Facta non verba, "deeds not words," privileges action over speech, doing over talking. In poetry, this phrase creates paradox—poetry is words asserting words' insufficiency. Poets invoke it when expressing frustration with rhetoric divorced from action, when demanding accountability, or when claiming their poems are themselves actions. The phrase suggests both skepticism about language and faith in concrete accomplishment. It appears in poems about political hypocrisy, romantic betrayal, and the gap between profession and performance, where speakers demand that words be backed by corresponding deeds, that speech be verified through action, creating irony as poetry—made of words—insists that words aren't enough, that saying must be matched by doing.

Facta non verba privileges action over speech, doing over talking. When poets use the phrase, they create paradox—poetry is words asserting words' insufficiency. Related to ancient skepticism about rhetoric divorced from action, to demands that profession be verified through performance. Useful for understanding poems about political hypocrisy, romantic betrayal, the gap between stated values and actual behavior. The phrase expresses frustration with mere talk, demanding that words be backed by corresponding deeds. Contemporary poets invoke facta non verba when calling out performative allyship, virtue signaling, promises unmatched by commitment. The phrase is particularly effective because it acknowledges its own irony—using words to insist words aren't enough creates productive tension. The phrase also relates to questions about poetry's efficacy: is writing poems action or just more words? Can facta non verba apply to poetry, or does poetry necessarily remain on the verba side?