The Case for the Prosecution in the Ciceronian Era

Notes

Notes chapter 1 1. On this topic of the rhetorical schools, see Quint. Inst. 7.4.36. 2. Translations are mine, unless otherwise indicated. 3. On Cestius and on the date of the younger Cicero’s governorship, see Kaster’s commentary in Suetonius Tranquillus 1995, 327–29. 4. See Inst. 3.6.93 and 10.1.23, where Quintilian makes it clear that Brutus’s speech was written “exercitationis gratia” [for the sake of practice], although Cornelius Celsus mistakenly believed that it was actually delivered. 5. This criterion enables me to avoid the trial of C. Rabirius (TLRR no. 221) in 63 B.C., which took place in a iudicium populi (trial before the people), and the trial of Milo (TLRR no. 309) in 52 B.C., which occurred in a quaestio extraordinaria (special court). The ‹rst is the most dif‹cult of all trials to understand in legal terms, and Cicero’s published speech in the second is probably farthest removed from the delivered version. 6. See Ayers 1950. Pierpaoli (1997) has described the speech of Ser. Sulpicius Rufus in the trial of Murena; references to his article occur in chap. 6 of the present book. In the category of works that examine some of these trials from a non-Ciceronian perspective , I should also mention the ‹ctional creations of Steven Saylor, three historically convincing mystery novels based on, respectively, the Pro Roscio Amerino, the Pro Caelio , and the Pro Milone: Roman Blood (1991), The Venus Throw (1995), and A Murder on the Appian Way (1996), all published by St. Martin’s Press. Saylor narrates the events surrounding these three trials from the point of view of a detective called Gordianus the Finder. I refrain from discussing Saylor’s reconstruction of events, so as not to lessen the enjoyment of future readers of these novels. 263 264 Notes to Pages 4–9 7. Ayers 1950, 1–3. 8. For that reason, when I cite a section number without any accompanying title, the section citation is to that speech. Unless otherwise indicated, the Oxford Classical Text has been followed for Cicero’s orations, except the Pro Sulla, for which Berry’s text has been used, and the Pro Caelio, for which Austin’s text has been used. 9. This analysis is based on trials listed in TLRR. Although there could be disagreement about the precise numbers, the overall picture is indisputable. Of course, it is possible that the extant sources do not provide a representative sample of the actual trials that took place during this period. 10. This statement is based on the criminal trials listed in TLRR. I calculate 108 condemnations and 105 acquittals between 149 and 50 B.C., but I concede that there can probably be no agreement about the exact numbers, since the verdict, and sometimes even the occurrence of the trial, is often doubtful. The overall picture, however, is that verdicts could go either way. 11. See Crawford 1984, 15. 12. The crucial attack came from P. A. Brunt (1965). 13. Riggsby (1999) makes important progress in this direction with his comprehensive coverage of Ciceronian forensic speeches and the trials in which they were delivered . 14. Riggsby (1995a, 249) calls this “appropriation” and “reversal.” 15. Crook 1995, 197. 16. This section is meant to provide a general overview, rather than presenting original conclusions, and provides only a sketch of a very complex topic. See Greenidge 1901, 456–76; Bianchini 1964; Alexander 1977, 98–130, 200–22; Alexander 1985; David 1992, 497–589; Santalucia 1997. 17. Fantham (1997, 120–21) writes: “Many a young man made his name by accusing a public ‹gure. . . . it was virtually a duty for a young Roman to lay a charge if there was a family vendetta and to prosecute the man who had laid charge against his father.” 18. Quintilian (Inst. 7.4.34) lists industria, vires, and ‹des (respectively, “energy,” “force,” and “trustworthiness”) as the criteria by which the prosecutor was chosen. 19. See Alexander 1982, 154. 20. See Greenidge 1901, 479. Quintilian (Inst. 6.4.5) says that some orators compensated for weak speeches by their performance in the altercatio. 21. The locus classicus is Polyb. 6.14. For an overview of Roman capital punishment and exemptions from it, see Bauman 1996, 14–19. I shall refer to the defendant as masculine , because I deal in this book with no female defendants, and they cannot have been common in the quaestiones perpetuae, the standing criminal courts. However, it...