Of charms with early ripen'd joy to pierce, Weighs her in human scales, metes her with measures In self-contented, youthful joy elate, In all that now around him breathes. And ever blest Perfection hovers o'er, Where tear-drops fall from Misery's eyes- Soft as attraction's features, graceful bending ; His spirit mingles with the boundless sea That round his captive sense voluptuous flows; In lofty unison with Fate Amongst the Muses and the Graces blest The shaft that threats his earthly state, He meets with freely proffer'd breast." Since writing the above, we have received two additional volumes of Mr. Merivale's Poems, containing the well known translations from the "Anthologia," the "Ricciardetto," the "Morgante Maggiore," Dante, "Petrarch," besides some original poetry of a very high character. Elegance and fidelity are better combined by Mr. Merivale than we have yet seen them in any modern translator. We do not except Cary or Rose, highly as we think of both these gentlemen. Those unable to read the various sources from which Mr. Merivale has derived his inspiration, will gain the deepest insight into these authors from him attainable to those unacquainted with the original; and to those in possession of French, German, Italian, and the Classic tongues, these volumes will exhibit models of style and beautiful illustration, of possibly many a passage, dark in its seeming even to their gifted sight. On a comparison, the immense superiority of Mr. Merivale's over all existing translations is quite apparent, and we are perfectly surprised at the shameless injustice of any professed critic, who, to serve some petty purpose, should review Sir E. Lytton Bulwer's translation without noticing one infinitely its superior, which had been previously published. Sir E. L. Bulwer's "Diver" is fine; but far less true to the spirit fof the original than that inserted by Mr. Merivale as the work of an anonymous contributor; and let any unprejudiced person compare "The Gods of Greece," "The Cassandra," "The Resignation," "The Artists," with Mr. Merivale's, and the immense superiority, not only in fidelity, but eloquence, power, and rhythm, is instantly apparent. The gushing glory of the "Hymn to Joy" might also be adduced; at intervals also we cannot tell whether Sir E. L. B. is writing poetry or prose. We subjoin in illustration of this remark, two stanzas from "The Cassandra," and by their side we have placed Mr. Merivale's : Merivale. Polyxene, for blest I hold thee, I too saw him, whom my beating Bulwer. Wrapt in thy bliss, my sister, thine I too might know the soft control Why has Sir E. L. Bulwer changed also so extensively the metres, avowing as he does in his preface, that metrical rendering was to be his rule? The "Gods of Greece" has in consequence lost all its weight, while Merivale has adhered rigidly to his author. The advantages of literal reading are here also on the side of Merivale; the words in his version, which we have marked in Italics, are in the original, but not in Sir E. L. Bulwer's version; and the VOL. III.-NO. II. U U words in Italics, in Sir E. L. Bulwer's, are not in the original, but are his own. The manifest advantages of Merivale in this verse are apparent in greater fidelity. Seelenlos is soulless, and not lifeless. Glory and majesty are quite distinct. "Glory" is implied in the epithet golden, but "majesty" "Helios in stiller Majestat," "Helios in silent majesty," implies a kingly presence, independent of the golden glory. The "füllten" is not adored-"free rov'd" is its best poetical rendering. It may be questionable whether Sir E. L. Bulwer may not claim an "ovation" for the "wavelet's silver foam," in the notions of some; but to us, "the torrent's silver foam expresses better the dash of water from the urn. The Naiad also does not pour forth the stream-it is represented as springing from the urn— 99 "Sprang der Ströme Silberschaum." And here we close our remarks, retaining a decided preference for the elder version, of which Sir E. L. Bulwer has not failed to avail himself, and feeling fully convinced that for once even Maga must yield to our Magus. We have, however, been agreeably disappointed in finding Sir E. L. Bulwer's version better than we had anticipated; and though full of lines that are not poetry, but very limping prose, it is not deficient in power, nor even, at periods, in literal exactitude; but we must again repeat, that no version has yet appeared equal to Merivale's in fidelity, elegance, power, and rhythm. We wish to add, on the authority of Mr. Merivale's publisher, that the signature A attached to the translations of the Kindesmörderin and the Hero und Leander, in his volume, belongs to Dr. Anster; as also the spirited version of the opening scene of the drama of Wilhelm Tell. ART. XV.-Histoire Comparée des Littératures Espagnole et Française, Ouvrage qui a remporté le Prix proposé par L'Académie Française, au Concours Extraordinaire de 1842. Paris. 1844. THESE well written and interesting volumes have assumed their present shape under rather peculiar circumstances. Some two or three years ago the Academy of France (among other subjects marked out as fields for a generous competition,) proposed two questions, couched in the following terms:-1. "What influence had the literature of Spain upon French literature, at the beginning of the seventeenth century?" 2. "By what means did the latter, at different epochs, contrive to profit from intercourse with other nations, without losing anything of its original character?" The honour of giving a complete answer to these difficult questions belongs to M. Adolphe de Puisbusque, the author of the History before us. His Essay was crowned with the first prize awarded by the Academy for this subject, in 1842; and the gratification derived from such a flattering mark of distinction from that celebrated body, was not a little enhanced by the circumstances under which it was conferred. At an extraordinary meeting of the Society, held in June, 1842, M. de Puisbusque's Essay was made the subject of a brilliant extempore panegyric, from M. Victor Hugo, and was criticised by M. Villemain, the Minister of Instruction, in the most favourable terms. Encouraged by the testimonies borne to the merit of his Essay, M. de Puisbusque determined to expand and recast it, so that it might supply what was a desideratum in the literature of France. He resolved to attempt that for Spanish literature, which Madame de Stael and M. de Chateaubriand had already accomplished for German and English; and Ginguéné (of whom, by the way, Mr. Hallam entertains a more favourable opinion than he enjoys on the Continent) for the Italian. How well qualified our author was for his task, the high eulogiums passed on him by M. Villemain, the Minister of Public Instruction, have already proved to the satisfaction of the literary world in Paris; and we presume that none who shall have read the "Histoire Comparée," will regret that Ginguéné did not live to complete his purpose of following up his work on Italian literature with a literary history of Spain. It is not, in our opinion, a small recommendation to the volumes before us, that they contain copious translations and analyses of the earlier and less known Spanish authors. If by this method our author has sometimes subjected himself to the imputation of going too much into detail, he has on the other hand avoided the far more serious reproach of criticising authors of whose works his readers have no conception, and so placing them in the situation of an ignorant man reading certain celebrated histories which we could mention, which suppose the facts well known already, or leave them to be gathered elsewhere. M. Villemain noticed in very eloquent terms the skill with which M. de Puisbusque has pursued, amidst a variety of intricate details, one principal object of his history. We may add that he has taught us generally, amid them all, and by means of them all, to discriminate the boundaries of genuine and spurious imitation; and, by a number of instructive examples, has at once encouraged the genuine imitator, and, at the same time, warned the plagiarist. We shall close this imperfect notice (which yet we think will be sufficient to stimulate the curiosity of our readers) with a single quotation from our author. He is speaking of Louis of Grenada:-"Aucun prédicateur avant ce nouveau Chrysostome n'avoit ouvert le champ de la discussion,-aucun n'avait osé ou daigné raisonner. La chaire evangelique armée et militante comme le saint office, inspirée par les plus terribles inquisiteurs, et les inspirant à son tour, ne demandait pas la foi, elle l'exigeait le bûcher brûlait à ses pieds, et c'était à travers les flammes qu'elle jetait sa parole. Les images de pénitence, de macération, et de torture, que les pinceaux des Zurburan et des Velasques ont rendues avec une si effrayante vigueur, assombrissaient les plus graves instructions! Louis de Grenade versa sur l'enseignement réligieux toute l'aménité de cette raison bienveillante que Louis de Léon étendit à l'enseignement philosophique: il préfera les formes onctueuses de la persuasion au ton hautain du commandement: l'impenetrable profondeur des decrets célestes ne ut pas pour lui un sujet d'anathème contre l'aveuglement de l'homme, mais d'adoration pour la puissance de Dieu. Quel esprit égaré par le doute, quel cœur endurci dans l'incrédulité, ne se serait ému en le voyant humilier sa haute intelligence devant les desseins du Créateur, et tirer les lumières de sa foi de la bonté paternelle qui veille sur la créature?" We think that this single passage will be quite sufficient to convince our readers, that, as a picturesque and eloquent writer at least, M. de Puisbusque has not been overrated. For a confirmation of this impression, and to verify the general truth of M. Villemain's high eulogiums, let them read his book! "WESTMINSTER REVIEW." THE "Westminster" has attempted a reply to our last; facts must form the test of its value. It begins with pleading the small space in which it perpetrated its blunders-half a page. Now we can readily believe that, in a lengthened article of deep research, some error may be committed, either in judgment or fact. But if a person contrives in half a page to make such numerous mistakes as in a lengthened article of several sheets would be unpardonable, we apprehend that the brevity of space in which the said mistakes occur is no extenuation of the offencebut rather an aggravation. So much for the logic of the “ Westminster." We next tell the "Westminster" plainly that we have not formally vindicated Mr. Gurney; we have expressed no opinion on that gentleman's merits or demerits. We have shown that the "Westminster" knows nothing of German. That was the question with us. Our extracts enabled our readers to form their opinion of the translation, independent of our judgment, which we have deliberately abstained from enunciating. And we now demand of the " Westminster" why it is silent on so many points,-whether it is prepared to support the translation of unerhört as "unheard?" Next, is it also prepared to assert Frieden to be a nominative case? Without it does so, its reading is nonsense. To these and other points it has given no reply, for the best of reasons,-that there is none to be given. Let it fold up its German books, then, and abstain from criticism on what it can neither construe nor comprehend. So much for the grammar of the "Westminster." The most amusing instance of dulness-independent of ignorance such as we have exposed-that we have yet encountered, occurs in the following words on the extremely favourable criti |