Marcus Tullius Cicero's Prosecution Of Verres

Modern citizens can look to the life of Marcus Tullius Cicero as the paradigm of civic duty and good conscious. Not only did Cicero garner his offices solely through hard work, as a novus homo, but he also upheld the reputation of the Roman legal system, easily seen by his prosecution of Verres, the corrupt, ex-governor of Sicily. Cicero justifiably prosecuted Verres mainly due to Verres’s guilt and Cicero’s desire for power, thus proving Livy’s claim that the law is blind, for even a very wealthy, well connected man can still be found guilty.

Cicero’s prosecution of Verres was motivated by desire for power, ethics, and personal duty. Cicero clearly viewed prosecuting Verres as his path to political success for Cicero claimed, “If you want power, there is a time when you have to seize it. This is my time.” When Terentia asked Cicero how he intended to accomplish this goal, he coolly responded, “By prosecuting Gaius Verres for extortion.” (Harris 66). Furthermore, Cicero’s impeccable ethics played a role in his desire to prosecute Verres, for Verres was unequivocally guilty and had killed people. Similarly, there is a recurring motif of Cicero not defending those he found incredibly guilty (particularly of violence), such as when he refused to defend Catiline on the grounds, that Catiline was “so obviously
guilty.” (Harris 243). Cicero’s desire to prosecute Verres could also be viewed as a personal struggle to do as his wife says, for after Verres’s freedmen searched Cicero’s house for Sthenius, Terrentia said he “must crush them [Verres].” (Harris 45).

Cicero’s prosecution of Verres was incredibly justified for provincial governors who extorted indigenous populations were ubiquitous and Verres was obviously guilty of killing Roman citizens without a trial and falsifying documents.
Provincial governors often had to extort local populations to replenish the funds they spent to win elections and it was very hard for provincials to seek justice due to inherent limitations in the Roman legal system (Boatwright 66). Moreover, Cicero’s journey to Sicily exposed many of Verres’s crimes including executing a Roman citizen without a trial, making false accusations, seizing property illegally, and falsifying
documents.

Cicero’s prosecution of Verres shows that while the Roman legal system is inherently very biased and not based upon fairness and culpability, it remains possible for a man to face justice regardless of his connections. Verres had an alliance with the Metellus family, whose member, Marcus Metellus, controlled the extortion court (Harris 120). Similarly, he had many powerful friends use favors or bribe jurors to avoid his prosecution (Harris 146). Despite all his connections and wealth, the jury still found Verres guilty, forcing him to flee the city (Harris 149). Therefore, Livy’s assertion that the law is blind is accurate in this specific case of Cicero prosecuting Verres, but remains inaccurate in many other court cases since bribery often allowed the guilty to be acquitted.

Cicero’s behavior remains a model of civic duty millennia after his death. Against all odds, Cicero successfully prosecuted a governor for extortion and was able to use this as the impetus for his rapid acceleration up the cursus honorum, the order of public offices, until he eventually reached consul. Cicero proved that through tenacity and ethics, anything can be accomplished.