IN VERREM 1

REVISION SUMMARY
CH 1

 Urgency to C’s speech for jury to ‘fix Rome, as the divinity requires
 How jury have been viewed negatively (‘unpopularity of your order’), thus through siding with C they might be
able to clear their ‘tarnished’ name
 Republic under threat
 Law courts are known to be inefficient – corrupt people are acquitted bcs they are wealthy
CH 2

 Mentions Verres’ criminality – hyperbole: condemned by everyone

 C saying V thinks he’ll be acquitted due to his wealth
 C pronounces himself as the prosecutor of the case – not to attack senate but to relieve its ‘unpopularity’
 C saying that by finding V guilty, it would restore reputation of courts
 Denigrates V character: not named, ‘abuser’ of Asia & Pamphylia, ‘shame & ruin’ of Sicily
CH 3 + 4 + 5

 C suggests if V is found innocent, it wont be bcs he didn’t commit a crime nor bcs there was nobody to punish
him, but instead bcs of corrupt nature of jury
 Then C portrays himself as weak & fearful of what might happen to elicit sympathy from jury

 C mentions how V’s tries to plot against C, jury (incl Glabrio), Roman people, allies, senate
 Quotes directly from V – V says nothing is incorruptible

 C blackens V character – ‘remarkable stupidity’ + ‘audacity’

CH 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10

 C requested 110 days to collect & prep evidence from Sicily he needed for case
 V & his supporters introduced a trumped-up charge/extortion against another gov (of Achaia), asking for 108 days to gather
evidence – to delay C’s case & occupy court time (C claims this)
 C claims he gathered evidence in only 50 days

 C is ‘de-crowning’ V here

 V’s reason for wishing to postpone case to following year was, as C puts it, to avoid trial running during ‘most violent gusts of
storm’
 C flatters jury by presenting them as ‘good men’ whom V is trying to corrupt
 If V was innocent, he wouldn’t be going to such lengths to disrupt court & proceedings
CH 11 + 12 + 13 + 14

 Praeteritio: C said he wouldn’t mention the ‘dishonors & disgraces’ of V’s youth but still mentions them: when V
was quaestor, he robbed Gnaeus Carbo of public money
 Consul was betrayed, army deserted, violated religious rites & duties
 When V was lieutenant/legatus to Gnaeus Dolabella in Asia & Pamphylia – V destroyed homes
 (V gave evidence against Dolabella when D was on trial for extortion)

 C describes V’s crimes while holding praetorship (e.g. destroyed sacred temples, law in Sicily was not respected,
Roman citizens tortured & killed, plundered ancient monuments)
CH 15 + 16 + 17 +18 + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23

 C adds further drama to trial for jury by dedicating a significant proportion of speech to the lengths to which V tried
to corrupt (e.g. bribe) & disrupt trial

 Hortensius (consul elect + V’s defence lawyer) accompanied by a large crowd – incl Gaius Curio
 Curio congratulates V saying he has been acquitted in trial as a result of H’s successful consular election =>
congratulation = ref to corruption of judges
 V said to have bribed ensure this would happen

 Bags of Sicilian money had been sent by a senator to a Roman knight for use in C’s comitia for aedileship in 69 (to
prevent C from being elected aedile – this would have given him a high profile)
 V is said to have given 500K sesterces to ensure this would happen
CH 24 + 25 + 26 + 27 + 28

 Hortensius tried to intimidate Sicilian delegates – but it didn’t work (Sicilians didn’t go to H’s home)

 V ensured through bribery Marcus Metellus should be praetor & president over extortion court following year

 C ref his duty & dignity

 All attempts made by opposition to ensure V wouldn’t be harmed

 Metelli attempt to intimidate Sicilians (esp witnesses) with their auctoritas – arrogance
 C saying Q Metellus is losing his duty & dignity by protecting V
CH 29 + 30 + 31 + 32

 C quotes V - V says Hortensius & Q Metellus became consuls due to his will
 V also says he needs to get rid of Glabrio (presiding judge) bcs he is too honest, and of Marcus Caesonius (colleague of Cicero,
judge), again bcs he is respecting the law

 V saying how they shouldn’t have politically correct, solemn & severe judges such as Publius Sulpicius, after Kalends of Jan

 C explains how V is going to postpone trial by allowing trial to go into games such as Pompey’s votive games, Roman Games, or
Victory Games

 C speaking to jury directly & asking for their advice as to what to do next
 Boasts about himself – he has prepared for the case the best; ‘hard work, industry, and diligence’
CH 33 + 34 + 35

 C announces his new strategy – won’t have a long uninterrupted speech (standard procedure for opening case)
 C will have written records & witnesses
 C blames Hortensius bcs this happens

 C announces his strategy would be that he’d have his adjournment over before 1 st set has even begun
 C saying he’s doing this for the sake of the Republic

 C saying he’s acting on behalf of people when attacking dominance of H in courts (H not named)
CH 36 + 37 + 38 + 39

 C promises he will oppose corruption to the best of his ability as aedile

 Even though C is only an aedile (so potestas, not imperium), his cause is so pleasing & agreeable that consul will
effectively be less than a private citizen (C will eclipse consul Hortensius)

 C claims when equestrian juries were in extortion courts (due to lex Acilia – but then abolished in 81), there was no
case of bribery to influence judicial decision
 But when judicial authority was transferred to senatorial order (lex Cornelia 81), judges started to adopt practice of
bribery – e.g. Quintus Calidus

 C gives more examples of corrupt jurors

CH 40 + 41 + 42 + 43

 C also gives a flagrant example of trial of Varro (74 for extortion; Hortensius’ cousin; H = his defence lawyer)
 C explains how V’s bribery money was distributed to different people – incl. judges (so V was well-prepared)

 C claims provinces would ask for law of extortion to be repealed so that governors wouldn’t extort money to cover their
court costs

 Use of tricolon (‘O trials…! O splendid reputation…! O when the allies…!’)

 C claims V has a v low opinion of senate bcs he thinks they are like him – greedy & avaricious

 C calls on jury to free senate from such calumny – it is by divine prudence that they have the opportunity to do so
CH 44 + 45 + 46

 The demand for restoration of tribunician powers is really a demand of people for proper administration of justice
 Quintus Catulus (Cato’s old friend) withdrew his opposition to Pompey’s motion to restore powers of tribunate

 Pompey has declared he’ll restore powers of tribunes (during speech as consul elect 71) + bring in a reform of
juries

 There’s no clear proof senatorial juries intend to judge justly even after restoration of tribunician powers
 Only 1 senator has been condemned – for being too poor to bribe
CH 47 + 48 + 49 + 50

 It’s a trial in which jury can prove itself – established whether v guilty & v rich men are condemned when senators
act as judges
 C again highlights V’s criminal character – ‘worst crimes’

 C again claims he will conduct the case so properly & suitably – sustained evidence – that no one will obtain
acquittal from judges for Verres

 C encourages jury to behave honestly to remove stain of shame & infamy, otherwise they’ll be replaced
 C also invokes Hercules – climax of speech!
CH 51 + 52 + 53

 C flatters Glabrio - ‘your authority, wisdom…’

 C uses lots of imperatives to persuade Glabrio to support him {e.g. ‘Accept the cause of the law courts…Accept
the cause of senate…Think what you ought to give to Romans…Call to mind Acilian law (set up a new permanent
extortion court with equestrian juries) passed by your father’}

 C taps into Glabrio’s ancestry – common theme

 C flatters G’s father (‘most brave man’), grandfather Scaevola (‘most wise’), father-in-law Scaurus

 C is resolved – ‘I will not permit…’ (tricolon) – jury & praetor to be changed, case to be delayed
CH 54 + 55 + 56

 C claims there are equal chances jury will be praised for what they did (if they find V guilty) or they will remain
unpopular (if they acquit V)

 C announces he’ll adopt a different procedure – to call witnesses immediately (but there’s a precedent)
 C thus is not delivering a long uninterrupted speech

 C finally comes to V’s crime: V had stolen 400K sesterces from Sicily against law