BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Six
continued to be suspected of dōrodokia; but, increasingly, so were individuals outside the
public sphere blamed for bribing them. What began as a fear that individuals within a
political body were making poor judgments about the community’s interests shifted to
include the concern that individuals outside a political body were illicitly influencing the
entire body in order to effect poor judgments about the community’s interests. Many of
these poor judgments concerned the accountability of public officials and, towards the
end of the century, the accountability of private citizens entering into the public sphere.
As before, with this series of legal changes there continued to be divergent views
on what to do with the dōrodokos: once the dēmos had passed its judgment on him,
should he be expelled from or reintegrated into the community? Should his ‘insider’ or
his ‘outsider’ status prevail? In the case of the graphē dekasmou, the Athenians
displayed little tolerance for individuals who corrupted the judicial process; with an
automatic death penalty, it expelled from the community forever those found guilty. 69 By
contrast, no comparable penalty existed when non-magistrates were prosecuted under the
graphē dōrōn: the only punishments for that procedure seem to have been the penalty of
atimia qua disfranchisement or a tenfold fine (Aeschin. 3.232, Din. 2.16).
It is all the more striking, therefore, that of the seven known prosecutions of
ambassadors and public speakers suspected of dōrodokia in the fourth century not one
used the graphē dōrōn process. Instead, all seven trials employed the eisangelia process,
and every conviction resulted in the death penalty. 70 Our evidence is doubtless limited
69 Whether or not they were always prosecuted is another matter altogether. Isocrates decries how the
politicians who corrupted (diafqei=rai) the most people the most obviously (fanerw/tata) were elected to
the stratēgia (Isoc. 8.50). Similarly, Aeschines reports that it was common to hear accusations that people
had bribed juries (Aeschin. 1.86), one reason behind the exceptional citizen registration process ordered by
Demophilus’ decree in 346/5: see further below.
70 The cases were against Andocides, Epicrates, Eubulides, and Cratinus (392/1); Timagoras (367);
Callistratus (361/0); Philocrates (343); and Euxenippus (330-24). Additionally, the stratēgoi Ergocles
285