BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua
BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua
Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Five fits better in the context of a series of large-scale reforms that essentially mapped out the entire terrain of licit and illicit actions within the community. Indeed, precisely this kind of legislation was common in the archaic period, when poleis frequently defined in law under what conditions an otherwise regular action became illicit. Solon’s regulations on who could or could not marry (F47, F48) or adopt (F49, F58) are typical in this regard. Similarly, archaic prohibitions on enslaving or hitting citizens, on killing—licit in war, illicit otherwise—as well as regulations on various kinds of property transfers, including sale, inheritance, and theft all divided basic social interactions into licit and illicit classes. 67 In Athens, at least, many of these laws date back to Solon’s extensive reforms and cohere with each other as a broad-based reorganization of social and political space within the law. The graphē dōrōn seems likely an innovation of the archaic period also because it established mere accountability, not accountability to the people, specifically. Were we to posit that the process was first implemented in the early decades of the fifth century, in those cases where it would have been applied the suit would have been heard by the elite Areopagus Council, not by the Assembly or a popular jury. 68 In this respect, the graphē dōrōn would have stood counter the trend in the early democracy of establishing the dēmos’ control over magistrates and citizens, alike. By contrast, if we look to when accountability, not public accountability, was first established, tradition holds that it was first institutionalized by the lawgiver Solon (Arist. Pol. 2.1274a15-18, 3.1281b31-4; AP 9.1). 67 On the range of archaic Greek law, see especially Gagarin (1986: 63-77) and Papakonstantinou (2008: 51-63). 68 Assembly and treason trials: Carawan (1987: 168-91). Properly, the Areopagus Council was a standing body of all previous archons. Prior to 487, and perhaps prior to 457, however, the only citizens eligible for the archonship were those from the highest census classes. 245
Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Five For these reasons, the original law against dōrodokia and the graphē dōrōn were most likely implemented by Solon, when he drafted a series of reforms in 594/3. We can hypothesize that, as a general regulation, the law might have been part of Solon’s broader plan of re-mapping the legal contours of the polis; it is significant, in this regard, that the measure fits in with a number of the lawgiver’s other legislative reforms, many of which were aimed at curbing elite abuses of power. 69 In archaic Athens, there were few public officials, and the chief magistrates, the nine archons, had both executive and judicial duties. One of Solon’s concerns, a sentiment common in archaic Greece, was that public officials were giving ‘crooked judgments’ when deciding disputes: in effect, they were being bribed to favor one party of the dispute. 70 In his poetry, Solon recognizes that judges gave both just and unjust decisions (cf. a)rxw=n a!koue kai\ di/kaia ka!dika, fr. 30 West), and he subtly encourages them to change their ways from bad order (dusnomia) to goodly order (eunomia), which would “straighten out [their] crooked judgments” (eu)qu/nei de\ di/kaj skolia/j, fr. 4a.35 West). Due in no small part to dōrodokia, these actions were considered tremendously harmful to the community. As Solon laments, the city itself was being destroyed by elite citizens who were “persuaded by material goods” (xrh/masi peiqo/menoi, fr. 4a.6 West); that is to say, dōrodokia was ruining the city. 71 69 Based on Solon’s introduction of the graphē (AP 9.1), ephesis (AP 9.1), eisangelia (AP 8.4) and euthyna (Arist. Pol. 1274a15-17, 1281b32-4) processes and the introduction of property qualifications for holding office (AP 7.3-4; Plut. Sol. 18). On Solon’s restraints on magistrates’ powers, see especially Humphreys (1983: 237-9; 1988: 469-70). Note how Solon claimed to have provided a proper ‘prize’ or ‘honor’ for the dēmos (ge/raj, timh=j, Sol. fr. 5.1, 5.2W). 70 For the complaint of crooked judgments (sxolia\i di/kai), see also Hom. Il. 16.387, Hes. WD 219, 263-4, Theog. 45-6 and perhaps ML 8A; Gagarin (1974; 1986: 81-97), Papakonstantinou (2008: 107-12). 71 Solon’s complaint is strikingly similar to Theognis’ description of how kakoi were destroying the dēmos (fqei/rousi, Theog. 45). For Theognis, this destruction was caused by judicial bribery: “[sc. the kakoi] provide unjust judgments for the sake of gain and power” (di/kaj t’ a)di/koisi didw=sin/ oi)kei/wn kerde/wn ei3neka kai\ kra/teoj, Theog. 45-6). Cf. Mülke (2002: 110), Papakonstantinou (2008: 111-12). 246
- Page 205 and 206: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 207 and 208: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 209 and 210: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 211 and 212: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 213 and 214: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 215 and 216: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 217 and 218: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 219 and 220: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 221 and 222: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 223 and 224: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 225 and 226: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 227 and 228: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 229 and 230: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 231 and 232: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 233 and 234: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 235 and 236: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 237 and 238: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 239 and 240: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 241 and 242: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 243 and 244: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 245 and 246: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 247 and 248: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 249 and 250: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 251 and 252: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 253 and 254: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 255: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 259 and 260: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 261 and 262: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 263 and 264: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 265 and 266: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 267 and 268: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 269 and 270: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 271 and 272: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 273 and 274: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 275 and 276: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 277 and 278: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 279 and 280: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 281 and 282: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 283 and 284: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 285 and 286: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 287 and 288: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 289 and 290: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 291 and 292: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 293 and 294: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 295 and 296: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 297 and 298: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 299 and 300: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 301 and 302: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 303 and 304: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
- Page 305 and 306: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Five<br />
For these reasons, the original law against dōrodokia and the graphē dōrōn were<br />
most likely implemented by Solon, when he drafted a series of reforms in 594/3. We can<br />
hypothesize that, as a general regulation, the law might have been part of Solon’s broader<br />
plan of re-mapping the legal contours of the polis; it is significant, in this regard, that the<br />
measure fits in with a number of the lawgiver’s other legislative reforms, many of which<br />
were aimed at curbing elite abuses of power. 69 In archaic Athens, there were few public<br />
officials, and the chief magistrates, the nine archons, had both executive and judicial<br />
duties. One of Solon’s concerns, a sentiment common in archaic Greece, was that public<br />
officials were giving ‘crooked judgments’ when deciding disputes: in effect, they were<br />
being bribed to favor one party of the dispute. 70 In his poetry, Solon recognizes that<br />
judges gave both just and unjust decisions (cf. a)rxw=n a!koue kai\ di/kaia ka!dika, fr. 30<br />
West), and he subtly encourages them to change their ways from bad order (dusnomia) to<br />
goodly order (eunomia), which would “straighten out [their] crooked judgments”<br />
(eu)qu/nei de\ di/kaj skolia/j, fr. 4a.35 West). Due in no small part to dōrodokia, these<br />
actions were considered tremendously harmful to the community. As Solon laments, the<br />
city itself was being destroyed by elite citizens who were “persuaded by material goods”<br />
(xrh/masi peiqo/menoi, fr. 4a.6 West); that is to say, dōrodokia was ruining the city. 71<br />
69 Based on Solon’s introduction of the graphē (AP 9.1), ephesis (AP 9.1), eisangelia (AP 8.4) and euthyna<br />
(Arist. Pol. 1274a15-17, 1281b32-4) processes and the introduction of property qualifications for holding<br />
office (AP 7.3-4; Plut. Sol. 18). On Solon’s restraints on magistrates’ powers, see especially Humphreys<br />
(1983: 237-9; 1988: 469-70). Note how Solon claimed to have provided a proper ‘prize’ or ‘honor’ for<br />
the dēmos (ge/raj, timh=j, Sol. fr. 5.1, 5.2W).<br />
70 For the complaint of crooked judgments (sxolia\i di/kai), see also Hom. Il. 16.387, Hes. WD 219, 263-4,<br />
Theog. 45-6 and perhaps ML 8A; Gagarin (1974; 1986: 81-97), Papakonstantinou (2008: 107-12).<br />
71 Solon’s complaint is strikingly similar to Theognis’ description of how kakoi were destroying the dēmos<br />
(fqei/rousi, Theog. 45). For Theognis, this destruction was caused by judicial bribery: “[sc. the kakoi]<br />
provide unjust judgments for the sake of gain and power” (di/kaj t’ a)di/koisi didw=sin/ oi)kei/wn kerde/wn<br />
ei3neka kai\ kra/teoj, Theog. 45-6). Cf. Mülke (2002: 110), Papakonstantinou (2008: 111-12).<br />
246