BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua BRIBERY IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Kellam ... - Historia Antigua

historiantigua.cl
from historiantigua.cl More from this publisher
10.04.2013 Views

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Introduction be of just as much use as any contemporary study in shedding light on current models used to examine bribery. On the whole, the goal of the following seven chapters is to paint a picture of how dōrodokia shaped the development of the Athenian democracy: representing an alternate trajectory that the democracy might take, instances of purported bribery were significant political and cultural moments at Athens. The Athenians consequently enacted a range of legal and institutional measures to weigh these moments and leverage them for the collective good. Each time dōrodokia was thought to have arisen, the Athenians decided as a collective body whether a particular outcome associated with dōrodokia was legitimate—and hence consonant with the democracy—or illegitimate—and hence bribery. And in looking back at the development of the democracy, they repeatedly looked to the dōrodokos as the conceptual bogeyman of their polity: the anti-citizen who violated his ‘friendship’ with the community. As we will consider in the Conclusion, even though dōrodokia appears to have been quite frequent, it need not have been detrimental to the polity. In fact, this dissertation suggests that we should take seriously the idea that more frequent bribery, playing the specific role it did in Classical Athens, actually may have helped, not harmed the emergence and persistence of democracy. 25

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter One Bribery, Politics, and the Problem of Definition Every inquiry into bribery must grapple with the question of definition: what is bribery? Typically, bribery is assumed to be an illicit payment to an official to obtain services or to avoid costs; that is, bribery is considered a particular type of abuse of public power for private gain. 1 So, for instance, paying a policeman not to write a speeding ticket, paying a legislator to vote a particular way, or paying a bureaucrat for a public contract or to expedite some public service are all classic examples of bribery in action, according to this definition. But what about paying a student to get good grades, a referee or athlete to throw a sporting event, or a bureaucrat who demands additional compensation for the provision of a public service? Are these not bribery, as well? Are they somehow qualitatively and meaningfully distinct from the above definition? One response might be to narrow our scope to include only ‘political’ bribery—so that pay-for-grades and athletic bribery are not included—and to differentiate between bribery and extortion, which might eliminate the last example given. In this way, we might arrive at a satisfactory set of actions, all firmly located within the public sphere (however that is defined), and all readily described as bribery. This is, in fact, the course adopted by most scholars, and there is much to recommend it, as it allows us to compare cross-culturally what does and does not constitute bribery. In the case of ancient Athens, 1 On this definition, see the recent discussion in Johnston (2005: 10-12). Alternatively, bribery is conceptualized as a means to corrupt a person’s (sc. public official’s) judgment, a definition used by Harvey (1985: 77) and Taylor (2001: 53) in their examinations of ancient bribery. Such a definition, however, quickly blends into an “illicit payment”: if it were licit, there would be no corruption of judgment; and the payment would not be necessary if the official was already going to do what was being paid for. The definition of bribery given above can thus be taken, simply, as an elaboration of why a corrupting payment is successful (because it succeeds in creating an abuse of public power for private gain). 26

Conover Bribery in Classical Athens Chapter One<br />

Bribery, Politics, and the Problem of Definition<br />

Every inquiry into bribery must grapple with the question of definition: what is<br />

bribery? Typically, bribery is assumed to be an illicit payment to an official to obtain<br />

services or to avoid costs; that is, bribery is considered a particular type of abuse of<br />

public power for private gain. 1 So, for instance, paying a policeman not to write a<br />

speeding ticket, paying a legislator to vote a particular way, or paying a bureaucrat for a<br />

public contract or to expedite some public service are all classic examples of bribery in<br />

action, according to this definition. But what about paying a student to get good grades, a<br />

referee or athlete to throw a sporting event, or a bureaucrat who demands additional<br />

compensation for the provision of a public service? Are these not bribery, as well? Are<br />

they somehow qualitatively and meaningfully distinct from the above definition?<br />

One response might be to narrow our scope to include only ‘political’ bribery—so<br />

that pay-for-grades and athletic bribery are not included—and to differentiate between<br />

bribery and extortion, which might eliminate the last example given. In this way, we<br />

might arrive at a satisfactory set of actions, all firmly located within the public sphere<br />

(however that is defined), and all readily described as bribery. This is, in fact, the course<br />

adopted by most scholars, and there is much to recommend it, as it allows us to compare<br />

cross-culturally what does and does not constitute bribery. In the case of ancient Athens,<br />

1 On this definition, see the recent discussion in Johnston (2005: 10-12). Alternatively, bribery is<br />

conceptualized as a means to corrupt a person’s (sc. public official’s) judgment, a definition used by<br />

Harvey (1985: 77) and Taylor (2001: 53) in their examinations of ancient bribery. Such a definition,<br />

however, quickly blends into an “illicit payment”: if it were licit, there would be no corruption of<br />

judgment; and the payment would not be necessary if the official was already going to do what was being<br />

paid for. The definition of bribery given above can thus be taken, simply, as an elaboration of why a<br />

corrupting payment is successful (because it succeeds in creating an abuse of public power for private<br />

gain).<br />

26

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!