Archaeology; Civilization, Ancient; Despotism; Greece -- History -- To 146 B.C.; Wealth
The difficulties in accepting the twenty-eighth Olympiad, as set forth
by Unger[821], are not very impressive. He argues that at the
twenty-eighth Olympiad the Eleians had arms[822], whereas Pheidon made
his attack “when the Eleians were without arms[823],” and that, as the
Pisatans celebrated the twenty-seventh Olympiad, Pheidon in the
twenty-eighth would have displaced not the Eleians, but the Pisatans.
But when Strabo says that the Eleians were without arms, he or his
source may mean that their Dymaean war left them unequipped for home
defence. Assume that this was so and that they were preoccupied with
their Dymaean war both in 672 B.C. and in 668 B.C., and the whole
situation is explained easily. At the twenty-seventh celebration the
Pisatans unaided might secure the presidency by a surprise attack. It
would be at the next festival, when the Eleians were forewarned, that
the Pisatans would need Pheidon’s help to displace them at Olympia.
Weaker still is Unger’s argument that a notice about Pheidon may have
fallen out in Eusebius under Olymp. VIII, as one has in the same
chronicle about the emperor Caligula.
We may indeed with Mahaffy[824] and Busolt[825] doubt whether these
early parts of the Olympian victor lists are contemporary records. But
it is easy to be unduly sceptical. Mahaffy, for instance, is inclined to
argue that the Olympian lists cannot have existed in the fifth century
because they are not then used for purposes of dating. He assumes that
Hippias who made his edition of the list in 370 B.C. can have had little
more evidence at his disposal than Pausanias, who lived over five
hundred years later. Plutarch[826], whom he quotes as discrediting the
list, merely expresses an opinion which is no more final than that of
Mahaffy himself. If our chronological data are untrustworthy, we are
thrown back on Pheidon’s achievements for determining his date, a
position long ago maintained by C. Mueller[827]. Regarded as a fact of
indeterminate date Pheidon’s interference at Olympia is more likely to
have been remembered if it was not made so early as the close of the
eighth century, when the festival had not yet attained its subsequent
reputation[828].
[Sidenote: Pheidon probably contemporary with the earliest Aeginetan
coins.]
The evidence as to Pheidon’s date is therefore quite compatible with the
statement that makes him the first to strike coins in Aegina. For if it
be allowed that he may have lived in the first half of the seventh
century, there would be nothing unique in his having his mint away from
his capital in an outlying but commercially important part of his
dominion. Ridgeway and Svoronos have already compared the Romans, who
struck their first coins in Campania[829], and the Ptolemies who coined
very largely in Cyprus[830].
[Sidenote: Did he strike them?]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account