BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Four While dōrodokia by a foreign autocrat and domestic dōrodokia were equally perceived as threats to the life of the city, the ways in which they endangered the city were not the same. As we have seen, taking money from Philip was tantamount to subordinating the city’s interests to his interests; if Olynthus, Pydna, and a host of other Greek cities were any indication, this entailed placing the city under his control. Even if the constitution itself were not radically altered, the threat of Macedonian hegemony was still a powerful one. In the case of domestic bribery, however, the stakes were rather different. As Dinarchus and Hyperides point out repeatedly, the apparently commonplace dōrodokia of which Demosthenes was but one of many corrupt practitioners was a threat to the city insofar as it entailed contempt for the city’s honor, its laws, and its politeia, or political constitution. 70 The concern here was that elites were rejecting the symbolic foundations of Athens’ polity, in effect dishonoring the democracy by opting out of it. Accordingly, although this picture of rampant domestic dōrodokia was also thought of as treason, there were additional elements that were contributing to this conceptual frame. Let us take a closer look. Men like Demosthenes were thought to bring ill-repute, adoxia, upon the city through their corrupt actions; only by convicting Demosthenes could Athens thus hope to regain her honor (Din. 1.93; cf. 3.21). In the extant speeches of the Harpalus Affair, there are a number of permutations of this argument—that Athens lost her honor and good- standing in the Greek world because of the policies proposed by corrupt statesmen (a)doci/a|, Din. 1.31); or that, in taking Harpalus’ money, a corrupt few implicated the Athenian people as a whole in a “shameful charge” (ai)sxra=j ai)ti/aj, Din. 1.93; cf. 70 Din. 1.65, 1.87, 1.113; Hyp. 5.12. Cf. Val. Max. 6.3.ext.2. Tellingly, in a rhetorical move familiar from the other contemporary narrative about dōrodokia, Dinarchus frames this overturning of the city’s institutions as a betrayal of the people’s trust (Din. 3.4). 199
Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Four ai)sxu/nhn, Din. 3.7)—both of which variations were relevant concerns for dōrodokia from an external source, too (e.g. Dem. 18.63; kataisxu/naj, Dem. 19.255). Yet there is a third variation that seems best to encapsulate the dishonor done the city by pervasive domestic bribery, a frame which has the added advantage of bringing together all of the elements at play in conceptualizing domestic dōrodokia as treason. Dinarchus seems to get at the heart of the matter when he posits that leaders like Demosthenes disgraced the city—literally, made it ‘base’ or ‘lowly’ (tapeinh/, Din. 1.98)—by so flagrantly defying its laws. According to this condemnation, corrupt leaders who were part of a broader network of corruption were debasing the city precisely by the way they placed themselves above the law. There were two interrelated elements in this condemnation: Demosthenes and others had contempt for the laws, and they displayed a more general contempt for the values of the city. It was obvious that anybody guilty of dōrodokia had broken the law, but Dinarchus’ more damning point is that Demosthenes thought himself above the law when he broke it. So Demosthenes is contrasted with the general Timotheus, who captured over 24 cities yet willingly acquiesced to the penalty imposed upon him for taking money from the Chians and Rhodians (Din. 1.14-17, cf. 3.17). 71 Despite Timotheus’ great services to the city, Dinarchus notes, the general did not ask for pardon, but rather submitted himself to the law and the jury’s decision. By contrast, Demosthenes seemed to think himself above the law, as if his previous services for the city, incidentally far less impressive than Timotheus’, outweighed his current crime. 72 In 71 On Timotheus, see further Worthington (1992: 148-57 ad 1.14). Isoc. 15.129; Din. 1.14, 31.17; Diod. 16.21.4; Nep. Timoth. 3.4-5, Iphicr. 3.3; Aelian, Var. Hist. 14.3; DH Din. 677, Lys 680; [Plut.] Mor. 605f. 72 Dinarchus later expands on this argument by pointing out that even the gods fairly submitted themselves to trial at Athens (Din. 1.84-7). That Demosthenes first proposed that the Areopagus investigate the 200
Page 1 and 2:
BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam
Page 3 and 4:
© Copyright by Kellam McChesney Co
Page 5 and 6:
legislating dōrodokia. Rather than
Page 7 and 8:
encouragement that made me crazily
Page 9 and 10:
and long-lasting patience were crit
Page 11 and 12:
CHAPTER SEVEN: Athenian dōrodokia
Page 13 and 14:
Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
Page 209: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363:
show all

BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?