BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Five norms. Yet it would be misleading to conclude that, for the Athenians, ‘the law’ was a predictable, autonomous system of rules that constituted legitimate action. The Athenians did not adhere in that sense to what we might call ‘the rule of law’. 16 Athens was a legally pluralistic society: although citizens used the courts to legitimate certain actions, as we will see shortly, law did not have a monopoly on legitimacy, nor did its authority always trump that of other socially legitimate sources of authority. 17 This was particularly true with bribery, as noted by the fourth century orator Hyperides (5.24): the laws forbad profiting from public office, but the people nevertheless allowed officials to take gifts provided that doing so did not harm the dēmos. 18 Like broader cultural narratives about dōrodokia, then, Athenian legislation and institutional reform actually tell us a lot more about dōrodokia than these scholars would allow. In essence, their view provides a plausible reason for some kind of legal or institutional change—dōrodokia was a ‘problem’ in society that needed to be addressed—yet fails to explain why the Athenians made the precise changes that they 16 This is contra the view taken by Ostwald (1986) and Sealey (1987) and Harris (2006), on which see the succinct reply by Todd (1993: 299-300), Lanni (2006). The extent to which the Athenians developed a concept like ‘the rule of law’ has been hotly debated among ancient historians: see Ostwald (1986), Sealey (1987), Cohen (1995), Todd (1993: 299-300), Allen (2000: 168-96), Lanni (2006; forthcoming), Karayiannis and Hatzis (2008). 17 Much sociolegal literature from the 1980’s is devoted to this idea of legal pluralism, a helpful overview of which is provided by Merry (1988). On legal pluralism generally, Moore (1973, 1978), Galanter (1981), and Griffiths (1986), Woodman (1998) are essential. Arthurs (1985) details how the normative order of formal law has a constitutive influence on other normative orders in society, while Felstiner, Abel, and Sarat’s description of the way divorce attorneys give counsel describes how the legal order can be constituted by the norms of other social fields, in their case professional lawyers (1980). For the relevance of legal pluralism to archaic Greek law, see Lakin (2005), Papakonstantinou (2008: esp. 143-4 n.50). Fourth-century evidence that ‘laws’ were sovereign: Aeschin. 1.4-5, 3.6, 3.169; Dem. 21. 223-5, 23.73, 22.46, 24.5, 24.75-6, 24.118, 25.20-1, 57.56; Lyc. 1.3-4; Din. 3.16; Hyp. 4.5. Cf. Hansen (1975: 48; 1990: 239-42), Ostwald (1986: 497), Ober (1989: 299-304). Yet the modern conception of sovereignty here is misplaced; certainly the laws were authoritative, but they were still only guides, not absolute authorities: Todd (1993: 59), Allen (2000: 176-7). 18 Hyperides’ distinction has rightly become the accepted view among ancient historians since at least Harvey (1985: 108-13). I would point out, however, that we have no evidence of any law prohibiting mere profiting from office; Hyperides’ comments might instead be read as rhetorical manipulation designed to empower the jury to vote against his opponent. 221
Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Five did. 19 A different approach to Athenian legal and institutional reform might focus more on the differences than on the similarities among these responses: why did the Athenians develop these particular laws, with different penalties and different procedures, and why did they modify their political institutions in these particular ways? For that matter, when did the Athenians choose to create a new legal procedure, and when did they choose to reform an institution? The rest of this chapter will lay out a theoretical approach for addressing these questions; Chapter Six will put the theory to work by examining the democracy’s formal and informal responses to dōrodokia. Both Dinarchus and Hyperides press on implicit assumptions we might make about the role (and rule) of law in Athenian society. We can re-examine those assumptions by investigating how the laws against dōrodokia worked in practice—the subject of Chapter Seven. Who were the litigants, what were their underlying concerns, and what were the broader causes and consequences of dōrodokia suits? To an extent, the answers to such questions will also give us a better handle on why the Athenians drafted the particular dōrodokia legislation that they did. Further, such questions will return us to one of the central ideas that has framed this dissertation: that, in defining dōrodokia, the Athenians subtly deliberated over democracy. As the next few chapters will examine, it was in the legal space created for the dōrodokos that the Athenians could weigh whether an official, process, or policy should be aligned with dōrodokia or democracy. 19 Essentially, these functionalist views focus on the direct effects of legislation, positing that Athenian legislation against dōrodokia was designed to eliminate the taking of gifts in office (vel sim.), not the indirect effects of these actions—say, the poor performance of one’s public duties or official action that went against the dēmos’ interests. On the difference between direct and indirect effects of legislation, see especially Griffiths (2003). I would maintain instead that, inasmuch as illicit exchange was the paradigm through which the Athenians understood other, distinct problems in their polity, the law gave expression to this offense, but primarily for the purpose of curbing these other problems. 222
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:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
Page 231: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
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?