BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Six
expanded the scope of who was subject to prosecution. 57 It did so, tellingly, by framing
the problem in terms of hetaireiai, which were essentially private associations wielding
public power through their members’ involvement in political processes. Again, by
modeling the clause in Demosthenes’ law on the nomos eisangeltikos, the Athenians
turned to regulations on public officials to create a procedure governing the conduct of
private citizens.
Crucially, the Athenians changed the original law against dōrodokia, as well, so
that the actions of ordinary citizens came under its purview. Like the compilation of
offenses drawn from the nomos eisangeltikos, in fact, the graphē dōrōn seems to have
pertained initially only to public officials and to have been redrafted later to apply to
ordinary citizens, too. Precise dating is impossible, but this new graphē dōrōn may have
been formalized by 419. 58 Around the same time, the law was also expanded to include
the offenses of active bribery and corruption by freely making promises to others, again
to the detriment of the dēmos or one of the citizens (cf. h@ au0to\j didw| ~ e9te/rw|, h2
diafqei/rh| tina\j e0paggello/menoj, Dem. 21.113). The impetus for both changes may
have been the same: to create a formal procedure that regulated how private citizens
interfaced with the public sphere.
Moreover, the expansion of the law’s scope appears intimately connected to its
redefinition. As the previous chapter argued, the wording of the original offense was
changed from “receives illicitly” (de/xhtai) to “receives...to the harm of the people or
one of the citizens” (lamba/nh|...e0pi\ bla/bh| tou~ dh/mou h@ tino\j tw=n politw~n, Dem.
57 Cf. Hansen (1975: 49), Rhodes (1981: 156 ad AP 8.4).
58 As argued above in the first section of this chapter. For the dating of this change, Ant. 6.49-50 describes
a case from 419/8, in which holders of a bribe, private citizens, were purportedly brought to trial and
convicted. It is unclear which legal procedure was employed at their trial, but it is likely to have been the
graphē dōrōn.
280