Studia Islandica - 01.06.1957, Blaðsíða 60

58
age of both, with poverty, in the one case, and loss of eye-
sight, in the other. Like Milton, Þorláksson was in a
sense “fallen on evil days”, because any pioneer — and
he was such in the field of Icelandic translations — is
seldom appreciated by his contemporaries. However,
viewing the adversities of Þorláksson and Milton in the
light of the magnitude of their undertaking and achieve-
ment, one readily feels pity give way to genuine ad-
miration.
And considering Þorláksson’s translation of Paradise
Lost purely as a work of poetry, it deserves all the praise
that Rask bestowed upon it. In excellent language, fraught
with imagination and poetic feeling, it deservedly holds an
honored place in Icelandic literature.
His major translations also have a certain continuity;
whether this was conscious or unconscious on the poet’s
part is, however, difficult to tell. At any rate, they give
some indication of his literary taste, as it can hardly be
thought that he undertook, even at the request of friends,
the translation of authors entirely unsympathetic to
himself.
Tullin, as we saw, was influenced by English writers,
not only by Young and Thomson, but also by Pope. (Cf.,
among others, Bricka, Dansk biogr. Lexikon, XII, pp.
573—575). Hence, after he had translated Tullin’s poems,
it was not surprising that Þorláksson should be ready to
accept the suggestion of Olavius and turn his attention
to the Essay on Man. Here Pope, from a different point
of view and in a different manner, attempted what Milton
had done a generation before — to “vindicate the ways
of God to man.” *) Obviously, the Essay and the Paradise
Lost have at least a similar purpose. The relation between
the latter and the Messias is even more close. Milton’s
epic served Klopstock both as a model and an inspira-
1) Essay on Man, I, 16. Cf. “Justify the ways of God to Man,”
Paradise Lost, I, 26.