Outdated Translations

Using outdated language in ancient translation is tedious. I get why someone translating 100 years ago would talk like someone from 100 years ago, but why are we still printing those. Is the translation itself really that interesting? Is there so much artistic value in what's being transmitted from the translator himself?

If yes, then how come nobody reads anything else from these people. A lot of them, to be frank, also seem kind of bad at it. Especially with non western sources. I don't want your christianized and superior feeling interpretation of what's happening. I just want to learn about the original text, god damn it.

But worse, I don't know why all good looking prints put out by publishers use old translations, and not new ones. Does no one actually want to read them?

I will never understand why companies republish centuries old translations of millenia old roman texts, when modern translations for those same texts exist.

The old timey translations can be a quirky niche thing if anyone is interested. All this does is convince people having barely thought about what they're reading that, yeah in fact this 2000 year old text does seem really ancient, because they talk like an Englishman in the 1870s would.

For anyone who has thought for more than a second about that fact, no it does in fact not make it feel more ancient. This doesn't make it more authentic either.\