In issue #3 of this mini-series which focuses on post-Dark-Reign Norman Osborn's incarceration in and escape from an extrajudicial, submarine prison, we find our title character taking part in a carefully planned inmate riot. Before jumping into the fray to prove himself as the alpha villain, Osborn removes his glasses and delivers the following bon mot:
"PAX PRO EO OPTIMUS ARMA . . . PEACE THROUGH SUPERIOR FORCE."
The phrase is of course complete nonsense in Latin, meaning something along the lines of "Peace for him/it, the best man, weapons." Pax is feminine nominative singular. Optimus is masculine nominative singular. Arma is neuter, either nominative or accusative, plural. Pro eo are the only two words other than pax that actually work together grammatically, and they are here used incorrectly in place of the preposition per. A correct translation for the idea of "peace through superior force" would be something like Pax per vim superiorem, or Pax per vires superiores; the first option would refer to an individual's strength or power, while the second would be used when referring to "force" in the military sense of "a group of soldiers". Other options would be substituting superiorem/-es with meliorem/-es ("better") or maiorem/-es ("greater"). Additionally, if you really dislike seeing per used to denote means, you could replace the phrase with an ablative, without or without the preposition a(b). If you prefer the idea of "weapons" to "force", arma is a fine choice, but the prepositional phrase would then read per arma superiora.
The sort of translation found in this comic is the most common type made by folks who have access to a Latin dictionary but who have no knowledge of its grammar. Since Latin (like German or a great many other tongues) is an inflected language, the endings of words tell the listener or reader what each word is doing in the sentence. This is different from English where meaning is mostly conveyed by word order. When words are found in a Latin dictionary, they are usually in the nominative singular for nouns (the subject case), the nominative masculine singular for adjectives (used to describe a single, masculine subject), and the first person singular present active indicative for verbs (e.g. "I see"). So when you take words straight from a dictionary without changing their endings, they won't mean what you want them to mean once you put them together in a sentence.
I don't mean to pick on DeConnick by pointing out the error. She's one of my favorite comic book writers right now--seriously, go read Pretty Deadly. I just mean to use the panel to illustrate one type of error often found when comic books use Latin: non-inflection. The error probably didn't even originate with DeConnick, as the phrase had been floating around the internet as early as 2005, and it stills pops up around the interwebs in mottoes, usernames, and even in the title of a political blog.
What's more interesting than the error itself is Latin's narrative function in the comic. Osborn/DeConnick uses Latin for a couple of reasons. First, Latin conveys authority to a saying. Even though Osborn is not actually quoting any author, by giving his strategy in Latin and then translating it into English, he implies that the saying has some older, classical pedigree.
Second, the Latin quotation establishes Osborn as a member of an intellectual elite. Not only does our anti-hero have knowledge of some ancient military theory, but he can also cite this theory in its original language--and not just any language but the one forced upon schoolboys for centuries and therefore an established marker of education. In this instance, the elite level of the language strengthens the irony between the two sides of Osborn's villainy: both his strategic, conniving planning and his shear physical brutality, as he displays in the ensuing fight. The Latin quotation raises Osborn above his fellow rioting prisoners, before he immediately dives face-first into their brawl.
It's also fun to note here that Osborn is talking not to another inmate but rather to a (presumably Catholic) priest. The Catholic clergy were for over a thousand years the primary users and preservers of the Latin tongue, so I find it interesting that the priest does not comment on Osborn's (poor) Latinity. Even though Latin is not actually required for American priests today, it's still recommended that they learn it. Can we assume that our Marvel priest understood the phrase as uttered by Osborn? Also, why does Osborn give an English translation of his Latin? Did Osborn/DeConnick translate it simply for the benefit of us, the readers? Generally, Marvel does likewise make sure that Spanish dialogue in its comics is either very simple or easily interpreted by a corresponding English reply. Perhaps Osborn repeats his strategy in English, because he really just likes the sound of his own voice.
Here's my take: Osborn cockily delivers his quip in both incorrect Latin and then English. The priest recognizes the error and rolls his eyes (off-panel), but he doesn't feel the need to correct him, since he doesn't actual care about Osborn's ideology. His only concern is getting Osborn out of the prison to create further chaos in the world, since he considers him the Anti-Christ (as we find out in issue #4) and wishes him to bring about the Second Coming. As such, our Marvel priest sees no point in correcting the grammar of his crazy embodiment of pure evil. Because, really, what could be a more obvious attribute of evil than bad grammar?
Now send me my NO PRIZE!
