1. For Terentia, Tullia, and Marcus, see below, pp. 65, 84, 157.
2. Established by the Calpurnian law of 149 B.C., regularizing procedure established twenty-two years earlier. Verres’ rapacity caused fears at Rome that the Sicilians would cut their wheat production, and the Roman state lose its rich tithes.
1. Like Cicero himself, he was executed by the Second Triumvirate (43 B.C.); the story was that Antony wanted one of his works of art.
1. As quaestor to Gnaeus Papirius Carbo, in Cisalpine Gaul, 84 B.C. Verres was in Pamphylia (to the south-east of the province of Asia) as legate to Gnaeus Cornelius Dolabella, governor of Cilicia, 81 B.C. He became city-praetor (see Appendix C, praetor) in 74. B.C., just before going to Sicily as governor. See also Appendix D (maps).
1. The chronology of these events of 70 B.C. has recently (though without certainty) been interpreted as follows: 10 January, prosecution announced, 20 January, speech against Quintus Caecilius Niger (p. 36), 20 January-20 April (a period which in this year may have included an ‘intercalary’, i.e. additional, month after 23 February). Cicero’s investigations (perhaps 20/25 days studying case in Rome, 15/20 in Sicily, 10/12 back in Rome), end April–early July abortive Achaian inquiry, between 14 and 26 July challenging of judges in Verres case, 5 August, this speech, 13 August, adjournment, mid-September, Verres retires into exile, 20 September, his conviction. For the Games during the later part of the year, see p. 48.
1. See last note. Under a law of the dictator Sulla both parties had a right to reject judges.
1. The quaestor was expected to behave like a son towards his governor, but in the civil war between the Marians and Sulla, Verres deserted his governor in order to change sides to the victorious Sulla.
1. i.e. promised agents a large sum to secure his acquittal by bribing the judges.
2. Such as would have indicated violation of secrecy, bribery of judges, or distrust of the bribed by the bribers.
1. At this period the conservative patrician clan of the Metelli gained a large proportion of the most important offices of state – as they had formerly under Sulla, of whose party they were the nucleus and also in the latter part of the previous century. There was also an earlier saying (p. 47), doubtfully attributed to the poet Naevius (c. 270–201 B.C.), ‘it is fated for the Metelli to become consuls at Rome*. The consul-elect, Quintus Metellus, was later known as Cre-ticus for his brutal reduction of Crete, a pirate base (68–66 B.C.). Lucius Metellus became consul in 68 and died during the year. (See Genealogical Table on p. 254.)
2. Candidates in a major election formed groups of supporters in each quarter of the city, paying them sums of money through an intermediary, who employed agents to distribute the money. On the present occasion the portion of the Sicilian plunder sent to the knight was intended for the forthcoming elections to consulships and praetorships.
1. It is not known whether Verres made such an attempt.
1. See Appendix C. The centuries which voted first influenced the votes of those which followed and therefore needed particularly generous bribes.
2. In the Brutus, Cicero describes him as lazy and careless.
1. This court in 73 B.C. had convicted Statius Albius (or Abbius) Oppianicus, with two others, of attempting to poison his stepson Aulus Cluentius Habitus, whom in 66 B.C. Cicero was to defend against charges of poisoning Oppianicus (who had died in exile) and of bribing Gaius Junius’s court – of which Cicero himself however, in the present case, has nothing good to say.
2. A ‘new man’, became praetor in 67 or 66. Publius Sulpicius was elected to a quaestorship for 69. Gaius Tremellius Scrofa was an agriculturist and a friend of Varro.
3. Reference is made to the following Games: Pompey’s (last half of August, duration fifteen days), to celebrate his successful conclusion of the civil war against the ex-Marian Quintus Sertorius in Spain in 72 B.C.; Roman (4–19 September), annual Games originally promised to gods in event of Roman victory, gradually extended in scope: Victory (27–31 October), instituted by Sulla to commemorate his victory over the Samnites (Marians) in 82 B.C.; Plebeian, 4–17 November.
1. One of the tribunes’ powers removed by Sulla had been their right to arrest and bring before an Assembly or throw into prison any offender of senatorial rank.
2. Governor of Spain, condemned 77 B.C.; Publius Septimius Scaevola, condemned 72 B.C. (in his speech For Cluentius Cicero tries to take back the present reference); Gaius Popilius Laenas subsequently went into exile at Nuceria (Campania); Marcus Atilius Bulbus, condemned 73–71 B.C.
1. Gaius Fidiculanius Falcula and others were charged with this in the Oppianicus case (p. 48); ‘another judge’ is believed to have been Gaius Aelius Staienus, in the same court.
1. Consul 78 B.C, moderate conservative; for many years leader of the Senate. A relative of Quintus Hortensius.
2. Earlier this year (70 B.C.) as fellow-consul with Marcus Licinius Crassus. His first public speech was made outside Rome because he had not yet laid down his military command (after the defeat of Sertorius, p. 48, and of the slave revolt of Spartacus) and could therefore not make an electoral speech within the walls.
1. Earlier this year by a law sponsored by the two consuls; this removed the disabilities (other than their exclusion from the courts) which Sulla had imposed.
1. 123 or 122 B.C: made the knights judges in extortion cases. This was one of the laws which Sulla had repudiated.
1. Consul 133 B.C., chief priest 123; Glabrio’s maternal grandfather. Marcus Aemilius Scaurus was consul in 117 and 115.
2. During Pompey’s Votive Games and the Roman Games (p. 48).
3. Lucius Licinius Lucullus, commander in the East and conservative enemy of Pompey, and his brother Marcus (M. Terentius Varro Lucullus) when they accused the augur Servilius (or a certain Marcus Cotta) of responsibility for their father’s death. (Neither of them was a good orator, which may account for their choice of this procedure.)
1. According to the normal procedure for the first part of a trial, the prosecutor opened with a long speech, which was answered by a long speech for the defence; speeches by juniors may have followed. Only then was it customary for the witnesses to give evidence – first for the prosecution, then for the defence. It is not immediately clear how the modification of procedure proposed by Cicero would necessarily shorten the total duration of the trial, but perhaps he foresaw that the early witnesses (to be heard, incidentally, at a time when there were many summer visitors at Rome (p. 56)) would be so damning that Verres would quit: as in fact happened, so that the second part of the trial, which normally followed after the adjournment and was again introduced by long speeches on both sides, never took place. Moreover, if there was no legal limit to the length of time which could be spent on the customary long, continuous speeches, Cicero may have believed it useful to abandon these so as to prevent the defence from spinning theirs out to an inordinate length.