MEFB2015

Wow. Well done for basically summarising the opposite of your attempted position. You seem to be incapable of realising that if you cannot read the original texts from which you are working then you are immediately beholden to the whims of the translator. Don't you see that? Your comment that "perhaps you needed Latin in 1807" is staggeringly fatuous and if you are a genuinely serious academic the you should realise the sheer idiocy of your post. The increasing accessibility of Classics is wonderful, but not when it means that lazy people think they can fully engage with classics without engaging with the primary texts (or, even worse, effectively dismiss the primary texts as meaningless now we have a nice, easy "translation", seemingly ignoring any potential foibles of the translator); your complaint smacks of nothing but dumbing down of the most academically obtuse level. Honestly, if you are not skilled enough to read the original texts, then you are not a Classicist.