BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Two
to have corrupted the relationship. When the newly minted dōrodokos citizen substitutes
silver for timē, then, he privileges an altogether different economy of value—one
symbolized by silver, not timē—and hence a different way of valuing relations in the
polis.
This image of the dōrodokos recalls Cimon’s warnings about short-circuiting the
polis’ economy of empire, and the same picture emerges again about two-thirds of the
way into the tragedy, when Creon accuses the prophet Tiresias of being bribed to side
with Antigone. 62 Again we find the substitution of bribe monies for an economy of
public honor: Tiresias’ own divine wisdom made him a benefactor and leader within the
city, yet his association with bribery quickly turns this economy of honor into one of base
profit. 63 As a result, whereas Tiresias’ good counsel, that “most powerful of possessions”
(kra/tiston kthma/twn, Soph. An. 1050), previously reified the king’s own power, the
seer’s purported bribe-taking inverts the power dynamic of their relationship. Rather
than have control over the possessions symbolic of his archē, the king himself becomes a
possession bought and sold by his enemies (cf. Soph. An. 1036).
In this way, the monies used to negotiate relations among philoi and kakoi are
themselves metaphors for those relations—witness the misthos for Polynices’ burial and
Tiresias’ commercial cargo—yet each moves past symbolizing mere archē. Indeed, in
both cases, the monies signal domination and physical control, as well. 64 Creon’s second
62 See especially Soph. An. 1035-43, 1055, 1061, 1063; cf. 1077.
63 The prophet’s wisdom is said to have made him a hēgemōn within the city (Soph. An. 993-4, 1058), one
who provided a great “benefit” to the community (o)nh/sima, Soph. An. 995). Once Creon thinks that
Tiresias has taken bribes, however, he employs commercial imagery to characterize his relationship with
the seer. He claims to have been “bought and sold for a long time” by prophets like Tiresias (e)chmpo/lhmai
ka)mpefo/rtismai pa/lai, Soph. An. 1036). Cf. the king’s use of kerdos (“gain”): Soph. An. 1047, 1061
and the similar accusation at Soph. OT 124-6.
64 Hence, Creon grounds his debate with Tiresias in terms of which laws, those of the gods or of the polis,
can compel obedience. When he finally does obey (cf. pei/somai, Soph. An. 1099), he submits himself to
107