The Sun.
London, England, 1846-11-28 00:00:00

LITERATURE.

I IR ROMAN TRAITOR, a True Tale of the Re-'
By H. W. Herbert, author of " Oliver Groin-
..ell." 3 Vo/s.
Very correctly does the author of these volumes
a%Jak of his work—" a Roman novel of the classic
yes"—as one " difficult of execution and doubtful
of success." Its difficulty has probably been
manifested to him by experience, while its
dubious chances of popularity may be inferred from
its design. It labours under two disadvantages. In
the first place, although the taste of the novel
reading public, has greatly improved of late years,
and although political topics are freely discussed,
and historical events fully described within the limits
of three volumes, yet the subject of this work, the
time, the place, and the chief actors, are scarcely
calculated to interest the general reader—they are
almost too historical ; while the numerous details
(however important in themselves), and, above all,
the speeches in the Senate (however appropriate, or
however excellent), tending to confirm the impres-
sion that he is reading a history and not a novel, de-
stroy the interest of the book, and defeat the object
of the author. On the other hand, to the classical
student, or the lover of history, for whom their
theme would have most attractions, these
volumes must appear quite superfluous. No modern
embellishments can approve attractive to those ac-
quainted with the stirring scenes of ancient times, as
pourtrayed by the old masters. No English version
of Cicero's orations can be desired by those familiar
with them in their native eloquence—who cares for a
portrait in presence of the original ? Against
difficulties arising from these opposite causes—from
the erudition of the one class, and the insouciance of
the other—has the author of a classical novel to con-
tend. In the " Roman Traitor," however, these
lisadvantages are in some degree counterbalanced, by
many qualities entitling it to favourable consideration.
In the first place, it is valuable as a picture (more or
ess correct) of the Romans as they were—as they
were in the last days of the Republic, during what
may be almost termed their state of transition, when
the internal glory was being exchanged for the ex-
ternal—real grandeur for empty glitter. We are
he introduced to them in their domestic life—a
strange compound of barbarism and effeminacy ; we
behold them in their warlike sports ; we listen to their
eloquent harangues, and to their familiar discourses,
"at the charmed senate and the festive board." We
sympathise with and admire the elevated sentiments
and noble conduct of those Romans, truly worthy of
their name, while with ineffable horror and disgust
we turn away from details (many of which we could
wish had been omitted) of the appalling cruelty and
gross immorality which disgraced too many of those
—compatriots of Cicero and of Cato—bearing the once
glorious title of citizens of Rome. We would fain
hope that Mr. Herbert has somewhat overdrawn this
portion—nevertheless, taking it as a whole, his picture
of Rome is peculiarly valuable just now. Now when,
like the fair city of the Tiber, our country is conspi-
cuous for its wealth, its grandeur, and its power; and
there are not wanting those who, judging from the
past, would construe that prosperity into an omen of
its downfall. Let such but carefully contemplate the
social condition of civilised Rome, and then compare,
or rather contrast, it with our own : they will find
little resemblance, they will find little cause of alarm.
Successful in war—rich in territories and treasures—.
their country the acknowledged " mistress of the
orld"—the citizens of Rome, in the days of pros-
perity, relinquished the practice of those stern vir-
ties and pure morals which had characterised them
during long years of energy and exertion. Possessed
of unbounded wealth, their only care was to obtain
with it the meanest gratifications : luxurious dainties
and costly apparelling, constituted their chief delight.
The Roman was no longer conspicuous for the noble
feelings which animated his breast, but for the gorge-
ous robe which enveloped it. Such, at least, was the
condition of a great portion of that once glorious people.
Overcome by prosperity, they plunged into all manner
of excess : the effects of their own triumphs thus
becoming the cause of their defeat. With us, it is
very different. Like them, we have obtained great
prosperity and power : like them, we have reached a
state of high civilization—but its effects are of a very
different kind. Like them, we have raised a goodly
edifice : but not like them, do we devote all our time
and talents, all our wealth and energies, to adorning
and embellishing its exterior—increasing its already
great elevation, adding gilded domes and stately
pinnacles, till, for want of adequate snpport, the
glorious fabric totters to its fall. Our exertions are
otherwise employed : not satisfied with adding to the
external attractions, we look within. We remedy,
we enlarge, we improve the internal portion, but,
above all, we are greatly extending the base. We are
strengthening the foundations on which all depends,
and thus, so far from proving dangerous to the welfare
of the State, our wealth and prosperity only serve to
render it more secure. Not like Rome do we de-
grade our senators and citizens into Sybarites ; we
are elevating our people into citizens and senators.
Some such thoughts may be suggested by a perusal
of the "Roman Traitor, although most probably
such suggestions were not intended by the author ;
for, to judge from a few incidental remarks, his
opinions do not err on the side of too much liberality.
Bat to return to his work. Impressed with
the arduous nature of his task—a Roman
novel of the classic ages—Mr. Herbert has
apparently spared no pains to render these
volumes deserving of such an appellation. lhe style
is vigorous and impressive, and if at times somewhat
too elaborate, and even formal, it is not ill in accord-
ance with the theme. Some of the dialogues and
descriptions are very forcible and emphatic. The
plot is, of course, partly fictitious; the greater portion
of it, however, is strictly historical. The narrative
of Sallust has been closely followed, though the
arrangement of the incidents has been, apparently,
borrowed from Ben Jonson, the novel commencing
almost with the same scene, and giving translations of
the very same speeches as does his poem (as he calls
it) of "Catiline." Of these translations it is
hardly necessary to speak ; they are perhaps ap-
propriately introduced—a work intended to represent
Rome and the Romans would be incomplete without
specimens of the speeches in the senate. The first
and longest is Cicero's famous oration against Cati-
line—the sentepce of banishment. This has been
very faithfully translated, indeed almost too much so,
for in some cases the exactitude of the translation
destroys the veri-similitude. The same words do not
always convey the same ideas, and synonymous ideas
may be expressed in very various manners. But al-
lowing Mr. Herbert the merit of having expressed
both words and ideas correctly, it is in the manner of
expressing them that he has occasionally failed,
and no wonder : it is surely no easy task
to translate Cicero. For instance, at the
commencement of that impressive appeal—that
unpremeditated burst of eloquence, when, on the
conspirator daring to appear in his place in the
Senate, the Consul indignantly turns to him,
" Quosque tandem akutere, Catalina, patientia nostra
Mr. Herbert, anxious to preserve the majestic and
sonorous beauty of the latin oration, has translated
it almost literally, and, by so doing, has destroyed the
earnest and emphatic brevity for which it is no less
remarkable. The whole force of that famous ejacu-
lation—so eloquent from its very lack of words—
" 0 tempora ! 0 mores !" is quite lost in the trans-
lation. The conclusion of the discourse is, however,
far better than the commencement; not following
the text so scrupulously, it is more like what Cicero
may be supposed to have said—earnest, eloquent, and
most animated, superior to Ben Jonson's version
of the same. We are hardly satisfied with the cha-
racter of the Roman Traitor, as delineated in the
work which bears his name—it is that of a monster
not of a man. History, it is true, has transmitted
the name of Catiline to the reprobation of posterity,
yet he could hardly have been guilty of the enormi-
ties here imputed to him ; or, if so, it is not in such
a work that they should have been so prominently
brought forward. He is introduced to us as a Ro-
man traitor, yet that title is apparently no more his
due than would be that of the Roman assassin, or
murderer, or any other term of reproach. If the au-
thor of Eugene Aram, and others, have been cen-
sured for making vice appear attractive, by their
too favourable portraits of its perpetrators ; Mr.
Herbert has, from a totally opposite cause, pro-
duced nearly the same effect. He has failed
in exciting our horror for the crime by concentrating
it all upon the criminal. Our disgust for Catiline
himself is so great, that we have none to spare for him
in his character of traitor ; indeed, his treason appears
to be one of his least crimes. Some of the other cha-
ractersl are very forcibly conceived—that of Catiline 's
daughter is, perhaps, the most interesting. Reared
by her father and his fitting wife Orestilla, in the
midst of vice of every kind, her conduct and character
are such as might be expected from her education, till,
by the powerful influence of love, her heart becomes
purified, and her whole being renewed. The battle
df Pistoria—the ("losing scene of the conspirator's
career—is very forcibly pourtrayed, but the account
of Catiline' valourous conduct, his emphatic address
to his soldiers, his gallant bearing, and, lastly, his
daring onset in the thickest of the fight, almost alone—
" Arca'd with a glory high as his despair,"
is somewhat marred by the almost revolting picture of
his death. With many faults, many of which are almost
incidental to the character of the work itself, it will
be seen that the 1, Roman Traitor possesses many
good qualities ; it certainly evinces no inconsiderable
M
abilities. Were r. Herbert less ambitiousil he would
do better ; and though he tellsthat
be h
e will find conso-
lation, if defeated, in the fact s"
run for a
high prize," we are inclined to think he would find it
More satisfactory to strive for a more
which he would be more likely to obtain. one,
The fol-
Jowing are specimens of the delineations .of Roman
;men and manners :

" ROME.

"As she had gradually rendered herself, by the
exertion of indomitable valour, the supreme mistress of
every foreign power that bordered on the Alediterrangan,