BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Three
His is a logical argument predicated on how much money the community would receive:
a vote for the greatest financial gain would be a vote for justice. 77
The second argument from logos comes towards the end of the speech, when, as
we just saw, the defendant proves his innocence by showing how irrational it would have
been for him to have taken bribes in the first place (Lys. 21.21-22). His argument is
strikingly similar to those made by political economists today who employ rational actor
models in studying contemporary corruption. Just as they emphasize that the proper
context of incentives and sanctions will determine whether or not someone is inclined to
take bribes, the defendant claims that in no way would taking bribes have been in his own
best interests. If anything, he asserts, it would have been irrational (cf. mainoi/mhn, Lys.
21.22). As with the previous argument predicated on the community’s pursuit of
financial resources, his defense rests on the assumption that he, too, would always try to
maximize wealth.
With both of these arguments, therefore, the defendant employs logos—rational,
impersonal reasoning—that reduces questions of political justice to profit maximization.
It seems we are back in the world of Wealth, with its thoroughly financialized vision of
politics and society. Yet the argumentation employed in Lysias 21 sheds light on how, or
why, that world became so financialized. In Lysias 21 the financialization of political
justice is ultimately underpinned by the defendant’s shift from ethos to logos: that is, a
shift from arguments based on inherent character to those based on impersonal reason.
Although the defendant begins his speech by focusing intently on his own character, he
ultimately shies away from such a personalized view of justice. Instead, in the course of
77 In making this argument, the defendant virtually equates justice (ta\ di/kaia) with the financial benefits
he provides the people (ta\ lusitelou=nta), as they amount to one and the same thing: his own acquittal
(Lys. 21.12).
161