42.  What is it that they maintain?  Look at the terms of their imposture.  “We assert that connumeration is appropriate to subjects of equal dignity, and sub-numeration to those which vary in the direction of inferiority.”  “Why,” I rejoined, “do you say this?  I fail to understand your extraordinary wisdom.  Do you mean that gold is numbered with gold, and that lead is unworthy of the connumeration, but, because of the cheapness of the material, is subnumerated to gold?  And do you attribute so much importance to number as that it can either exalt the value of what is cheap, or destroy the dignity of what is valuable?  Therefore, again, you will number gold under precious stones, and such precious stones as are smaller and without lustre under those which are larger and brighter in colour.  But what will not be said by men who spend their time in nothing else but either ‘to tell or to hear some new thing’? Acts xvii. 21.  Let these supporters of impiety be classed for the future with Stoics and Epicureans.  What sub-numeration is even possible of things less valuable in relation to things very valuable?  How is a brass obol to be numbered under a golden stater?  “Because,” they reply, “we do not speak of possessing two coins, but one and one.”  But which of these is subnumerated to the other?  Each is similarly mentioned.  If then you number each by itself, you cause an equality of value by numbering them in the same way but, if you join them, you make their value one by numbering them one with the other.  But if the sub-numeration belongs to the one which is numbered second, then it is in the power of the counter to begin by counting the brass coin.  Let us, however, pass over the confutation of their ignorance, and turn our argument to the main topic.