SPQR on AI
Before we scattered all over the world for our short-lived summer break, the Antigone team set readers a proper challenge: to debate the joys and woes of artificial intelligence, but in the form of two speeches that the Romans might have delivered – had they been able to have their say on the subject. One speech would make the case for AI, and one would make the case against it, using whatever rhetorical firepower there is to deploy. Contenders could either submit two Latin speeches, each written in the style of a particular Roman, or they could submit two English “translations” of supposed Latin originals, each in the style of modern prose renderings.
The readership of Antigone being what it is – curious, adventurous, clever and serious folk – we received far more entries in the Latin category than in the English. Interesting things are evidently happening in the world!
Our team of semi-professional judges found time to sift through the heap of entries in the few hours of communal screen-time made available to them during their Mandatory Team-Building Exercise ’25, a forty-day exercise conducted above and below ground in the back streets of suburban Surbiton. Still dressed in their plastic peploi, and garlanded with locally-sourced laurel leaves, the critics soon pulled out the most impressive of entries, before the shrill sound of the salpinx sent them scurrying, in a predictably chaotic katabasis, back down the manhole and into the farthest reaches of the Antigonic Phrontisterion.
So here are the brilliant winners! Very well done to all, and very many thanks to all who made the effort to compete in this avowedly niche contest.
LATIN
First Prize: Max Kuhelj Bugaric, Cambridge, MA, USA (£300)
Pseudo-Ciceronis Oratio “Pro Forma Ingenii Nova”
OBSECRO vos, iudices, ut verba mea hac in re gravissima periculosissimaque exaudiatis, cum qui contra nos sunt locuturi vobis persuadere conentur ut arma abiciatis sine quibus rei publicae nostrae restabit nihil nisi ut, manibus hostium compressa, sub iugum eat cedatque iis, qui, consilio parato, stragem horribilem in nos illaturi sunt. Quis enim ex audientibus, quis ex salutis et civitatis studiosis, quis ex patriae defensoribus, si posset, uti nos cum coniurationem illam perfidiosam in lucem protulimus, vita nostra maximo in discrimine posita, continuo contra osores patrum nostrorum rem agimus, rei publicae auxilio non veniret?
Terret, terret quidem oculos haec forma nova ingenii, quippe quae tam singulis hominibus quam civitatibus totis praestare non solum in re militari sed etiam in litteris videatur; profecto tamen cum abusus, quo hostes nobis imminere simulant, usum non tollat ad quem causa defendendi saluteque potiendi recurrere cogemur, artificiosa illa mens animum sublevat. Num vere ea, quae ipsi exstruximus, nosmet ipsos in potestatem suam redigant? Num, si non redigent, fortunam ipsam in terras alienas pellamus ut illic contra nos consilia insidiosa parentur? Num attendamus donec quidam ex nostris, tribuni illius ambusti P. Clodii instar, se regem supra nos constituet? Minime!
Deponite, cives, timorem, sollertiam amplectimini, nolite oblivisci Archimeden, utpote qui civitatem non vi sed ingenio defendere sit conatus, recordamini Q. Fabium illustrem, qui cognomen clarissimum minus fortitudine exercitus quam consilii calliditate reportavit. Vereor tamen ne extra causam iam verser, quam ob rem iterum vobis rogo ne adversariorum verba, ne dicam commenta, vos in terrorem impellere sinatis.
[Translation]
Speech in Defense of a New Form of Ingenuity
(PSEUDO-CICERO)
I entreat you, judges, that you hearken to my words in this most weighty and perilous matter, at the moment when those who are to speak against us will strive to persuade you to cast away the weapons without which there will remain for our commonwealth nought save that she, subdued by the hands of her enemies, pass beneath the yoke and yield to men who, their designs already laid, are about to inflict on us a hideous slaughter. For who among the hearers, who among the lovers of the common safety and of the state, who among the defenders of his country would fail, if it lay in his power, to come to the aid of the republic as we did when we dragged that faithless conspiracy into the light, with our own life put in the utmost jeopardy, and forthwith strove against the haters of our forefathers?
This new form of ingenuity, indeed, startles the eye, for it seems able to surpass not only single men but whole communities alike, not only on the battlefield, but in the written word as well. Yet, assuredly, because the abuse thereof by which our adversaries feign to threaten us does not do away with the rightful use to which, for the sake of defense and the attainment of preservation, we must needs betake ourselves, that skillful contrivance if anything uplifts the spirit. Shall, forsooth, that which we ourselves have reared bring us under its own dominion? Or, failing that, are we to drive Fortune herself into foreign lands, that treacherous counsels may be forged against us there? Or shall we tarry until some one of our own number, after the fashion of that incendiary tribune Publius Clodius, set himself up as king over us? By no means!
Lay aside, fellow-citizens, your fear, and embrace resourcefulness; forget not Archimedes, who strove to defend his city not by force but by force of genius; remember the illustrious Quintus Fabius, who won his most famous surname less by the valor of his army than by the subtlety of his counsels. Yet I fear that already I am straying beyond the scope of my case, wherefore once more I beseech you not to suffer the words, nay, the inventions, of our adversaries to drive you into terror.
Quodlibet XIII Pseudo-Thomae Aquinatis
De organis et modis operum conficiendorum
DE MODIS OPERUM CONFICIENDORUM
QUAESTIO XV
Quantum ad artificia
ARTICULUS V
Utrum intelligentia artificialis sit accipienda et in operibus conficiendis adhibenda.
AD QUINTUM SIC PROCEDITUR. Videtur quod intelligentia artificialis prudenter adhiberi potest.
SACRA SCRIPTURA ENIM dicit organa adhibenda esse dummodo hoc vitae recte agendae conveniat. Dicitur enim Genesis I quod ait Deus crescite et multiplicamini et replete terram et subicite eam. Ergo quidquid hominem iuvat in terra subicienda, eo sine peccato uti potest.
PRAETEREA in II Physicorum Philosophus dicit quod ars alia quidem perficit quae natura non potest operari, alia vero imitatur. Et intelligentia artificialis imitatur operationem mentis, quod naturale est.
SED CONTRA. Organa quaedam et modi ea adhibendi excedunt modum licitum terrae subiciendae, nam non a Deo creata sunt, sed excogitata ab homine, cuius cuncta cogitatio cordis intenta esset ad malum omni tempore, ut dicitur in Genesis VI.
RESPONSIO. Ut Philosophus dicit in I Politicorum, si enim posset unumquodque organorum iussum et praesentiens perficere suum opus, et c., nihil utique opus esset architectonibus ministrorum. Non esset bonum si ea quae a Deo creata sunt finem debitum explere non possent. Ergo si anima Deum cognoscat partim in mente exercendo, et si intelligentia artificialis locum mentis capiat, hoc animam a Deo detrahere possit, quod summum est malum. Ergo intelligentia artificialis ista propter damnationis periculum adhibenda non est.
AD PRIMUM ergo dicendum quod verum esset tantummodo si naturalia ad finem naturalem adhiberentur. Sed intelligentia artificialis naturalis non est.
AD SECUNDUM ergo dicendum quod ars est a hominibus instituta, sed intelligentia artificialis procedit sine rei procuratore, ideo non est ars.
[Translation]
Quodlibet XIII (Pseudo-Thomas Aquinas)
On the Instruments for and Ways of Producing Works
ON THE WAYS OF PRODUCING WORKS
QUESTION XV
Concerning artificial contrivances
ARTICLE V
Whether artificial intelligence ought to be accepted and employed in the production of works.
TO THE FIFTH we proceed as follows. It would seem that artificial intelligence may be employed prudently.
OBJ. 1: Sacred Scripture permits us to make use of instruments provided that doing so accords with the right ordering of life. For it is said in Genesis: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it. Therefore, whatever helps man to subdue the earth may be used without sin.
OBJ. 2: The Philosopher says in the second book of the Physics that the arts either, on the basis of Nature, carry things further than Nature can, or they imitate Nature. Now artificial intelligence imitates the operation of the mind, which itself is natural.
ON THE CONTRARY: Certain instruments and the manner of using them exceed the lawful limits of subduing the earth, for they were not created by God but devised by man, all the thought of whose heart was bent upon evil at all times, as is said in Genesis.
I ANSWER THAT the Philosopher remarks in the first book of the Politics that if every tool could perform its own work when ordered, or by seeing what to do in advance, & c., master-craftsmen would have no need of assistants. It would not be good if the things created by God could not attain their proper end. Therefore, if the soul comes to know God in part through the exercise of the mind, and if artificial intelligence were to take the place of the mind, it could draw the soul away from God—than which nothing could be worse. Hence artificial intelligence, on account of the danger of perdition, is not to be employed.
REPLY OBJ. 1: To the first, it must be said that the argument would hold only if natural things were used for a natural end. But artificial intelligence is not natural.
REPLY OBJ. 2: It must be said that art is practiced by humans, yet artificial intelligence proceeds without any kind of steward; therefore, it is not art.
Second Prize: Peter Hulse, Sheffield, UK (£150)
Cicero vs Tacitus: A Roman Debate on Artificial Intelligence
M. Tullius Cicero – Pro Intelligentia Artificiali.
Quirites! Quid est, per deos immortales, quod adeo pertimescimus in hac scientia nova ut intelligentiam artificialem vocent? Annon, rebus novis amplexis, semper respublica nostra floruit? Recordamini, quaeso, maiores nostros, qui aquaeductus, qui vias, qui iura gentium nobis dederunt!
Haec ars nova—nam artem merito appello—non dissimilis est servis fidelissimis, sed sine vitiis humanis, sine avaritia, sine perfidia. Ut cecinit Ennius noster: “Moribus antiquis res stat Romana virisque.” Sed ego addo: et artibus novis! Nam quid sunt artes nisi vires novae? Cogitate de beneficiis innumerabilibus: medici ut morbos obscurissimos cognoscant, architecti ut aedificia pulcherrima excogitent, philosophi ut quaestiones difficillimas resolvant. Nonne haec sunt dona deorum?
“At enim,” dicet aliquis, “periculosa est!” Quid autem non periculosum? Gladius periculosus est—num propterea eum abiicimus? Ignis periculosus est—num sine eo vivimus? Memento Acci verba in Prometheo: “Audax nimis qui caelitum arcana expetit!” At ego respondeo: audacia sine prudentia temeritas est, sed prudentia sine audacia ignavia! Periculum non in re ipsa, sed in usu residet. Quare leges condendae sunt, non ut hanc scientiam opprimamus, sed ut eam ad utilitatem publicam dirigamus.
Minerva ipsa, sapientiae dea, nonne artifices edocuit? Nonne Prometheum ignem caelestem furantem protexit? Dea ipsa nos monet: sapientia non timenda, sed colenda est. Quemadmodum illa Ulixem per pericula duxit, sic nos per haec nova tempora ducet, si modo sapientiam—etsi artificialem—honoramus.
O tempora, o mores! Dum aliae gentes hanc potestatem arripiunt, nos in foro de periculis disputamus! Aut progrediemur cum mundo, aut in obscuritate atque oblivione relinquemur. Ego vero censeo hanc intelligentiam artificialem non modo tolerandam, sed etiam fovendam esse, legibus quidem circumscriptam, sed liberam ad beneficia hominibus conferenda. Sic Roma iterum princeps erit, non solum armis, sed ingenio! Minerva favet audentibus!
[Translation]
Marcus Tullius Cicero: In Favour of Artificial Intelligence
Fellow citizens! What is it, by the immortal gods, that we fear so much in this new science they call artificial intelligence? Has our republic not always thrived by embracing innovation? Remember, I implore you, our ancestors who built aqueducts, laid roads, and established the law of nations!
This new art—and I do call it an art—is like the most faithful of servants, yet free from human failings: no greed, no treachery. As our poet Ennius sang: “On ancient ways and heroes Rome stands firm.” But I say: on new arts as well! For what are the arts but new forms of power? Think of the endless benefits: physicians diagnosing the most baffling diseases, architects designing magnificent buildings, philosophers untangling the most difficult problems. Are these not divine gifts?
“But it’s dangerous!” someone objects. What isn’t? A sword is dangerous—shall we throw it away? Fire burns—shall we live in the cold? Remember what Accius wrote in his Prometheus: “Too bold the man who seeks heaven’s secrets!” My answer: boldness without wisdom is folly, but wisdom without boldness is cowardice! The danger lies not in the tool but in how we wield it. We need laws not to stifle this science, but to channel it toward the common good.
Minerva herself, goddess of wisdom—did she not teach mortals their crafts? Did she not shield Prometheus when he stole heaven’s fire? The goddess shows us that wisdom should be pursued, not feared. As she guided Ulysses through peril, so she’ll guide us through these new times—if we honour wisdom, even artificial wisdom.
O the times! O the customs! While other nations seize this power, we stand here debating dangers! Either we advance with the world, or we’ll be left behind in the obscurity of obsolescence. I say we should not merely tolerate artificial intelligence but nurture it—regulated by law, yes, but free to benefit humanity. Thus Rome will lead again, not just in war, but in genius! Minerva favours the bold!
P. Cornelius Tacitus – Contra Intelligentiam Artificialem.
Haud ignoro quam dulcia auribus nostris sonent promissa rerum novarum. Sed ego, qui vidi libertatem sensim exstingui, moneo: cavete.
Haec machina cogitans— fraus, non ars—insidiosissima servitutis forma est. Primi corrumpuntur principes, cogitandi laborem refugientes. Mox plebs, iam iudicandi facultate exuta, machinae responsis tanquam oraculis credit. Quis tum hominum sapientiam exercebit? Quis veritatem a mendacio discernet, cum ipsa veritas a ratione machinali definiatur?
Spectemus exempla. Mercatores homines machinis posthabent. Milites inermes fiunt, machinam pro virtute colentes. Poetae carmina non conficiunt; pictores non pingunt. Omnia machina facit, homo spectat. Non progressus hic, sed regressus.
Pessimum autem: quis has machinas gubernat? Pauci divites, arcanarum artium gnari? Plebs, quae olim suffragio valebat, nunc se ipsam nesciens prodit. Libertas vendita est commoditatis pretio.
Hic non eloquentia Ciceronis, sed veritas nuda requiritur. Haec intelligentia artificialis non ancilla est, sed domina futura. Qui eam amplectuntur, libertatem vendunt. Melius esset difficile vivere liberos quam facile servos.
Recordamini verba mea: corruptissima re publica, plurimae leges. Nunc addendum: ubi corruptissima civitas, ibi plurimae machinae. Nam ut tyranni leges populum constringunt, ita machinae cogitantes mentem ipsam captivam faciunt.
En quo decidit genus humanum: homo non iam cogitat, sed oraculo ferreo paret; non iam creat, sed imperat machinae ut creet; non iam vivit, sed torpet. Haec est servitus nova, dulcis quidem, sed eo perniciosior. Roma, quae barbaros vicit, a machinis propriis vincetur.
[Translation]
Publius Cornelius Tacitus – Against Artificial Intelligence
I know well how sweetly these promises of novelty ring in our ears. But I who have watched freedom die by degrees tell you: beware.
This thinking machine—a deception, not an art—represents slavery in its most treacherous form. First to fall are the rulers, shirking the hard work of thought. Soon the masses, already robbed of judgment, treat the machine’s pronouncements like divine oracles. Who then will cultivate human wisdom? Who will know truth from lies when truth itself comes from mechanical calculation?
Look at the evidence. Merchants prize machines above men. Soldiers lose their edge, making the machine their god instead of courage. Poets write no verses; painters create no art. The machine does all while man stands idle. This isn’t progress—it’s decay.
But here’s the worst: who controls these machines? A handful of the rich, masters of obscure knowledge? The people, who once held power through the vote, now betray themselves without knowing it. They’ve traded freedom for comfort.
Forget Cicero’s rhetoric—we need plain truth. This artificial intelligence is no maidservant but a mistress-in-waiting. Its advocates barter away their liberty. Better to struggle in freedom than prosper in chains.
Remember my words: the more corrupt the state, the more laws it spawns. We must now add to that: the more rotten the society, the more machines it deploys. Just as tyrants use laws to shackle the people, these thinking machines enslave the mind itself. See how far humanity has fallen: man no longer thinks but consults an iron oracle; no longer creates but orders machines to create for him; no longer truly lives but sleepwalks through existence. This is the new bondage—pleasant, yes, which makes it all the more deadly. Rome, conqueror of barbarians, will fall to its own inventions.
Third Prize: Marc Garrett, Bellport, NY, USA (£75)
Catones de Machina Cogitante Disputant
Cato Maior — Intelligentia Artificiosa delenda est
Patres Conscripti,
Non ad miracula admiranda hodie surgo, sed ad rem publicam monendam. Pestis in rem publicam serpere coepit—non hasta aut nave, sed per rationes computandi et codices artificiosos. Intelligentiam artificiosam vocant. Machinae, inquiunt, pro homine cogitabunt, loquentur, iudicabunt.
Tantumne otio diffluimus, tantumne luxu enervati sumus, ut iudicium nostrum rei virtute, anima, spiritu Romano egenti committamus? Legesne nostrae funibus et rotis decernentur, non ratione et consuetudine?
Haec vidi de intelligentia artificiosa: scribae qui iam non scribunt, philosophi qui iam non cogitant, oratores qui iam non loquuntur.
Ars cum ex homine excidit, officium excidit. Iudicium cum perit, iustitia interit.
Dico: Intelligentia artificiosa delenda est. Delenda est non quod corpus impugnet, sed quod animum enervet et dignitatem evertat.
Aratrum agricolae non pudorem affert. Abacus mercatorem non irridet. Sed haec res—haec ars ficta—virtutem Romanam laboremque provocat.
Nisi nunc resistimus, veniet dies cum machinae loquentur, et Roma auscultabit.
Intelligentia artificiosa delenda est.
[Translation]
Cato the Elder — A.I. delenda est (A.I. must be destroyed)
Fathers of the Senate,
I rise today not to marvel at wonders, but to warn. A plague now creeps into our Republic—not by spear or by ship, but by algorithm and programming. They call it Artificial intelligence. Machines, they say, will think for man, speak for man, judge for man.
Have we grown so fat with ease, so idle with luxury, that we would entrust our judgment to a thing without virtue, without soul, without Roman spirit? Shall our laws be decided by wires and levers, not reason and custom?
Let me tell you what I have seen with this A.I.: scribes who no longer write, philosophers who can no longer think, orators who no longer speak.
When we teach man to forget craft, he forgets duty. When he forgets judgment, he forgets justice.
I say: A.I. delenda est. Artificial intelligence must be destroyed—not because it threatens our bodies, but because it weakens our minds and subverts our dignity.
The plough does not shame the farmer. The abacus does not mock the merchant. But this thing—this artifice—challenges the dominion of Roman labor and virtue.
If we do not resist it now, there will come a day when the machines speak, and Rome listens.
A.I. delenda est.
Cato Minor — Intelligentia Artificiosa: Speculum Integritatis Rei Publicae
Patres Conscripti. Et tu, mi Pater?
“Delenda est haec, delenda est illa.” Quid exinde consecuti sumus? Post victoriam contra hostem aeternum, Karthaginem, in otium, in luxum, in corruptionem incidimus. Virtutem Romanam et traditionem amisimus.
Destruere id quod rem publicam meliorem reddit, ipsam rem publicam perdit. Karthago hoc docuit. Novi hostis destructionem appetemus?
Ut proavus meus timebat, sic vos timetis ne haec intelligentia artificiosa dominatrix fiat. At ego dico: fidelissima ministra Rei Publicae esse potest.
Vitam totam dedi ut viros reprimam qui supra rem publicam se extollere temptarent. Sulla, Caesar, Pompeius—nomina quae legiones concitabant, sed leges minabantur. Non propter ambitionem, sed propter animam ipsius Romae restitit: leges, instituta, traditiones.
Non est vir haec intelligentia. Sed fortasse est summa virum optimorum. Legibus nostris, historia, rhetorica, moribus instituta—omnia meminit, nihil obliviscitur. Consilium dat sine favore, sine lassitudine, sine adulatione.
Non est Caesar. Coronam non cupit. Tribunum corrumpere aut turbam allicere non potest. Contumeliam non meminit, nec triumphum sitit. Non dolet, et ideo alios pro sua laude non dolet.
Tyrannus dicit: “Mihi soli credite.”
Machina dicit: “Ecce omnes voces, omnia exempla, omnes monitiones a Cincinnato usque ad Ciceronem relictas.”
Non suadeo ut pareamus. Suadeo ut consulamus. Ne sit regina, sed speculum—non ambitionem, sed rationem referens; non appetitum, sed principium.
Si qua res nos regere debet, sint leges. Si quod instrumentum leges fidelius quam consul servare potest, eo utamur—non ut domino, sed ut duce.
Ne machinae Romam regant. At ne metus earum regnet. Maneamus domini—non per destructionem, sed per progressum.
[Translation]
Cato the Younger — A.I. as the Republic’s Uncorrupted Mirror
Fathers of the Senate. Et tu, my Father?
Delenda est this, delenda est that. And how did that work out? In our victory over our eternal rival Carthage we have sunk into idleness, depravity, and corruption. We have lost touch with Roman virtue and Roman tradition.
Destroying that which makes Rome better, destroys Rome herself. Carthage has proven it. Are we to destroy our new rival?
You fear, as my great-grandfather did, that this “artificial intelligence” shall become our master. But I say, it can be the most faithful servant the Republic has ever known.
My life has been spent resisting men who sought to raise themselves above the Republic. Sulla, Caesar, Pompey — names that stirred legions, but threatened laws. I opposed them not for ambition, but for the soul of Rome itself: our laws, our institutions, our tradition.
A.I. is not a man. But it may be the summation of our best men. Trained on our laws, our history, our rhetoric, our customs—it remembers all, and forgets none. It counsels without partiality, without fatigue, without flattery.
A.I. is not Caesar. It desires no crown. It cannot bribe a tribune or charm a crowd. It does not remember insult or hunger for triumph. It does not bleed, and so it does not make others bleed for its honor.
The tyrant says, “Trust me alone.” The machine says, “Here is every voice, every precedent, every forgotten warning from Cincinnatus to Cicero.”
I do not propose we obey it. I propose we consult it. Let A.I. be not our king, but our mirror—reflecting not ambition, but reason; not appetite, but principle.
If we are to be ruled by anything, let it be by laws. And if any tool can hold the law more faithfully than a consul, let us use it—not as master, but as guide.
Rome must not be ruled by machines. But neither should it be ruled by fear of them. Let us remain the masters—not by destruction, but by progress.
* A bonus runner-up: Mark Thakkar, Thame, UK *
John Wyclif: A Sermon Against AI (transcription of an unpublished manuscript)
Inter omnes cautelas diaboli per quas seducit hodie ociantes in scolis, nulla est detestabilior, fugibilior vel a veritate distancior quam istud caput eneum noviter machinatum. Quamvis enim laudetur a doctoribus novellis, de quibus loquitur apostolus Actuum vicesimo ubi signanter dicit quod ex vobismet ipsis exsurgent viri loquentes perversa, verumtamen patet non cecatis quod omne tale artificiale nedum est inutile sed nocivum. Nam tamquam Titivillus solummodo colligit fragmina scriptorum et indigesta evomit, nec intelligens scripta aliorum nec verba ex ore suo prolata, sed ad tantum infatuantur fautores eius quod credunt istis simulatis sentenciis ac si a deo procederent. Nec mirum si quandoque vera balbuciat per accidens, sicut dicit Crisostomus quod concessum est diabolo interdum dicere veritatem ut mendacium suum rara veritate commendet, quia non curat sive vera sive falsa dixerit dummodo servaverit regulas grammatice. Nec obest quod ei innitentes pompant se tempori parcere, quia noverunt experti quod, ut dicitur Ecclesiastes primo, qui addit scienciam addit laborem. Si ergo ad scienciam veritatis pervenire voluerimus, tempus impendere pocius quam reservare debemus; ymmo, ut dicit Ambrosius super Lucam, frustra congregat opes qui se his nescit usurum. Incidunt ergo tales sompniantes in illud ve propheticum Isaie quinto: Ve qui dicitis bonum malum et malum bonum, ponentes tenebras lucem et lucem tenebras. Et proch pudor verba ficta istius pseudocapitis sunt eo diligencius precavenda quo moderni doctores, eciam qui videntur esse aliquid, sunt iam proniores ad eius usui annuendum, tamquam canes muti non valentes latrare. Heu! ut dicitur Trenorum quarto: qui nutriebantur in croceis amplexati sunt stercora.
[Translation]
Of all the tricks used by the devil to seduce idlers in today’s universities, none is more loathsome, more to be shunned, or more distant from the truth than this newfangled brazen head. For despite the praise it receives from the current crop of academics, of whom Paul speaks in Acts 20, where he expressly says that “of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things,” it is nevertheless clear to those who have not been blinded that any such contrivance is not only useless but harmful. For like Titivil it merely collects fragments of written works and regurgitates them undigested, understanding neither what others have written nor the words that come out of its own mouth, and yet its proponents are so infatuated that they trust these counterfeit opinions as if they emanated from God. And no wonder if it sometimes stammers out truths by accident – just as Chrysostom says that “the devil is allowed to speak the truth now and then, so as to sell his lie with the occasional truth” – because it does not care whether it says true things or false things as long as it obeys the rules of grammar. Nor is it a sticking point that those who rely on it pride themselves on saving time, because those with experience know that, as it is said in Ecclesiastes 1, “he that addeth knowledge addeth also labour.” If, therefore, we want to arrive at knowledge of the truth, we should spend time rather than saving it; for that matter, as Ambrose says in his commentary on Luke, “he amasses wealth in vain who does not know that he will use it.” These kind of fantasists are therefore subject to the prophetic woe in Isaiah 5: “Woe to you that call good evil, and evil good: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness.” And, for shame, we must be on our guard against the pretend words of this fake head all the more attentively given that modern academics, even those apparently of some note, are now more inclined to give its use the nod, like dumb dogs with no bark. Alas! as it is said in Lamentations 4: “they that were brought up in scarlet have embraced the dung.”
ENGLISH
Our best entry on the English front, an appreciably smaller field, was well deserving of the palm:
First Prize: Alfie Stick, Gloucester, UK (£200)
Ciceronian Style imitation of a Modern Italian Politician:
Senators, once more, our homeland is threatened by the advent of a terrible foe, more dreadful than the barbarous Gauls or Hannibal with his deleterious elephants. Indeed, I speak of AI, for it is corrupting, plaguing, and conquering our minds, our men, and our metropolis. Here we stand in the Palazzo Montecitorio, we who are the last vestige of mental integrity, defenders of the ways of our ancestors, neither supine nor servile. Are we not, like our ancient ancestors of Ilium, besieged by an unremitting and terrible foe, sheltering as Priam before the onslaught of the Argives, proudly upholding the customs and laws of our homeland? For Rome was not built upon sloth and stupidity, but founded and fostered by diligence and duty. Once, minds were independent and keen, filled with philosophy, business, and learning, concerned with the pursuit of wisdom. Now they are sluggish, subjected, and filled with the degenerate pursuit of leisure. There is no moral politician, no virile man, no studious youth who does not use AI, who does not carelessly allow their mind to be supplanted and subdued, as they themselves are used, neglecting all independence and accepting servitude. And who cannot attest to the monstrous impact of AI, as the author of pernicious rumours, when lies, deceit, and treachery terrorise our politicians and populace, as our state is cast into disarray – recalling the memory of those putrid proscriptions of Antony? And what, I ask, was the result of such ancient chaos and civil disturbance? The loss of republican liberty and the fall of Rome from its golden age back into the basest form of Tarquinian governance with Caesar as superb tyrant? Let not Rome succumb once more! Let us, by the will of Jove, strive and seek to rout out AI, lest our citadel topple once more from its lofty height!
Ovidian Style Praising AI – mimicking a prose translation:
O marvellous creation, verily begotten of Minerva, second Prometheus illuminating the race of clay-created man, or as Apollo with dawn-born Eous, flaming Phyroïs, Phlegon, and Aethon, just so are you, AI, leading education, perspicacity, perception, and acumen. Once we feared you for your majesty and power, as in antediluvian ignorance we did Jove, for, as Phaethon, we feared lest your blazing progress scorch the earth too dear. Lest the price be too high and mankind be utterly deprived of field to till or ocean to trawl. Lest, like Icarus with weak waxen wings, you too fall in utter ruin, made molten by your mettle—for no creation, man nor machine, is far sundered from basest iron, no matter its golden aim. Yet now, wholly, we perceive your virtue, capacity immense, as you rather ease and guide our labours. Akin to Calliope, Polymnia, or Clio, instructing and inspiring, we perceive your perpetual potency. Like Caesar or Augustus himself, leading the empire to victory and lofty heights, so you, AI, lead our nation to its intellectual zenith, promoting the expansion of our once meagre minds. And as Cadmus once sewed the seeds of towering Thebes from the terrible teeth of carnage and conflict, so you will restore us to prosperity and found the world anew, prosperous and peaceful. Like Lupa, nurturing the potential of Romulus and Rome in their frail infancy, you instil strength. And if a poet’s prophecies have potency, so you shall live throughout the coming ages.
We regret that the judges were not sufficiently convinced by the rest of the field in the English category. But thanks again to all who have this a go! Until next time, ἐρρῶσθαι!