Charles Rodgers’ translation of Inferno, the first cantica of the Divine Comedy, represents the first substantial attempt to translate Dante’s great poem into English. Rodgers, being without precedent, made choices which would come to influence future English translations of Dante. Most crucially, Rodgers completely abandons the structure of the original work. Each canto is a single stanza, and any rhymes are completely accidental. This choice preserves Dante’s meaning at the cost of his style. Future translators seemingly agreed with Rodgers, opting to write in blank verse in order to preserve the substance of the original. By contrast, some of Rodgers’ choices have not endured, and may seem bazaar to a reader familiar with more modern translations. Returning to the translation’s structure, Rodgers’ version of Canto V is 127 lines, while the original is 142 lines. This choice is perhaps the result of his being the first English translation. Modern translators, aware of the other versions of the Commedia, are more likely to preserve the original’s length in order to ease comparison between their translation and others. Rodgers obviously had no such concern. Another interesting feature of this translation is its style. Rather than writing in contemporary English, Rodgers wrote in an antiquated, poetical style. Presumably, Rodgers’ motivation was to preserve the feeling of reading something several centuries old. The following two lines are a good example of this style: “To him my Guide; ‘Why do you thus exclaim? / ‘Prevent his passage not, by Fate ordain’d…'” (Lines 19-20). By opting for the more classic “thus” rather than 
the more modern “so,” Rodgers gives the reader the sense that he or she is reading something medieval and esoteric. The apostrophe in “ordain’d” has a similar effect, in addition to hearkening back to earlier English poets, who often omitted the final, unstressed e.
While I personally agree with Rodgers that the Divine Comedy should not be an easy, comfortable read, and while I am especially fond of earlier English styles, most modern readers will probably not feel the same way. The principal weakness of Rodgers’ approach is therefore his intentionally obtuse style.
If Rodgers’ translation is a humble first foray into translating Dante, Patrick Bannerman’s translation, written almost 70 years and several English translations later, is a bit more ambitious. Unlike Rodgers, Bannerman does not write in free verse, instead opting for an AAB rhyme scheme. At the very least, a rhyme scheme will necessitate reordering the text, and likely a change in its substance as well. In most other ways, Bannerman takes a similar approach to Rodgers. Again, each canto is a single stanza; and, despite being in general an easier read, Bannerman leans more heavily into an antiquated, poetical style than does Rodgers, especially in dialogue. “Wherefore I said, ‘Master, whose are those cries— / That race the blackening are doth so chastise?'” (Page 21). The Early Modern English “doth,” centuries old even in the 19th century, and the colloquially uncommon “Wherefore” both give the impression of reading something far older than Bannerman’s translation.
Though I prefer Rodgers’ translation, I believe the average American would prefer that of Bannerman. By dedicating himself to an AAB rhyme scheme, and by maintaining a strong medieval, poetical tone throughout, Bannerman puts far more effort into style than does Rodgers. This attention to style over accuracy, and the fact that it is still easily readable after a century and a half, will render Bannerman’s translation superior in the eyes of most American readers. My largest problem with Bannerman’s translation is the extent to which it departs from the original. I imagine Bannerman’s intention in doing this was to create something that an English reader would enjoy, but I personally want something closer to Dante, even if it sounds awkward in English. An example of Bannerman departing from the original is the last line of the Canto. Bannerman translates “E caddi come corpo morte cadde” as “[I] fell, as body falls, deprived of breath” (p. 24). Though Bannerman’s translation sounds natural and clever in English, it is not faithful to the original. By contrast, Rodgers translated the line as “I with pity swoon’d, and fell like a dead corpse” (line 127). Rodgers preserves the meaning of the original, while making slight alterations for English. He changes the syntax to fit English style, and simplifies “corpo morte” to “corpse” rather than “dead body.” Fundamentally, however, the concept of “And I fell like dead body falls” is preserved, even if it sounds a bit dopey in English.