Part 3

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.

To classic coursers I would particularly recommend the perusal and reperusal of the Greek original; for I am confident that it is far more worthy of their attention than the English version; which “is submitted to the correction and amendment of those worthy and well-knowing gentlemen,” under the hope that it may escape the severity of acrimonious criticism, as the work of a retired countryman, with no learned resources at hand, beyond a library moderately furnished with classic authorities, and writings illustrative of some departments of natural history. I wish I had been endowed with all the qualities essential to a more perfect performance. But such as it is, “I crave,” with an old Chronicler, “that it may be taken in good part. I wishe I had bene furnished with so perfect instructions, and so many good gifts, that I might have pleased all kindes of men, but that same being so rare a thing in any one of the best, I beseech thee (gentle reader) not to looke for it in me the meanest.”

Difficulty has occurred in rendering the ancient technical terms of a courser’s manual, with any degree of elegance, in a modern tongue—“ornari res ipsa negat.” This has partly arisen—

[Sidenote: Lucret. L. +i.+ vs. 139.]

Propter egestatem linguæ, et rerum novitatem,

and partly from the corresponding English terms being debased into vulgarity by an usage too familiar to be pleasant to polite ears. Expressions of this kind in Arrian are occasioned by the accuracy which he affects in the most minute particulars connected with the subject of coursing, the shape of Celtic dogs, the discipline of the kennel and field, the breeding of whelps, &c.

In relation to this and other defects, it is requested of all my brethren of the leash, in behalf of the oldest courser who has written on their manly diversion, that whatever may appear inelegant, dull, or uninteresting in the following little work, may be laid to the account of the translator: the errors of whose style and execution ought not to affect the intrinsic merits of the Cynegeticus.

Many classical quotations have been introduced in the notes to elucidate and enliven the text; some in their original language, others in the English tongue. Where the former appeared more illustrative and expressive, it has been retained. The latter has been occasionally substituted, where the passages selected conveyed information acceptable to an English courser, or a version of acknowledged merit faithfully conveyed the sense of the original. And in a few instances the original and translation have been introduced in juxta-position, to enable the reader to judge of their respective excellencies. To this too I have been “moved,” as Wase very nicely observes, by a wish that the quotations from the dead languages “may be understood with ease, and the delight of attending to the elegancies in them rather doubled than intermitted, by adjoyning a translation in equal consort:” “wherein,” as he adds, “I shall have pleased either those that have an affection to see our language enriched with the wit of former ages; or on the other side, even those men whose inclinations do rather move to look upon the native beauties of every piece.”

[Sidenote: Plinii Præf. Vespas.]

The references to antiquity, which have imperceptibly increased to some extent,—“nec dubitamus multa esse, quæ et nos præterierint, homines enim sumus, et occupati officiis,”—have not been introduced for the sake of ostentatious display of knowledge of Greek and Latin literature, like those

[Sidenote: Young’s Love of Fame, Sat. +i.+]

Who, for renown, on scraps of learning dote, And think they grow immortal as they quote.

but that the classical courser might be induced “antiquos exquirere fontes,”

[Sidenote: Pitt’s Vida.]

T’ examine all, and bring from all away Their various treasures as a lawful prey;

to compare the beauties and defects of the several authors who have treated on the same favourite subject; and that the issue of the comparison might be the illustration of the Nicomedian courser.

[Sidenote: Ausonius Symmacho. Griphus.]

To the classic reader (“cui nihil neque non lectum est, neque non intellectum”) no apology is necessary for the number of the extracts made from writers who must ever be prized, while pure and correct taste prevails: and to the courser, who with his academic gown has laid on the shelves of his library the authors of Greece and Rome, to be no more disturbed, like “the rude forefathers” of the rustic cemetery,

Each in his narrow cell for ever laid;

[Sidenote: Ben Jonson’s Epicœne, act +ii.+ sc. 3.]

[Sidenote: Churchill “The Author.”]

and who “wonders” with Sir John Daw in “The Silent Woman,” that “those fellows have such credit with gentlemen;” there is a summary power vested in himself, of reducing the number to the measure of his own taste and capacity. Such, however, not having been the fate of “the crabbed authors” with myself, I confess that I have found it difficult to check my pen in transcribing apposite and explanatory quotations from these early friends. For in the language of old Gervase, “the minde being preoccupied and busied with a vertuous search, is ever ready to catch hold of whatsoever can adorne or illustrate the excellencie of the thing in which it is imployed.”

This, I trust, will be received as an apology; and that the practical notes interspersed with the classical, will redeem my character as a moderate amateur of the sport, and give admission to this translation on the courser’s table.

[Sidenote: Oppian. Cyneg. L. +iv.+ vs. 16.]

αὐτὰρ ἐγὼν ἐρέω τά τ’ ἐμοῖς ἴδον ὀφθαλμοῖσι, θήρην ἀγλαόδωρον ἐπιστείχων ξυλόχοισιν ὅσσα τ’ ἀπ’ ἀνθρώπων ἐδάην, τοῖσιν τὰ μέμηλε, αἰόλα παντοίης ἐρατῆς μυστήρια τέχνης.

[Sidenote: Specimens of English Poets, Vol. +i.+ p. 11.]

With the exception of Somerville, “who has shown,” as Dr. Johnson observes, “by the subjects which his poetry has adorned, that it is practicable to be at once a skilful sportsman and a man of letters,” I have extracted very little from writers of the last century: but the natural historians, poetic and prosaic authors of the olden time, whose works are not of very common occurrence in our libraries, have afforded much information confirmatory of Arrian’s opinions. These selections, as well as those from ancient English authors, incorporated with this preface, have been left in their original spelling, so happily expressed by Mr. Ellis as “that fortuitous combination of letters, which the original transcribers or printers had assigned to them.”

[Sidenote: Plin. in Præfat. Vespas.]

A knowledge of what others have written on a subject on which we ourselves are about to write appears indispensable. “Although I were very much experienced,” says the translator of Gratius, “in any art, and were apt to conceive a good opinion of my own ability therein, yet being to publish a discourse concerning it, I was obliged to inform myself of what others had formerly proposed in the same matter, as far as may conveniently be attained. There are some who esteem it glory to be thought to have declined any other helps but their own wit, which I should charge upon myself as negligence.” Far be such self-sufficiency from me! I am ever glad to avail myself of the opinions and sentiments of others; and in so doing, to give the merit of originality to its rightful owner, and not to a modern plagiarist. “Est enim benignum ut arbitror, et plenum ingenui pudoris, fateri per quos profeceris, non ut plerique ex iis, quos attigi, fecerunt. Scito enim conferentem autores me deprehendisse à juratissimis et proximis veteres transcriptos ad verbum, neque nominatos,” &c.

[Sidenote: Chaucer, Assembl. of Fowls.]

For out of the old fieldis, as men saith, Cometh all this new corn from year to year; And out of olde bookis, in good faith, Cometh all this new science that men lere.

[Sidenote: Ausonius Symmacho. Griphus.]

Few will think me sparing of citation: but if there be such a one, and well disposed to a brother courser, “si bonus est, quæ omisi, non oblita mihi, sed præterita existimet. Dehinc qualiscunque est, cogitet secum, quàm multa de his non reperisset, si ipse quæsisset. Sciat enim me non omnibus erutis usum;” I hope he will not add with Ausonius, “et quibusdam oblatis abusum.”

[Sidenote: On Gardening Miscell. Pt. +ii.+]

Should curiosity induce any one to inquire who is the translator of this treatise, let it suffice, that he is an humble individual of retired habits, too utterly unknown to the world to expect that any additional interest will be imparted to his labours by the publication of the name of their author:—that he is in the enjoyment of the ease and freedom of a private scene, where, in the felicitous language of Sir W. Temple, “a man may go his own way and his own pace:”—that his pursuits at home and abroad are rationally diversified. “For honest pleasures,” like Brathwait’s gentleman, “he is neither so Stoicall as wholly to contemne them, nor so Epicureall as too sensually to affect them.” “There is no delight on mountaine, vale, coppice, or river, whereof he makes not an usefull and contemplative pleasure;”

[Sidenote: Darcius Venusinus.]

At sylvæ gelidique specus, cava lustra ferarum, Ruraque, et arcanâ labentia flumina valle Sunt animo!

[Sidenote: Plin. Panegyr. Trajan. 81.]

But his “hour-beguiling pastime,” when not occupied in any of the more important duties of life, “si quandò cum influentibus negotiis paria fecit, instar refectionis,” is that of a theoretical and practical courser—desirous of acquiring, in the sedentary retirement of his library, the science of active enjoyment in the field; and of elucidating the mysteries of the leash, and the pertinent anecdotes of animal biography, by collecting in one point of view the scattered glimmerings of classical antiquity, and the illustrations of more modern days, relative to an elegant and manly diversion:—directing the whole under the guidance of experience, and the name of the father of the leash, to the advancement of human recreation.

[Sidenote: Terent. Andr. act. +i.+ sc. +i.+ 28.]

Quod plerique omnes faciunt adolescentuli, Ut animum ad aliquod studium adjungant, aut equos Alere, aut canes ad venandum, aut ad philosophos: Horum ille nihil egregiè præter cætera Studebat, et tamen omnia hæc mediocriter.

The translator has his hack, his greyhound, and his slipper, (κυναγωγὸς,) participating of the unimportant character of their master, and equally devoid of interest in the eyes of the public. All, therefore, are consigned to the same fate, and merged in one common namelessness; spite of the example of Hippamon of old, in the metrical commemoration of his sporting establishment:

[Sidenote: Apud Pollucis Onomasticon.]

Ἀνδρὶ μὲν Ἱππάμων ὄνομ’ ἦν, ἵππῳ δὲ Πόδαργος, καὶ κυνὶ Λήθαργος, καὶ θεράποντι Βάβης.

With regard to the Appendix,

Si quis tamen hæc quoque, si quis Captus amore leget,

I have only a few remarks to make. To many, though mere sciolists in natural history, it must have appeared, during their progress in classical reading, that much ignorance of the varieties of the canine race is shown by annotators. With the gentlemen è societate Jesu, and others who have favoured us with their expositions of the ancients, there is too great an inclination to generalize both as to the names and properties of the canine tribe. The “veloces Spartæ catuli” are all “lévriers,” though there was not, according to Arrian, (and he is supported by Blumenbach,) a greyhound in the whole of ancient Greece: and certainly as “the babbling echo mocked them” in their quick-scented pursuit of the Laconian quarry, they could be no more entitled to the appellation, than any sharp-nosed mongrel, bred in modern days, between a sagacious yelping hound, and a prick-eared shepherd’s cur. Upon the same principle of generalization, all truculent Molossi, C. Custodes, Pecuarii, &c. are by these worthies at once dismissed as Gallicè “dogues,” Anglicè “mastiffs,” without an attempt to particularize their respective attributes in warfare, or the chase, or the economy of rural life.

[Sidenote: Macbeth, act +iii.+ sc. +i.+]

Hounds, and greyhounds, mongrels, spaniels, curs, Shoughs, water-rugs, and demi-wolves, are cleped All by the name of dogs; the valued file Distinguishes the swift, the slow, the subtle, The housekeeper, the hunter, every one According to the gift which bounteous nature Hath in him closed; whereby he does receive Particular addition, from the bill That writes them all alike.

This confusion of nomenclature might pass at school, but not longer. Subsequent experience, and the reflection of maturer years would direct the attention of many literary ruralists to the occasional correction of errors in the canine vocabulary. Such at least has been the case with the writer of these pages; and he conceives that errors, apparent to him, must have been manifest to others. Nor is a misapprehension of some of the names and qualities of the individuals of this multifarious genus

[Sidenote: Gratii Cyneg. 154.]

(Mille canum patriæ, ductique ab origine mores Cuique suâ)

[Sidenote: A New Discourse of a Stale Subject, &c.]

to be wondered at in scholiasts and commentators; when we consider their monkish habits of indolent seclusion, and how unfit and unwilling they were to ascertain by actual experiment, whether Pliny was correct in affirming that Minerva was as fond of traversing the hills as Diana. “These bookish fellowes,” in the words of Sir John Harrington, “could judge of no sports, but within the verge of the fair fields of Helicon, Pindus, and Parnassus.” Their practice in the field was not commensurate with their scholastic knowledge. Very few carried their note-books, like the learned and indefatigable Vlitius to the covert side, and examined the difficulties of rural poetry, and obscure allusions to canine instinct in the field of experience. And unless they did so, they had little chance of becoming acquainted with the sylvan goddess, who tells us in her petition to her sire, that she rarely descends from her mountain haunts into the cities of men;