Why read Jordans translation instead of Richmond Lattimores translation?
Matthew A. Roberts’ review in Chronicles: :”Richmond Lattimore’s 1951 translation was for decades the staple of undergraduate courses. While Lattimore is praised for his literalness, translating each line of Greek with one line of English, he is criticized for his awkwardness because of needed filler to complete his six-stress lines. Jordan seeks to rectify the shortcomings of Lattimore’s meter with a five beat-line, avoiding unnecessary filler. Employing contemporary language, Jordan renders supple verse that is loyal to the traditions of English blank verse.” Calum Maciver in Bryn Mawr Classical Review, January 15, 2009, states that while Lattimore is “closer to the original,” his translation is often “painfully literal.” As an example, he avers that Jordan’s translation of book 3, line 9:’Each man’s heart steeled to support his comrades’ is “eminently better to read than Lattimore’s’Stubbornly minded each in his heart to stand by the others.
