Classical Conceptions of Corruption vs.

             Corruption has traditionally been defined as any practice that promotes self interest over the interests and well being of the public or community at large. Historically corruption has existed in the form of political abuse or deceit to facilitate the interests of the person over the public. The corrupt practices of early Stuart England have often been compared with contemporary views on corruption within government and politics. This paper will address broadly the notion of corruption with particular emphasis on the transition from classical to contemporary analysis and attention to the forces and trends most likely to influence society's notions of corruption today. .

             Classical Vs. Contemporary Perceptions of Corruption.

             As Peck (1993) points out contemporary theorists often describe political corruption using the same metaphor as classical theorists. Classical definitions of corruption often entailed descriptions or corrupted public officials, described by some as the "muddying of the streams of royal patronage" (Peck, 2). Corruption during classical times was considered an ever existing threat to the royal government officials of the time and support of the royal government by its citizens (Peck, 1993). .

             In contemporary society market and government often intermingle in much the same fashion as during classical times. Analysis of early Stuart government begs the question as to whether the government was more corrupt or unworkable during this time compared with modern times or whether the government was merely perceived as such by contemporary analysts. One may argue that multiple factors contributed to corruption in classical times including financial strain and mismanagement, economic distress and inflation (Peck, 1993). Interestingly these are the same pressures that contemporary officials often face and the very same subjects inspiring political malfeasance.