The Cicero Essay: Selecting Evidence in 40 Minutes
The literature paper asks: How does Cicero use rhetorical techniques to discredit Verres in the passage you have studied? You have 40 minutes and 25 marks. You know the passage contains a tricolon, a rhetorical question, an apostrophe and an argument from probability. You have time for an introduction, three body paragraphs and a conclusion. Your teacher has warned that narrating what Verres did earns little; you must analyse Latin words and sentence structure. You must choose three techniques that can be supported with short quotations, and decide whether to mention a technique you cannot quote accurately. The mark scheme rewards accurate reference, analysis of effect and a coherent argument. You also need to avoid writing a list of device names with no explanation of how each device works on the jury.
1. Construct a thesis and a three-paragraph plan. For each paragraph, name the technique, give the kind of Latin evidence you would quote, and state the effect.
Read the worked answer
Thesis: Cicero constructs Verres as a predator who treats the province as personal property, and he does so in order to make the jury see condemnation as the only way to restore Roman credibility. Paragraph 1: the tricolon. Quote two or three parallel words or short phrases, not a whole sentence; identify whether the parallels are nouns, clauses or infinitives. Effect: the list feels exhaustive and inevitable, so Verres's crimes appear to have no limit. Paragraph 2: the rhetorical question. Quote the interrogative word and the key verb; explain that the question does not seek information but forces the jury to supply the answer. Effect: the jury becomes complicit in the judgement. Paragraph 3: apostrophe or argument from probability. If apostrophe, quote the vocative and one verb; explain the sudden change of address and its emotional force. If probability, quote the conditional or comparative structure; explain how Cicero makes Verres's behaviour seem incredible except on the hypothesis of greed. The conclusion should return to the thesis: the techniques are not ornaments but a strategy of ethical demolition.
2. Explain why a paragraph that lists five techniques without quotations would score poorly, and rewrite the guidance as two sentences a candidate could use in the exam.
Read the worked answer
A list of five techniques without quotation gives the examiner labels but no evidence. The mark scheme rewards accurate reference and analysis of effect: the candidate must show where in the Latin the technique occurs and how the wording produces the effect. Five bare labels also flatten the argument, because each technique receives only a clause and none is connected to the thesis. Two exam-ready sentences: Choose two techniques that can be quoted in three to five words each, and spend the paragraph showing how the wording positions the jury. If a third technique is needed for coverage, give it one sentence with a short quotation, but do not let it displace analysis of the first two. The candidate should prefer depth over breadth when time is short, because a well-analysed tricolon is worth more than a hurried catalogue of tropes.
3. You have 8 minutes left and have written only two body paragraphs. Should you add a third technique or deepen the analysis of the two you have? Justify with reference to the mark scheme.
Read the worked answer
The better choice depends on what the two paragraphs already contain, but the default should be to deepen rather than add. The mark scheme rewards analysis of effect and a coherent argument; a rushed third technique with no quotation or explanation adds coverage but little quality, and it may introduce an unsupported claim. If the two paragraphs already quote accurately and explain effect, spend the remaining time adding a short concluding sentence that ties both techniques to the thesis and, if possible, one contextual point about the jury. If the first two paragraphs are thin and merely identify devices, then a brief third paragraph with one short quotation may be better, because it at least provides a second piece of evidence. The judgement call is to ask which gap is larger: lack of evidence or lack of analysis. In a 25-mark essay, a coherent two-technique argument with close reading usually beats a three-technique list with no close reading.