deserves not the name of a translation; the unaccountable liberties therein taken, and the numberless faults, both of omission and commission, leaving scarce any resemblance of the original. It was made near six hundred years ago, being finished in 1143, by Robertus Retenensis, an Englishman, with the assistance of Hermannus Dalmata, at the request of Peter, abbot of Clugny, who paid them well for their pains. From this Latin version was taken the Italian of Andrea Arrivabene, notwithstanding the pretences in his dedication of its being done immediately from the Arabic;* wherefore it is no wonder if the transcript be yet more faulty and absurd than the copy.† About the end of the fifteenth century, Johannes Andreas, a native of Xativa in the kingdom of Valencia, who from a Mohammedan doctor became a Christian priest, translated not only the Korân, but also its glosses, and the seven books of the Sonna, out of Arabic into the Arragonian tongue, at the command of Martin Garcia,+ bishop of Barcelona, and inquisitor of Arragon. Whether this translation were ever published or not I am wholly ignorant; but it may be presumed to have been the better done for being the work of one bred up in the Mohammedan religion and learning; though his refutation of that religion, which has had several editions, gives no great idea of his abilities. Some years within the last century, Andrew du Ryer, who had been consul of the French nation in Egypt, and was tolerably skilled in the Turkish and Arabic languages, took the pains to translate the Korân into his own tongue: but his performance, though it be beyond comparison preferable to that of Retenensis, is far from being a just translation; there being mistakes in every page, besides frequent transpositions, omissions, and additions,§ faults unpardonable in a work of this nature. And what renders it still more incomplete is, the want of notes to explain a vast number of passages, some of which are difficult, and others impossible to be understood, without proper explications, were they translated ever so exactly; which the author is so sensible of that he often refers his reader to the Arabic commentators. || The English version is no other than a translation of Du Ryer's, and that a very bad one; for Alexander Ross, who did it, being utterly unacquainted with the Arabic, and no great master of the French, has added a number of fresh mistakes of his own to those of Du Ryer; not to mention the meanness of his language, which would make a better book ridiculous. And His words are: "Questo libro, che già havevo a commune utilità di molti fatto dal proprio testo Arabo tradurre nella nostra volgar lingua Italiana," &c. afterwards: "Questo è l'Alcorano di Macometto, il quale, come ho già detto, ho fatto dal suo idioma tradurre," &c. † Vide Joseph. Scalig. Epist. 361 et 362; et Selden. de Success. ad Leges Ebræor. p. 9. J. Andreas, in Præf. ad Tractat. suum de Confusione Sectæ Mahometanæ. § Vide Windet. de Vitâ Functorum statu, sect. 9. "If," says Savary, "the Korân, which is extolled throughout the East for the perfection of its style, and the magnificence of its imagery, seems, under the pen of Du Ryer, to be only a dull and tiresome rhapsody, the blame must be laid on his manner of translating. This book is divided into verses, like the Psalms of David. This kind of writing, which was adopted by the prophets, enables prose to make use of the bold terms and the figurative expressions of poetry. Du Ryer, paying no respect whatever to the text, has connected the verses together, and made of them a continuous discourse. To accomplish this misshapen assemblage, he has had recourse to frigid conjunctions, and to trivial phrases, which, destroying the dignity of the ideas, and the charm of the diction, render it impossible to recognize the original. While reading his translation, no one could ever imagine that the Koran is the masterpiece of the Arabic language, which is fertile in fine writers; yet this is the judgment which antiquity has passed on it." In 1698, a Latin translation of the Korân, made by Father Lewis Marracci, who had been confessor to Pope Innocent XI., was published at Padua, together with the original text, accompanied by explanatory notes and a refutation. This translation of Marracci's, generally speaking, is very exact; but adheres to the Arabic idiom too literally to be easily understood, unless I am much deceived, by those who are not versed in the Mohammedan learning.* The notes he has added are indeed of great use; but his refutations, which swell the work to a large volume, are of little or none at all, being often unsatisfactory, and sometimes impertinent. The work, however, with all its faults, is very valuable, and I should be guilty of ingratitude, did I not acknowledge myself much obliged thereto; but still, being in Latin, it can be of no use to those who understand not that tongue. Having therefore undertaken a new translation, I have endeavoured to do the original impartial justice, not having, to the best of my knowledge, represented it, in any one instance, either better or worse than it really is. I have thought myself obliged, indeed, in a piece which pretends to be the Word of GOD, to keep somewhat scrupulously close to the text; by which means the language may, in some places, seem to express the Arabic a little too literally to be elegant English: but this, I hope, has not happened often; and I flatter myself that the style I have made use of will not only give a more genuine idea of the original than if I had taken more liberty (which would have been much more for my ease), but will soon become familiar; for we must not expect to read a version of so extraordinary a book with the same ease and pleasure as a modern composition. In the notes my view has been briefly to explain the text, and especially the difficult and obscure passages, from the most approved commentators, and that generally in their own words, for whose opinions or expressions, where liable to censure, I am not answerable; my province being only fairly to represent their expositions, and the little I have added of my own, or from European writers, being easily discernible. Where I met with any circumstance which I imagined might be curious or entertaining, I have not failed to produce it. The Preliminary Discourse will acquaint the reader with the most material particulars proper to be known previously to the entering on the Korân itself, and which could not so conveniently have been thrown into the notes. And I have taken care, both in the Preliminary Discourse and the notes, constantly to quote my authorities and the writers to whom I have been beholden; but to none have I been more so than to the learned Dr. Pocock, whose Specimen Historia Arabum is the most useful and accurate work that has been hitherto published concerning the antiquities of that nation, and ought to be read by every curious inquirer into them. As I have had no opportunity of consulting public libraries, the manuscripts of which I have made use throughout the whole work have been such as I had in my own study, except only the Commentary of al Beidâwi, and the Gospel of St. Barnabas. The first belongs to the library of the Dutch church in Austin Friars, and for the use of it I have been chiefly * Of Marracci's translation Savary says: "Marracci, that learned monk, who spent forty years in translating and refuting the Korân, proceeded on the right system. He divided it into verses, according to the text; but, neglecting the precepts of a great master, 'Nec verbum verbo curabis reddere, fidus he translated it literally. He has not expressed the ideas of the Korân, but travestied the words of it into barbarous Latin. Yet, though all the beauties of the original are lost in this translation, it is preferable to that by Du Ryer." indebted to the Rev. Dr. Bolton, one of the ministers of that church: the other was very obligingly lent me by the Rev. Dr. Holme, rector of Hedley in Hampshire; and I take this opportunity of returning both those gentlemen my thanks for their favours. The merit of al Beidâwi's Commentary will appear from the frequent quotations I have made thence; but of the gospel of St. Barnabas (which I had not seen when the little I have said of it in the Preliminary Discourse, and the extract I had borrowed from M. de la Monnoye and Mr. Toland,† were printed off), I must beg leave to give some further account. * The book is a moderate quarto, in Spanish, written in a very legible hand, but a little damaged towards the latter end. It contains two hundred and twenty-two chapters of unequal length, and four hundred and twenty pages; and is said, in the front, to be translated from the Italian, by an Arragonian Moslem, named Mostafa de Aranda. There is a preface prefixed to it, wherein the discoverer of the original MS., who was a Christian monk, called Fra Marino, tells us, that having accidentally met with a writing of Irenæus (among others), wherein he speaks against St. Paul, alleging for his authority the gospel of St. Barnabas, he became exceedingly desirous to find this gospel; and that GOD, of his mercy, having made him very intimate with Pope Sixtus V., one day, as they were together in that Pope's library, his holiness fell asleep, and he, to employ himself, reaching down a book to read, the first he laid his hand on proved to be the very gospel he wanted: overjoyed at the discovery, he scrupled not to hide his prize in his sleeve, and on the Pope's awaking, took leave of him, carrying with him that celestial treasure, by reading of which he became a convert to Mohammedism. This gospel of Barnabas contains a complete history of Jesus Christ from his birth to his ascension; and most of the circumstances of the four real gospels are to be found therein, but many of them turned, and some artfully enough, to favour the Mohammedan system. From the design of the whole, and the frequent interpolations of stories and passages wherein Mohammed is spoken of and foretold by name, as the messenger of GOD, and the great prophet who was to perfect the dispensation of Jesus, it appears to be a most barefaced forgery. One particular I observe therein induces me to believe it to have been dressed up by a renegade Christian, slightly instructed in his new religion, and not educated a Mohammedan (unless the fault be imputed to the Spanish, or perhaps the Italian translator, and not to the original compiler), I mean the giving to Mohammed the title of Messiah, and that not once or twice only, but in several places: whereas the title of the Messiah, or, as the Arabs write it, al Masîh, i. e., Christ, is appropriated to Jesus in the Korân, and is constantly applied by the Mohammedans to him, and never to their own prophet. The passages produced from the Italian MS. by M. de la Monnoye are to be seen in this Spanish version almost word for word. But to return to the following work. Though I have freely censured the former translations of the Korân, I would not therefore be suspected of a design to make my own pass as free from faults: I am very sensible it is not; and I make no doubt but the few who are able to discern them, and know the difficulty of the undertaking, will give me fair quarter. I likewise flatter myself that they, and all considerate persons, will excuse the delay which has happened in the publication of this work, when they are informed that it was carried on at leisure times only, and amidst the necessary avocations of a troublesome profession. A SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF GEORGE SALE. Or the life of GEORGE SALE, a man of extensive learning, and considerable literary talent, very few particulars have been transmitted to us by his contemporaries. He is said to have been born in the county of Kent, and the time of his birth must have been not long previous to the close of the seventeenth century. His education he received at the King's School, Canterbury. Voltaire, who bestows high praise on the version of the Korân, asserts him to have spent five-and-twenty years in Arabia, and to have acquired in that country his profound knowledge of the Arabic language and customs. On what authority this is asserted it would now be fruitless to endeavour to ascertain. But that the assertion is an erroneous one, there can be no reason to doubt; it being opposed by the stubborn evidence of dates and facts. It is almost certain that Sale was brought up to the law, and that he practised it for many years, if not till the end of his career. He is said, by a co-existing writer, to have quitted his legal pursuits, for the purpose of applying himself to the study of the eastern and other languages, both ancient and modern. His guide through the labyrinth of the oriental dialects was Mr. Dadichi, the king's interpreter. If it be true that he ever relinquished the practice of the law, it would appear that he must have resumed it before his decease; for, in his address to the reader, prefixed to the Korân, he pleads, as an apology for the delay which had occurred in publishing the volume, that the work "was carried on at leisure times only, and amidst the necessary avocations of a troublesome profession." This alone would suffice to show that Voltaire was in error. But to this must be added, that the existence of Sale was terminated at an early period, and that, in at least his latter years, he was engaged in literary labours of no trifling magnitude. The story of his having, during a quarter of a century, resided in Arabia, becomes, therefore, an obvious impossibility, and must be dismissed to take its place among those fictions by which biography has often been encumbered and disgraced. Among the few productions of which Sale is known to be the author is a part of "The General Dictionary," in ten volumes, folio. To the translation of Bayle, which is incorporated with this voluminous work, he is stated to have been a large contributor. When the plan of the Universal History was arranged, Sale was one of those who were selected to carry it into execution. His coadjutors were Swinton, eminent as an antiquary, and remarkable for absence of mind; Shelvocke, originally a naval officer; the well informed, intelligent, and laborious Campbell; that singular character, George Psalmanazar; and Archibald Bower, who afterwards became an object of unenviable notoriety. The portion of the history which was supplied by Sale comprises "The Introduction, containing the Cosmogony, or Creation of the World;" and the whole, or nearly the whole, of the succeeding chapter, which traces the narrative of events from the creation to the flood. In the performance of his task, he displays a thorough acquaintance with his subject; and his style, though not polished into elegance, is neat and perspicuous. In a French biographical dictionary, of anti-liberal principles, a writer accuses him of having adopted a system hostile to tradition and the Scriptures, and composed his account of the Cosmogony with the view of giving currency to his heretical opinions. Either the accuser never read the article which he censures, or he has wilfully misrepresented it; for it affords the fullest contradiction to the charge, as does also the sequent chapter; and he must, therefore, be contented to choose between the demerit of being a slanderer through blundering and reckless ignorance, or through sheer malignity of heart. Though his share in these publications affords proof of the erudition and ability of Sale, it probably would not alone have been sufficient to preserve his name from oblivion. His claim to be remembered rests principally on his version of the Korân, which appeared in November, 1734, in a quarto volume, and was inscribed to Lord Carteret. The dedicator does not disgrace himself by descending to that fulsome adulatory style which was then too frequently employed in addressing the great. As a translator, he had the field almost entirely to himself; there being at that time no English translation of the Mohammedan civil and spiritual code, except a bad copy of the despicable one by Du Ryer. His performance was universally and justly approved of, still remains in repute, and is not likely to be superseded by any other of the kind. It may, perhaps, be regretted, that he did not preserve the division into verses, as Savary has since done, instead of connecting them into a continuous narrative. Some of the poetical spirit is unavoidably lost by the change. But this is all that can be objected to him. It is, I believe, admitted, that he is in no common degree faithful to his original; and his numerous notes, and Preliminary Discourse, manifest such a perfect knowledge of Eastern habits, manners, traditions, and laws, as could have been acquired only by an acute mind, capable of submitting to years of patient toil. But, though his work passed safely through the ordeal of criticism, it has been made the pretext for a calumny against him. It has been declared, that he puts the Christian religion on the same footing with the Mohammedan; and some charitable persons have even supposed him to have been a disguised professor of the latter. The origin of this slander we may trace back to the strange obliquity of principles, and the blind merciless rage which are characteristic of bigotry. Sale was not one of those who imagine that the end sanctifies the means, and that the best interests of mankind can be advanced by violence, by railing, or by deviating from the laws of truth, in order to blacken an adversary. He enters into the consideration of the character of Mohammed with a calm philosophic spirit; repeatedly censuring his imposture, touching upon his subterfuges and inventions, but doing justice to him on those points on which the pretended prophet is really worthy of praise. The rules which, in his address to the reader, he lays down for the conversion of Mo |