No Subject

[Unregistered]

You have a point there. readers might be confused of using such counterpart names instead of their greek names..Since readers got familiarized with the greek names, why not focuse on it.In that way we can help readers to get familiarize with the greek names of it and maintain the knowledge gained by the readers/learners before.In a way, confusion may be avoided.If others will be asked they are familiar with the greek names than the romans counterpart names of those characters. However, these can be taught provided that it will be clarified to the readers that those were the counterpart names in roman form. <br>

[Elliott]

First of all, Zeus's Roman name is Jupiter and second, disappointing has two p's.

[Unregistered]

This is the Samuel Butler translation, written at a time when all school students learned Latin and were familiar with the Latinised versions of the Greek gods and stories. Butler's use of (some) Latinised names would have been perfectly acceptable to his audience. As it is, the Greek names used in later translations -- such as Fagles -- are English forms of the ancient Greek words, and may sound very different from the words that Homer spoke. Fagles writes about this in his introdyction. <br><br>So it is not a case of "leaving the names how they were" because we really can't be sure how they were in some cases, and the decision about what names and words to use in a tranlsation lie properly with the translator. <br>I do feel however that this entry shoujld be labelled as the Butler translation, and not just accredited to "Homer"

[Unregistered]

It was disapointing to see your translation of the Iliad use the Roman terms for the Greek Gods, for example; Minerva in place of Athene, Jove in place of Zeus and so on. The Iliad is a Greek work and not a Roman one thus names should not be latinised but left in their (truer) hellenic forms.