The obscurity of Prudentius condemns the taste of our age. Writing in the late fourth and early fifth centuries, Prudentius produced Christian poetry whose power, vividness, sophistication and richness of expression ought to have made it a perennial, well-known classic. In fact, his work was popular and widely appreciated into the early modern period – Richard Bentley called him ‘the Virgil and Horace of the Christians’ (Christianorum Maro et Flaccus). Yet Prudentius has since been relegated to the outer reaches of readerly interest and attention, particularly in the Anglophone world.
R. has done his part to change this state of affairs. His excellent translation of Prudentius’ Cathemerinon captures the poet's virtues and should inspire audiences to want to read more Prudentius. The Cathemerinon is a twelve-work cycle of hymns in lyric metres: the first six comprise hymns for different times in the day, while the second six are varied but seem largely organised around the liturgical year and the major events of Lent, Easter, Christmas and Epiphany. With significant skill, R. performs the translator's task of transmitting the character and essence of the original. His translation is itself lyric poetry that enables Prudentius’ verse to inhabit a new language and to live again in it.
A considerable part of R.’s achievement lies in his use of metre. R. translates either in a strict metre or in a looser but still recognisable metrical pattern; he varies his metres, moreover, to reflect Prudentius’ own lyric polymetry. R. follows Prudentius by rendering the first and last pair of poems in the collection (as well as C. 10) in four-line stanzas of iambic dimeter. Prudentius framed the Cathemerinon in that manner to link his work to the iambic dimeter hymns of Ambrose. Much as Prudentius utilised form to create continuity between him and Ambrose, R. bridges the distance between his translation and Prudentius through rhythm and structure. This goes a long way towards preserving the quality and feel of the original.
R. reproduces Prudentius’ metres in other poems as well (C. 6, 7, 9). Yet even when he does not so adhere to his source, his formal patterns, coupled with his lexical choices, are such that he succeeds in creating Prudentian poems in English. This is translation at a high level, in which the translator exhibits artistic sympathy with his predecessor and takes on his voice, rather than just rendering his words. It would have been useful to have a facing text of the Latin, so that those with the language might easily compare R.’s version with Prudentius and thus see immediately how he reconstitutes his source. The series to which R.’s Cathemerinon belongs, however, does not print the Latin text in any of its titles.
R. also provides a valuable introduction and notes to the Cathemerinon. The introduction orients newcomers to Prudentius by presenting an overview of his life, œuvre, literary and historical contexts, and the Cathemerinon; experienced readers of the poet, however, will also benefit from R.’s perceptive and economical account. The notes summarise the content of each poem and elucidate varied details. R. discusses themes and imagery and treats a range of other topics, including biblical parallels, church/doctrinal history, liturgical practices and Prudentius’ echoes of classical poets and late-antique authors.
In a preface to an edition of his complete works, Prudentius states his wish to fly forth to heaven, the place to which his quick tongue also tends (quo tulerit lingua sono mobilis ultimo, praef. 45). In this sublunary realm, however, he could not have sought a better destination for his lingua mobilis than R. His translation of the Cathemerinon is a keen pleasure and a major achievement.
