Book xv., the note 13.—The note10 Book xvi., of that volume, and by Homer: Summary, Meaning & Analysis
This text isn't a poem in the usual way — it's actually two editorial prefaces for a 19th-century edition of Cowper's English translation of Homer's *Iliad*.
The poem
the note 14, Book xix., of the same. ADVERTISEMENT TO SOUTHEY’S EDITION It is incumbent upon the present Editor to state the reasons which have induced him, between two editions of Cowper’s Homer, differing so materially from each other that they might almost be deemed different versions, to prefer the first. Whoever has perused the Translator’s letters, must have perceived that he had considered with no ordinary care the scheme of his versification, and that when he resolved upon altering it in a second edition, it was in deference to the opinion of others. It seems to the Editor that Cowper’s own judgment is entitled to more respect, than that of any, or all his critics; and that the version which he composed when his faculties were most active and his spirits least subject to depression,—indeed in the happiest part of his life,—ought not to be superseded by a revisal, or rather reconstruction, which was undertaken three years before his death,—not like the first translation as “a pleasant work, an innocent luxury,” the cheerful and delightful occupation of hope and ardor and ambition,—but as a “hopeless employment,” a task to which he gave “all his miserable days, and often many hours of the night,” seeking to beguile the sense of utter wretchedness, by altering as if for the sake of alteration. The Editor has been confirmed in this opinion by the concurrence of every person with whom he has communicated on the subject. Among others he takes the liberty of mentioning Mr. Cary, whose authority upon such a question is of especial weight, the Translator of Dante being the only one of our countrymen who has ever executed a translation of equal magnitude and not less difficulty, with the same perfect fidelity and admirable skill. In support of this determination, the case of Tasso may be cited as curiously in point. The great Italian poet altered his Jerusalem like Cowper, against his own judgment, in submission to his critics: he made the alteration in the latter years of his life, and in a diseased state of mind; and he proceeded upon the same prescribed rule of smoothing down his versification, and removing all the elisions. The consequence has been that the reconstructed poem is utterly neglected, and has rarely, if ever, been reprinted, except in the two great editions of his collected works; while the original poem has been and continues to be in such demand, that the most diligent bibliographer might vainly attempt to enumerate all the editions through which it has passed. EDITOR’S NOTE. It will be seen by the Advertisement to Southey’s edition of Cowper’s Translation of the Iliad, that he has the highest opinion of its merits, and that he also gives the preference to Cowper’s unrevised edition. The Editor of the present edition is happy to offer it to the public under the sanction of such high authority. In the addition of notes I have availed myself of the learning of various commentators (Pope, Coleridge, Müller, etc.) and covet no higher praise than the approval of my judgment in the selection. Those bearing the signature E.P.P., were furnished by my friend Miss Peabody, of Boston. I would also acknowledge my obligations to C.C. Felton, Eliot Professor of Greek in Harvard University. It should be observed, that the remarks upon the language of the poem refer to it in the original. For a definite treatment of the character of each deity introduced in the Iliad, and for the fable of the Judgment of Paris, which was the primary cause of the Trojan war, the reader is referred to “Grecian and Roman Mythology.” It is intended that this edition of the Iliad shall be followed by a similar one of the Odyssey, provided sufficient encouragement is given by the demand for the present volume.
This text isn't a poem in the usual way — it's actually two editorial prefaces for a 19th-century edition of Cowper's English translation of Homer's *Iliad*. The first preface is by Robert Southey, who shares his reasons for selecting Cowper's original, unrevised translation instead of the later revised version. The second preface, written by an unnamed American editor, reinforces that choice and acknowledges the scholars who contributed to the notes.
Line-by-line
It is incumbent upon the present Editor to state the reasons...
Whoever has perused the Translator's letters, must have perceived...
It seems to the Editor that Cowper's own judgment is entitled to more respect...
The Editor has been confirmed in this opinion by the concurrence of every person...
In support of this determination, the case of Tasso may be cited as curiously in point.
It will be seen by the Advertisement to Southey's edition of Cowper's Translation...
In the addition of notes I have availed myself of the learning of various commentators...
For a definite treatment of the character of each deity introduced in the Iliad...
Tone & mood
The tone is consistently measured, respectful, and subtly persuasive. Southey's writing reflects a clear conviction, aiming to guide you through calm reasoning instead of heated debate. In contrast, the American editor's note carries a more deferential tone — he acknowledges Southey's significant reputation. Both voices exhibit a Victorian editorial seriousness: thoughtful, somewhat formal, yet never lacking warmth.
Symbols & metaphors
- The two editions of Cowper's Homer — They capture the struggle between a creator's true voice and the urge to fit in with outside opinions. The first edition shows Cowper at his most vibrant, while the second reflects his surrender to critics during a time of mental anguish.
- Tasso's Jerusalem Delivered — Used as a historical reflection of Cowper's situation, Tasso's overlooked revision cautions that a significant work changed under pressure—contrary to the poet's own instincts—often loses the essence that originally made it remarkable.
- Cowper's letters — The letters serve as direct evidence of the poet's own thoughts, which Southey views as more authoritative than any critic's opinion. They provide the editorial argument with its moral weight.
Historical context
William Cowper released his blank-verse translation of Homer's *Iliad* and *Odyssey* in 1791, and it received acclaim as a more faithful alternative to Alexander Pope's earlier rhymed version. In the later years of his life, marked by deep depression, Cowper worked on revising the translation at the request of critics who sought smoother, more consistent verse. He passed away in 1800 before he could finish the revisions. Robert Southey, the Poet Laureate of England at the time, edited a posthumous edition in the early 19th century, strongly advocating for the restoration of the original text. The American edition presented here followed Southey's approach, including scholarly notes from Harvard classicists and other sources. The fragment labeled "Book xv., note 13" and related references at the top of the text likely come from the catalogue or index of the original volume's materials.
FAQ
You’re correct to point that out. This text isn’t a poem — it’s actually two editorial prefaces that accompany a 19th-century edition of William Cowper's English translation of Homer's *Iliad*. It’s listed under Homer's name since the entire edition is his work, but the prefaces were penned by Robert Southey and an unidentified American editor.
William Cowper (1731–1800) was a highly regarded English poet during the late 18th century. His translation of Homer sought to stay truer to the Greek original compared to Alexander Pope's well-known rhymed version. The two editions are quite different in rhythm and style — the first was created when Cowper was in good spirits and full of enthusiasm, while the second was a difficult revision made during a time of severe depression. Southey suggests that the liveliness of the first version stems directly from those circumstances.
Torquato Tasso was a 16th-century Italian poet known for his epic *Jerusalem Delivered*, a hallmark of Renaissance literature. Later in life, facing criticism, he revised it into *Jerusalem Conquered*, making adjustments to the verse similar to what Cowper experienced. However, this rewrite quickly faded into obscurity, while the original continued to be widely read. Southey points to this as an example: revising a masterpiece due to external pressure, and against one's better judgment, often undermines what made it exceptional.
Henry Francis Cary (1772–1844) translated Dante's *Divine Comedy* into English blank verse — a task that is as challenging as translating Homer. Southey notes that Cary supported his editorial decision because Cary, having undertaken similar work, appreciates more than most critics the value of a translator's instincts.
He includes scholarly annotations, referencing commentators like Pope, Coleridge, and the German classicist Müller. He also acknowledges Miss Peabody from Boston and C.C. Felton, a Greek professor at Harvard, for particular notes. He directs readers to a companion mythology text for context on the gods and the Judgment of Paris, and hints that an edition of the *Odyssey* might be released soon.
The Judgment of Paris is the myth that sparked the Trojan War. Paris, a prince of Troy, had to decide who was the most beautiful goddess among Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite. He picked Aphrodite, who in turn helped him win Helen, the wife of Menelaus, the Greek king. Helen's abduction led the Greeks to launch their expedition to Troy. This backstory is mentioned because it gives readers important context for understanding the *Iliad*.
Blank verse is poetry that doesn't rhyme, written in iambic pentameter — ten syllables per line following a set stress pattern. Cowper chose this form to align with Homer's unrhymed Greek style. Critics at the time typically favored smoother, more polished lines that used fewer contractions and elisions (where syllables blend together). Cowper's revisions aimed to meet these preferences, but Southey contends that this smoothing-out removed the original's vitality.
Those entries resemble catalogue or index references from the original printed volume — they point to specific footnotes in Books XV, XVI, and XIX of the *Iliad*. It seems they are metadata or navigation markers that were included during the digitization process, rather than being part of the preface itself.