Should any one address me in the language of the old nurse to Phædra—
[Sidenote: Euripidis Hippolyt. v. 226.]
τί κυνηγεσίων καὶ σοὶ μελέτης;
or of Menedemus to Chremes—
[Sidenote: Terentii Heauton. act. +ii.+ sc. 1.]
Tantumne est ab re tuâ otii tibi Aliena ut cures, eaque nihil quæ ad te attinent?
[Sidenote: Love of Fame, Sat. +i.+]
[Sidenote: Sir T. Elyot’s The Governour, B. +i.+ c. +xiii.+]
I would reply, that I do not consider these authors as affording unsuitable mental recreation to any literary gentleman, be his vocation what it may; nor as rendering him amenable to the charge of Dr. Young of being “a polite apostate.”[25] Saint Chrysostom, the most eloquent of the Greek fathers of the church, was so enamoured of Aristophanes, notwithstanding the malignity of his satire, his occasional obscenities, and licentious morals, as “to wake with him at his studies, and to sleep with him under his pillow:” and it was never “objected either to his piety or his preaching, even in those times of pure zeal and primitive religion.” To close the ancient cynegetica against the modern student, merely because the lowly quadruped, that gives a name to such works, forms a part of their subject-matter, pregnant in every page with innumerable other beauties, unconnected with the poor tyke, but scattered around him, would be (in an expressive simile of the author of “the Governour”) like “prohibiting a man to come into a fayre gardein, lest in gadring good and holsome herbes, he may happen to be stung with a netle”—“Semblaby yf a man doe rede wanton matter, myxt with wysdom, he putteth the worst under fote, and sorteth out the beste.”
But the “Scriptores Rei Venaticæ” are, of all others on the classic file, most chaste and pure of sentiment. The character bestowed by Price on Gratius in particular, is applicable to all collectively:
their style, their argument Is pleasant, rev’rend, candid, innocent.
Their eminent beauties in poetry and prose, their fine moral reflections and religious aspirations, will bear comparison with the brightest productions of Greek and Roman literature, and can only be lightly esteemed, because they are little known. If a candid and susceptible reader, competent to enjoy their beauties, shall, after a perusal, deem his hours of recreative study mispent, I will acknowledge that I have lost a few days of my life. But he, who pretends to decide their claims to attention, must have a mind sensible of the beauties of nature, and of didactic poetry and prose, devoted to the illustration of objects in rural life: and so far, I think, from deeming it beneath the notice of man to mark the hand of Providence among the inferior beings of Creation, and to contemplate the fixed regulations under which they support the economy of the animal world, he will allow that it is rather the entertainment of a correctly-constituted mind to admire the originals in the natural world, and the descriptions of their habits, and the modes of applying them to the service and amusement of mankind in the works of learned men. With such sketches of animal life the cynegetical writers abound: and Oppian, more especially, with the poetic pen of a philosophic naturalist, deduces from the habits of irrational creatures precepts worthy of enrolment in the code of a moralist.
[Sidenote: Cowper’s Task, B. +vi.+]
For learn we might, if not too proud to stoop To quadruped instructors, many a good And useful quality, and virtue too, Rarely exemplified among ourselves.
With such instructions, too, for rendering animal powers subservient to the recreation and support of mankind, the works of Xenophon, Arrian, and others De Re Venaticâ are plentifully stored.
[Sidenote: Aristot. de Part. Animal. L. +i.+ c. +v.+]
[Sidenote: Lucian. Hist. Veræ, L. +i.+]
Let us hear then no more of the unworthiness of these authors or their subjects—διὸ δεῖ μὴ δυσχεραίνειν παιδικῶς τὴν περὶ τῶν ἀτιμωτέρων ζώων ἐπίσκεψιν. I know the study of them to be eminently entertaining, and believe it to be equally innocent and instructive. Our higher and more grave studies are pleasantly diversified by such intermixture, and the mind returns from its lighter to its more serious avocations with renewed vigour.—τοῖς περὶ λόγους ἐσπουδακόσιν ἡγοῦμαι προσήκειν μετὰ τὴν πολλὴν τῶν σπουδαιοτέρων ἀνάγνωσιν ἀνεῖναί τε τὴν διάνοιαν, καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἔπειτα κάματον ἀκμαιοτέραν παρασκευάζειν.
[Sidenote: Beaumont and Fletcher’s The Elder Brother, act +ii.+ sc. +i.+]
The amusement derived from the Cynegeticus of Arrian, its terse, elegant language, and valuable information, has been my principal inducement to present it to the patrons of the leash in an English dress; that those who might never have read the original, and might be unwilling, or, like Miramont in “the Elder Brother,” (who could “speak no Greek,” and held “the sound sufficient to confirm an honest man” without a knowledge of its sense) unable to peruse it, might have an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the first author who had treated systematically of coursing. For “those,” says Christopher Wase in his preface to Gratius, “which are curious artisans, doe not content themselves that they have attained to so great perfection in their art, but are extremely pleased to look back and reflect upon the periods and steps whereby that art hath made its graduall progresse; if perchance by comparing the former with the latter, even the present state of it may be advanced.”
It was my wish that the copy should read like an original: and if I have failed in this respect, as I fear and feel I have, (for such an object is attended with far greater difficulties of attainment than the inexperienced may suppose,) the failure must be attributed to a fearfulness of assuming too great a licence of translation, and departing too far from the letter of the original—a fear of paraphrasing instead of translating my author; whose lively and spirited language indicates a power of description, and accurate knowledge of his subject, to which no translation could do justice, but by as faithful an adherence as the different idioms of different languages would allow. Under this impression, I have spared no pains in rendering the version with fidelity, deeming truth and perspicuity more essential than embellishment of language. For it has been well observed by Mr. Pope in his preface to the Iliad, that “it is the first grand duty of an interpreter to give his author entire and unmaimed.” And again, “it is certain no literal translation can be just to an excellent original in a superior language: but it is a great mistake to imagine (as many have done) that a rash paraphrase can make amends for this general defect; which is no less in danger to lose the spirit of an ancient, by deviating into the modern manners of expression. If there be sometimes a darkness, there is often a light in antiquity, which nothing better preserves than a version almost literal.”
If however this translation should be deemed too close and literal, and greater freedom of language desired in a little coursing manual; I am willing to plead guilty to the fault. Still if its style and manner can neither be defended nor excused on the grounds stated, I trust they will be pardoned, because they are acknowledged.
[Sidenote: Horat. de Arte Poeticâ, vs. 347.]
Sunt delicta tamen quibus ignovisse velimus.
I am fully sensible that what I have done, might have been done by others far better. For though an occasional worshipper of the classic Minerva—“parcus ... cultor et infrequens.” I know that there are, under the tutelage of Diana, many disciples who have been more richly endowed by the goddess of wisdom, and are better qualified for this undertaking. If, however, I have the good fortune to direct the attention of the more learned patrons of the leash to a manual scarce known among them, and to excite the same degree of interest in their minds, which its first perusal excited in my own; I shall rest satisfied that the errors and deficiencies of this attempt will induce them to devote superior knowledge of the Greek language, and greater experience in coursing, to decorating the Athenian Sportsman with an English dress, more becoming the antiquity of his claim to distinction.
[Sidenote: Ovid. Trist. +i.+ Eleg. +vi.+]
Et veniam pro laude peto: laudatus abundè, Non fastiditus si tibi, lector, ero.
[Sidenote: Demetrii Constantinop. Hieracosophii +i.+]
Individuals possessed of great accuracy of knowledge in Greek literature, or what Schneider calls “ἀκρίβεια Græcæ doctrinæ,” united to extensive experience in field-sports, must necessarily be rare; and till such shall undertake an improvement on the present version, it may pass its ordeal of utility with the public. Moderate love of the diversion, and moderate experience in the field or on the plain, I conceive to be as indispensable as an acquaintance with the language of the original text to the translator of a courser’s enchiridion, or he will not work in it con amore, (πρόδηλον γὰρ εἰ μή τις ἔρως ἐπί τινι παρακολουθήσει πράγματι, ἀμήχανον τοῦτο κατορθωθῆναι,) nor acquit himself to the satisfaction of his readers.