Archaeology; Civilization, Ancient; Despotism; Greece -- History -- To 146 B.C.; Wealth
Thus the whole story, as it appears in the Aristotelian _Constitution of
Athens_, has been accounted for. In this, as in the account of
Peisistratus’ second exile, the author of the treatise seems to be
following a better authority than Herodotus. Herodotus’ deviations
appear to be attempts at rationalistic explanation in the best
Herodotean style. From Herodotus’ account of Peisistratus’ second exile
it is plain that he knew nothing of the tyrant’s connexions with Thrace,
of which we are informed in the Aristotelian treatise. According to
Herodotus the whole period of the second exile was spent in Euboea.
Hence the Thracian reference had to be rationalized away. But a fact
mentioned by Herodotus in another connexion[313] points to Hippias
having maintained some sort of position in the North Aegean till the end
of his reign. When in 510 B.C. he was banished, a home was offered him
by the king of Macedon.
Thrace and Paionia might be used indifferently in the original account,
the latter being the more accurate name, the former the more popular.
Herodotus takes Paionian as a corruption of Paianian, and Thracian as a
popular version of Paionian. That Herodotus himself was personally
responsible for the emendation Paianian is made probable by the words of
the _Constitution of Athens_, “as Herodotus says, a Paianian, as some
say, a Thracian.” The Paionians are made by Herodotus[314] to recognize
their own name in the paian or war-cry of their enemies. Only the verb
appears in the anecdote, and that in the form παιωνίζω, but Herodotus
must have been equally familiar with the forms in -α-, παιανίζω, παιάν,
and the anecdote shows how ready he would be to equate Paionian with
Paianian. I am dealing here with pure speculation, but so too has been
every one else who has tried to explain away this “extraordinarily silly
business[315].” The explanation just offered is at least in harmony with
the rest of our knowledge about both Peisistratus and Thrace.
Greeks were certainly capable of misunderstanding a _jeu de mot_ based
on a coin type. Mention has been made already of Aristophanes’
invocation of the “owls of Laurium” to nest in his purse[316]. A
Scholiast on the _Knights_ has turned these owls of silver into real
birds. “The owl,” he says, “is the sacred bird of Athena, that haunts
Laurium in Attica[317].”
[Sidenote: The tyrant Histiaeus and the Thracian mines.]
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account