The following text is encoded in accordance with EpiDoc standards and with the CTS/CITE Architecture.
THE translation of Homer was amongst the latest of
Hobbes' works; a signal of retreat from those mathematical
contests in which he had spent so much of
his time:—“ Silentibus tandem adversariis, annum
agens octogesimum septimum, Homeri Odysseam
edidit.”-See VITA Themae Hobbes.
In 1673 appeared, " The travels of Ulysses, as they
were related by himself in Homer's 9th, 10th, 11th,
and 12th books of his Odysses, to Alcinous king of
Phaeacia," published by Wm. Crook, in 12mo. The
date of 1674, given by Anthony Wood and others,
seems to be a mistake ; they may perhaps have been
misled by Hobbes' telling us, that he translated the
Odyssey in his 87th year.
Whether Hobbes had at this time finished any
other part of Homer, and put forth those four books
of the Odyssey as a specimen of the performance, or
to ascertain what reception might be expected from
the public for the remainder of it, is unknown. In
about a year afterwards (see VITA) they were
followed by the translation of the entire Iliad and
Odyssey. Copies are to be found of various dates;
as 1676, 1677, 1684, 1686, and perhaps others: but
there were but three editions, the second dated 1677,
and the third, 1686. The biographers appear to have
been mistaken in repeating one after the other, (see
Biog. Britan., Brit. Biog., Gen. Diet., Aikin's Biog.),
that in the course of ten years this translation went
through three large editions.
Pope, in the preface to his translation, observes,
that the poetry of Hobbes' version is “ too mean for
criticism." Some, however, may possibly find the unstudied
and unpretending language of Hobbes convey
an idea less remote from the original, than the smooth
and glittering lines of Pope and his coadjutors.
Pope's remark upon the habitual carelessness displayed
in the execution of the work, is well founded.
It was possibly never meant for criticism, and may
be fairly looked upon, as the translator has told us
in his preface, as the amusement of his old age.
The present edition is printed from that of 1677.
THE virtues required in an heroic poem, and indeed in all
writings published, are comprehended all in this one worddiscretion.
And discretion consisteth in this, that every part of the
poem be conducing, and in good order placed to the end and
design of the poet. And the design is not only to profit,
but also to delight the reader.
By profit, I intend not here any accession of wealth, either
to the poet, or to the reader; but accession of prudence,
justice, and fortitude, by the example of such great and noble
persons as he introduceth speaking, or describeth acting.
For all men love to behold, though not to practise virtue.
So that at last the work of an heroic poet is no more but to
furnish an ingenuous reader, when his leisure abounds, with
the diversion of an honest and delightful story, whether true
or feigned.
But because there be many men called critics, and wits,
and virtuosi, that are accustomed to censure the poets, and
most of them of divers judgments, how is it possible, you'll
say, to please them all? Yes, very well; if the poem be as
it should be. For men can judge what is good, that know
not what is best. For he that can judge what is best, must
have considered all those things, though they be almost innumerable,
that concur to make the reading of an heroic
poem pleasant. Whereof I'll name as many as shall come
into my mind.
And they are contained, first, in the choice of words.
Secondly, in the construction. Thirdly, in the contrivance
of the story or fiction. Fourthly, in the elevation of the
fancy. Fifthly, in the justice and impartiality of the poet.
Sixthly, in the clearness of descriptions. Seventhly, in the
amplitude of the subject.
And, to begin with words: the first indiscretion is, the use
of such words as to the readers of poesy (which are commonly
persons of the best quality) are not sufficiently known. For
the work of an heroic poem is to raise admiration, principally,
for three virtues, valour, beauty, and love; to the reading
whereof women no less than men have a just pretence,
though their skill in language be not so universal; and therefore
foreign words, till by long use they become vulgar, arc
unintelligible to them. Also the names of instruments and
tools of artificers, and words of art, though of use in the
Schools, are far from being fit to be spoken by a hero. He
may delight in the arts themselves, and have skill in some of
them, but his glory lies not in that, but in courage, nobility,
and other virtues of nature, or in the command he has over
other men. Nor does Homer in any part of his poem attribute
any praise to Achilles, or any blame to Alexander, for
that they had both learnt to play upon the guitar. The
character of words that become a hero are property and significancy,
but without both the malice and lasciviousness of
a satyr.
Another virtue of an heroic poem is the perspicuity and
the facility of construction, and consisteth in a natural contexture
of the words, so as not to discover the labour, but the
natural ability of the poet; and this is usually called a good
style. For the order of words, when placed as they ought
to be, carries a light before it, whereby a man may foresee
the length of his period, as a torch in the night shows a man
the stops and unevenness in his way. But when placed unnaturally,
the reader will often find unexpected checks, and
be forced to go back and hunt for the sense, and suffer such
unease, as in a coach a man unexpectedly finds in passing
bound the Greeks and Latins to number of feet, and quantity
of syllables, and the English and other nations to number
of syllables and rhyme) put great constraint upon the natural
course of language, yet the poet, having the liberty to depart
from what is obstinate, and to choose somewhat else that is
more obedient to such laws, and no less fit for his purpose,
shall not be, neither by the measure, nor by the necessity of
rhyme, excused; though a translation often may.
A third virtue lies in the contrivance. For there is difference
between a poem and a history in prose. For a history
is wholly related by the writer; but in an heroic poem the
narration is, a great part of it, put upon some of the persons
introduced by the poet. So Homer begins not his Iliad
with the injury done by Paris, but makes it related by
Menelaus, and very briefly, as a thing notorious; nor begins
he his Odysseys with the departure of Ulysses from Troy,
but makes Ulysses himself relate the same to Alcinous, in the
midst of his poem; which I think much more pleasant and
ingenious, than a too precise and close following of the time.
A fourth is in the elevation of fancy, which is generally
taken for the greatest praise of heroic poetry; and is so,
when governed by discretion. For men more generally
affect and admire fancy than they do either judgment, or
reason, or memory, or any other intellectual virtue, and for
the pleasantness of it, give to it alone the name of wit,
accounting reason and judgment but for a dull entertainment.
For in fancy consisteth the sublimity of a poet, which is that
poetical fury which the readers, for the most part, call for.
It flies abroad swiftly to fetch in both matter and words;
but if there be not discretion at home to distinguish which
are fit to be used and which not, which decent and which
undecent for persons, times, and places, their delight and
grace is lost. But if they be discreetly used, they are greater
ornaments of a poem by much than any other. A metaphor
also (which is a comparison contracted into a word) is not
unpleasant; but when they are sharp and extraordinary,
but only for an accusation or defence at the bar.
A fifth lies in the justice and impartiality of the poet, and
belongeth as well to history as to poetry. For both the poet
and the historian writeth only, or should do, matter of fact.
And as far as the truth of fact can defame a man, so far they
are allowed to blemish the reputation of persons. But to do
the same upon report, or by inference, is below the dignity,
not only of a hero, but of a man. For neither a poet nor a
historian ought to make himself an absolute master of any
man'is good name. None of the Emperors of Rome whom
Tacitus, or any other writer, hath condemned, was ever subject
to the judgment of any of them; nor were they ever
heard to plead for themselves, which are things that ought to
be antecedent to condemnation. Nor was, I think, Epicurus
the philosopher, (who is transmitted to us by the Stoics for
a man of evil and voluptuous life), ever called, convented,
and lawfully convicted, as all men ought to be before they be
defamed. Therefore it is a very great fault in a poet to
speak evil of any man in their writings historical.
A sixth virtue consists in the perfection and curiosity of
descriptions, which the ancient writers of eloquence call
icones, that is images. And an image is always a part, or
rather a ground of the poetical comparison. As, for example,
when Virgil would set before our eyes the fall of Troy, he
describes perhaps the whole labour of many men together in
the felling of some great tree, and with how much ado it fell.
This is the image. To which if you but add these words,
" So fell Troy," you have the comparison entire ; the grace
whereof lieth in the lightsomeness, and is but the description
of all, even the minutest, parts of the thing described; that
not only they that stand far off, but also they that stand
near, and look upon it with the oldest spectacles of a critic,
may approve it. For a poet is a painter, and should paint
actions to the understanding with the most decent words, as
painters do persons and bodies with the choicest colours, to
the eye; which if not done nicely, will not be worthy to be
placed in a cabinet.
The seventh virtue, which lying in the amplitude of the
subject, is nothing but variety, and a thing without which a
whole poem would be no pleasanter than an epigram, or one
good verse; nor a picture of a hundred figures better than
any one of them asunder, if drawn with equal art. And
these are the virtues which ought especially to be looked
upon by the critics, in the comparing of the poets, Homer
with Virgil, or Virgil with Lucan. For these only, for their
excellency, I have read, or heard compared.
If the comparison be grounded upon the first and second
virtues, which consist in known words and style unforced,
they are all excellent in their own language, though perhaps
the Latin than the Grerk is apter to dispose itself into an
hexameter verse, as having both fewer monosyllables and
fewer polysyllables. And this may make the Latin verse
appear more grave and equal, which is taken for a kind of
majesty; though in truth there be no majesty in words, but
then when they seem to proceed from a high and weighty
employment of the mind. But neither Homer, nor Virgil,
nor Lucan, nor any poet writing commendably, though not
excellently, was ever charged much with unknown words,
or great constraint of style, as being a fault proper to translators,
when they hold themselves too superstitiously to their
author's words.
In the third virtue, which is contrivance, there is no doubt
but Homer excels them all. For their poems, except the
introduction of their Gods, are but so many histories in
verse: where Homer has woven so many histories together
as contain the whole learning of his time (which the Greeks
call cyclopœdia), and furnished both the Greek and Latin
stages with all the plots and arguments of their tragedies.
The fourth virtue, which is the height of fancy, is almost
proper to Lucan, and so admirable in him, that no heroic
poem raises such admiration of the poet, as his bath done,
though not so great admiration of the persons he introducetli.
And though it be a mark of a great wit, yet it is fitter for a
rhetorician than a poet, and rebelleth often against discretion,
as when he says,
that is,
Than which nothing could be spoken more gloriously to the
the exaltation of a man, nor more disgracefully to the depression
of the Gods. Homer indeed maketh some Gods for
the Greeks, and some for the Trojans, but always makes
Jupiter impartial; and never prefers the judgment of a man
before that of Jupiter, much less before the judgment of all
the Gods together.
The fifth virtue, which is the justice and impartiality of a
poet, is very eminent in Homer and Virgil, but the contrary
in Lucan. Lucan shows himself openly in the Pompeian
faction, inveighing against Caesar throughout his poem, like
Cicero against Cataline or Marc Antony, and is therefore
justly reckoned by Quintilian as a rhetorician rather than a
poet. And a great part of the delight of his readers proceedeth
from the pleasure which too many men take to hear
great persons censured. But Homer and Virgil, especially
Homer, do everywhere what they can to preserve the reputation
of their heroes.
If we compare Homer and Virgil by the sixth virtue,
which is the clearness of images, or descriptions, it is manifest
that Homer ought to be preferred, though Virgil himself
were to be the judge. For there are very few images in
Virgil besides those which he bath translated out of Homer;
so that Virgil's images are Homer's praises. But what if he
have added something to it of his own ? Though he have,
yet it is no addition of praise, because it is easy. But he
hath some images which are not in Homer, and better than
his. It may be so; and so may other poets have which
never durst compare themselves with Homer. Two or three
fine sayings are not enough to make a wit. But where is
that image of his better done by him than Homer, of those
that have been done by them both ? Yes, Eustathius, as
Mr. Ogilby hath observed, where they both describe the
is in that, I think, mistaken. The place of Homer is in the
fourth of the Iliads, the sense whereof is this:
It is manifest that in this place Homer intended no more
than to show how comely the body of Simoisius appeared as
he lay dead upon the bank of Scamander, straight and tall,
with a fair head of hair, and like a straight and high poplar
with the boughs still on; and not at all to describe the
manner of his falling, which, when a man is wounded through
the breast, as he was with a spear, is always sudden.
The description of how a great tree falleth, when many
men together hew it down, is in the second of Virgil's
Æneads. The sense of it, with the comparison, is in English
this:
And here again it is evident that Virgil meant to compare
the manner how Troy, after many battles, and after the
losses of many cities, conquered by the many nations under
Agamemnon in a long war, and thereby weakened, and at
last overthrown, with a great tree hewn round about, and
then falling by little and little leisurely.
So that neither these two descriptions, nor the two comparisons
can be compared together. The image of a man
lying on the ground is one thing; the image of falling,
especially of a kingdom, is another. This therefore gives no
of the felling and falling of a tree is exceeding
graceful, but is it therefore more than Homer could have
done if need had been ? Or is there no description in Homer
of somewhat else as good as this ? Yes, and in many of our
English poets now alive. If it then be lawful for Julius
Scaliger to say, that if Jupiter would have described the fall
of a tree, he could not have mended this of Virgil; it will
be lawful for me to repeat an old epigram of Antipater, to
the like purpose, in favour of Homer.
The seventh and last commendation of an heroic poem
consisteth in amplitude and variety; and in this Homer
exceedeth Virgil very much, and that not by superfluity of
words, but by plenty of heroic matter, and multitude of
descriptions and comparisons (whereof Virgil hath translated
but a small part into his Æneads), such as are the images of
shipwracks, battles, single combats, beauty, passions of the
mind, sacrifices, entertainments, and other things, whereof
Virgil, abating what he borrows of Homer, has scarce the
twentieth part. It is no wonder therefore if all the ancient
learned men both of Greece and Rome have given the
first place in poetry to Homer. It is rather strange that
two or three, and of late time, and but learners of the Greek
tongue, should dare to contradict so many competent judges
both of language and discretion. But howsoever I defend
Homer, I aim not thereby at any reflection upon the following
translation. Why then did I write it ? Because I had
nothing else to do. Why publish it ? Because I thought
it might take off my adversaries from showing their folly
upon my more serious writings, and set them upon my
verses to show their wisdom. But why without annotations ?
Because I had no hope to do it better than it is already done
by Mr. Ogilby.
T. HOBBES.
HOMER, whose proper name was Melesigenes, was born in
the country of Æolia, about 160 years after the siege of
Troy, which was about the year of the world 3665, of
Critheis, daughter of Melanopus and Omyris, who, after her
father and mother's death, was left to a friend of her father's
at Cuma, who, when he found she was with child, in displeasure
he sent her away to a friend's at a place nigh the
River Meles; where, at a feast among other young women,
she was delivered of a son, whose name she called Melesigenes,
from the place where he was born. Critheis went with her
son to Ismenias, and after to Smyrna, where she dressed
wool to get a livelihood for herself and son. Phemius, the
schoolmaster, taking a fancy to her, married her, and took
her son into the school, who by his sharpness of wit outwent
all the school in wisdom and learning. In a short time after,
his master dying, he taught the same school, and gained
great reputation by his learning, not only at Smyrna, but all
the countries round about; for the merchants that did frequent
Smyrna, with corn, &c. did spread his fame about;
amongst which merchants, one Mentes, master of a ship of
Leucadia, took that kindness for him, that he persuaded him
to leave his school and travel with him, which he did, by
whom he was maintained well and plentifully in his travels.
They went to Spain, from thence to Italy, and from Italy
through several countries, and at last came to Ithaca, where
a violent rheum fell into the eyes of Homer, that he could
not travel any further, so that Mentes left him with a friend
of his called Mentor, a person of great riches and honour in
Ithaca, where Homer learned the principal matters relating
to Ulysses' life; but Mentes the next year came back the
same way, and finding Homer recovered in his eyes, took
him in his travels. They went through many countries till
they came to Colophen, where he fell into his old distemper
of his eyes, and there grew quite blind; after which he
addicted himself to poetry; but being poor, he went to
Smyrna, expecting to get better encouragement there; but
being disappointed of his expectation, he went to Cuma, and
as he went he rested at a town called New-wall, where he
repeated some of his verses; and one Tichio, a leather-seller,
took such delight to hear them, that he entertained him
kindly for a long time. After, he proceeded on his journey
to Cuma, and when he came there he was well received, and
he had some friends in the senate that did propose to have
had a maintenance settled on him for life, but it could not
be carried. At this place he first received the name of
Homer, from his blindness.
From Cuma he went to Phocaea, where lived one Thestorides,
a schoolmaster, who invited Homer to live with him,
and by that means he got some of his verses, and after
went to Chios, where he taught them as his own verses,
and got great reputation by them. When Homer heard
that Thestorides had thus abused him, he followed him to
Chios, and by the way, at a place called Bollisus, was taken
up by a shepherd, as he was keeping his master's sheep;
the shepherd did relieve him, and carried him to his master,
where he lived some time, and taught his children; yet
he could not rest till he had been at Chios to discover
the cheat of Thestorides, who when he heard of Homer's
coming, he left Chios, where Homer tarried some time, and
taught a school, grew rich, married, and had two daughters,
one of which died young, the other he married to the shep
old he left Chios, and went to Samoa, where he staid some
time singing of verses at feasts and at new moons, at the
chiefest men's houses in all places where he was. From
Samos he was going to Athens, but fell sick at Ios, and
there died, and was buried on the sea-shore. Long after,
when his poems had gotten an universal applause, the people
of Ios built him a sepulchre.
The discontent and secession of Achilles.
The dream of Agamemnon. The tempting of the army, and the catalogue of ships and commanders.
The duel of Menelaus and Paris, for the ending of the war.
The articles broken by the Trojans.
The first battle continued, wherein Pallas strengtheneth Diomedes to Supply the absence of Achilles.
The first battle yet continued. The other Gods forbidden by Jove to assist.
The Greeks enclose their ships with a wall and ditch. The duel betwixt Hector and Ajax.
The second battle ; and the Trojans stay all night in the field.
The Greeks deliberate of going home, but are staid by Diomed and Nestor.
Encounter of the scouts by night.
The third fight.
The fourth fight, Hector having entered the Argive camp, at the ships.
Neptune encourageth the Greeks.
Juno, by the help of Venus, layeth Jove asleep, whilst Neptune assisteth the Greeks.
Jupiter awakes and sends away Neptune. fictor chaseth the Greeks again to
The sixth battle. The acts of Patroclus, and his death.
The seventh battle, about Patroclus'sbody.
The grief of Achilles, and new armour made for him by Vulcan.
Achilles reconcUed to Agamemnon goes forth to battle.
The eighth battle, and the Gods permitted to assist.
Achilles, with great slaughter, pursues the Trojans to Seamantier, and takes twelve alive to kill at Patroclus’s tomb.
The death of Hector. and lamentalion in Troy.
The funeral games for Patroclus.
The redemption of Hector, and his funeral.
END OF THE ILIAD.