liberties. Compare lines 2-6 with the original and with Lembcke. In
every case the Danish version is more faithful than the Norwegian. And
more mellifluous. Why Lassen should choose such clumsy and banal lines
as:

I slig en Nat
Trojas Murtinder Troilus besteg

when he could have used Lembcke's, is inexplicable except on the
hypothesis that he was eager to prove his own originality. The remainder
of Lorenzo's first speech is scarcely better. It is neither good
translation nor decent verse.

In 1882 came Lassen's _Julius Caesar_,[20] likewise published as a
supplement to _Folkevennen_ for use in the schools. A short postscript
tells us that the principles which governed in the translation of the
earlier play have governed here also. Lassen specifically declares that
he used Foersom's translation (Copenhagen, 1811) as the basis for the
translation of Antony's oration. A comparison shows that in this scene
Lassen follows Foersom closely--he keeps archaisms which Lembcke
amended. One or two instances:

_Foersom_:
Seer, her foer Casii Dolk igjennem den;
seer, hvilken Rift den nidske Casca gjorde;
her rammed' den høitelskte Bruti Dolk, etc.

_Lembcke_:
Se, her foer Cassius' Dolk igjennem den;
se hvilken Rift den onde Casca gjorde.