self to prepare for the 66 for the press, as they came to his hands," were actually left behind him for that purpose, with a sum of money adequate to the expenses of the publication. Every impartial person who examines the original Gaelic must be satisfied of its authenticity. Not an instance can be recollected, of a fabrication being attempted, in a foreign language, or in a language supposed to be of an ancient period, where, upon an accurate examination, internal proofs of the forgery have not been discovered, in the very language even in which the forgery was attempted to be conveyed. Indeed, by a good critic, an original version is known from a mere translation or imitation, in the same way as a connoisseur in painting, distinguishes a copy, from an original of a Raphael, or of a Michael Angelo. When the new translation is brought before the public, the following particulars will be distinctly proved: 1. That Mr Macpherson, in many instances, gave an erroneous translation; 2. That he frequently added many words or expressions, not to be found in the original; which additions have been mentioned as plagiarisms from other authors, and, consequently, as arguments against the authenticity of the poems; 3. That he left out some beautiful words and passages to be found in the original; 4. That he passed over many expressive words or phrases, which he found it difficult to translate; and, 5. That, on the whole, he did not do sufficient justice to the nervous simplicity and genuine beauties of the Celtic bard. The first book of Fingal, as a specimen of a proposed new translation, was drawn up by the Rev. Dr Ross, and printed in the first volume of the Gaelic edition. It furnishes the strongest possible internal proofs, that the Gaelic was the original, and Macpherson's prose a loose, and in many parts a turgid, translation from that original. Upon comparing the two together, a celebrated critic, (Miss Baillie, the dramatic authoress), has well remarked, "That the new translation appears less pompous, more simple, and more appropriate than that of Macpherson; and besides being free from those particular images and forms of expression, which, in his, seem to be borrowed from other sources, it presents us with the story, and the images and sentiments that enrich the story, in a more distinct and defined manner, avoiding the great repetition of general epithets, which give to the other, notwithstanding all its beauties, a fatiguing sameness, of which many readers have complained. This, I should think, must impress the public at large with a belief, that the Gaelic copy is the original, and Macpherson's a translation,-a translation, too, by a writer of a different character from the elder poet. In confirmation of this opinion, I am sure that a poem, in imitation of Macpherson's translation, would be a much easier task to compose, than one in imitation of the new translation." But though Macpherson's translation is evidently inferior to the new translation, (to the original it must be infinitely more so), and though his conduct in regard to Ossian is doubtless in many particulars reprehensible, yet he is certainly not without claims to merit. The same ingenious critic, above alluded to, has remarked, "That whatever marks of false taste, or of having misunderstood the original, may be found in his translation of Ossian, we are indebted to Mr Macpherson for having first introduced it to the world, and in a more attractive garb, than perhaps any other man could at that time have given to it. He has not always translated it as he ought, but he has at least pointed out to those who shall follow him, a way of doing it, which, without his aid, might not perhaps have been discovered. To him also we owe this Gaelic copy, which he might so easily have burnt, assuming to himself the honours of an original poet; and for these good deeds, whatever his demerits may be in regard to other things, he ought not to be mentioned but with respect." These observations are just; at the same time, even his admirers and friends must acknowledge, that Mr Macpherson might have acted a part more creditable to himself, and less likely to prove injurious, to the fame of one of the greatest poets recorded in history. Another authoress, distinguished by great talents, (Mrs Grant of Laggan,) expressed, in the following energetic terms, her approbation of my endeavours to do justice to the merits of Ossian, in the dissertation to prove his authenticity, prefixed to the Gaelic edition. SIR, I return your valuable work, which had with me the effect of making "assurance double sure," in regard to the Ossianic remains. I hope the clear and complete evidence you have so industriously collected, and arranged in such lucid order, has confirmed the wavering, and in many instances converted the unbelieving. We Highlanders owe you much on this score. It was particularly hard, that we should be branded as a confederacy united in sanctioning an imposture, and that by those who never took pains to investigate the subject. This you have done in a manner honourable to your own candour, and generous to a class of your fellow-subjects, long neglected, and often misrepresented. I have sent my Essay *, which I think I should scarce have ventured to do without your encouragement, but will be for some time ignorant of its fate. Whatever that may be, your approbation will gratify my feelings, and sooth the disappointment I anticipate. I am, Sir, your obliged and faithful servant, ANNE GRANT. 101. Prince's Street, I cannot conclude, without alluding to the high opinion entertained of the Poems of Ossian on the Continent, where no national prejudices were felt against their authenticity or merits. In England, under the banners of so powerful a • The Essay, which regarded the character of the ancient Highlanders, received that reward from the Highland Society of London, which it justly merited. leader as Dr Samuel Johnson, such was the violence of the hostile torrent, that nothing but the intrinsic beauties of the poetry, prevented the entire extinction of the work. But on the Continent, it was quite otherwise, for in France, Germany, and Italy in particular, ample justice was done to the transcendant beauties of the Celtic bard. There is none, however, to whom Ossian is under higher obligations, than to the celebrated Madame de Staël. In her excellent work, "De la Literature," she thus expresses herself: "Il existe, ce me semble, deux littératures tout-à-fait distinctes ;-celle qui vient du midi, et celle qui descend du nord; celle dont Homère est la première source, celle dont Ossian est l'origine." She then gives her ideas of the merits of the latter poet. If Madame de Staël entertained so high an opinion of the beauties of Ossian, in a defective version, the only one hitherto much known, what would she not have felt, had she perused it in an able translation? But every exertion shall now be made by myself, and the other admirers of Ossian, to do the Celtic bard that justice, by a new translation, which will place his name among the proudest of those who have hitherto adorned the fields of poetry, and reached its highest ranks. The following two most important propositions shall then be established, beyond the possibility of doubt: 1. That the Poems of Ossian are authentic ancient poetry. And, 2. That in a remote period of our history, the mountains of Scotland produced a bard, whose works must render his name immortal, and whose genius has not been surpassed, by the efforts of any modern, or even ancient competitor. Translation. There exists, as it seems to me, two distinct descriptions of literature, one of which has its origin in the south, and the other in the north; of the first, Homer was the source, and of the latter, Ossian. |