteralastheonetheschool-boymakes，whenheopenshisVirgilattheFourthEclogue，andlumberinglyreads，“SicilianMuses，letussingthingsalittlegreater。“Butthereisnothingclumsy，nothingwhichsmacksoftherecitation-room，intheselinesofMr。Longfellow。Foreasygraceandexquisitebeautyitwouldbedifficulttosurpassthem。TheymaywellbearcomparisonwiththebeautifullinesintowhichLordByronhasrenderedthesamethought:——
“Softhourwhichwakesthewish，andmeltstheheart，Ofthosewhosailtheseas，onthefirstdayWhentheyfromtheirsweetfriendsaretornapart；
Orfillswithlovethepilgrimonhisway，Asthefarbellofvespermakeshimstart，Seemingtoweepthedyingday’sdecay。
Isthisafancywhichourreasonscorns？
Ah，surelynothingdiesbutsomethingmourns！“
Settingasidetheconcludingsentimentalgeneralization，——whichismuchmoreByronicthanDantesque，——onehardlyknowswhichversiontocallmoretrulypoetical；butforafaithfulrenderingoftheoriginalconceptiononecanhardlyhesitatetogivethepalmtoMr。Longfellow。
Thusweseewhatmaybeachievedbythemosthighlygiftedoftranslatorswhocontentshimselfwithpassivelyreproducingthedictionofhisoriginal，whoconstituteshimself，asitwere，aconduitthroughwhichthemeaningoftheoriginalmayflow。Wherethedifferencesinherentinthelanguagesemployeddonotintervenetoalloytheresult，thestreamoftheoriginalmay，asintheversesjustcited，comeoutpureandunweakened。Toooften，however，suchisthesubtlechemistryofthought，itwillcomeoutdiminishedinitsintegrity，orwillappear，bereftofitsprimitivepropertiesasamereelementinsomenewcombination。Ourchannelisatrifletooalkalineperhaps；andthatthetransferredmaterialmaypreserveitspleasantsharpness，wemayneedtothrowinalittleextraacid。ToooftenthemeredifferencesbetweenEnglishandItalianpreventDante’sexpressionsfromcomingoutinMr。Longfellow’sversionsopureandunimpairedasintheinstancejustcited。Butthesedifferencescannotbeignored。Theyliedeepintheverystructureofhumanspeech，andarenarrowlyimplicatedwithequallyprofoundnuancesinthecompositionofhumanthought。ThecauseswhichmakedolenteasolemnwordtotheItalianear，anddolentaqueerwordtotheEnglishear，arecauseswhichhavebeenslowlyoperatingeversincetheItalicanandtheTeutonpartedcompanyontheirwayfromCentralAsia。Theyhavebroughtaboutastateofthingswhichnocunningofthetranslatorcanessentiallyalter，buttotheemergenciesofwhichhemustgraciouslyconformhisproceedings。Here，then，isthesolepointonwhichwedisagreewithMr。Longfellow，thesolereasonwehaveforthinkingthathehasnotattainedthefullestpossiblemeasureofsuccess。Notthathehasmadea“realistic“
translation，——sofarweconceivehimtobeentirelyright；butthat，bydintofpushingsheerliteralismbeyonditsproperlimits，hehastoooftenfailedtobetrulyrealistic。Letushereexplainwhatismeantbyrealistictranslation。
Everythoroughlyconceivedandadequatelyexecutedtranslationofanancientauthormustbefoundeduponsomeconscioustheoryorsomeunconsciousinstinctofliterarycriticism。Asisthecriticalspiritofanage，soamongotherthingswillbeitstranslations。Nowthecriticalspiritofeveryageprevioustoourownhasbeencharacterizedbyitsinabilitytoappreciatesympatheticallythespiritofpastandbygonetimes。Intheseventeenthcenturycriticismmadeidolsofitsancientmodels；
itacknowledgednoseriousimperfectionsinthem；itsetthemupasexemplarsforthepresentandallfuturetimestocopy。LetthegenialEpicureanhenceforthwritelikeHorace，lettheepicnarratorimitatethesupremeeleganceofVirgil，——thatwastheconspicuousidea，theconspicuouserror，ofseventeenth-centurycriticism。Itoverlookedthedifferencesbetweenoneageandanother。Conversely，whenitbroughtRomanpatriciansandGreekoligarchsontothestage，itmadethembehavelikeFrenchcourtiersorCastiliangrandeesorEnglishpeers。Whenithadtodealwithancientheroes，itclothedtheminthegarbandimputedtothemthesentimentsofknights-errant。Thencametherevolutionarycriticismoftheeighteenthcentury，whichassumedthateverythingoldwaswrong，whileeverythingnewwasright。Itrecognizedcrudelythedifferencesbetweenoneageandanother，butithadawayoflookingdownuponallagesexceptthepresent。Thisintoleranceshowntowardthepastwasindeedameasureofthecrudenesswithwhichitwascomprehended。BecauseMohammed，ifhehaddonewhathedid，inFranceandintheeighteenthcentury，wouldhavebeencalledanimpostor，Voltaire，thegreatmouthpieceandrepresentativeofthisstyleofcriticism，portrayshimasanimpostor。Recognitionofthefactthatdifferentagesaredifferent，togetherwithinabilitytoperceivethattheyoughttobedifferent，thattheirdifferenceslieinthenatureofprogress，——thiswastheprominentcharacteristicofeighteenth-centurycriticism。Ofallthegreatmenofthatcentury，Lessingwasperhapstheonlyonewhooutgrewthisnarrowcriticalhabit。
Nownineteenth-centurycriticismnotonlyknowsthatinnoprecedingagehavementhoughtandbehavedastheynowthinkandbehave，butitalsounderstandsthatold-fashionedthinkingandbehaviourwasinitswayjustasnaturalandsensibleasthatwhichisnownew-fashioned。Itdoesnotflippantlysneeratanancientcustombecausewenolongercherishit；butwithanenlightenedregardforeverythinghuman，itinquiresintoitsorigin，tracesitseffects，andendeavourstoexplainitsdecay。
ItisslowtocharacterizeMohammedasanimpostor，becauseithascometofeelthatArabiaintheseventhcenturyisonethingandEuropeinthenineteenthanother。ItisscrupulousaboutbrandingCaesarasanusurper，becauseithasdiscoveredthatwhatMr。MillcallsrepublicanlibertyandwhatCicerocalledrepublicanlibertyarewidelydifferentnotions。ItdoesnottellustobowdownbeforeLucretiusandVirgilasunapproachablemodels，whilelamentingourownhopelessinferiority；nordoesittellustosetthemdownashalf-skilledapprentices，whilecongratulatingourselvesonourowncomfortablesuperiority；butittellsustostudythemastheexponentsofanageforevergone，fromwhichwehavestillmanylessonstolearn，thoughwenolongerthinkasitthoughtorfeelasitfelt。Theeighteenthcentury，asrepresentedbythecharacteristicpassagefromVoltaire，citedbyMr。Longfellow，failedutterlytounderstandDante。TothemindsofVoltaireandhiscontemporariesthegreatmediaevalpoetwaslittleelsethanaTitanicmonstrosity，——amaniac，whoseravingsfoundrhythmicalexpression；hispoemagrotesquemedley，whereinafewbeautifulverseswereburiedundertheweightofwholecantosofnonsensicalscholasticquibbling。Thisview，somewhatsoftened，wefindalsoinLeighHunt，whosewholeaccountofDanteisanexcellentspecimenofthissortofcriticism。Mr。Hunt’sfinemoralnaturewasshockedandhorrifiedbytheterriblepunishmentsdescribedinthe“Inferno。“HedidnotdulyconsiderthatinDante’stimethesefearfulthingswereanindispensablepartofeveryman’stheoryoftheworld；and，blindedbyhiskindlyprejudices，hedoesnotseemtohaveperceivedthatDante，inacceptingeternaltormentsaspartandparcelofthesystemofnature，wasnevertheless，indescribingthem，inspiredwiththatineffabletendernessofpitywhich，intheepisodesofFrancescaandofBrunettoLatini，hasmeltedtheheartsofmeninpasttimes，andwillcontinuetodosointimestocome。“Infinitepity，yetinfiniterigouroflaw！
ItissoNatureismade:itissoDantediscernedthatshewasmade。“[57]Thisremarkofthegreatseerofourtimeiswhattheeighteenthcenturycouldinnowisecomprehend。ThemenofthatdayfailedtoappreciateDante，justastheywereoppressedordisgustedatthesightofGothicarchitecture；justastheypronouncedthescholasticphilosophyanunmeaningjargon；justastheyconsideredmediaevalChristianityagiganticsystemofcharlatanry，andwerewontunreservedlytocharacterizethePapacyasablightingdespotism。Inourtimecultivatedmenthinkdifferently。Wehavelearnedthattheinterminablehair-splittingofAquinasandAbelardhasaddedprecisiontomodernthinking。[58]WedonotcurseGregoryVII。andInnocentIII。asenemiesofthehumanrace，butreverethemasbenefactors。WecanspareamorselofheartyadmirationforBecket，howeverstronglywemaysympathizewiththestalwartkingwhodidpenanceforhisfoulmurder；andwecanappreciateDante’spooropinionofPhiliptheFairnolessthanhisdenunciationofBonifaceVIII。ThecontemplationofGothicarchitecture，aswestandentrancedinthesublimecathedralsofYorkorRouen，awakensinourbreastsagenuineresponsetothemightyaspirationswhichthusbecameincarnateinenduringstone。AndthepoemofDante——whichhasbeenwelllikenedtoagreatcathedral——wereverentlyaccept，withallitsquaintcarvingsandhieroglyphicsymbols，astheauthenticutteranceoffeelingswhichstillexist，thoughtheynolongerchoosethesameformofexpression。
Carlyle，HeroesandHero-Worship，p。84。
SeemyOutlinesofCosmicPhilosophy，Vol。I。p。
Acenturyago，therefore，atranslationofDantesuchasMr。
Longfellow’swouldhavebeenimpossible。Thecriticismofthattimewasinnomoodforrealisticreproductionsoftheantique。
Iteithersuperciliouslyneglectedtheantique，orelsedressedituptosuititsownnotionsofpropriety。Itwasnotlikeaseven-leaguebootwhichcouldfiteverybody，butitwaslikeaProcrustes-bedwhicheverybodymustbemadetofit。ItsgreatexponentwasnotaSainte-Beuve，butaBoileau。ItstypicalsampleofareproductionoftheantiquewasPope’stranslationoftheIliad。Thatbook，wepresume，everybodyhasread；andmanyofthosewhohavereaditknowthat，thoughanexcellentandspiritedpoem，itisnomoreHomerthantheageofQueenAnnewastheageofPeisistratos。OfthetranslationsofDantemadeduringthisperiod，thechiefwasunquestionablyMr。Cary’s。[59]Foramanbornandbroughtupinthemostunpoeticalofcenturies，Mr。
Carycertainlymadeaverygoodpoem，thoughnotsogoodasPope’s。ButitfellfarshortofbeingareproductionofDante。
Theeighteenth-centurynoteringsoutloudlyoneverypageofit。
Likemuchotherpoetryofthetime，itislabouredandartificial。Itssentencesareofteninvolvedandoccasionallyobscure。Take，forinstance，CantoIV。25-36ofthe“Paradiso“:
Thisworkcomesattheendoftheeighteenth-centuryperiod，asPope’stranslationofHomercomesatthebeginning。
“ThesearethequestionswhichtheywillUrgeequally；andthereforeIthefirstOfthatwilltreatwhichhaththemoreofgall。
Ofseraphimhewhoismostenskied，Moses，andSamuel，andeitherJohn，Choosewhichthouwilt，norevenMary’sself，Havenotinanyotherheaventheirseats，Thanhavethosespiritswhichsolatethousaw’st；
Normoreorfeweryearsexist；butallMakethefirstcirclebeauteous，diverselyPartakingofsweetlife，asmoreorlessAfflationofeternalblisspervadesthem。“
HereMr。CarynotonlyfailstocatchDante’sgrandstyle；hedoesnotevenwriteastyleatall。Itistooconstrainedandawkwardtobedignified，anddignityisanindispensableelementofstyle。Withoutdignitywemaywriteclearly，ornervously，orracily，butwehavenotattainedtoastyle。ThisisthesecondshortcomingofMr。Cary’stranslation。LikePope’s，itfailstocatchthegrandstyleofitsoriginal。UnlikePope’s，itfrequentlyfailstoexhibitanystyle。