Every translation requires interpretation. Even if you tried to do a word-for-word dictionary translation of a book, you still have to make decisions about how

Every translation requires interpretation. Even if you tried to do a word-for-word dictionary translation of a book, you still have to make decisions about how to handle things like idioms, metaphors, and puns that don't necessarily make sense when translated directly. A lot of translations of verse also try to keep some sort of meter in the translation, which requires even more artistic interpretation. That's only compounded with a story like Beowulf where the only known extant copy has missing sections, typos, and intentional alterations from whatever it was originally transcribed from. >I'm not offended by it, but /if/ it can be said that prior translators kept their bias and creativity to the minimum required to maintain story and poetic elements One thing that can be interesting to look at is the things that prior translators tried to avoid or gloss over in their translations. If you look at public domain translations from the 19th and 20th centuries, you'll see that the translators often go through great pains to avoid even a hint of sexuality or vulgarity. The most infamous example I can think of is Catullus 16, a poem that begins with the speaker threatening to insert his penis into various orifices of his rivals. Some translations totally skipped those lines of the poem. Or partially translated them like Sir Richard Francis Burton in 1894 ("I'll . . . you twain and . . . Pathic Aurelius!"). Some liven the lines in with a bit of euphemism while still sounding clinical ("I will make you my boys and bone you, sexually submissive Aurelius"), from ET Merrill in 1893. Some translations jazz it up with literal descriptions of the actions while keeping the aggressive tone ("I'll sodomize and face-fuck you, submissive Aurelius"), some turn into steretypical Xbox Live users ("I'll push your shit in and stuff your face, Aurelius you stupid cocksucker") etc. It's also worth keeping in mind that a translation for the 19th century won't have the same impact on a modern audience as it would then, at least without additional context. e.g. Calling someone pathic would've been like using a homophobic slur back in the day. I think Headley's translation actually does a good job of that even when it isn't so literal. "#blessed" was a bit silly. But the opening along the lines of "Bro! Back in my day, everyone knew what men were: brave, bold, glory bound, but I’ll sound the Spear-Danes’ song, hoarded for hungry times" really sets the tone of "crusty drunk dude at the bar telling you a badass and exaggerated story". Older translations just don't do that for me: Lo, praise of the prowess of people-kings of spear-armed Danes, in days long sped, we have heard, and what honor the athelings won!