cause of the literary value of
Terence's comedy. In consequence, its benefits would apply to "most
sorts of People, but especially for the Service it may do our _Dramatick
Poets_." Secondly, the work was undertaken for "the Honour of our own
_Language_, into which all good Books ought to be Translated, since
_'tis now become so Elegant, Sweet and Copious_ . . . ." Thirdly, it
might rival the translations done in other countries, particularly those
in France. The audience envisaged ranged from schoolboys, who would find
the translation less Latinate and the notes more pointed than those of
Bernard or Hoole, to "Men of Sense and Learning," who ought to be
pleased to see Terence in "modern Dress." As for the dramatists, Terence
might serve as an exemplar, especially since the translation could "be
read with less Trouble than the Original . . ." (pp. xvii-xix). The
_Plautus_ Preface is far less detailed, but refers back to these
reasons, while stressing the function of the translation for the
schoolboy. Judging by the number of editions, the _Terence_ found its
market, for where the _Plautus_ ran to only two editions, the first and
that of 1716, the _Terence_ appeared in a seventh edition in 1729. Nor
was Echard's audience merely made up of students. If one of his main
targets was contemporary dramatists, he would have been elated to learn
that William Congreve owned a copy of the first edition of both
translations.[7]

The Prefaces are perhaps a little disingenuous in acknowledging Echard's
and his collaborators' debt to the contemporary French classical scholar
and translator, Anne Dacier. On both occasions Echard paid her some
tribute. What he does not mention is that the two volumes seem to be
modelled on her example. The _Terence_ translates the plays which had
appeared in her _Les comedies de Terence_ (Paris, 1688), and it is
significant that despite his claims that he wished to translate more
than three of Plautus' comedies, he in fact translated only those three
which Mme. Dacier had already done in her _Les comedies de Plaute_
(Paris, 1683). Moreover, the notes and to some extent the Prefaces, are
modelled on the French scholar's work: Echard's notes are often directly
dependent upon Mme. Dacier's and are exactly described by her account of
her own volume as being "avec de remarques et un examen de chaque
comedie selon les regles du theatre."

The views on translation put forward by the Prefaces are an intelligent