Reversing the order of things, suppose these lines read by a Greek of twenty-seven centuries ago; suppose him even well acquainted with the English tongue--could he appreciate their beauty? Let the Greek attempt to _translate_ the lines into his own language. He begins with _stark_. The nice excellence of this word he knows nothing of. He finds that its meaning is somewhere between _stout_ and _swift_, and gives the Greek word "οχυς." The first downward step has been taken. He next pounces upon the term, _moss-troopers_. He translates this "Ληστης ιπποτʼ ανδρειος." _Couched_, is an idiom which he cannot translate; he gives us by way of equivalent, "εβαλλε." _Border lance_, is beyond his version. He contents himself with a simple "δορυ,"--for how is the word _Border_ to be translated? It is a word depending on collateral matters for its meaning. These matters--involving the storied reyd and feud--must be known before the word can be understood; and twenty centuries would blot out all remembrance of the Percy and Douglas feuds. The word _Border_ is therefore, wholly lost in the version. The Greek version would read when completed-- Ληστης, καλεδονος οχυς ην ιπποτʼ ανδρειος ʼΟυ, το δορυ μηδεις αθεμιστον, αμεινον εβαλλε, which may be re-translated into This Scot was a swift horse-riding robber, And no one balanced spear by knee better, --verses as little resembling the original as "an eyas does a true hawk." Translated into Latin, the original lines would read Scotticus fuit eques, strenuus raptoque pollutus Quo nullus hastam a genu tam apte librabat, as great a failure as the Greek. If Scott would suffer so much in the eyes of the Greek and Latin reader, it is only fair to presume that Homer and Virgil suffer as much in our eyes. We perceive the merits of our modern poet; we are blind to the merits of the ancient. We are consequently incapable of judging between them. Mr. Grimckè's comparison is unreasonable. {315} II. "Humility is certainly beautiful, but vanity is not always uncomely."--_Anon._