Printable View
I came across a map of political corruption in the world, and most countries in the world are indeed very corrupt. So I started to think about antiquity. How corrupts were the officials (generals, servants, princes etc) in the various EB factions? Were some cultures more suspectible to corruption than others?
I would say just as corrupt as today. Any polity with a hierarchy od power breeds abuses of said power, of which corruption is a major component.
About the same everywhere I suspect. Though, in States like Rome there was technically more corruption than in kingdoms like Macedonia, because the Kings were above the law.
Generally, corruption has to do with the state of a particular Nation at a particular time, and means different things to different people.
Too true. What one views as corrupt abuses another might see as a perfectly legitimate use of power. I would imagine it is one of the many reasons different people fought each other thru history.
I believe that the Spartans were one of the least corrupt peoples, because of there way of life.
Which reminds me of Persians becoming worried that the Greeks in the Olympic competed not for cold, but for a plant on there head(forgot name srry:sweatdrop:). Remember reading that once.:2thumbsup:
I say, a lot more. Corruption was always a huge part of large societies, and only due to numerous laws is it less noticeable in certain countries of today. I am sure AS and the Roman Empire were corrupt beyond imagination. Hell, almost everything in the Late Republican politics of Rome rested on corruption and political assassinations. That was the high point according to what I read in history books.
"Corruption" has a relative meaning. As Philipvs told, what was considered inadmissable in a Republic such as Rome was perfectly tolerable in the elites of powerful monarchical states. Later powerful Roman magnates were simply doing what powerful figures, pretenders and rulers always did in Hellenistic monarchies, the most glaring part being the sponsorship of private and civil strife vying for power. What gives them a corrupt image is the fact that the Republic rested on a solid basis of laws and aristocratic codes that officially condemned this, and not merely on the power and influence of the sovereign.
Spartans were notorious in the 4th century BC for becoming extremely corrupt outside of Sparta. They used metal rods (or whatever) as currency in Sparta, so after leaving to govern subject states or serve as advisors they basically were like "lololol goldz is so cooooool omg".
Well, everything in this world, to an intelligent and wise person is relative. That's how it is. However, must we always answer questions like this?...Quote:
Originally Posted by Basileos ton Ellenon
Whenever necessary, of course.
And to add to the OP I always find big Imperial institutions to be the most prone to corruption and disorder. The Great Hellenistic Empires were quite familiar to it: big blobs with excessively centralized administrations and more often than not ruled by sun kings in a formless regime where they exercised de facto despotic authority despite the formal trappings and constitutions. They were often plagued by Civil strife and pretenders and were the main ancestors of the Supreme Roman blob. Many times, as was said, normal offenses conducted by the sovereign and even the bureaucracy would be overlooked in a way that minor Monarchies with a reasonable tradition behind them or Republics never would.
Just look at the typical Hellenistic tax colleting system. From today's point of view a sheer abyss of corruption.
Well, "everything is relative" is an absolute statement, so if everything were relative then so would be the "fact" that everything is relative. Kind of a self-contradicting statement. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
Only an AP deals in absolutes...
it must be a logical deduction; the more entended a state, the more corrupted as it is..
Even ancient philosophers admits it IDK who said "governers are the ones in a society who have the privilages of liying"..
İf you think about Rome, AS, later Arsacids became very corrupted. In Rome local governors tried to be emperor, in AS and Arsacids local governors tried to be king themselves in their land.
Both empire were declined even arsacid kingdom died because of the rise of the power of local governors.(Strap of Parsa, a strap of the king managed to capture whole kingdom even killed the king!)
So the size of an empire also determines what size of corruption she has.
Basically I agree with everyone above; every government that rises to a certain power is bound to get corrupted.
Maion
I agree with everything you stated, but I must correct you on that. The RTW quote you're referring to is a very sloppy translation of a passage in Plato's "Politeia".Quote:
Originally Posted by Atraphoenix
From the EB Quotes Project:
Sorry for nitpicking. :sweatdrop:Quote:
τοι̂ς ἄρχουσιν δὴ τη̂ς πόλεως, εἴπερ τισὶν ἄλλοις, προσήκει ψεύδεσθαι ἢ πολεμίων ἢ πολιτω̂ν ἕνεκα ἐπ' ὠφελίᾳ τη̂ς πόλεως, τοι̂ς δὲ ἄλλοις πα̂σιν οὐχ ἁπτέον του̂ τοιούτου:
The rulers then of the city may, if anybody, fitly lie on account of enemies or citizens for the benefit of the state; no others may have anything to do with it
Plato, Republic, Book III, 389b
Don't forgett that early states' officials often were not payed on regular basis, and more or less expected to cheat the crown to own their living. This might have been in fact more effective (or say, cheaper) than the government establishing a more effective system of administration that gave the crown enough revenue that would have allowed to pay high ranking official in way that would correspond with their office.
Or to quote Frederick the Great, responding when a retired tax collector complained about his small pension: "I had placed you to the feeder. Why haven't you eaten?".
:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by konny
Good ol' Frederick the Great. He always had a witty reply up his sleeve. :beam:
Quote:
Originally Posted by desert
Yes some of them got very corrupt, yet generally speaking Spartans were one of the less corrupt people, because of there laws.:skull:
Interesting. So the corruption in modern-day Russia is a piece of cake compared to the corruption that took place in ancient Rome and the Hellenistic kingdoms? What about the tribals, like the Germanic tribes, Celtic tribes etc?
And what about those with philosophical inclinations, before they became rulers, like Ashoka the Great and Marcus Aurelius?