PO´NDERA
PO´NDERA (
σταθμοί). In
recent years the subject of Greek and Roman weights has received much
attention, especially in connexion with the history of the coinage; and the
researches of Boeckh, Hultsch, Mommsen, and Brandis have thrown light over
what was before their time a most obscure field. The method of these
inquirers, especially that of the two latter, has been scientific induction.
In the ancient world coins were always struck on one or another of the
weight-standards in use for commercial purposes, and in Greece the stater of
gold or silver always bore a simple and definite relation to the talent and
mina in use in the state where they were struck. In Rome the as was
originally merely a pound of copper. Thus it is by weighing great quantities
of coins that we are enabled to recover the weights in use in Greece and
Italy, and trace the historical succession and the derivation of the various
standards. When we have thus reached definite results, we can turn to the
works of ancient writers on metrology with better hope of understanding
them.
Weights of Babylon.--It is known from the testimony of
cuneiform inscriptions that at a very remote period the people of that city
developed an elaborate and scientific system of numerical notation, and
applied it to the reckoning of time, of weights, and of measures. The basis
of this system of notation was neither decimal nor duodecimal, but
sexagesimal; that is to say, the first figure in the line represented units,
the second sixties, the third 60 [multi] 60, three thousand six
hundreds, and so forth. The convenience of this system will be clear if we
consider that sixty is divisible by both ten and twelve.
Of the sexagesimal division introduced by the Babylonians into the reckoning
of time, traces remain to our own day: still sixty seconds make a minute and
sixty minutes an hour. We also inherit from the Babylonians the division of
a foot into twelve inches. This system of division was used by the
Babylonians, and after them by the Greeks in the case of weights.
For the verification of Babylonic standards, we are not left to conjecture.
Mr. Layard brought from the ruins of Nineveh a number of
[p. 2.445]weights, some in the shape of a lion and some in that of a
goose or duck. These weights bear upon them complete and satisfactory
legends, stating what they are, partly written in the cuneiform character,
and partly in the Aramaic character which was commonly used in Asia Minor at
the time of the Assyrian dominion. The name of the king in whose reign they
were made is added, so that our information regarding them is of the most
definite character.
A detailed account of these weights is given by Mr. E. Norris in the
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. xvi., by Dr.
Brandis (pp. 43
sqq.), and in the ninth
Report of the Warden of the Standards. The facts
established by them may be briefly put. They show that under the Assyrian
Empire there were in use in Mesopotamia, Syria, and Asia Minor two principal
standards of weight. The minas of these two standards were related one to
the other in the proportion of 2 to 1. The mina of the heavier standard
weighed about 1010 grammes or 15,600 grains troy; the mina of the lighter
standard, 505 grammes or 7,800 grains. Whether the two standards had
different origins, or represent only a different mode of calculation, is
obscure.
It can scarcely be a coincidence that the sixtieth parts of these two minae,
the heavier sixtieth weighing 260 grains (16 8 grammes) and the lighter
weighing 130 grains (8 4 grammes), were the weights according to which many
of the earliest gold coins of Asia Minor were struck. This fact seems to
prove that the weights in question had long been in use in that district for
the precious metals, before coins were invented. According to the view of
Brandis, accepted by Mr. Head, the heavier sixtieth was the accepted unit in
Phoenicia; whereas the lighter travelled overland to Lydia, and thence
reached the Greek colonies of the coast of Asia Minor.
On the ground of Homer's mention of the talent, which mention proves at any
rate that fixed standards of weight for gold and other metals were in his
time current, Mr. Ridgeway has maintained (
Journal of Hellenic
Studies, 8.133) that by the Greeks, even in the Homeric age,
gold bars of the weight of 130 grains were regarded as the equivalent of an
ox, and gold bars of 260 grains as the equivalent of a yoke of oxen. But
granting the probability of the fact, it seems most likely that the Greeks
did not arrive at the gold bar of 130 grains by an empirical process, but
derived it directly from some metrological system in force among their
neighbours, and perhaps arbitrarily regarded it as equivalent to an ox under
ordinary circumstances. If either gold or oxen became abnormally scarce, of
course the equation would no longer hold good.
From the gold shekel of 130 or 260 grains, whencesoever the weight was
derived, the peoples of Asia Minor and of Syria seem to have formed
metrological systems. By multiplying by 50, they formed minae of 6,500 and
of 13,000 grains, and from these minae again talents of sixty times those
weights. All this appears to have taken place before coins were in use,
while the currency of the precious metals consisted only of bars or rings.
It is clear that in the circulation of the precious metals two plans might be
adopted. Either bars both of gold and of silver might be current of the
weight of the shekel, which would exchange against one another at any time
or place according to the proportion between the value of silver and that of
gold; or else different standards of weight might be adopted for the two
metals, and bars of gold and of silver issued of such weight that a round
number of.the silver bars would exchange for one of the gold. In point of
fact, both these courses were adopted at various periods in the countries of
Western Asia and Europe.
In his list of the Persian tribute (3.89
sqq.),
Herodotus reckons the proportionate value of gold to silver as 13 to 1. This
proportion seems to have been fixed by custom, and not to have changed
during the Assyrian and Persian empires. Mommsen and Brandis, however, agree
that the relation would be more exactly expressed by the figures 13 1/3 : 1
or 40 : 3. In practice the rule of Herodotus might be maintained in small
transactions, but there seem to be grounds for holding that in dealing with
large sums the fraction was taken into account. Had the fixed proportion
been 12 : 1 or 10 : 1, bars of gold and silver of the same weight would have
exchanged conveniently one against the other. Indeed, in Greece at various
periods, this did take place. But the awkwardness of the relation 13 or 13
1/3 to 1 necessitated in Asia the adoption of a different standard for
silver, in order that a round number of the current bars of silver should
exchange for one of gold.
According to the theory of Brandis the Phoenician standard for silver, which
was certainly in use from early times to late times, was formed on this
principle from bars of gold weighing 260 grains. Multiply 260 by 13 1/3 ,
and we get the weight of the silver equivalent of this unit, 3466 grains.
Dividing this again by 15, we get a convenient bar of silver of the weight
of 231 or 230 grains of the value of the fifteenth part of a gold shekel.
Thus four gold shekels would be equivalent to 60 bars of silver formed on
this new unit. We have reason to believe that the silver currency in Syria
and Phoenicia before the invention of coining was,. in accordance with the
standard afterwards followed in the earliest coins, composed of bars of
metal of about 230 grains each, of which fifteen went to a gold shekel.
In Asia Minor and Lydia the ordinary unit of value in gold weighed but half
this amount,, 130 grains. Its silver equivalent was 1720 or 1730 grains.
This sum was represented in the currency by ten bars of about 172 grains
each,. which would together be equal in value to a bar in gold. From this
new silver unit, 172. grains, were formed, by multiplying by 50,. a mina of
about 8,600 grains and a talent of 516,000 grains, which were known among
the Greeks as the Babylonian silver talent and mina. Dr. Brandis tries to
show that these were in use in Mesopotamia as early as the 16th century
before our era. In any case, it is clear from the testimony of Herodotus
that they were in use in Persia for estimating the tribute paid in silver by
subject nations. The passage, indeed, in which Herodotus sums this tribute
(3.89) is perplexing, and certainly corrupt, since his
[p. 2.446]totals do not represent the sum of his items. As the passage
stands, the Babylonian talent is said to be equivalent to 70 Euboic minae.
But Mommsen, by an emendation universally accepted (
Röm.
Münzwesen, p, 22), alters the figures to 78, so making
Herodotus consistent. 78 Euboic minae give a weight nearly equal to that
above attributed to the Babylonic silver talent.
In Egypt, in early times, the weights used were the
kat and the
outen or
ten, which was its tenfold. Various metrologists have given
different values of the kat; and as existing Egyptian weights vary
considerably in force, no accurate determination is possible. The generally
received values are, for the kat about 9 grammes or 140 grains, and for the
ten 90 grammes or 1400 grains. Various attempts have been made to derive
from these Egyptian weights those current in historical times in Greece. And
in fact the smallness of the difference between the kat and the lighter
shekel of Babylon seems to indicate that they had either a common or a
parallel origin. We cannot, however, prove that Egyptian weights were used
out of Egypt, while the Aramaic inscriptions on the Assyrian weights prove
that they were in use in countries where the Aramaic writing was used; that
is to say, in Asia Minor or N. Syria. Brandis also has argued that when
certain weights of precious metal are recorded in Egyptian inscriptions as
paid by way of tribute by the peoples of Syria, the sum, though expressed in
Egyptian weights, almost always consists of a round number of Babylonish
shekels. So far therefore as research has at present gone, it would seem
that the monetary systems of Syria, Asia Minor,
|
|
HEAVY SYSTEM.
|
LIGHT SYSTEM.
|
|
|
|
|
Avoirdupois. |
|
|
Avoirdupois. |
|
Part of Talent. |
Grammes. |
Grains. |
lbs. |
oz. |
Grammes. |
Grains. |
lbs. |
oz. |
I. Babylonic
Talent for weighing goods. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Talent |
1 |
60,600 |
936,000 |
133 5/7 |
|
30,300 |
468,000 |
66 6/7 |
|
Mina |
[frac160] |
1,010 |
15,600 |
2 |
3 2/3 |
505 |
7,800 |
1 |
1 5/6
|
Sixtieth |
1/3600 |
16.83 |
260 |
|
3/5 |
8.41 |
130 |
|
3/10 |
II.
Babylonic Gold Talent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Talent |
1 |
50,490 |
780,000 |
111 3/7 |
|
25,245 |
390,000 |
55 5/7 |
|
Mina |
[frac160] |
841.5 |
13,000 |
1 |
13 5/7 |
420.7 |
6,500 |
|
14 6/7
|
Shekel |
1/3000 |
16.83 |
260 |
|
3/5 |
8.41 |
130 |
|
3/10 |
III.
Babylonic Silver Talent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Talent |
1 |
67,320 |
1032,000 |
147 3/7 |
|
33,660 |
516,000 |
73 5/7 |
|
Mina |
[frac160] |
1,122 |
17,200 |
2 |
7 1/3 |
561 |
8,600 |
1 |
3 2/3
|
Shekel |
1/3000 |
22.4 |
344 |
|
4/5 |
11.2 |
172 |
|
2/5 |
IV.
Phoenician Silver Talent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Talent1 |
1 |
44,700 |
690,000 |
98 4/7 |
|
22,350 |
345,000 |
49 2/7 |
|
Mina |
[frac160] |
745 |
11,500 |
1 |
10 2/7 |
372.5 |
5,750 |
|
13 1/7
|
Shekel |
1/3000 |
14.9 |
230 |
|
1/2 |
7.45 |
115 |
|
1/4 |
Greece, and Italy were derived rather from Babylon than from Egypt.
The silver talent in use among the Jews was that of the Phoenicians in its
heavier form. To quite a late date the Jewish mina weighed 11,500 grains and
the shekel 230. This is sufficiently proved by the statements of Epiphanius
(Hultsch,
Metrolog. Script. reliqq. p. 265) as well as from
the testimony of a Jewish stone weight with the legend PONDO. CXXV. TALENTVM SICLORVM III.: whence it appears that the
Jewish talent weighed even in Roman times as much as 125 Roman pounds,
637,500 grains, which is but a little below the heavy Phoenician standard
(see table); and contained 3,000 shekels.
We have reason to believe that the Phoenician weight was in use also at
Carthage; having doubtless accompanied the emigrants from the
mother-country. For the coinage of Carthage, which does not however begin at
an early period, is chiefly struck on the Phoenician nician standard, and
slightly heavier than the money of Tyre and Sidon. And no doubt the
Carthaginians, like the Phoenicians, applied the same standard they used for
money in weighing other articles.
Derivation of Greek Monetary Standards.--We have already seen
what were, before the invention of coinage, the principal monetary standards
in use in Western Asia. These we will briefly recapitulate, and assign them
names, in order that we may cite them with more convenience hereafter.
First, there was the heavy Babylonian gold standard, with its shekel of 260
grains. Next there was the light Babylonian gold standard, with its shekel
of 130 grains. Next there was the Babylonian silver standard, of which the
unit weighed 172 grains. Last, there was the standard called by Brandis
Graeco-Asiatic, but which, as it originally ginally spread from Phoenicia,
we shall prefer
[p. 2.447]to call the Phoenician. It was
used only for silver, and its unit weighed about 230 grains. it is probable
that from one or other of these four units all monetary systems, except
those of the ancient Chinese and the modern French, have been derived.
Considering the vigorous commercial activity of the Phoenicians in the eighth
and ninth centuries before our era, it cannot appear surprising if the
standards adopted by them spread more rapidly and obtained wider currency
than the standards which were transmitted by land only. In particular they
spread to the Greek cities of the Asiatic coast, which were at this time far
superior in wealth and splendour to the cities of Greece proper. Ephesus and
Miletus, Phocaea and Smyrna, learned to accept as units of value the heavy
Babylonian gold shekel of 260 grains, and the Phoenician silver shekel of
230 grains. And from Ephesus and Smyrna the Phoenician silver standard
passed to Sardis, the wealthy capital of the Lydian kings, though the
greater part of the Lydian money was minted on the Babylonian standard which
reached the country by land.
The credit of inventing the idea of money--that is, of stamping an ingot of
metal of fixed weight with an official die, which should guarantee its
quality and value--belongs to the Lydians. Herodotus (
1.94) states that this people were the first to strike coin in
gold and silver. But probably the earliest coins were neither of gold, nor
of silver, but of electrum, which is a natural mixture of those two metals,
found in the bed of the Pactolus and other rivers of Asia Minor, and
reckoned by the G(reeks as a separate metal. [See
ELECTRUM] Whether ingots of electrum unstamped had
previously been current, we cannot say; but it is likely. If we are to
suppose, with Brandis, that by a fixed convention the value of the Lydian
electrum was regarded as 3/4 of that of gold, gold standing to silver in the
relation of 13 1/3 to 1 as regards value, electrum would appear to have
stood to silver in the relation of 10 to 1. In this proportion recent
metrologists have found an explanation of the fact that the electrum was
struck upon the standard used for silver and not that used for gold, each of
the new coins of electrum passing for ten of the previously used bars of
silver. We must, however, observe that the proportion of value between gold
and electrum cannot be regarded as ascertained fact.
The claim of the people of Lydia to have invented money is usually allowed by
numismatists. The invention appears to belong to the seventh century, when
Lydia was ruled by the Mermnadae. It spread to the towns of the Ionian
coast, and thence with decreased rapidity south and west. The great bulk of
the early electrum coins are struck on the Phoenician silver standard. In
their division the duodecimal system prevails; the third, fourth, sixth,
twelfth, and twenty-fourth parts of the stater being usual. Some of the
early coins of Lydia are on the Babylonic silver standard. This, however,
was not used out of Lydia. Electrum pieces on the Phoenician standard, on
the contrary, were struck in a host of cities; including Sardes, Miletus,
Chios, Samos, Lampsacus, and even the distant Aegina. A few cities, such as
Samos and Eretria, seem in the earliest times to have struck electrum coins
on the Babylonic gold standard. For further details as to the early electrum
coinage, see ELECTRUM and the authorities there cited.
The city of Phocaea, which enjoyed great wealth and prosperity during the
half-century previous to its destruction by Harpagus, the general of Cyrus,
issued at that period coins of dark electrum, containing a considerable
proportion of gold, minted on the heavy Babylonian gold standard,--coins
which seem during the earlier half of the sixth century to have pushed their
way on the Asiatic coast, and in many places to have taken the place of the
Milesian electrum. (Head,
Numismatic Chronicle, 15.272.)
The supersession in Asia of the electrum coinage by one of gold and silver
has been generally regarded as the work of Croesus. This able and wealthy
monarch is supposed to have recognised the fact that electrum, in
consequence of its varying purity and value, is ill-fitted to be a measure
of value, and so to have stopped the issue of electrum coins in the mint of
Sardes, and in the place of them to have substituted pieces of pure gold
struck on the light Babylonian gold standard (126 grains) and pieces of fine
silver struck on the Babylonian silver standard (168 grains). Of these
coins, which bear as type the head of a lion and the head of a bull, many
specimens survive to our day. Ten of the silver pieces were equal in value
to one of the gold, being considerably heavier. It is, however, the view of
M. Six that this monetary reform was the work not of Croesus, but of his
Persian conqueror, Cyrus (Head,
Historia Numorum, p. 546).
Darius, son of Hystaspes, regulated the internal affairs of the Persian
Empire, and introduced a state coinage on the model of that of Lydia, which
continued unchanged until the overthrow of the Persian Empire by Alexander
the Great.
The coinage of gold he claimed as his own peculiar privilege, and insisted on
his exclusive right in this matter with so much vigour that it became a
settled principle of Persian rule that no power in Asia, save the Great King
only, had the right to issue money of gold. The staters of Darius were in
weight identical with those of Croesus (128-130 grains). They were called
Darics, perhaps from the king who instituted them; also
τοξόται. [See
DARICUS] Darius issued also silver coin, in shape
and type similar to the gold. He adopted as his monetary unit the half of
that of Croesus, at the same time somewhat raising the standard. Thus the
silver pieces called
σίγλοι or shekels
weighed about 86 grains, and twenty of them were equivalent in value to a
Daric. [See SIGLUS.] But the right of issuing
silver money was not reserved exclusively to the king. Satraps, especially
when in command of military expeditions, were allowed to strike in silver,
to adopt any types or devices they might think proper, and even to place
their names on the coin. The cities of the Asiatic coast, of Lycia, and of
Cyprus were allowed to have coins of their own. In these cases the standard
was the same as that of the siglos, but the pieces issued were usually of
the weight of two sigli (about 172 grains). The cities of Phoenicia, on the
other hand, which issued silver coin in great abundance, retained, Aradus
excepted,
[p. 2.448]their ancient silver standard. Such was
the general nature of the Asiatic issues of coin until the Persian Empire
fell.
But we must now trace the rise of coining in Greece proper; and for this
purpose return to a period before the date of Darius. We have already
mentioned that, probably as early as the seventh century B.C., the cities of
Euboea minted electrum on the Babylonian gold standard (130 grains), and
Aegina on the Phoenician silver standard (230 grains). At this period the
cities of Euboea, together with Corinth and Aegina, were the great
commercial states of Greece. So it is not surprising that with these issues
in electrum all the coinage of Greece proper took its rise. A coinage in
electrum, however, could not exist long in Greece, for the substance of
which it was formed had to be imported from Asia Minor. Silver, on the
contrary, was abundant in Hellas, being procured in large quantities and
many places, especially in Thrace. [See
ARGENTUM] It was therefore natural that the cities
of Greece proper should have adopted silver for their currencies. But in so
doing they adhered in the main, as we shall see, to the standards which had
reached them from Asia.
Herodotus states that it was Pheidon, king of Argos, who regulated the
measures of the Peloponnese (
Hdt. 6.127); and
Ephorus, quoted by Strabo (viii. pp. 358 and 376), says that he struck
νόμισμα τὸ τε ἄλλο καὶ τὸ
ἀργυροῦν at the island of Aegina. Certainly some of the earliest
of the coins of Greece proper were the electrum and silver money of Aegina,
bearing the type of a tortoise. According to Herodotus (
6.127), Pheidon's son was one of the suitors of Agariste,
daughter of Cleisthenes of Sicyon. If this be true, his date must be brought
down to that of Cleisthenes, about 600-580 B.C.;
and we agree with Unger, who has discussed the whole question of the date of
Pheidon in the
Philologus (vols. 28, 29), that
there is good reason to believe that there was a Pheidon ruling in Argos at
that period. The testimony of Herodotus is too clear and explicit to be
rejected. And this king it must certainly have been who introduced coins
into Greece. It is contrary to all evidence to place that introduction at so
early a period as the eighth Olympiad.
Whether it was this Pheidon who also regulated the measures of the
Peloponnese may be considered more doubtful. That the same ruler regulated
the weights also is not stated by Herodotus, but is probable. That there was
an earlier Pheidon is proved by a mass of testimony; and the explicit
statement of Pausanias (
6.22,
2) that he presided at the eighth Olympic festival
appears too definite to be disputed. The conjecture of Weissenborn, who
wishes to substitute twenty-eighth for eighth, is rightly rejected by Unger,
and has indeed nothing in its favour, besides being quite inconsistent with
the testimony of Herodotus; and it may be this earlier Pheidon who regulated
Peloponnesian weights and measures.
In any case we may allow the truth of the tradition that silver coin was
first struck in Hellas proper in the island of Aegina. Of this very
primitive coinage we possess many specimens. Their type is a turtle, the
emblem of the Phoenician goddess of trade. One specimen in the British
Museum weighs 211 grains, but few weigh more than 200 grains. It is
difficult to determine whence the Aeginetans or Argives derived this
standard, which is called the Aeginetan. It is possible that it is merely a
slightly degraded form of the Phoenician. Argos had been from early times in
constant commercial intercourse with the Phoenicians, and long before the
invention of coinage the Argives must have been in the habit of using bars
of metal of fixed weight. It is possible that Pheidon, in regulating the
weight of the Aeginetan stater, thought best to adapt it to the Babylonic
gold standard, which was already in use, as we shall see, in some parts of
Greece for silver. The Babylonic stater weighing 130 grains, he may have
lowered the standard of Phoenicia (supposing that to have been in use at
Argos) so that his new staters should weigh 195 grains, and two of them
exchange for three of the Babylonic staters. Of late years attempts have
been made to deduce the Aeginetic mina from the water-weight of the cube of
the Olympic foot, and so to connect it with Hellenic systems of metrology.
These, however, are speculations; what is. certain is, that the scale of the
coins with the tortoise on them, a scale henceforward called Aeginetan,
spread with great rapidity over Greece. It was in the sixth century used
everywhere in Peloponnesus except at Corinth, and was the customary standard
in the Cyclades; in Thessaly, Boeotia, and the whole of Northern Greece,
except Euboea; and some parts of Macedon. Its weights are as follows:--
|
Grammes. |
Grains. |
Talent |
37,800 |
585,000 |
Mina |
630 |
9,750 |
Stater (didrachm) |
12.60 |
195 |
Drachm |
6.30 |
97 |
Obol |
1.05 |
16 |
It will be seen that we here reach new terms,--stater, drachm, and obol. The
first is but a rendering of the Semitic word
shekel
[see
STATER]. But the other
terms are of Greek origin. The drachm became in Greece the unit in which
calculations of weight and of money were made, and the obol, which was the
sixth part of the drachm, was the coin used for small payments. [See
DRACHMA]
The only other standard in use in Greece proper before the time of Solon was
the Euboic. This was identical with the light Babylonian gold standard. The
silver staters struck on the Euboic standard at Chalcis and Eretria weighed
about 130 grains. This Euboic standard obtained currency in some other
parts, such as the island of Chios. Herodotus in his account of the tribute
paid by the Persian Satrapies (3.89) states that the gold was measured by
the Euboic standard, clearly identifying it with the Persian official
standard according to which the Darics. were coined. In the course of the
fifth century B.C. we find Cumae in Campania and other Euboean colonies
striking on a standard which is apparently the Euboic, the coins weighing
from 120 to 110 grains. But about the middle of the sixth century B.C. the
Attic standard arose, and it is impossible to distinguish henceforth the
history of the Euboic from that of the Attic standard.
[p. 2.449]
In the time of Solon the standard used at Athens for weighing both
merchandise and the precious metals was the Aeginetan. Whether actual coins
were minted then at Athens is uncertain; at all events, none survive to our
day. It is probable that Athens was still trading with bars of silver of
Aeginetan weight, or adopting the rude coins issued in quantities by Aegina
and copied in all parts of Greece. Solon, as we are told by Plutarch (
Plut. Sol. 15), introducing his laws for the
relief of debtors, the celebrated
σεισάχθεια, ordered that the standard of the drachm should be
lowered to 73/100 of what it had previously been; that is to say, that the
weight of the drachm should be lowered from 95 grains to 68, but that debts
contracted in the old currency might be discharged in the new, the debtors
thus gaining 27 per cent. The Aeginetan mina was still retained as a weight
for merchandise, as we know both from several surviving specimens of
Athenian weights, and from the testimony of a popular decree of later time
(Boeckh,
C. I. 123), which reckons the commercial mina at 138
silver drachmas. Further, Priscian states the larger Attic (commercial)
talent, which was of course equal to 60 of its own minae, to be equivalent
to 83 1/3 of the ordinary minae. These three testimonies agree then
accurately as to the relations of the pre-Solonic and the Solonic weights of
Attica; and as the coins of Athens of the Solonic standard survive in great
quantities, there is nothing in the above account which admits of any doubt.
It may indeed excite surprise that Solon should have lighted on so strange a
proportion as 27/100 for the reduction of the coin. Most recent writers have
supposed that his motive was to assimilate the new standard to the Euboic,
which it only slightly exceeds in weight; but there is here room for doubt.
For it does not appear why, if such were his intention, he should not have
at once adopted a depreciation of 33 per cent. If he had issued the new coin
of two-thirds the weight of the old coins or bars, he would have given
greater ease to debtors, have lighted on an easy and simple proportion, and
almost exactly adopted the existing Euboic weight. Attention is due to an
ingenious suggestion put forth by Mr. Poole (
Dict. of the
Bible, art. “Weights and Measures” ) that the new
Solonic standard is more likely to have been borrowed from Egypt than fiom
Asia Minor. We have already seen that the Egyptian unit of weight, the kat,
weighed about 9 grammes or 140 grains, and the Solonic drachms of Athens are
thus nearly of the weight of half a kat. The intercourse between Egypt and
Attica was in Solon's time very close; and it is far from improbable that in
departing from the national standard of the Greeks he should adopt that of
Egypt.
The weights of the units of the Solonic standard, henceforward known as the
Attic, are as follows:--
|
Grammes. |
Grains. |
Talent |
26,400 |
405,000 |
Mina |
440 |
6,750 |
Drachm |
4.40 |
67.5 |
Obol |
.73 |
11.25 |
The ordinary coin was the tetradrachm of about 270 grains.
The only remaining standard early used in Greece proper was the Corinthian.
This has the same unit of value as the Euboic; namely, a stater of 130
grains, the weight of which rises under Athenian influence to 135 grains.
But in the subdivisions of this stater the Corinthian mint took a line
peculiar to itself. With it the drachm was not half but a third of this
unit, and the obol again a sixth part of that:--
|
Grammes. |
Grains. |
Stater |
8.80 |
135 |
Drachm |
2.93 |
45 |
Obol |
.49 |
7.5 |
As many of the Corinthian coins bear marks of value, this fact cannot be
disputed. Also Thucydides (
1.27) mentions the
Corinthian drachm as a thing apart. The reason of this method of division
has been disputed. Mommsen (p. 61) is inclined to see in it a reminiscence
of the Asiatic origin of the weight. But it is not improbable that the
Corinthian drachms of 45 grains were intended to pass as Aeginetan
hemidrachms, of which the weight was about the same. The money of Aegina and
Athens would naturally meet in the market of Corinth; and the Corinthian
coin seems to have been specially adapted to mediate between the two.
We must now follow the course of the invention of money westwards to Italy
and Sicily. It is almost certain that when the people of Phocaea migrated to
Velia in Italy, about B.C. 543, they took with them the art of coinage. But
at about this period the Achaean cities of Southern Italy--Sybaris and
Poseidonia, Rhegium and Caulonia, with Croton, Tarentum, and other
towns--were already issuing money much of which still remains in our
Museums, and is remarkable for bearing the same type on both sides; on one
side in relief, on the other in intaglio. This money is apparently struck on
the Euboic standard which the people of Chalcis and Corinth had already
introduced in these regions. At some cities the drachm is half the stater,
as in Euboea; in some a third of it, as at Corinth. Its date is certain, for
we have specimens minted at Sybaris and Siris, which were destroyed not
later than B.C. 510. At about the latter date Syracuse as well as Zancle,
Naxos, and other Chalcidian colonies in Sicily began to issue coin. The
Chalcidian cities, for some unexplained reason, began by issuing pieces
weighing about 90 grains, which must therefore either be drachms of the
Aeginetan, or, more probably, didrachms of the Corinthian standard. but they
soon adopted--as Syracuse, Gela, and Leontini did from the first--the Attic
standard, and struck coins as follows:--
tetradrachm |
270 |
grains. |
Didrachm |
135 |
grains. |
Drachm |
67.5 |
grains. |
Hemidrachm |
33.75 |
grains. |
Obol |
11.25 |
grains. |
But, in addition to the obol, we find at Syracuse a litra weighing about 13
1/2 grains. In order to explain its relation to the other coins, it is
necessary to give some account of the systems of weighing and the monetary
systems of Italy and Sicily. (See below, p. 455.) Among the purely Greek
cities of these regions we do not find, until a comparatively late period,
any
[p. 2.450]standards in use for money except the Euboic
and the Attic.
Monetary Standards of Greece at the time of the Peloponnesian
War.--If we attempt a general survey of the standards employed by
the Greeks for money, say at about the year B.C. 420, we must confine
ourselves carefully to generalities. The monetary history of each city is a
study, sometimes an intricate one, and we might often fail to find reasons
for the adoption of this or that standard in turn. But a more general survey
is not impossible. In Sicily, as has already been stated, the Attic standard
was universal; the ordinary coin was the tetradrachm; didrachms,
hemidrachms, and obols were in use, and decadrachms occasionally struck.
[See
DAMARETEION] In Italy,
that is, the Greek colonies of S. Italy, the Euboic standard, appreciably
lower than the Attic, was in general use; but the standard coin was not the
tetradrachm, but the didrachm, which is said at Tarentum to have been called
νοῦμμος. [See
NUMMUS] In Hellas proper, including Epirus and
Thessaly, the Aeginetan standard was almost universal. The exceptions were
Athens, where the Attic standard prevailed; and Corinth, together with the
Corinthian colonies in Acarnania, which minted as was natural on the
Corinthian standard. The iron money of Laconia was of Aeginetan standard,
the
πέλανορ being of the weight of an
Aeginetan mina. Crete and the islands near the European coast also used the
Aeginetan weights. In Macedonia several standards were in use. The kings of
Macedon in the fifth century used the Persian silver standard for their
coins; but the cities of Chalcidice mostly used the standard of their
Euboean mother-city, somewhat raised, in fact raised nearly to the Attic
level; and the rude tribes of Mount Pangaeum, who coined very largely, used
a somewhat degraded form of the Persian or Babylonian silver standard, their
staters not weighing more than 160 grains.
On the shores of the Black Sea the Persian standard was almost universally in
use; Sinope, Amisus, and other cities issuing large numbers of coins of the
weight of the Persian siglus,--that is, of about 86 grains. Probably three
of these prices went in exchange for an Attic tetradrachm. In other parts of
Asia Minor, in some of the Ionian cities, as Colophon, in Lycia and Cyprus,
the same Persian standard was in use; but in the southern district the
double siglus of 170 grains or thereabouts was more usual than the single
one. Some of the great cities of the west coast retained the Phoenician
silver standard, which, however, varied somewhat from place to place. At
Ephesus the stater sometimes exceeded 230 grains; at Samos it seldom weighed
more than 205 grains. The Samian standard ruled in the African colony of
Cyrene. The cities of Phoenicia about this time began to strike coins on
their original standard. At this time no gold coin except the Persian Darics
was anywhere current. But electrum coin was issued in great quantities by
the city of Cyzicus. The standard used by that city was the Phocaic of
260-250 grains, and the denominations issued were the stater and the hecte
or sixth. [See
STATER and
HECTE] Lampsacus also issued
electrum coin.
History of Coinage in the Levant after B.C. 420.--In 408 B.C.
the city of Rhodes was founded. The origin of this city coinciding so nearly
with the humiliation of Athens by Lysander, the commerce of Rhodes spread
rapidly over all seas. The Rhodians adopted from the first a standard of
their own, which seems to have been a variety of the Phoenician. Their
tetradrachm weighed at first 240 grains, though in the course of a century
it sank to 220 grains. This standard made its way in the fourth century
rapidly among Greek states. King Mausolus of Caria adopted it. And even the
distant Olynthus, head of the Chalcidian league, struck money on the same
standard: thence it was adopted by Philip of Macedon for his silver coin.
The early years of the fourth century saw a copper or rather bronze coinage
spring up in most cities of Greece proper and the Greek colonies in Italy
and Sicily. Hitherto for small change the Greeks had used minute pieces of
silver. Pieces of the weight of two grains troy, representing two chalci or
the fourth part of an obol, were commonly used at Athens, and survive to our
day. Copper money was at first scouted, as we see from the language of
Aristophanes (
Aristoph. Eccl. 818), but
it gradually made its way by its superior convenience. At about the same
time gold was first minted by Greeks. Small pieces first make their
appearance in Sicily; but before the middle of the fourth century gold
staters struck on the Attic standard were issued in considerable numbers by
Olynthus, Panticapaeum, Athens, Lampsacus, Cius, Rhodes, and other cities,
eventually driving out of circulation the electrum money of Cyzicus and
Lampsacus.
When Philip of Macedon acquired the gold mines of Thrace, he began issuing
large quantities of gold coins with his own types. And as in the case of his
issues in silver, so in those in gold, he adopted the standard already
current in Chalcidice, the wealthiest and most civilised part of his
dominions. That is to say, he minted gold didrachms of the Attic standard,
those didrachms which soon became notorious all over the world. They opened
to Philip the gates of many a Greek city, they constituted the greater part
of the wealth of the capitalists in Greece and Italy, and they were copied
by the barbarous nations on the northern frontiers of Greece and even by the
remote tribes of Gaul and Britain.
But, as in other departments of Greek activity, so in the coinage, the
greatest of epochs is furnished by the life of Alexander the Great.
Alexander adopted throughout his vast dominions the Attic standard of weight
for both silver coins and gold. We must pause for a moment to consider his
objects in taking this measure. Hitherto almost all cities which issued both
gold and silver, Athens excepted, had used a different standard for the two
metals. The ratio of value between gold and silver being, as we have above
seen, as 13 1/3 to 1, it was necessary that the standards should be
different in order that a round number of silver staters should exchange for
one gold stater. In Asia the Euboic standard was in use for gold, and either
the Babylonic silver standard or the Phoenician for silver. Gold was seldom
minted in Europe; but the states, such as the Olynthian league and Macedon,
which did issue gold coin, minted
[p. 2.451]it of Attic
weight, at the same time that they adopted for their silver one of the
Asiatic standards. This procedure was obviously desirable so long as the old
relation of value between gold and silver was maintained. But in the time of
Philip of Macedon, consequently on the active use made by that king of the
rich gold mines of Thrace, the value of gold in proportion to that of silver
fell. Alexander seems to have perceived that in consequence it
GREEK COINAGE.
|
|
No. of drachms or part of a
drachm. |
Phoenician, Rhodian. |
Babylonic, Persian. |
Samian. |
Aeginetan, Cistophoric. |
Euboic. |
Attic. |
Corinthian. |
Dodecadrachm |
12 |
690 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decadrachm |
10 |
575 |
|
|
|
|
675 |
|
Octadrachm |
8 |
460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tetradrachm |
4 |
230 |
|
210 |
|
260 |
270 |
|
Tridrachm |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
135 |
Didrachm |
2 |
115 |
172 |
105 |
194 |
130 |
135 |
|
Trihemidrachm |
1 1/2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
67.5 |
Drachm |
1 |
57.5 |
86 |
52.5 |
97 |
65 |
67.5 |
45 |
Tetrobol |
2/8 |
38.3 |
57.3 |
35 |
|
43.3 |
45 |
|
Hemidrachm |
1/2 |
28.7 |
43 |
26.2 |
48.5 |
32.5 |
33.7 |
22.5 |
Diobol |
1/3 |
19.2 |
28.6 |
17.5 |
32.3 |
21.6 |
22.5 |
15 |
Trihemiobol |
1/4 |
14.3 |
21.5 |
13.1 |
24.2 |
|
16.8 |
11.2 |
Obol |
1/6 |
9.6 |
14.3 |
8.7 |
16.1 |
10.8 |
11.2 |
7.5 |
Tritartemorion |
1/8 |
7.2 |
10.7 |
|
12.1 |
|
8.4 |
|
Hemiobol |
1/12 |
4.8 |
7.1 |
4.3 |
8 |
5.4 |
5.6 |
3.7 |
Tetartemorion |
1/24 |
2.4 |
3.6 |
|
4 |
|
2.8 |
1.8 |
|
Attic Standard.
|
|
Gold. |
Electrum. |
Silver. |
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
Talent |
3375 |
0 |
0 |
2531 |
5 |
0 |
210 |
18 |
9 |
Mina |
56 |
5 |
0 |
42 |
3 |
9 |
3 |
10 |
3 3/4
|
Decadrachm |
5 |
12 |
6 |
4 |
4 |
4 1/2 |
0 |
7 |
0 1/2
|
Tetradrachm |
2 |
5 |
0 |
1 |
13 |
9 |
0 |
0 |
9 3/4
|
Didrachm |
1 |
2 |
6 |
0 |
16 |
10 1/2 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
Drachm |
0 |
11 |
3 |
0 |
8 |
5 1/4 |
0 |
0 |
8 1/2
|
Hemidrachm |
0 |
5 |
7 1/2 |
0 |
4 |
2 1/2 |
0 |
0 |
4 1/4
|
Obol |
0 |
1 |
10 1/2 |
0 |
1 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
1 1/4
|
Hemiohol |
0 |
0 |
11 1/4 |
0 |
0 |
8 1/2 |
0 |
0 |
0 1/2
|
|
Aeginetan.
|
Phoenician.
|
|
Silver. |
Electrum. |
Silver. |
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
Talent |
303 |
2 |
6 |
2156 |
5 |
0 |
179 |
13 |
9 |
Mina |
5 |
1 |
0 1/2 |
35 |
18 |
9 |
2 |
19 |
10 3/4
|
Decadrachm |
0 |
10 |
1 1/4 |
3 |
11 |
10 1/2 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
Tetradrachm |
0 |
0 |
0 1/2 |
1 |
8 |
9 |
0 |
2 |
4 3/4
|
Didrachm |
0 |
2 |
0 1/4 |
0 |
14 |
4 1/2 |
0 |
1 |
2 1/2
|
Drachm |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
7 |
2 1/4 |
0 |
0 |
7 1/4
|
Hemidrachm |
0 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
3 |
7 |
0 |
0 |
3 1/2
|
Obol |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 1/2 |
0 |
0 |
1 1/4
|
Hemiobol |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
7 1/4 |
0 |
0 |
0 1/2
|
|
Persian (silver standard).
|
|
Gold. |
Electrum. |
Silver. |
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
£ |
s.
|
d.
|
Talent |
4300 |
0 |
0 |
3225 |
0 |
0 |
268 |
15 |
0 |
Mina |
71 |
13 |
4 |
53 |
15 |
0 |
4 |
9 |
7 |
Decadrachm |
7 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
7 |
6 |
0 |
8 |
11 1/2
|
Tetradrachm |
2 |
17 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
7 |
Didrachm |
1 |
8 |
8 |
1 |
1 |
6 |
0 |
1 |
9 1/2
|
Drachm |
0 |
14 |
4 |
0 |
10 |
9 |
0 |
0 |
10 3/4
|
Hemidrachm |
0 |
7 |
2 |
0 |
5 |
4 1/2 |
0 |
0 |
5 1/4
|
Obol |
0 |
2 |
4 3/4 |
0 |
1 |
9 1/2 |
0 |
0 |
1 3/4
|
Hemiobol |
0 |
1 |
2 1/4 |
0 |
0 |
10 3/4 |
0 |
0 |
0 3/4
|
was impossible to maintain a double standard and to secure that a
certain number of silver staters should always pass for a gold one. He
therefore minted both metals on one standard, in order that when the ratio
of value of silver to gold was 1:12 a gold didrachm should exchange for six
silver tetradrachms, when the ratio was 1:10 a gold didrachm should exchange
for 5 tetradrachms, and so forth. It was no doubt stated or else implied in
all promises of payment whether gold or silver was to be the metal employed.
Gold continued to be minted in the name and with the types of Alexander in
many cities of Asia for many years after his death, and silver for more than
a century longer.
The successors of Alexander coined in their various cities immense quantities
of money in gold and silver. The Ptolemies of Egypt used the Phoenician
standard for both gold and silver, but the Attic standard was the one in
general use by the kings of Macedon, Syria, Pergamus, Bithynia, Bactria, and
India, as well as by the Parthians. But it would be a mistake to suppose
that all issues except regal ones came to an end, either in Asia or Europe.
In Asia we find cities like Ephesus, Miletus, Colophon, and Rhodes,
continuing their old coinages, with types and even standards unchanged. In
European Greece some cities, such as Athens, Corinth, and Elis, continue
their issues as of old, altering the style of their coins to suit the taste
of the age. But a new feature is presented by the federal coinages of the
new political leagues. The cities of the Achaean league issue a uniform
series of coins, only bearing at each city a different monogram or
mint-mark. Their silver coins are Aeginetan hemidrachms, or, which is the
same thing, Corinthian drachms. The Acarnanian and Aetolian leagues follow
the Aeginetan standard.
The only great innovation which takes place after this in the coinage of Asia
Minor is the introduction of the coins called Cistophori, on account of
their type, which is the
cista mystica of
Dionysiac worship. These coins were first
[p. 2.452]struck
in the times of the later kings of Pergamus, and were peculiar to the West
and Interior of Asia Minor. They follow the Aeginetan standard, with the
variety that what was called a didrachm in the case of the Aeginetan coins
was usually called a tetradrachm in the case of the Cistophori. The
Cistophoric drachm was therefore equivalent to an Aeginetan hemidrachm, or a
Corinthian drachm. How this standard originated is not known, but the coins
struck on it formed the main part, together with the drachms of Rhodes, of
the currency of Asia Minor during the first century B.C., and pieces of the same class were issued even under the
earlier Roman emperors. And by this time the drachms of Rhodes had sunk to
the weight of the quarter of a Cistophoric tetradrachm.
When the Romans conquered Asia, they introduced a tariff according to which
the various coins in circulation exchanged against the denarius.
The first set of the preceding tables gives the approximate weights of the
Greek coins in general use; the others give the values of those coins,
roughly, in English money; reckoning gold at the value of 2
d. a grain Troy, silver at 5
s. an ounce Troy, and electrum at 1 1/2
d. a
grain: for although as a matter of fact electrum seldom contains 3/4 of
gold, yet it is supposed that the ancients valued it on that basis.
In this way we get the
metal equivalents of the
ancient coins. Their equivalents in purchasing power cannot be determined.
We can only say quite roughly that in many respects a silver drachm in
Greece would go almost as far as a sovereign with us. The daily pay of a
mercenary in later Greece was four Attic obols, equal in weight to a
sixpence. The younger Cyrus gave his soldiers a daric (£1 1
s. 6
d.) a month. Probably
these mercenaries were able after a few years' service to retire on a
competency. Any attempt at closer comparison between ancient and modern
prices can only serve to mislead.
Greek Systems of Weight for Commodities.--The history of the
weights used by the various states of Greece can thus be established by
induction. From the testimony of a few coins we can easily discover the
weight of the talent and mina according to which they were minted. And as a
rule the talents and minae used for coins were those used for other goods.
But to this rule the exceptions were very numerous. There is no reason to
think that peculiar monetary standards, such as those of Rhodes and of
Samos, were ever applied to the weighing of merchandise. And there are
reasons for supposing that whereas the standard used for coins had at all
times a tendency to fall, the standard used for merchandise had often a
tendency to rise. So even if originally at any place money and merchandise
were governed by the same weights, a process of differentiation would soon
set in.
There is indeed, for determining the weights in use in the Greek markets, a
mass of material available in the shape of extant Greek weights of lead or
bronze. But hitherto this material has not been used in a sufficiently
methodical manner. And there are very great difficulties inherent in its
use. Firstly, weights of lead, unlike gold and silver coins, lose weight in
the course of ages by decay or gain weight by oxidation or accretion, so
that the original weight of any extant specimen is very hard to determine.
Secondly, very few existing weights have inscriptions sufficiently exact to
determine their date, locality, and denomination. And, thirdly, we have
reason to believe that the standards which prevailed in any city or district
were not carefully adhered to by the shopkeepers, who used considerable
licence.
The statements of ancient writers on metrology are useful to us in the case
of two cities, Athens and Alexandria. But they are of little authority
unless we can verify them by an appeal to extant monuments, since the
authority of these writers is small, and numbers are notoriously liable to
alteration and corruption in the MSS,
Under these circumstances we shall venture to do little beyond giving a
sketch of the metrological systems of Athens and Alexandria. Lists of extant
weights will be found in the papers of Schillbach (
Annali dell'
Instituto, 1865), Murray (
Numismatic Chronicle,
1868), Longpérier (
Annali dell' Inst., 1847), R.
S. Poole (
Dict. of the Bible, art. “Weights” ),
and elsewhere.
Athens.--In the case of this city we know from existing
inscriptions and extant weights what standards were used for weighing
various articles.
First, there was the usual Attic or Solonic standard, corresponding in use to
our Troy weight. This is the standard on which all the coins of Athens from
first to last were struck. It was also used for weighing all precious
articles of gold and silver. This we know from the lists of the treasure
stored in the Parthenon, which ale still preserved. The same standard was
used for their drugs, not only by the physicians of Attica, but by those of
Alexandria and other cities. In the writings of Galen, for example, the
weights are given according to the Solonic standard. Of the extant leaden
weights of Athens, many conform to this standard.
Others among the existing weights of Athens are regulated according to a
standard just double the weight of the Solonic. One of them marked
ΤΡΙΤΗ weighs 4,440 grains, one marked
ΤΕΤΑΡΤ 3,218 grains, and one
marked H M
ΗΜΙΤΕΤΑΡΤ 1770 grains.
These are clearly fractions of a weight equal to two minae of Attic
standard, but used as a unit for certain purposes (12,800 to 14,200 grains).
The excess in case of the heavier specimens need not trouble us; it is
extremely common to find Greek weights somewhat above the standard; and an
inscription quoted below may partially explain the fact. What is important
at present is the use at Athens of a standard of double weight. Probably it
was used for certain specified kinds of goods only. It is not mentioned by
writers or in inscriptions.
The third standard in use at Athens was the Commercial or Emporic. This also
is followed in many extant weights. It was identical with the Aeginetan
standard for coins of which we have already spoken, with a mina of about
9,700 grains (628.5 grammes). It corresponded in use to our weight
avoirdupois, being the ordinary weight in use in the market. There is a very
important Athenian inscription (
C. I. G. 123) which throws
much light on the use of the Solonic and the Emporic standards at Athens, as
well as on other matters connected with
[p. 2.453]weights.
It runs thus:--“The Emporic mina (
μνᾶ
ἐμπορικὴ) shall weigh 132 drachms of the Stephanephoros,
according to the weights preserved at the mint, and there shall be added
(thrown in) twelve drachms of the Stephanephoros; and all bargains shall
be regulated by this mina, except in cases where silver-weight is
specially mentioned, the scales being balanced so that the rod is level,
against a weight of 150 drachms of the Stephanephoros.” The
inscription goes on to say that in every Emporic
πεντάμνουν (5 minae) one Emporic mina shall be thrown in,
and in every Emporic talent five minae.
From this inscription, the date of which is somewhat doubtful, but must be as
late as the third century B.C., and is probably
not later than the first, we learn (1) that the Solonic mina and drachm were
called
τοῦ Στεφανηφόρου. The
Stephanephoros was an Attic hero or daemon in whose temple the mint was in
early times placed; thus the drachms called after him were drachms of money:
on the weights the Solonic mina is called
μνᾶ
δημοσία: (2) that the proportion between the Aeginetan or
Attic commercial mina and that of the mint remained at 138:100 (just as it
had been fixed by Solon) throughout Athenian history: but (3) that Greek
weights were sometimes arbitrarily raised by authority, at least in
democracies. In this case it is acknowledged that the commercial mina does
not exceed 138 drachms; yet all sellers are ordered to act as if it weighed
150 drachms. This will account in part for the curious fact that ancient
weights so often exceed their nominal standard. The
ῥοπή, or weight thrown in, is less in proportion in the
higher denominations. In the case of the
πεντάμνουν 20 per cent. is to be added; in the case of the
talent, only 8 per cent. The democratic origin and intention of this
distinction are obvious.
That the Emporic mina was also called the mina of the Agoranomi is shown from
the inscription of a weight found at Athens which weighs 335 grammes,
ΗΜΙ ΑΓΟΡΑΝΟ (
Ann. dell'
Inst., 1865, p. 199).
A fourth talent of quite a different character was in use at Athens in later
times. It is mentioned by the poet Philemon, who writes (
Etym.
M. s. v.
τάλαντον),
Δύ᾽ εἰ λάβοι τάλαντα, χρυσοῦς ἓξ ἔχων
ἀποίσεται. From which it appears that this talent was made
up of three Attic gold staters or didrachms. Six drachms of gold may very
well have been equivalent to a talent of copper of 6,000 drachms.
In Greece proper it is very probable that the Attic and Aeginetan standards
were in general use from early times to late. Indeed the Aeginetan was for
most classes of goods probably almost universal. But as we have few or no
weights bearing marks of value which we can with certainty attribute to
cities of Hellas, we are unable to establish this by the satisfactory method
of induction.
Alexandria.--The only city of the Levant besides
Athens in which we can fully trace the systems of weight in use is
Alexandria. In this case our guides are less existing weights than the
statements of late writers. As these generally use for their standard the
weight of the Roman denarius, which is certain, their meaning can usually be
fixed with. accuracy. By comparing the table which bears the name of
Cleopatra, but really belongs to a later date (Hultsch,
Metrolog.
Script. Reliqq. p. 109), with that of Galen, the eminent
physician (Hultsch, p. 79), and with others, we reach the following
results:--(1) The standard in most general use at Alexandria seems to have
been based on the Attic mina. In the prescriptions of doctors this was
universal until a late time. The table of Cleopatra calls it
ψ̔ μνᾶ
par excellence. Its weight was 16 Roman ounces or
6,800 grains. (2) For money and perhaps other things the standard usually
employed was the Ptolemaic. The Ptolemaic mina contained the weight of 100
Ptolemaic drachms, which, as we have seen, were struck on Phoenician weight.
After the time of Nero this mina was sometimes called the Attic, because it
contained 100 of the denarii of Nero, which were commonly considered as
Attic drachms. Its weight was that of 12 1/2 Roman ounces or 5,500 grains.
Besides these two minae and the Roman libra, three other systems of weight
were in use. (3) That also called Ptolemaic, which was, as Hultsch points
out, an Egyptian weight of great antiquity. Its mina contained 18 Roman
ounces, 7,650 grains, and it is apparently nothing but the old native
Egyptian standard. (4) That called Alexandrian. Its mina contained 20 ounces
(8,500 grains), and it is identical with the [Babylonian or] Persian silver
standard. (5)
Τάλαντον ξυλικόν, used for
wood only, and said to be 1/2 heavier than the Ptolemaic standard. It was a
local weight,
τάλαντον ἐπιχώπιον. It was
very nearly equivalent to the Attic weight.
The following table gives the values of the weights thus in ordinary use in
Greece and in Egypt during the age of their autonomy:--
|
Part of Mina. |
Attic--Solonian. |
Attic--Double. |
Aeginetan,
Attic commercial. |
Ptolemaic,
Late Attic. |
|
|
Grammes |
Grains |
Grammes |
Grains |
Grammes |
Grains |
Grammes |
Grains |
Talent |
60 |
26,436 |
408,000 |
52,872 |
816,000 |
37,700 |
582,000 |
21,384 |
330,000 |
Pentamnoun |
5 |
2,203 |
34,000 |
4,406 |
68,000 |
3142.5 |
48,500 |
1,782 |
27,500 |
Dimna |
2 |
881.2 |
13,600 |
1762.4 |
27,200 |
1257 |
19,400 |
712.8 |
11,000 |
Mina |
1 |
440.6 |
6,800 |
881.2 |
13,600 |
628.5 |
9,700 |
356.4 |
5,500 |
Hemimnaion |
1/2 |
220.3 |
3,400 |
440.6 |
6,800 |
314.2 |
4,850 |
178.2 |
2,750 |
Tritemorion |
1/3 |
146.9 |
2,266 |
293.8 |
4,532 |
209.5 |
3,233 |
118.8 |
1,833 |
Tetartemorion |
1/4 |
110.2 |
1,700 |
220.4 |
3,400 |
157.1 |
2,425 |
89.1 |
1,375 |
Pemptemorion |
1/5 |
88.1 |
1,360 |
176.2 |
2,720 |
125.7 |
1,940 |
71.2 |
1,100 |
Hemitetartemorion |
1/8 |
55.1 |
850 |
11.2 |
1,700 |
77.6 |
1,212 |
44.5 |
687 |
Tetradrachm |
1/25 |
17.6 |
272 |
35.2 |
544 |
25.1 |
388 |
14.2 |
220 |
Drachm |
1/100 |
4.4 |
68 |
8.8 |
136 |
6.2 |
97 |
3.5 |
55 |
Hemidrachm |
1/200 |
2.2 |
34 |
4.4 |
68 |
3.1 |
48 |
1.7 |
27 |
Obol |
1/600 |
.7 |
12 |
1.4 |
23 |
1.0 |
16 |
.6 |
9 |
[p. 2.454]
When we pass from Athens and Alexandria to Asia Minor, Syria, and other parts
of the Levant, we find insurmountable difficulties in the way of
ascertaining the standards of weight in general use. The number of published
weights coming from those regions and bearing inscriptions, sufficiently
clear and satisfactory to enable them to be used as the basis of induction,
is very small. And even of these it is very difficult to determine how far
the actual weight has been diminished or increased by burial in the ground
and consequent chemical action. It is probable that in obscure collections
and museums in Europe and the Levant there may be many unpublished weights
which would help us to reach a securer standing ground. But this is of
course mere matter of conjecture. At present we can quote little more than
the weights mentioned by M. de Longpérier (
Ann. dell'
Inst. for 1847), by Brandis (pp. 154-6), and by Schillbach
(
Beiträge zur Gewichtskunde). All of these
appear to belong to the period subsequent to the expedition of Alexander. We
add a table of the most important specimens.
VARIOUS INSCRIBED GREEK WEIGHTS.
|
Place. |
Date B.C. |
Inscriptions. |
Weight.
Grammes. |
Mina.
|
Grammes. |
Grains. |
1. |
Antioch in Syria |
194 |
ΜΝΑ ΑΝΤΙΟΧΕΙΑ
|
498.6 |
498 |
7,700 |
2. |
Antioch in Syria |
175-164 |
ΜΝΑ
|
516 |
516 |
7,960 |
3. |
Antioch in Syria |
57 |
ΜΝΑ ΔΗΜΟΣΙΑ
|
1068.2 |
1,068 |
16,490 |
4. |
Antioch in Syria |
62-29 |
ΗΜΙΜΝΑΙΟΝ
ΔΗΜΟΣΙΟΝ
|
535.1 |
1,070 |
16,520 |
5. |
Seleucia |
|
ΤΕΤΑΡΤΟΝ
|
109.4 |
437 |
6,740 |
6. |
Antioch in Caria |
|
ΤΕΤΑΡΤΟΝ
|
122 |
488 |
7,530 |
7. |
Chios |
|
ΔΥΟ ΜΝΑΙ
|
1124.1 |
562 |
8,680 |
8. |
Chios |
|
ΜΝΑ
|
547 |
547 |
8,450 |
9. |
Lampsacus |
|
Η[ΜΙ]
|
270 |
540 |
8,340 |
10. |
Cyzicus |
|
ΚΥ<*>Ι ΜΝΑ
|
466.5 |
466 |
7,200 |
11. |
Smyrna |
|
ΤΕ]ΤΑΡ[ΤΟΝ
|
180 |
720 |
11,110 |
12. |
Alexandria Troas |
|
ΑΛΕ Τ[ΕΤΑΡΤΟΝ
|
99.8 |
400 |
6,200 |
13. |
Bisanthe |
|
ΒΙΣΑΝ ΜΝΑ
|
556 |
556 |
8,590 |
It will be at once seen that these weights fall into different categories and
belong to various systems. Nos. 3 and 4 give very clear and decisive
evidence as to the market weights in use at the Syrian Antioch at the period
when they were cast. They give a
μνᾶ
δημοσία of about 1070 grammes, or 16,520 English grains. All the
other weights, except No. 11, coming from several parts of Asia Minor and
Syria, appear to belong to the same system. The mina of this system would
appear to have weighed some 540-560 grammes, and therefore to have been as
nearly as may be half as heavy as that according to which 3 and 4 were
regulated. On referring to the table of Babylonian weights (p. 446), we
shall see that in the Babylonian system for weighing silver the two minas,
according to heavy and light standard, respectively are 1122 and 561
grammes. These two weights are certainly strikingly like those which we have
just reached. Induced by this correspondence, brandis (p. 155) suggests that
the mina of our weights is that of the Babylonian silver standard. This
standard was adopted by the Persian kings for their silver money, as has
already been mentioned. After the conquest of Persia by Alexander it ceased,
except in some outlying parts of the Empire, such as the Euxine Sea and
India, to be used for money, but Brandis supposes that it still persisted as
a weight for goods. As in many parts of the Persian Empire it was somewhat
lowered, a mina of 1070 grammes might very well belong to this standard. But
in this case the term
Δημόσιος would still
remain to be explained; as things changed very slowly in the East, it is
scarcely likely that the Persian silver standard which belonged in an
especial degree to silver coin or bars should so have superseded the
original Babylonian weights which were used for the weighing of goods other
than silver in Mesopotamia and Syria, as to become the usual or normal
standard.
Referring again to our table (p. 446), we shall see that of this ordinary
Babylonian system for general weighing the minas weighed respectively 1010
and 505 grammes. It is à
priori far
more probable that a mina called
δημοσία
should belong to this standard than to another. And further it is to be
observed that although weights used for coin have a strong tendency to fall,
yet weights used for other purposes do not experience this tendency in
anything like the same force. Indeed, the instance above quoted from the
laws of Athens shows that the interest of the purchaser tended sometimes
successfully to raise weights in market use. And further, weights of lead
which have been long buried vary decidedly from their normal strength. It is
then best, on the whole, to leave it undecided whether the public mina of
Antioch was derived from the Babylonian system for weighing silver or that
used for other articles.
Weight No. 11 in the Museum of Smyrna was probably in use not far from that
city, and appears to follow the Phoenician standard.
We learn from an anonymous Alexandrian writer (Hultsch,
Metrologici, i. p. 301) that wood was at Antioch weighed on a
system of its own, by a
ξυλικὸν τάλαντον,
which appears from its equivalent of 375 Roman librae to have been
considerably heavier than any of the
[p. 2.455]talents above
mentioned. Hultsch reckons it at 128,400 grammes (
Metrologie,
p. 591). The existence of this weight is interesting, as showing that in
ancient times bulky articles were sometimes weighed on a different scale
from lighter goods: and in fact this custom has held in most countries.
In late Imperial times most of the weights in use in the Levant gave way to
the Roman libra, inscribed specimens of which are found in Asia Minor and
Syria.
It is thus clear that the cities of Syria, Asia Minor, and Mesopotamia did
not, in adopting the Attic system for their coinage, as they did mostly in
or soon after the time of Alexander, adopt the same system for weighing
goods, but adhered to their ancient standards. For a general review of the
systems of weighing actually in use, materials entirely fail.
Italian Systems of Weight.--The Roman libra or pound was from
the earliest times used alike for money and for other commodities. It
remained unchanged in standard to a very late period. At first pieces of
copper were cast in all Roman parts of Italy of the weight of a pound, and
of the various fractions of a pound. Soon, as we have seen (under As), the
standard of the coins fell rapidly. But the weight continued unchanged.
When, at a far later period, the coinages of silver and gold were introduced
at Rome, the gold and silver pieces were struck so many to the pound. Even
to the time of Diocletian and Constantine the Roman
libra as a weight remained undiminished; and the late
metrologists of Alexandria appeal to it as an unchangeable standard, testing
by reference to it the weight of the various Greek talents and minas.
The dominion then of the
libra as a weight is as
durable and extensive as the dominion of Rome herself. Of the
libra of money we have spoken under As. The weight
of the Roman
libra has been investigated by
Boeckh, Mommsen, and Hultsch. The materials for ascertaining it are
threefold: (1) existing weights, (2) copper coinage, (3) gold and silver
coinage. It is the latter alone which gives consistent and satisfactory
results; for the weights vary unaccountably, and the copper coinage very
soon sank in weight to a lower level. Letronne made a calculation of weight
on the basis of gold coin; and his results with slight modification are
accepted by the three metrologists above named. We may safely accept their
results. They fix on 327.453 grammes, about 5050 grains, as the true or
normal standard. The weights of the fractions of the
as, with their signs in Roman notation, are as follows:--
Denomination. |
Part of libra. |
Part of uncia. |
Weight. Grammes. |
Weight. Grains. |
Sign in notation. |
Libra or As |
1 |
12 |
327.45 |
5,050 |
| |
Deunx |
11/12 |
11 |
300.16 |
4,629 |
S = =-- |
Dextans |
5/6 |
10 |
272.88 |
4,208 |
S = = |
Dodrans |
3/4 |
9 |
245.59 |
3,787 |
S =-- |
Bes |
2/3 |
8 |
218.30 |
3,366 |
S = |
Septunx |
7/12 |
7 |
191.02 |
2,946 |
S-- |
Semis |
1/2 |
6 |
163.73 |
2,525 |
S |
Quincunx |
5/12 |
5 |
136.44 |
2,104.1 |
= =-- |
Triens |
1/3 |
4 |
109.15 |
1,683.3 |
= = |
Quadrans |
1/4 |
3 |
81.86 |
1,262.5 |
=-- |
Sextans |
1/6 |
2 |
54.58 |
841.6 |
= |
Sescuncia |
1/8 |
1 1/2 |
40.93 |
631.2 |
-£ |
Uncia |
1/12 |
1 |
27.28 |
420.8 |
- |
Semuncia |
1/24 |
1/2 |
13.64 |
210.4 |
£, Σ |
Sicilicus |
1/48 |
1/4 |
6.82 |
105.2 |
[CC] |
Sextula |
1/72 |
1/6 |
4.54 |
70.1 |
I, ~ |
Scripulum |
1/288 |
1/24 |
1.13 |
17.5 |
[CF],
[CI][CI] |
The only modification which ever took place in this system occurred in
connexion with the weighing of drugs in Imperial times. As we have seen, at
Alexandria and in the Levant generally, drugs were regulated by Attic
weight. But under Roman influence the denarius was regarded as the
equivalent in weight of the Attic drachm. The denarius, as we have shown
under As, weighed 1/84 of a pound from the time of the Punic wars to those
of Nero, and 1/96 of a pound after that. The Greek divisions of the drachm
were applied to the denarius as a weight. We thus obtain two systems of
weight for drugs.
Denomination. |
FIRST SYSTEM.
|
SECOND SYSTEM.
|
Part of uncia. |
Weight. Grammes. |
Weight. Grains. |
Part of uncia. |
Weight. Grammes. |
Weight. Grains. |
Uncia |
1 |
27.28 |
420.8 |
1 |
27.28 |
420.8 |
Sicilicus |
1/4 |
6.82 |
105.2 |
1/4 |
6.82 |
105.2 |
Drachma |
1/7 |
3.90 |
60.1 |
1/8 |
3.41 |
52.6 |
Scripulum |
|
|
|
1/24 |
1.14 |
17.5 |
Obolus |
1/42 |
.65 |
10 |
1/48 |
.57 |
8.7 |
Siliqua |
|
|
|
1/244 |
.19 |
2.9 |
Chalcus |
1/356 |
.08 |
1.25 |
1/384 |
.07 |
1.1 |
[p. 2.456]
It is a remarkable fact that, although at Rome the
as
was probably never minted of the full weight of a pound of twelve ounces,
yet in some of the Roman colonies, such as Ariminum and Hatria, it was
issued of the weight of 14 ounces (5,900 grains). It is doubtful how this
change may be accounted for. But it is noteworthy that this heavier weight
comes near the standard (5,750 grains; see above, p. 446) of the silver
talent of Phoenicia. We are inclined to think, then, that the Roman pound,
which, as Hultsch has shown, was not in its origin in any way connected with
the Roman measures of length, was derived from the Phoenician mina, as was
probably the national or Aeginetan standard in Greece. In both cases a
considerable reduction took place, before the weight was fixed for all
future time in Greece by Pheidon of Argos, and at Rome by the Decemviri.
Of the Roman librae which have come down to us, many are considerably above
standard. One in the Museum of Smyrna, for instance, weighs 374 grammes;
others as much as 390 grammes. After what has been above observed as to the
tendency of weights to rise in use, this need not surprise us.
It must not be supposed, however, that either in earlier or later times the
Roman libra possessed anything like a monopoly in the markets of Italy.
There, as in Greece and Asia, local customs largely prevailed. The Greek
colonies in South Italy used, until they were absorbed by Rome, the weights
which they had brought with them from Greece, the standards of Phocaea, of
Athens, and of Corinth. At a later time we find proof of the use of various
Italian minae (Hultsch,
Metrologie, p. 672):--A mina of 16
Roman ounces, 436.6 grammes, which seems to govern the extant weights of
Pompeii and Herculaneum. A mina of 18 Roman ounces, 491.2 grammes, called in
an ancient metrological table
Ἰταλικὴ
μνᾶ. A mina of 20 Roman ounces, 545.8 grains, the existence of
which is proved by a Roman inscribed weight found in the Danube. A mina
equal to two Roman pounds, mentioned by Vitruvius,
10.21. Compared, however, with the libra, these minae had but
little historical importance.
Sicilian Weights.--In Sicily the pound of copper was the unit
of value in very early times, and was adopted to some extent by the Greek
colonies. These, however, as we have above seen, adopted late in the sixth
century B.C. the Attic standard for coinage, and struck silver on it of the
denomination of tetradrachm, didrachm, drachm, hemidrachm, and obol. Into
this system by a peculiar process they incorporated the
litra or pound of copper. The weight of this litra is not known
from direct testimony. But we have means of fixing the weight of its
equivalent in silver. The silver litra was a coin in use at Syracuse and
other Sicilian cities; and its weight was a tenth part of that of the
Corinthian stater (135 grs.), which was called
δεκάλιτρος στατήρ (Pollux, 4.174), and a fiftieth part of
that of the Damareteion (
q. v.). Hence it is safe to
assume that the weight of the silver litra was 13.5 grains. Multiplying this
amount by 250, which represents the proportion in ltaly and Sicily between
silver and copper, we reach a sum of 3,387 grains. This is just half the
weight of the Attic silver mina. Mommsen (p. 80) concludes on this basis
that the weight of the Sicilian litra was 3,387 grains or 217.5 grammes,
nearly the weight of 8 Roman ounces. And since he wrote, the researches of
Deecke (
Etruskische Forschungen, Part II.) have made it
probable that the same system of the litra in silver and copper passed in
the fifth century from Syracuse into Etruria, and is the base of the whole
of the later Etruscan coinage. The Etruscan silver pieces which bear marks
of value, are all multiples of a litra of the Sicilian weight (13.5 grains),
and the Etruscan
aes grave is of the standard
of eight Roman ounces, 3,366 grains. This latter fact seems of sufficient
importance to finally establish the theory of Mommsen as to the litra. The
Athenian origin of the latter is more than probable. It was divided, like
the Roman libra, into twelve parts; but the names of the parts were
different, a fact which must have caused some confusion in the minds of the
Italians. The names of these parts are given by Aristotle as quoted by
Pollux, 4.174.
|
Grammes |
Grains |
Written |
Corresponds to Roman |
Litra |
219.5 |
3,387 |
λίπρα
|
libra |
Hemilitron |
109.75 |
1,693 |
ἡμίλιτρον
|
semis |
Pentuncium |
91.5 |
1,410 |
πεντώγκιον
|
quincunx |
Tetras |
73.2 |
1,128 |
τετρα_ς
|
triens |
Trias |
84.9 |
846 |
τρια_ς
|
quadrans |
Hexas |
36.6 |
564 |
ἑξα_ς
|
sextans |
Uncia |
18.3 |
282 |
οὐγκία
|
uncia |
Thus the tetras corresponds to the Latin triens, and the trias to the Latin
quadrans; a most confusing correspondence. The talent, if equal to the
Athenian, contained 120 litrae originally. But we are able to trace its
rapid degradation. For Aristotle (Pollux, 9.87) speaks of the older Sicilian
talent (
τὸ μὲν ἀρχαῖον) as equivalent to
24 nummi, and the later as equal to 12. The nummus here stands for the
litra. By the time of Aristotle, then, there had been two reductions in the
weight of the litra as applied to money, and it had fallen to a tenth of its
early value. But analogy bids us suppose that this reduction did not affect
the litra except as money.
[
P.G]