But your Notes, I know, seem excellent to
me; I mean, in the Style of them (for of the Scholarship I am not a
proper Judge); totally without pedantry of any sort, whether of solving
unnecessary difficulties, carping at other Critics, etc., but plainly
determined to explain what needs explanation in the shortest, clearest,
way, and in a Style which is most of all suited to the purpose, 'familiar
but by no means vulgar,' such as we have known in such cases, whether in
Latin or English. My Quotation reminds me of yours: how sparingly, and
always just to the point, introduced; Polus 'gambolling' from the Theme:
old Wordsworth's Robin Hood, etc. And the paraphrases you give of the
Greek are so just the thing. I have not read Vaughan's (?) Translation
of the Republic; which I am told is good. But this I know that I never
met with any readable Translation of Plato. Whewell's was intolerable.
You should have translated--(that is, paraphrased, for however far some
People may err on this score, rushing in where Scholars fear to tread) a
Translation must be Paraphrase to be readable; and especially in these
Dialogues where the familiar Grace of the Narrative and Conversation is
so charming a vehicle of the Philosophy. If people will conscientiously
translate [Greek text] 'Oh most excellent man,' when perhaps 'My good
Fellow' was the thing meant, and 'By the Dog!' and so on, why, it is not
English talk, and probably not Greek either. I say you should have, or
should translate one or two Dialogues to show how they should be done; if
no longer than the Lysis, or one of those small and sweet ones which I
believe the Germans disclaim for Plato's.

'The Dog' however does need a Note, as I suppose that, however
far-fetched Olympiodorus' suggestion, this was an Oath familiar to
Socrates alone, and which he took up for some, perhaps whimsical, reason.
It is not to be found (is it?) in Aristophanes, where I suppose all the
common Oaths come in; but then again I wonder that, if it were Socrates'
Oath, it did not find its way into the Clouds, or perhaps into the
criminal Charge against Socrates, as being a sort of mystical or scoffing
Blasphemy.

I am afraid I tire you more with my Letter than you tired me with your
Introduction, a good deal. And you see, to your cost, that my MS. does
not argue much pleasure in the act of writing. But I would say my little
say; which perhaps is all wrong. . . .

One of your Phrases I think truly