Seventeenth-Century Translations of Juvenal

Abstract

A MONG numerous cross-currents of seventeenth-century writing (the clich6 is perhaps inevitable), there are two which are often closely connected: satire and translation. It is main purpose of this article to consider some of problems this relationship produces, by a study of seventeenth-century translations of Juvenal. For greater clarity and ease of handling discussion will be largely limited to translations of three satires only-Satires 1, 2, and 10. Throughout late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Juvenal's reputation was high and interest in his work considerable. To mention no others, Elizabethans such as Lodge and Nashe knew him and quoted him; antiquarians such as Selden and Camden regarded him highly; Hall was clearly under his influence in writing of Virgidemiarum; Jonson borrowed from Satire 10 for some passages in Sejanus' and owned a late manuscript.2 He is praised for his deep judgment and grave sentences;3 his satires are far better than those of Horace; and though he be sententiously tart, yet is his phrase cleare and open;4 he is the best Satyrist and wittiest man of all Latin writers.' Boccalini, whose Ragguagli di Parnasso were popular reading in second half of century, to judge by number and variety of translations, saw not why Italian poets should so much presume upon their skill in Satyrical Poetry, there not being any one of them who might deservedly be compared to Juvenal;6 and preface to Dryden's translation of 1693 has a measured and balanced appraisal of Juvenal, Horace, and Persius.7 All this being so, it is surprising that first complete translation of Juvenal into English did not appear until as late as 1647, when Stapylton published his version as 7uvenal's Sixteen Satyrs, or a Survey of Manners