The Lusiad; Or, The Discovery of India, an Epic Poem
[21] Richard Fanshaw, Esq., afterwards Sir Richard, was English
Ambassador both at Madrid and Lisbon. He had a taste for literature, and
translated from the Italian several pieces which were of service in the
refinement of our poetry. Though his Lusiad, by the dedication of it to
William, Earl of Strafford, dated May 1, 1655, seems as if published by
himself, we are told by the editor of his Letters, that "during the
unsettled times of our anarchy, some of his MSS., falling by misfortune
into unskilful hands, were printed and published without his knowledge
or consent, and before he could give them his last finishing strokes:
such was his translation of the Lusiad." He can never have enough of
conceits, low allusions, and expressions. When gathering of flowers is
simply mentioned (C. 9, st. 24) he gives it, "gather'd flowers by
pecks;" and the Indian Regent is avaricious (C. 8, st. 95)--
_Meaning a better penny thence to get._
But enough of these have already appeared in the notes. It may be
necessary to add, that the version of Fanshaw, though the Lusiad very
particularly requires them, was given to the public without one note.
[22] Some liberties of a less poetical kind, however, require to be
mentioned. In Homer and Virgil's lists of slain warriors, Dryden and
Pope have omitted several names which would have rendered English
versification dull and tiresome. Several allusions to ancient history
and fable have for this reason been abridged; e.g. in the prayer of GAMA
(Book 6) the mention of Paul, "thou who deliveredst Paul and defendest
him from quicksands and wild waves--
_Das scyrtes arenosas e ondas feas_--"
is omitted. However excellent in the original, the prayer in English
would lose both its dignity and ardour. Nor let the critic, if he find
the meaning of Camoëns in some instances altered, imagine that he has
found a blunder in the translator. He who chooses to see a slight
alteration of this kind will find an instance, which will give him an
idea of others, in Canto 8, st. 48, and another in Canto 7, st. 41. It
was not to gratify the dull few, whose greatest pleasure in reading a
translation is to see what the author exactly says; it was to give a
poem that might live in the English language, which was the ambition of
the translator. And, for the same reason, he has not confined himself to
the Portuguese or Spanish pronunciation of proper names. Regardless,
therefore, of Spanish pronunciation, the translator has accented
Granáda, Evóra, etc. in the manner which seemed to him to give most
dignity to English versification. In the word Sofala he has even
rejected the authority of Milton, and followed the more sonorous usage
of Fanshaw. Thus Sir Richard: "Against Sofála's batter'd fort." Which is
the more sonorous there can be no dispute.
[23] Judges xviii. 7, 9, 27, 28.
[24] This ferocity of savage manners affords a philosophical account how
the most distant and inhospitable climes were first peopled. When a
Romulus erects a monarchy and makes war on his neighbours, some
naturally fly to the wilds. As their families increase, the stronger
commit depredations on the weaker; and thus from generation to
generation, they who either dread just punishment or unjust oppression,
fly farther and farther in search of that protection which is only to be
found in civilized society.
[25] The author of that voluminous work, _Histoire Philosophique et
Politique des Etablissements et du Commerce des Européens dans les deux
Indes_, is one of the many who assert that savage life is happier than
civil. His reasons are thus abridged: The savage has no care or fear for
the future; his hunting and fishing give him a certain subsistence. He
sleeps sound, and knows not the diseases of cities. He cannot want what
he does not desire, nor desire that which he does not know, and vexation
or grief do not enter his soul. He is not under the control of a
superior in his actions; in a word, says our author, the savage only
suffers the evils of nature.
If the civilized, he adds, enjoy the elegancies of life, have better
food, and are more comfortably defended against the change of seasons,
it is use which makes these things necessary, and they are purchased by
the painful labours of the multitude who are the basis of society. To
what outrages is not the man of civil life exposed? if he has property,
it is in danger; and government or authority is, according to our
author, the greatest of all evils. If there is a famine in North
America, the savage, led by the wind and the sun, can go to a better
clime; but in the horrors of famine, war, or pestilence, the ports and
barriers of civilized states place the subjects in a prison, where they
must perish. There still remains an infinite difference between the lot
of the civilized and the savage; a difference, all entirely to the
disadvantage of society, that injustice which reigns in the inequality
of fortunes and conditions.
[26] The innocent simplicity of the Americans in their conferences with
the Spaniards, and the horrid cruelties they suffered from them, divert
our view from their complete character. Almost everything was horrid in
their civil customs and religious rites. In some tribes, to cohabit with
their mothers, sisters, and daughters was esteemed the means of domestic
peace. In others, catamites were maintained in every village; they went
from house to house as they pleased, and it was unlawful to refuse them
what victuals they chose. In every tribe, the captives taken in war were
murdered with the most wanton cruelty, and afterwards devoured by the
victors. Their religious rites were, if possible, still more horrid. The
abominations of ancient Moloch were here outnumbered; children, virgins,
slaves, and captives bled on different altars, to appease their various
gods. If there was a scarcity of human victims, the priests announced
that the gods were dying of thirst for human blood. And, to prevent a
threatened famine, the kings of Mexico were obliged to make war on the
neighbouring states. The prisoners of either side died by the hand of
the priest. But the number of the Mexican sacrifices so greatly exceeded
those of other nations, that the Tlascalans, who were hunted down for
this purpose, readily joined Cortez with about 200,000 men, and enabled
him to make one great sacrifice of the Mexican nation. Who that views
Mexico, steeped in her own blood, can restrain the emotion which
whispers to him, This is the hand of Heaven!--By the number of these
sacred butcheries, one would think that cruelty was the greatest
amusement of Mexico. At the dedication of the temple of Vitzliputzli,
A.D. 1486, no less than 64,080 human victims were sacrificed in four
days. And, according to the best accounts, the annual sacrifices of
Mexico required several thousands. The skulls of the victims sometimes
were hung on strings which reached from tree to tree around their
temples, and sometimes were built up in towers and cemented with lime.
In some of these towers Andrew de Tapia one day counted 136,000 skulls.
During the war with Cortez they increased their usual sacrifices, till
priest and people were tired of their bloody religion.--See, for ample
justification of these statements, the _Histories of the Conquest of
Mexico and Peru_, by Prescott.--_Ed._
[27] Mahommed Ali Khan, Nawab of the Carnatic, declared, "I met the
British with that freedom of openness which they love, and I esteem it
my honour as well as security to be the ally of such a nation of
princes."
[28] Every man must follow his father's trade, and must marry a daughter
of the same occupation. Innumerable are their other barbarous
restrictions of genius and inclination.
[29] Extremity; for it were both highly unjust and impolitic in
government to allow importation in such a degree as might be destructive
of domestic agriculture.
[30] Even that warm admirer of savage happiness, the author of _Histoire
Philosophique et Politique des Etablissements_, confesses that the wild
Americans seem destitute of the feeling of love. When the heat of
passion, says he, is gratified, they lose all affection and attachment
for their women, whom they degrade to the most servile offices.--A
tender remembrance of the first endearments, a generous participation of
care and hope, the compassionate sentiments of honour; all these
delicate feelings, which arise into affection, and bind attachment, are
indeed, incompatible with the ferocious and gross sensations of
barbarians.
[31] It is a question still debated among medical writers, and by no
means yet decided, whether the disease referred to is of American
origin. We do not read, it is true, of any such disease in the pages of
the ancient classic writers; it has hence been inferred that it was
unknown to them.--_Ed._
[32] The degeneracy of the Roman literature preceded the fate of the
state, and the reason is obvious. The men of fortune grew frivolous, and
superficial in every branch of knowledge, and were therefore unable to
hold the reigns of empire. The degeneracy of literary taste is,
therefore, the surest proof of the general ignorance.
[33] The soldiers and navigators were the only considerable gainers by
their acquirements in the Indies. Agriculture and manufactures are the
natural strength of a nation; these received little or no increase in
Spain and Portugal by the great acquisitions of these crowns.
[34] Ariosto, who adopted the legends of the old romance, chose this
period for the subject of his Orlando Furioso. Paris besieged by the
Saracens, Orlando and the other Christian knights assemble in aid of
Charlemagne, who are opposed in their amours and in battle by Rodomont,
Ferraw, and other Saracen knights. That there was a noted Moorish
Spaniard, named Ferraw, a redoubted champion of that age, we have the
testimony of Marcus Antonius Sabellicus, a writer of note of the
fifteenth century.
[35] Small indeed in extent, but so rich in fertility, that it was
called _Medulla Hispanica_, "The marrow of Spain."--Vid. Resandii Antiq.
Lusit. l. iii.
[36] In propriety most certainly a crusade, though that term has never
before been applied to this war.
[37] The power of deposing, and of electing their kings, under certain
circumstances, is vested in the people by the statutes of Lamego.
[38] For the character of this prince, see the note, Bk. iii. p. 96.
[39] For anecdotes of this monarch, see the notes, Bk. iii. p. 99.
[40] This great prince was the natural son of Pedro the Just. Some years
after the murder of his beloved spouse, Inez de Castro (see Lusiad, Bk.
iii. p. 96), lest his father, whose severe temper he too well knew,
should force him into a disagreeable marriage, Don Pedro commenced an
amour with a Galician lady, who became the mother of John I., the
preserver of the Portuguese monarchy.
[41] The sons of John, who figure in history, were Edward, Juan,
Fernando, Pedro and Henry. Edward succeeded his father. Juan,
distinguished both in the camp and cabinet, in the reign of his brother
Edward had the honour to oppose the expedition against Tangier, which
was proposed by his brother Fernando, in whose perpetual captivity it
ended.
[42] The dominion of the Portuguese in the Indian seas cut the sinews of
the Egyptian and other Mohammedan powers.
[43] Flanders has been the school-mistress of husbandry to Europe. Sir
Charles Lisle, a royalist, resided in this country several years during
the Commonwealth; and after the Restoration, rendered England the
greatest service, by introducing the present system of agriculture.
Where trade increases, men's thoughts are set in action; hence the
increase of food which is wanted is supplied by a redoubled attention to