Zusammenfassung der Ressource
Defence
of Roscius 80 BC
- What happened BEFORE trial?
- RtY had been accused of killing
his dad (he was accused of
planning it, not actually DOING it)
- In 81 BC his father had been murdered in Rome while
visiting friends, by unknown thugs
- Slaves only witnesses
- RtY was in Ameria - nothing to
connect him to the crime
- Magnus, Capito +
Chrysogonus sought and
succeeded in depriving
RtY of his inheritance
- Had the name of RtE placed on
posthumously placed on the
proscriptions lists
Anmerkungen:
- Sulla had created the proscription lists the year before - it meant any man on it could be killed. The killer would not be prosecuted, and usually was given a reward. A way of getting rid of his opponents.
Men placed on the lists, once dead, would lose their inheritance + property would be auctioned at a low price
- Meaning - they obtained his property
- Though he had never been an
enemy of Sulla
- They had clearly expected to get
away with this - they were powerful +
intimidating
- However RtY sought to
regain the property +
inheritance
- The men realised they had
underestimated him
- This is when they hired
prosecutor Erucius + charged
RtY with murdering his father
- Significance
- Cicero's first appearance in a
criminal as opposed to civil
court
- A very high profile case
- The trial was the first in 1 of 7
new courts established by
Sulla
- It was one of the courts
that had received particular
attention
- Crimes of murders + poisoning
- The first trial held in said court
- The people were anxious for a
conviction - to demonstrate some
return to law + order
- Cicero believed that it was the
first to launch his oratorical
career
- Cicero was attacking
Chrysogonus - a
favourite of Sulla
- Who?
- Roscius the Younger (RtY) - the accused
- Defended by - Cicero
- Had been given the trial by
the Metelli family
- Provided RtY with support, but did
not speak in the trial
- Son of Roscius the Elder (RtE) -
wealthy man from Ameria
- Erucius - the prosecutor. Hired by:
- Magnus + Capito
- Relatives of both RtY + RtE
- Chrysogonus
- A favourite of Sulla
- What happened DURING trial?
- The prosecutors had contradicted
themselves - IF RtY had killed his father,
he was on the proscription lists, thus
meaning he could not be punished
- Despite being told not to,
Cicero criticised + incriminated
Chrysogonus (as it would have
seemed like an attack on Sulla)
- To his shock, Cicero
repeatedly mentioned his name
- Cicero drew great rhetorical mileage from
the hideous nature of both the crime +
punishment to highlight the weakness of
the trial
- Cicero denied allegations that RtY did not get on
well with his dad + was afraid he'd be disinherited
- He argued RtY was too
naive + devoted to his
father to commit/consider
committing the crime
- He did not have to PROVE the other
men did commit the crime, just provide
the jury was a possible + plausible alt
- Why did Capito hear the news before RtY?
Even though the men had previously fallen
out
- Why did Magnus + Capito not hand
over the slaves (the only witnesses)?
- Cicero argued that RtY did not
have the character, motive nor
opportunity to kill his father
- Whereas the 3 men did
- RESULTS
- RtY seems to have been acquitted
- Chrysogonus seems to fall out the
history books
- Cicero - increasingly called
upon to undertake new cases