BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Six case of citizenship trials, too, the Athenians expelled from their community those elements which were corrupting the political process. Both the extraordinary diapsēphisis of 346/5 and the graphē dōroxenias represent attempts to reassert the authority of proper, uncorrupted political domains through repeating a formal process. Yet if an entire body had been thoroughly corrupted, it was conceivable that repeating the process would only result in the same, unjust outcome. In such instances, the Athenians may have had little choice but to change the process entirely, hence switching a process from one domain to another. One is reminded, for instance, of Ephialtes’ reforms and the suspected corruption of the Areopagus at the time. There is a similar explanation in the AP about judging patterns for the robe used in the quadrennial Great Panathenaia procession: originally the Council had judged these matters, but because they had shown favoritism (kataxari/zesqai), jurisdiction was transferred to a jury court selected by lot (AP 49.3). 77 In the 350’s all eisangeliai before the Assembly began to be held in front of a jury court instead. 78 While this last change was due most likely to economic considerations—particularly amid the Social Wars, it was cheaper for the Athenians to fund a day’s worth of court cases rather than an identical penalty for both the dōroxenia and xenia procedures would have effectively created an incentive for non-Athenians to try to bribe the jury! With the same penalty for losing a xenia trial as for being convicted of bribing the jury in a xenia trial, nothing would have been lost, and everything could have been gained, by at least attempting to bribe the jury. On the other hand, the punishment probably could not have been death, for what then would have distinguished the graphē dōroxenias from the graphē dekasmou, which already had the death penalty? Indeed, positing a different penalty is a good reason for the creation of the graphē dōroxenias in the first place. Given the gravity of the offense, atimia in the sense of outlawry, is our most sensible option. 77 What the AP intends here is a matter of debate. The phrase ta\ paradei/gmata kai\ to\n pe/plon (“public works and the robe”) was emended by Blass to refer to just the peplos (ta\ paradei/gmata ei)j to\n pe/plon); Rhodes (1981: 568-9 ad loc) follows Blass, albeit with caution. Wilamowitz (1893: 1.212- 13), on the other hand, follows the manuscripts in positing that these decisions involved public works in general. What is important for our purposes is simply that some change was made in the fourth century, and that the AP, at least, attributed this change to dōrodokia. 78 Hansen (1975: esp. 53-5), Rhodes (1979: 108); cf. Thalheim (1902: 351-2), Lipsius (1905-15: 1.191- 2). 291
Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter Six Assembly meeting—here too concerns about dōrodokia may have played a role in the decision. 79 Perhaps our best example of a new process designed to circumvent some of the institutional corruption thought to be plaguing the democracy in the fourth century is the apophasis procedure for suspected acts of treason and corruption. This procedure entailed an investigation, preliminary report and verdict by the Areopagus, followed by a final verdict and punishment by a jury, with the prosecution led by publicly elected prosecutors. 80 We can date its creation to the mid 340’s, exactly the same time that there were a number of trials for judicial dōrodokia (Aeschin. 1.86) and fears that ‘traitors’ were destroying the city. To be sure, part of the impetus for the change lay in contemporary constitutional debates, which focused on the Areopagus’ ancestral authority as “guardian of the laws.” 81 But it is worth considering what need the Athenians had for these debates at this particular time. Amid fears of widespread institutional corruption, I suggest, the Athenians looked to restore the Areopagus’ authority as ‘guardian of the laws’ precisely because they believed the laws were being contravened on a systematic basis. The details of the apophasis procedure support this interpretation. It is telling, after all, that unlike the preliminary judgments of officials, which simply established that a certain case was worthy of trial before a jury, in an apophasis the Areopagus also passed a preliminary verdict on guilt or innocence in drafting its report. It was up to the 79 Financing: Hansen (1975: 55; 1991: 159). Dōrodokia: Isocrates laments how the constitution had been corrupted by his time (cf. diefqarme/nhj, Isoc. 7.15), and for this reason he advocates a return to the Solonian constitution with a prominent Areopagus, but his reference might be to an imbalance of power, not active corruption. 80 On the apophasis, see MacDowell (1978: 190-1), Wallace (1989: 113-18), Hansen (1991: 292-4), Todd (1993: 115). 81 Carawan (1985: 138-40). 292
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:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
Page 301: Conover Bribery in Classical Athens
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?