BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Four
meaning that the content of pre-existing social ties among citizens in that space would
have already been diluted to something closer to an arms-length tie. Within that context,
interactions between citizens and non-citizens would have been virtually identical, the
civic bond linking two citizens and the trust it engendered thus diminished. 39
We have good reasons to think, therefore, that citizens really were more anxious
about the civic bonds of community at this time. As a result, what had earlier been
conceptualized as a socio-economic class of elite rogues plundering the city’s resources
was now envisioned as an amorphous and omnipresent group of pro-Macedonian elites;
political, not socio-economic, affiliations were now key. This conceptual frame for the
dōrodokos was a potent one in the 340’s and 330’s and was frequently used to
delegitimize public speakers and their policies. Time and again, an orator labeled his
opponents pro-Macedonians or outright cronies on Philip’s payroll in order to cast doubt
upon their policies and actions. So, in 341 Demosthenes insinuated that anyone who was
in favor of peace with Philip was receiving payment (misthos) from the Macedonian; and
in 330, Aeschines and Demosthenes traded barbs, each claiming that the other was a
traitorous hireling of Philip. 40 Similarly, around 338 Hyperides’ speech against
Philippides revolved around the claim that certain public officials whom Philippides had
proposed be honored were, in fact, Macedonian sympathizers. Moreover, Hyperides
claims, they had taken bribes to honor either Philip, certain Macedonians, or even some
pro-Macedonian Athenians. 41
39 See further Karayiannis and Hatzis (2007: 9).
40 Demosthenes asserts that all pro-Macedonians were hired by Philip: Dem. 8.53. Cf. Dem. 6.32, 6.34,
8.61, 8.66, 9.9. Aeschines on Demosthenes: Aeschin. 3. 58, 66, 81, 167, 170, 173, 209, 226, cf. 3. 239-40
and Dem. 18.82, 103-4, 107, 19.222. Demosthenes on Aeschines: Dem. 18.28, 31-3, 36, 42, 44, 45-9, 50-
1, 51-2, 131, 149, 236, 284, 296, 298-9, 307, 320.
41 Hyperides 2: see especially fragments 15a and 15b for the accusation that the officials were traitors who
had taken money from some Macedonian source. Similarly, Din. 1.10, 18-21, 70 with Worthington (1992:
184