DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4377#0356
68G APPENDIX NO. III.
of alloy it contained. This is borne out by the
statement in Hesychius, s. v. Qcoxaig ... to xclxhttm
XQua-iov, and by the mention of false stateres in an
Athenian inscription, C. I. 150, § 36. Hence, pro-
bably, the popular prejudice against the innovation
of a gold currency at Athens, to which Aristophanes
appeals, Ranse, ed. Dind. 1. 720. As we do not
possess the context, from which the line in Crates
is a fragment, we cannot be sure whether his state-
ment about the liemiektoii is not a specimen of the
exaggeration in which the Athenian comic writers
so often iiuVulged.0
When Aristophanes, in the passage already re-
ferred to, stigmatizes the new gold pieces at Athens
as made of copper, 1. 725, rovroig to7$ Trovr,f,o7s yjxhx'ioig,
his statement can hardly be regarded as an histori-
cal fact; for the Athenians of his time would hardly
have established a debased gold currency side by
side with a silver coinage of remarkable purity.
c According to Hesychius, s. r. >)fiUrrov, this coin was the equiva-
lent of the iifjuoftuXwy; but this statement can hardly have been
applied to the ftemieklon of gold, which, as the twelfth part of a
stater equal in weight to two golden drachma;, must have been the
equivalent of the obolos. The statement of Hesychius can, how-
ever, be explained if we adopt Moininscn's view, that the liemiek
ton of Crates is an Athenian coin, the twelfth part of the drachma.
It does not follow, however, that Hesychius is speaking of a In mi
clcton of gold. The term may have been applied to silver, like
ncrq, rtrapni.
of alloy it contained. This is borne out by the
statement in Hesychius, s. v. Qcoxaig ... to xclxhttm
XQua-iov, and by the mention of false stateres in an
Athenian inscription, C. I. 150, § 36. Hence, pro-
bably, the popular prejudice against the innovation
of a gold currency at Athens, to which Aristophanes
appeals, Ranse, ed. Dind. 1. 720. As we do not
possess the context, from which the line in Crates
is a fragment, we cannot be sure whether his state-
ment about the liemiektoii is not a specimen of the
exaggeration in which the Athenian comic writers
so often iiuVulged.0
When Aristophanes, in the passage already re-
ferred to, stigmatizes the new gold pieces at Athens
as made of copper, 1. 725, rovroig to7$ Trovr,f,o7s yjxhx'ioig,
his statement can hardly be regarded as an histori-
cal fact; for the Athenians of his time would hardly
have established a debased gold currency side by
side with a silver coinage of remarkable purity.
c According to Hesychius, s. r. >)fiUrrov, this coin was the equiva-
lent of the iifjuoftuXwy; but this statement can hardly have been
applied to the ftemieklon of gold, which, as the twelfth part of a
stater equal in weight to two golden drachma;, must have been the
equivalent of the obolos. The statement of Hesychius can, how-
ever, be explained if we adopt Moininscn's view, that the liemiek
ton of Crates is an Athenian coin, the twelfth part of the drachma.
It does not follow, however, that Hesychius is speaking of a In mi
clcton of gold. The term may have been applied to silver, like
ncrq, rtrapni.