Studia Islandica - 01.06.1957, Blaðsíða 48

46
Þorláksson dated from the time he visited the poet in
1814, and there began to collect his original poems, re-
views the translation of Paradise Lost in considerable
detail in Literatur bladet, No. 20,1829. He writes in part:
“As regards the translation, as such considered, it is
by no means one of the best. J. Þorláksson did not know
English, and had never seen the English original, but
translated first from Schönheyder’s Danish translation,
which, as is known, leaves out many beautiful passages,
and does not always render happily what he retained;
then Þorláksson is said to have borrowed a German trans-
lation, but as he hardly possessed a full command of the
German, it is likely that he has principally based his work
on the Danish translation.”
This assumption of Rask’s is hardly true, since a com-
parison of the Icelandic translation with the German one
shows that, in Books 4—12, the former followed the latter
very closely, and thus proved that Þorláksson must have
known German fairly well.
Rask then discusses Þorláksson’s choice of verse form,
which the critic considers not very happy, as it differs
so much from that of the original and causes the transla-
tor to add and eke out the lines. Inaccuracies and omis-
sions come in for a brief mention, as does the language of
the translation. The work of the editors is then discussed
in more detail. The review is, in general, a sound piece
of criticism, as was to be expected from a scholar of
Rask’s standing. “As a separate work of art”, he writes,
“our translation is, on the other hand, excellent, as the
poet has had perfectly at his command the richest and
most beautiful language Europe possesses, and has
grasped, at least, the principal thoughts of Milton with
true poetic genius, and reproduced them with cleamess
and power.”
Finnur Magnússon takes issue with Henderson’s
opinion of the translation. “The merits of Þorláksson’s