The examiner. [volume] (Louisville, Ky.) 1847-1849, 1847-07-10

! whilst giving an overbalance Of the accent
, to the last. The Paradise Lost" being
, printed during Millions blindness. did not
receive the full an consistent benefit Of his
spelling reforms. which (as | have contend
ed) certainly arose partly in the imperfec.
tons Of typography at that ara; but s,ch
changes as had happened most to impress,
his ear with sense Of his importance, he
took special trouble. even under all the
disadvantages Of his darkness, to have riqor.
ously adopted. He must have astonished
the compOsitors. though not quite 50 much
as the tiger-cat Ritson, or the Mr.. (viz.
monastery Pinkerton-each after his kind
l-astonished their compositors.
| But the caprice Of Mr. Landor is shown
most Of all upon Greek names Nous Gu
tres say aristotle, and are quite content
with ii, until We migrate into some extra
superfnc world; but this title will not do
for him: "Aristoteles' it must be. And
why 50? Because, answers the Landor. if
|once consent to say Aristotle, then sm
pledged to go the whole hog; and perhaps
the next man meet is EInpedocles, whom,
in shat case, must call Empslocle. Well,
do 50. Call him Empedocle: it will rot
break his back, which seems broad enough.
But, now, mark the contradictions in which
MIR. Lander is soon landed. lie says, as
every body says, Terrence, and not Teren
thus, Horace, and not Horati,,s. but he must
leave off such horrid practices, because he
dares not call Lucretius by the analogous
name Of Lucrece, since that would be put
ting q she instead Of he nor Propertius
by the name of Properce, because that
would be. speaking French instead Of Eng
llsh. Next he says. and continually he
says, Virgil for Virgilius. But on that prin.
ciPle, he ought to say, Waller for Valerius
and Yet again he ought not, because, as he
says Tully and not Tull for Tulius, 50 also
is he bound, in Christian equity, 10 say Val
cry for Waller; but he cannot say either
Valer Or Valery. So here We are all in a
mess. Thirdly, | charge him with saying
Ovid for Ovidlus: which i do, which every
body does, but which he must not do, for,
II ne means 10 persist in that, then, upon
his own argument from analogy, he must
call Didlus Julianus by the shocking name
of Did, which is the same thing as Tit
since L is ID soft. Did was a very great
man indeed, and for very short time IL
deed. Probably Did was the only man
that ever bade for an empire, and no mis-
take, al a public auction. Think Of Dds
bidding for the Roman empire; nay, think
also OF Dds having the lot actually knock
ed down to him; and Of Dds going home
to dinner with the lot in his pocket 1t
makes one perspire TO think thar, if the rea-
der or myself had been living at that time,
and had been prompted by some whim
within us 10 bid agains, him, we-that is,
he or should actually have come down
TO poaerity by the abominable name Of
Anti All Of us in England say Livy
when speaking Of the great historian, not
Livius. Yet Livius Andronicus it would
be impossible 10 indulge with that brotherly
name of Livy. Marcus Antonius is called
mot BY Shakespeare only, bu, BY all the
world-Mark Antony; but who is il tina,
ever called Marcus Brutus BY the affection
ale name Of Mark Bruiel keep Your dis
lance" We say 10 tina, very doubtful brute,
land expect no pet names from us Fl
nally. apply the principle Of Authorization
involved in the names Pliny, Livy, Tully.
all substituting for ius to Marius-thal
grimmest Of grim visions tha, rises up TO Us
from The phaniasmagoria Of Roman history.
Figure 10 yourself. reader. that truculeni
face, trenched and scared with hostile swords,
carving thunder in its ominous eyebrows.
and frightening armies mile off with its
scowl, being saluled BY the tenderest OF
feminine names, as 'My Mary"
| Not only, therefore, j. MIR. Landor in
consistent in these innovations, but the In
novatons themselves. supPosing them all
lharmonized. and established. would but
plough up the landmarks OF old hereditary
feelings. We Learn oitentimes. by man S
bearing a good-naiured sobriquet amongs,
his comrades, tina; he is a kind hearted, So
cial creature, popular with them all. And
Ii, is an illustration of the same tendency,
! ,ha, the scale Of popularity for the classical
authors amongst Our fathers, is registered
tolerably well. in gToss general way. by
the difference between having and not hav-
ing familiar name. IL we except the first
Cesar, the mighty Caius julius. who was
! too majestic to invite familiarity, though too
gracious to have repealed it, there is no au-
thor whom our iorefathers loved, but has
won a sort Of Christian name in the land.
Homer. and Hesiod, and Pindar, we all
saw, We cancel the alien us; but We never
say Theocnt for Thcocritus. Anacreon re-
t mains rigidly Grecian marble; but that is
only because his name is not OF plastic
: form-else everybody loves the sad old fel-
. low. The same bar to familiarity existed
, l. in the names Of the tragic poets, exceP,
, perhaps for Eschylus; who, however, like
: Cesar, is too awful for cafessing name.
e But Roman names were. generally, more
$ flexible. Livy and Sullust have ever been
q favorites with men: Livy with everybody;
Sallust in degree that may be called eH
a travagant, with many celebrated Frenchmen
/, as the President des BrosSes, and in our OWL
= DAYS with NJ. Leminier, most eloquen
e and original writer ("Eiudss Historiquss'
!. and two centuries ago, with the greatest o.
J. men, John Milton. in degree that seem:
!, to me absolutely mysterious. There wri
}. tiers, are baptized into our sOciety-havt
!. gained a settlement in our parish; wher
!, YOU cali man Jack, and not MIR. John
!, Its plain you like him. But, as 10 tn
i. gloomy Tacitls, our fathers like not. HI
IA ,yas too VINEGAR a fellow for them. nothinI