diff options
70 files changed, 17 insertions, 41559 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a23d0d2 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #66160 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/66160) diff --git a/old/66160-0.txt b/old/66160-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 9ddc4be..0000000 --- a/old/66160-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,17754 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Origin of Metallic Currency and Weight -Standards, by William Ridgeway - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: The Origin of Metallic Currency and Weight Standards - -Author: William Ridgeway - -Release Date: August 28, 2021 [eBook #66160] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -Produced by: MFR and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at - https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images - generously made available by The Internet Archive) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ORIGIN OF METALLIC CURRENCY -AND WEIGHT STANDARDS *** - - - - - - THE ORIGIN OF - METALLIC CURRENCY AND - WEIGHT STANDARDS. - - London: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, - CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, - AVE MARIA LANE. - - [Illustration] - - Cambridge: DEIGHTON, BELL AND CO. - Leipzig: F. A. BROCKHAUS. - New York: MACMILLAN AND CO. - - - - - THE ORIGIN OF - METALLIC CURRENCY AND - WEIGHT STANDARDS - - BY - WILLIAM RIDGEWAY, M.A., - PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN QUEEN’S COLLEGE, CORK, - LATE FELLOW OF GONVILLE AND CAIUS COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. - - ἌΝΘΡΩΠΟϹ Ἢ <ΒΟὟϹ Ἢ> ὟϹ ἊΝ ΕἼΗ ΜΈΤΡΟΝ ἉΠΆΝΤΩΝ. - - CAMBRIDGE: - AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS - 1892 - - [_All Rights reserved._] - - Cambridge: - PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, - AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. - - - - -PREFACE. - - -The following pages are an attempt to arrive at a knowledge of the -origin of Metallic Currency and Weight Standards by the Comparative -Method. As both these institutions played a not inconsiderable part in -the development of civilization, it seemed worth while to approach the -subject from a different point of view from that from which it had been -previously studied. Hitherto Numismatists when studying the Origins of -Coinage had confined themselves to the materials presented to them in -the earliest money of Lydia, Greece and Italy, and on the other hand the -Metrologists had almost completely limited their range of observation -to the systems of Babylon, Egypt, Greece and Rome. As the Comparative -Method has yielded such excellent results in the study of other human -institutions, I have endeavoured by its aid to get some new principles -which may throw some fresh light on the first beginnings of monetary and -weight systems. - -The leading principle which I have here endeavoured to establish by the -Inductive Method, I had already put forward in a short paper, but there -are various other doctrines now published for the first time, such as the -origin of the earliest Greek coin types, the origin of the earliest Greek -silver coins, of the Greek Obolos, the Sicilian Litra, and Roman As, of -the Mina, and its sixty-fold the Talent. - -In treating of the Distribution of gold and the priority of its discovery -to that of the other metals, I have been led to criticise the principles -of the science of Linguistic Palaeontology, which have gained such -currency in this country from Schrader’s _Prehistoric Antiquities of the -Aryans_, and from Dr Isaac Taylor’s popular little book, _The Origin of -the Aryans_. I have been led to conclude that Comparative Philology taken -alone is a misleading guide in the study of Anthropology. - -From the nature of this work, a certain amount of polemic was inevitable; -but I trust that not a line will be found which contains anything which -could be offensive to the living, or is disrespectful to great scholars -now no more. I owe so much to the works of distinguished men, from whose -principles I am obliged to dissent, that I feel myself almost an ingrate -who assails his benefactors with the very means provided for him by their -labours. - -It now only remains for me to thank many friends, who have aided me and -taken an interest in this work. - -To Mr J. G. Frazer, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, I am under -obligations which I cannot adequately express in words. He has read -through the proofs of the whole of this work, and there is scarcely a -page which has not benefited from his most careful and acute criticism. -Besides this his vast knowledge of the manners and customs of barbarous -peoples has furnished me with many most valuable references, and his -fine Ethnological Library has been ungrudgingly placed at my disposal. -Professor W. Robertson Smith has read the proofs of those pages which -deal with Semitic systems, and Prof. J. H. Middleton those treating of -the Greek. - -By their kind sacrifice of time and labour which have been robbed from -important works of their own, the many shortcomings of this book have -been rendered far less numerous than they otherwise would be, but of -course I alone am responsible for the manifold ones which remain. - -I must also express my gratitude to Mr Head, Mr Wroth and Mr Grueber of -the Coin Department of the British Museum for their kindness and courtesy -in affording me every facility for studying the coins under their charge. - -I have to thank the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press for having -undertaken the publication of this work. - - QUEEN’S COLLEGE, CORK, - _Christmas Eve, 1891_. - - - - -CONTENTS. - - - PAGE - - CHAPTER I. - - The Ox and the Talent in Homer 1 - - CHAPTER II. - - Primitive Systems of Currency 10 - - CHAPTER III. - - The distribution of the Ox and the distribution of Gold 47 - - CHAPTER IV. - - Primaeval Trade Routes 105 - - CHAPTER V. - - The Art of Weighing was first employed for Gold 112 - - CHAPTER VI. - - The Gold Unit everywhere the value of a Cow 124 - - CHAPTER VII. - - The Weight Systems of China and Further Asia 155 - - CHAPTER VIII. - - How were Primitive Weight Units fixed? 169 - - CHAPTER IX. - - Statement and Criticism of the Old Doctrines 195 - - PART II. - - CHAPTER X. - - The Systems of Egypt, Babylon, and Palestine 234 - - CHAPTER XI. - - The Lydian and Persian Systems 293 - - CHAPTER XII. - - The Greek, Sicilian, Italian and Roman Systems. Conclusion 304 - - Appendix A 389 - - Appendix B 391 - - Appendix C 394 - - Index 407 - - - - -LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. - - - FIG. PAGE - - 1. Cowrie Shell 13 - - 2. Wampum 14 - - 3. Al-li-ko-chik 15 - - 4. Burmese silver shell money 22 - - 5. Chinese hoe money 23 - - 6. Fish-hook money 28 - - 7. Siamese silver bullet money 29 - - 8. Silvered brass bars 30 - - 9. Rings found in the tombs of Mycenae 37 - - 10. Gold rings found in Ireland 38 - - 11. West African axe money 40 - - 12. Old Calabar copper-wire formerly used as money 41 - - 13. Irish bronze fibulae and West African manillas 42 - - 14. Ancient British Coins 93 - - 15. Barbarous imitation of Drachm of Massalia 111 - - 16. Gold Stater of Philip of Macedon 125 - - 17. Persian Daric 126 - - 18. Gold Stater of Diodotus of Bactria 126 - - 19. Egyptian wall painting showing the weighing of gold rings 128 - - 20. Regenbogenschüssel 140 - - 21. Chinese knife money 157 - - 22. Egyptian Five-Kat weight 240 - - 23. Lion weight 245 - - 24. Assyrian Duck weight 245 - - 25. Weights in the form of Sheep 271 - - 26. Coin of Salamis in Cyprus 272 - - 27. Bull’s-head Five-shekel Weight 283 - - 28. Lydian Electrum Coin 295 - - 29. Coin of Croesus 298 - - 30. Coin of Eretria 306 - - 31. Coin of Cyrene with Silphium plant 313 - - 32. Coin of Cyzicus with tunny fish 316 - - 33. Coins of Olbia in the form of tunny fish 317 - - 34. Coin of Tenedos with double-headed axe 318 - - 35. Coin of Phanes, earliest known inscribed coin 320 - - 36. Archaic Coin of Samos 321 - - 37. Coin of Cnidus 321 - - 38. Coin of Thurii 322 - - 39. Coin of Rhoda in Spain 322 - - 40. Tetradrachm of Athens 325 - - 41. Vase from Cyrene, showing the weighing of the Silphium 326 - - 42. Coin of Metapontum 327 - - 43. Coin of Croton 328 - - 44. Tortoise of Aegina 328 - - 45. Coin of Boeotia with Shield 331 - - 46. Coin of Lycia 332 - - 47. Coin of Messana 336 - - 48. Aes Rude 355 - - 49. Bronze Decussis, with figure of Cow 356 - - 50. As (_Aes grave_) 361 - - 51. As (semi-uncial) 362 - - 52. As, 3rd Cent. A.D. (_Third Brass_) 362 - - 53. Didrachm of Corinth 362 - - 54. Sesterce of First Roman Silver coinage 363 - - 55. Didrachm of Tarentum 364 - - 56. Romano-Campanian coin 377 - - 57. Victoriatus 377 - - 58. Sextans (_aes grave_) 379 - - 59. Gold Solidus of Julian the Apostate 384 - - 60. Tremissis of Leo I. 385 - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -THE OX AND THE TALENT IN HOMER. - -ἮΜΟϹ Δ’ ΟΎΤ’ ἌΡ ΠΩ ἨῺϹ, ἜΤΙ Δ’ ἈΜΦΙΛΎΚΗ ΝΎΞ. - - -The object of this essay is to enquire into the origin of Metallic -Currency and Weight Standards. Since August Boeckh in his metrological -enquiries[1] put forth the idea that the weight standards of antiquity -had been obtained scientifically, all subsequent writers with scarcely -an exception have followed in the same path. This theory was undoubtedly -suggested by the fact that the French Republic had established a new -scientific metric system. Yet reflection might have shown scholars -that even the French system was not a wholly independent outcome of -science, for beyond doubt the _mètre_ and _litre_ and _hectare_ were only -varieties of older measures of length, capacity and surface, then for -the first time scientifically adjusted. The discovery of certain weights -of bronze and stone in the ruins of Nineveh, Khorsabad and Babylon lent -force to the theory of Boeckh; the imaginations of scholars were excited -by the marvellous remains of Chaldaean and Assyrian civilization which -had just been brought to light by Sir A. H. Layard, and they hastened to -conclude that in the mathematical science of Mesopotamia the source of -all weight-standards was to be found. Egypt however put in her claim to -priority, and standards based on the measurements of the Great Pyramid, -or on the weight of a given quantity of Nile-water, have entered the -lists against the astrologers of Chaldaea. This battle still rages hotly, -Assyriologists and Egyptologists hurling at each other statements drawn -from tablets and papyri, as regards the translation of which no two of -these savants are agreed. In spite of this all modern works on metrology -start with the systems of Babylon and Egypt and from these they derive -the systems of Greece and Italy. It would at least be more scientific -to move backwards from the known to the unknown, but beguiled by the -glamour of a “scientific” metrological system, scholars have turned their -backs upon scientific method. Whilst our knowledge of the Assyrian and -Egyptian weight systems is most imperfect, being derived from literary -monuments, or from inscriptions on weights not half understood, the -systems of Greece and Rome are known to us not simply from the vast -literatures written in languages thoroughly intelligible, but likewise -from the evidence of immense numbers of coins struck in gold and silver, -by the weights of which we are enabled to check off and substantiate the -literary sources. - -As Greece coined money several centuries before Italy, and as its -literature reaches much further back than that of Rome, it is plain that -any sound enquiry into the origin of weight standards must commence with -Greece. We shall therefore without further preface proceed to investigate -the evidence afforded to us by the oldest Greek records. - - -_The Homeric Talent._ - -In the Homeric Poems, which cannot be dated later than the eighth century -B.C., there is as yet no trace of coined money. We find nevertheless in -those Poems two units of value; the one is the cow (or ox), or the value -of a cow, the other is the Talent (τάλαντον). The former is the one which -has prevailed, and does still prevail, in barbaric communities, such as -the Zulus of South Africa, where the sole or principal wealth consists -in herds and flocks. For several reasons we may assign to it priority -in age as compared with the Talent. In the first place it represents -the most primitive form of exchange, the barter of one article of value -for another, before the employment of the precious metals as a medium -of currency; consequently the estimation of values by the cow is older -than that by means of a Talent or “weight” of gold, or silver or copper. -Again, in Homer, all values are expressed in so many oxen, as “golden -arms for brazen, those worth one hundred beeves, for those worth nine -beeves[2]” (_Il._ VI. 236). - -The Talent on the other hand is only mentioned in Homer in relation to -_gold_ (for we never find any mention of a Talent of _silver_) and we -never find the value of any other article expressed in Talents. But the -names of monetary units hold their ground long after they themselves -have ceased to be in actual use as we observe in such common expressions -as “bet a guinea,” or worth a “groat,” although these coins themselves -are no longer in circulation, and so the French _sou_ has survived for -a century in popular parlance, and the _Thaler_ has lived into the new -German monetary system. Accordingly we may infer that the method of -expressing the value of commodities in kine, which we find side by side -with the Talent, is the elder of the twain. - -Was there any immediate connection between the two systems or were they -as Hultsch (_Metrologie_², p. 165) maintains entirely independent? It -is difficult to conceive any people, however primitive, employing two -standards at the same time which are completely independent of each -other. For instance when we find in the _Iliad_[3] that in a list of -three prizes appointed for the foot-race, the second is a cow, the third -is a half-talent of gold, it is impossible to believe that Achilles or -rather the poet had not some clear idea concerning the relative value -of an ox and a talent. Now it is noteworthy that, as already remarked, -nowhere in the Poems is the value of any commodity expressed in Talents; -yet who can doubt that Talents of gold passed freely as media of -exchange? A simple solution of this difficulty would be that the Talent -of gold represented the older ox-unit. This would account for the fact -that all values are expressed in oxen, and not in Talents, the older name -prevailing in a fashion resembling the usage of _pecunia_ in Latin. - -A complete parallel for such a practice can be still found at the present -moment among some of the Samoyede tribes of Siberia. Thus we read in -the account of a recent traveller: “He finally came to the conclusion -that for the consideration of five hundred reindeer, he would undertake -the contract. This I regarded as a very facetious sally on his part. The -reindeer however I found was the recognised unit of value, as amongst -some tribes of the Ostiaks the Siberian squirrel. For this purpose the -reindeer is generally considered to be worth five roubles[4].” Again -forty years ago Haxthausen[5] tells us that the Ossetes, a Caucasian -tribe dwelling not very far from Tiflis, although long accustomed to -stamped money, especially on the border of Georgia, kept their accounts -in cows, five roubles being reckoned to the cow. Here then in Siberia and -in the Caucasus, in spite of a long experience not merely of a metallic -unit, but of actual coined money, we still find values estimated in -reindeer, and in cows, the older units, just as in Homer they are stated -in oxen. - -We shall likewise find that when the ancient Irish borrowed a ready made -silver unit (the _uncia_) from the Romans, they had to equate this unit -to their old barter-unit the cow, just as in modern times the wild tribes -of Annam when borrowing the _bar_ of silver from their more civilized -neighbours have had to equate it to their native standard, the buffalo; -facts in close accord with the well known derivation of Latin _pecunia_, -_money_ from _pecus_, English _fee_ from _feoh_, which still meant -cattle, as does the German _Vieh_, and _rupee_ (according to some) from -Sanskrit _rupa_, also meaning cattle. - -Let us now see if we have any data to support this hypothesis. That most -trustworthy writer, Julius Pollux, says in his _Onomasticon_ (IX. 60): -“Now in old times the Athenians had this (_i.e._ the didrachm) as a coin -and it was called an ox, because it had an ox stamped on it, but they -think that Homer also was acquainted with it when he spoke of (arms) -‘worth an hundred kine for those worth nine[6].’ Moreover in the laws of -Draco there is the expression, to pay back the price of twenty kine: and -at the time when the Delians hold their sacred festival, they say that -the herald makes proclamation whenever a gift is given by any one, that -so many oxen will be given by him, and that for each ox two Attic drachms -are offered: whence some are of opinion that the ox is a coin peculiar to -the Delians, but not to the Athenians; and that from this likewise has -been started the proverb, an ox stands on his tongue, in case any man -holds his tongue for money[7].” - -According to Pollux then the Attic didrachm, or at least a coin employed -by the Athenians (perhaps certain coins of Euboea), was called an ‘ox.’ -Plutarch (_Theseus_, c. 25) goes further and asserts that Theseus struck -money stamped with the figure of an ox (ἔκοψε δὲ νὸμισμα βοῦν ἐγχαράξας), -and the Scholiast on the _Birds_ of Aristophanes (1106) quotes from -Philochorus, an Athenian antiquary of the third century B.C.[8], the same -account of the Attic didrachms being marked with an ox. - -On the other hand the highest authorities on numismatics assert that the -Athenians never struck any such coins. Yet after making due allowance -for the additions made by Plutarch to the more crude statement of Pollux -and Philochorus, it is hard to conceive that such a belief could have -arisen without some foundation, and a probable solution may be found in -the fact that certain uninscribed coins, bearing the type of an ox-head, -which in recent years have been assigned to Euboea, are for the most part -found in Attica. We know that Eretria, and Chalcis, the great cities of -Euboea, were amongst the earliest places in Greece to strike money, and -it is quite possible, nay probable, that these Euboic coins formed (along -with the Aeginetan didrachms) the currency in use at Athens before the -time of Solon (B.C. 596). Why the name _ox_ was especially recollected in -after years as that of the earliest currency, we can readily understand; -the name derived from the old unit of barter would at once attach itself -to the coin which bore the image of the ox, and in the course of time -two traditions, one that the ancient unit was the ox, the other that the -first coins current at Athens bore the symbol of an ox, would merge into -one, and finally patriotic feeling would ascribe the first coinage to -Theseus, who was regarded as the father of so many Athenian institutions. - -That, at all events, the name might be applied to a certain sum, or coin, -is rendered highly probable by the fact that Draco, with true legal -conservatism, retained in his code the primitive method of expressing -values in oxen. Now it is evident that the term, ‘price of twenty -oxen’ (εἰκοσάβοιον), must have been capable of being translated into -the ordinary metallic currency, whether that consisted of bullion in -ingots or coined money. The “cow” therefore must have had a recognized -traditional and conventional value as a monetary unit, and this is -completely demonstrated by the practice at Delos. Religious ritual is -even more conservative than legal formula, so we need not be surprised -to find the ancient unit, the ox, still retained in that great centre -of Hellenic worship. The value likewise is expressed in the more modern -currency. But we are not yet certain whether the two Attic drachms, which -are the equivalent of the ox, are silver or gold. Now Herodotus (VI. 97) -tells us that Datis, the Persian general (B.C. 490), offered at Delos -three hundred _talents_ of frankincense. Hultsch (_Metrol._ p. 129) has -made it clear that the talent here indicated must be the gold Daric, -that is the light Babylonian shekel. For if they were either Babylonian -or Attic talents, the amount would be incredible. Frankincense was of -enormous value in antiquity; wherefore Hultsch is probably right in -assuming that in the opinion of the Persian who made the offering, the -three hundred “weights” of frankincense, each of which weighed a Daric, -were equal in value likewise to 300 Darics. We shall see in a moment that -there was a distinct tradition that the Daric was a _Talent_, and that -the Homeric one. Now the gold Daric = two Attic gold drachms; but as the -cow at Delos also = two Attic drachms, and the offering of frankincense -at Delos is made in _Talent_, each of which is equivalent to two _gold_ -Attic drachms, there is a strong presumption that this Talent is the -equivalent of the ox, and that the Attic drachms mentioned by Pollux are -_gold_. Besides, it is absurd to suppose that at any time two _silver_ -drachms could have represented the value of an ox. Even at Athens, in -a time of extreme scarcity of coin, Solon, when commuting penalties in -cattle for money in reference to certain ancient ordinances, put the -value of the ox at _five_ silver drachms[9]. Moreover it is not at all -likely that the substitution of silver coin for gold of equal weight -would have been permitted by the temple authorities. But we get some more -positive evidence of great interest from the fragment of an anonymous -Alexandrine writer on Metrology, who says[10], “the talent in Homer was -equal in amount to the later Daric. Accordingly the gold talent weighs -two Attic drachms.” Here we can have no doubt that Attic drachms mean -_gold_ drachms. Are we wrong then in supposing that at Delos still -survived the same dual system which we found in Homer, the Ox and the -Talent? But that at Delos both were of equal value we can have little -doubt. For the ox = 2 Attic drachms = 1 Daric = 1 Talent = (130 grains -Troy). Who can doubt that at Delos was preserved an unbroken tradition -from the earliest days of Hellenic settlements in the Aegean? Modern -discovery comes likewise to our support, and we shall find that it is -probable that the gold rings found by Dr Schliemann in the tombs at -Mycenae were made on a standard of about 135 grs. - -This identification of the ox and the Homeric Talent is of importance: -for it gives a simple and natural origin for the earliest Greek metallic -unit of which we read. It likewise incidentally explains the proverb, -βοῦς ἐπὶ γλώσσῃ which dates from a time long before money was yet -coined, or even the precious metals were in any form whatever employed -for currency; it possibly explains why the ox was such a favourite type -on coins, without having to call to our aid recondite mythological -allusions; and it clears up once for all some interesting points in -Homer. In the passage of the _Iliad_ (XXIII. 750 sq.) already referred -to the ox is second prize, whilst an half-talent of gold is the third. -The relation between them is now plain; the ox = 1 talent, and the -half-talent = a half-ox. - -The vexed question of the Trial Scene[11] can now be put beyond doubt. -In the _Journal of Philology_ (Vol. X. p. 30) the present writer -argued that the two talents represented a sum too small to form the -blood-price (ποινή) of a murdered man, and consequently must represent -the _sacramentum_ (or payment made to the Court for its time and trouble, -as in the Roman _Legis actio sacramenti_ described by Gaius, Bk. IV. -16), as proposed by that most distinguished scholar and jurist, the late -Sir H. S. Maine[12]. We know that the two talents are equal to two oxen, -but in the _Iliad_, XXIII. 705, the second prize for the wrestlers was -a slave woman “whom they valued at four oxen[13].” Now if an ordinary -female slave was worth four oxen (= four talents) it is impossible that -two talents (= two oxen) could have formed the bloodgelt or _eric_ of a -freeman. Probably four oxen was not far from the price of an ordinary -female slave. Of course women of superior personal charms would fetch -more, for instance, Euryclea, - - “Whom once on a time Laertes had bought with his possessions, - When she was still in youthful prime, and he gave the price of twenty - kine[14].” - -The poet evidently refers to this as an exceptional piece of extravagance -on the part of Laertes. We can likewise now get a common measure for -the ten talents of gold and the seven slave women who formed part of the -requital gifts proffered by Agamemnon to Achilles[15], and can form some -notion of the comparative value of the prizes for the chariot race and -other contests[16]. - - -_The wider question of Weight-standards in general._ - -But results far more important than merely the determination of the value -of Homeric commodities may be obtained as regards the weight-standards of -Europe and their congeners in Asia. For by taking as our primitive unit -the cow or ox, we may be able to give a much more simple account of the -genesis of those standards than that which hitherto has been the received -one. - -We have found the Homeric ox and talent identical with the didrachm or -stater of the Euboic-Attic standard. All the silver coinage of Greece -proper was struck either on this standard or the Aeginetic, and what is -still more important for us it was on the Euboic-Attic standard alone -that gold was estimated in every part of Greece. Practically the stater -of this system was of the same weight as the famous Persian daric which -in historical times formed the chief coin-unit of all Asia from India to -the Aegean shores. - - - - -CHAPTER II. - -PRIMITIVE SYSTEMS OF CURRENCY. - - ἘΞ ἈΝΆΓΚΗϹ Ἠ ΤΟΫ ΝΟΜΊϹΜΑΤΟϹ ἘΠΟΡΊϹΘΗ ΧΡΗϹΙϹ. - - ARISTOTLE. - - -Let us here propound the doctrine which seeks to obtain an explanation -of the origin for weight-standards more in accordance with the facts of -history and the process of development as exemplified both in ancient and -modern times. - -In early communities[17] all commodities alike are exchanged by bartering -the one against the other. The man who possesses sheep exchanges them -for oxen with the man who possesses oxen, the owner of corn exchanges -his commodity for some implement or ornament of metal with the owner of -the latter. The metals are only regarded as merchandise, not yet being -in any degree set apart to serve as a medium of exchange in the terms -of which all other commodities are valued. This is the practice which -prevails in so civilized a country as China down to our own days. The -only coinage which the Chinese possess is copper _cash_. According to M. -le Comte Rochechouart (_Journal des Économistes_, Vol. XV. p. 103) both -gold and silver are treated simply as merchandise, and there is not even -a recognized stamp or government guarantee of the fineness of the metal. -The traveller must carry these metals with him, as a sufficient quantity -of strings of _cash_ would require a waggon for their conveyance. Yet in -exchanging silver or gold he is sure to suffer loss both from the falsity -of balances and of weights and the uncertain fineness of the metal. - -When in a certain community one particular kind of commodity is of -general use and generally available, this comes to form the unit in terms -of which all values are expressed. The nature of this barter-unit will -depend upon the nature of the climate and geographical position, and -likewise upon the stage of culture to which the people have attained. In -the hunting stage, all the property of each individual consists in his -weapons and implements of war and the chase, and the skins of wild beasts -which form his clothing, and sometimes the cover of his hut or wigwam. -At a later stage, when he has succeeded in taming the ox, the sheep, or -the goat, or the horse, he is the owner of property in domestic animals, -whose flesh and milk sustain him and his family, and whose skins and wool -provide his clothing. - -By this time too he has found out that it is better to make the captive -whom he has taken in war into a hewer of wood and drawer of water than -merely to obtain some transient pleasure from eating him after putting -him to death by torture, or by wearing his skull or scalp as personal -decorations. - -This is now the pastoral or nomad stage. - -Next comes the more settled form of life, when the cultivation of land -and the production of the various kinds of cereals renders a permanent -dwelling-place more or less necessary. - -Property now consists not merely in slaves and domestic animals, but -likewise in houses of improved construction, and large stores of grain. -Man now possesses certain of the metals, gold and copper being the first -to be known. How does he appraise these metals when he exchanges them -with his neighbour? We shall find that he estimates them in terms of -cattle, and that he at first barters them all by measures based on the -parts of the human body, a method which continues to be employed for -copper and iron long after the art of weighing has been invented; next -he estimates his gold by certain natural units of capacity such as a -goosequill, and finally fixes the amount of gold which is equivalent -to a cow, by setting it in a rude balance against a certain number of -natural seeds of plants. Such is the process which history tells us has -taken place in the temperate regions of Asia and Europe, Africa and -America. Just as it is impossible to learn the history of the growth of -the earth’s crust by confining our observations to one locality, and as -the geologist only succeeds in gaining a true insight into the relations -between the various strata by a study of the phenomena of many regions, -so we shall only be able to comprehend properly the various stages in -the growth of metallic currency and the origin of weight-standards by -observing the facts revealed to us in various countries. Whilst in some -places we shall meet with but one or two steps, in others we shall find -traces of many, though often, broken strata. Like advance, however, seems -impossible under the extremes of heat and cold. Hence in the latter -regions the conditions of life remain almost unaltered. In the extreme -north the rigour of an arctic winter forbids the keeping and rearing of -domestic animals, or the cultivation of corn and vegetables. Hence the -hunter form of existence remains almost unaltered. The sole or chief -wealth of the people consists of the skins of the fur-bearing animals -such as the seal, the beaver, the marten, or the fox, or stores of dried -fish, which they exchange with traders for a few scant luxuries, or which -form their own sustenance and protection against the pitiless frosts and -snows. - -In these regions therefore we find the skins of certain animals serving -as units of account, in spite of the difference in value between those -of different quality and rarity. In the Territory of the Hudson’s Bay -Company, even after the use of coined money had been introduced among -the Indians, the skin was still in common use as the money of account. -A gun nominally worth forty shillings brought twenty ‘skins.’ This term -is the old one used by the Company. One skin (beaver) is supposed to be -worth two shillings, and it represents two martens and so on. “You heard -a great deal about skins at Fort Yukon, as the workmen were also charged -for clothing, etc., in this way[18].” Similarly in the extreme north of -Asia we find some Ostiak tribes using the skin of the Siberian squirrel -as their unit of account. - -The name of a small coin equal to a quarter kopeck indicates that -originally the Slavs had a like form of currency. It is called -_polooshka_. _Ooshka_ (properly little ears) means a hare-skin, and -_polooshka_ means _half a hare-skin_[19]. - -[Illustration: FIG. 1. Cowrie Shell (_Cypraea moneta_).] - -When we turn to the torrid zone, where clothes are only an incumbrance -and Nature lavishly supplies plenteous stores of fruits and vegetables, -the chief objects of desire will not be food and clothing but ornaments, -implements and weapons. Hence we find amongst the inhabitants of such -regions in especial strength that passion for personal adornment, which -is one of the most powerful and primitive instincts of the human race. -Shells have from very remote times formed one of the most simple forms of -adornment in all parts of the world. Shells which once perhaps formed the -necklace of some beauty of the neolithic age are found with the remains -of the cave men of Auvergne. Strings of cowries under their various names -of _changos_, _zimbis_, _bonges_ or porcelain shells are both durable, -universally esteemed, and portable, and therefore suited to form a medium -of exchange, and as such they are employed in the East Indies, Siam, -and on the East and West Coasts of Africa; on the tropical coasts they -serve the purposes of small change, being collected on the shores of the -Maldive and Laccadive islands and exported for that object. The relative -value varies slightly according to their abundance or scarcity. In India -the usual ratio was about 5000 to the rupee. Marco Polo found the cowry -in use in the province of Yunnam. He says (II. p. 62, Yule’s Transl.): -“In Carajan gold is so abundant that they give one Saggio of gold for six -of the same weight of silver. And for small change they use the porcelain -shell. These are not found in the country but are brought from India.” -How ancient is their use in Asia is shown by the fact that Layard found -cowries in the ruins of Nineveh. - -[Illustration: FIG. 2. Wampum (made from the _Venus mercenaria_).] - -Beyond all doubt the wampum belts of the North American Indians served -the purpose of currency. They consisted of black and white shells -rubbed down, polished and made into beads, and then strung into belts -or necklaces, which were valued according to their length, colour and -lustre, the black beads being the most valuable. Thus one foot of black -peag was worth two feet of white peag. It was so well established as -a currency among the natives that in 1649 the Court of Massachusetts -ordered that it should be received as legal tender among the settlers in -the payment of debts up to forty shillings[20]. - -[Illustration: FIG. 3. Al-li-ko-chik.] - -Nor has this employment of strings of shells as money even yet -disappeared from North America. Thus Powers writes[21] of the Karoks -and other tribes of California: “For money they make use of the red -scalps of woodpeckers, which rate at $2.50 to $5.0 a piece, and of the -dentalium shell, of which they grind off the tip, and string it on -strings, the shortest pieces are worth 25 cents, and the longest about -two dollars, the value rising rapidly with the length. The strings are -usually about as long as a man’s arm. It is called _al-li-ko-chik_ (in -Yarok this signifies literally Indian money) not only on the Klamath -but from Crescent city to Eel river, though the tribes using it speak -several different languages. When the Americans first arrived in the -country an Indian would give 40 or 50 dollars gold for a string, but -now the abundance of the supply has depreciated its value and it is -principally the old Indians who esteem it.” Again he writes, “Some -of the young bloods array their Dulcineas for the dance with lavish -adornments, hanging on their dress 30, 40 or 50 dollars worth of dimes, -quarter dollars and half dollars arranged in strings.” This shows that -the new currency of silver is treated by them in exactly the same way -as the old shell strings, both of them deriving their value as media of -exchange from the fact that they are the objects most universally prized -as ornaments for the person. - -Elsewhere the same writer observes: “Immense quantities of it (shell -money) were formerly in circulation among the Californian Indians, and -the manufacture of it was large and constant to replace the continual -wastage caused by the sacrifice of so much on the death of wealthy men, -and by the propitiatory sacrifices performed by many tribes, especially -those of the coast range. From my own observations, which have not -been limited, and from the statements of pioneers and of the Indians -themselves, I hesitate little to express the belief that every Indian -in the state in early days possessed an average of at least 100 dollars -worth of shell money. This would represent the value of almost two women -(though the Nishinam never actually bought their wives), or two grizzly -bear skins, or 25 cinnamon bear skins or about three average ponies. -The young English-speaking Indians hardly use it at all except in a few -dealings with their elders or for gambling. One sometimes lays away a few -strings of it for he knows he cannot squander it at the stores. It is -singular how old Indians cling to this currency when they know it will -purchase nothing for them at the stores; but then their wants are few, -and mostly supplied from the sources of nature, and besides that the -money has a certain religious value in their eyes, as being alone worthy -to be offered up on the funeral pile of departed friends or famous chiefs -of their tribes[22].” - -Here we see how amongst the Indian tribes there was a fully developed -system of inter-relations between the various objects which formed their -wealth. - -The horse was but a new comer into America, but he had his place soon -allotted in the scale of values, being little less valuable than a -squaw. We cannot doubt that if the Indian had succeeded in domesticating -the buffalo before the advent of the white man, it would have formed the -most general unit in use, as we shall find its congeners being employed -in all parts of the old world. But before the coming of the Spaniards at -least one race of North America had advanced a stage beyond shell money. -The Aztecs[23] of Mexico were employing a currency of gold and cacao -seeds. The former in the shape of dust was placed in goose quills, which -formed a natural unit of capacity, for weights were as yet unknown to the -Aztecs; whilst the cacao seeds were placed in bags, each containing a -specified number. - -In Queen Charlotte Islands the dentalium shell was recognized as a medium -of exchange by most of the coast tribes, but not so much as a medium of -exchange for themselves as for barter with the Indians of the interior. -With the Haidas it is still sometimes worn as an ornament though it has -disappeared as a medium of exchange. The blanket of the trader has now -however supplanted the _skin_ as the principal unit. Not only among the -Haidas but all along the coast it takes the place of the beaver-skin -currency of the interior of British Columbia and of the North West -Territory. The blankets used in trade are distinguished by the points or -marks on the edge, woven into their texture, the best being four-point, -the smallest and poorest one-point. The acknowledged unit of trade is -a single two and a half-point blanket, now worth a little over $1.50. -Everything is referred to this unit, even a large four-point blanket -is said to be worth so many _blankets_. There is also the “Copper,” -“an article of purely conventional value and serving as money. This is -a piece of native metal beaten out into a flat sheet and made to take -a peculiar shape. These are not made by the Haidas—nor indeed is the -native metal known to exist in the islands, but are imported as articles -of great worth from the Chilcat country north of Sitka. Much attention -is paid to the size and make of the copper, which should be of uniform -but not too great thickness, and should give forth a good sound when -struck with the hand. At the present time spurious coppers have come into -circulation, and although these are easily detected by an expert, the -value of the copper is somewhat reduced and is often more nominal than -real. Formerly ten slaves were paid for a good copper as a usual price, -now they are valued at from forty to eighty blankets”.[24] It is obvious -that such costly imported articles, though now used as occasional higher -units of account—much as we employ fifty-pound notes—must have had some -definite use, owing to which they were so highly prized. The attention -paid to their tone would lead us to conjecture that they were employed as -a kind of gong, and further on we shall find certain peoples of Further -Asia paying a large price in buffaloes for gongs. - -Before we quit finally the northern latitudes, it is worth our while to -observe the method of currency employed by the Icelanders. As metals and -other products of the land were scarce in their bleak home, the stockfish -(dried cod) formed naturally their chief commodity, and hence it appears -on the arms of Denmark as the emblem of Iceland. There is still extant -a proclamation for the regulation of English trade with Iceland issued -sometime between 1413 and 1426. As, _mutatis mutandis_, it affords -admirable insight into the methods by which trade was carried on between -men of different nations in the emporia of the Mediterranean, and in fact -everywhere else, it is worth giving it _in extenso_[25]. - -“I, _N. M._ do proclaim here to-day a general market between the English -and the Icelandic men, who have come here with peace and fair dealing, -and between the Icelandic men and the men of the islands who wish to -carry on their trade here. - -“First I proclaim this market on conditions of peace and lawful security -between one and the other, so that each can entirely dispose of his own -if he buy or if he sell. Price list in stockfish: of fish 2, 2½, or -1¾ lbs., 80 lbs. must be the equivalent of a hundred (of cloth, i.e. -129 _alens_ of _vadme_, a cloth formerly used as a medium of exchange), -provided the persons concerned cannot agree as to the price. - - Price of (foreign) goods. Stockfish. - 48 _alen_ of good and full width trade cloth 120 - 48 _alen_ linen cloth double width 120 - 6 tonder (tuns) malt 120 - 4 do. trade flour 120 - 3 do. wheat 120 - 4 do. beer 120 - 1 tonde clean and clear butter 120 - 1 do. wine 100 - 1 do. pitch 80 - 1 do. raw tar 60 - 1 cask of iron, containing 400 pieces 120 - ⅛ tonde honey 15 - ⅛ do. blubber 15 - ½ lb. of coppers (i.e. copper cauldrons) by weight 2½ - 1 pair black (leather) shoes 4 - 1 pair of women’s shoes 3 - 1 trade rug 30 - 1 “alen” timber, in planks or spars 5 - ⅛ tonde salt 5 - ½ lb. wax 5 - Horse shoes of iron for 5 horses 20 - Caps, knives, and other small mercer’s wares, according - to mutual agreement. - -“I charge all, not only the people from the country, but also the -inhabitants of these islands, that ye do in no way compass any disorder -or disturbance to the strangers, from the moment the guard flag is -hoisted, unless they themselves allow it. - -“They, who here are annoyed by word or deed, have a right to demand -double indemnity therefor. - -“Also I charge, and the merchants in no way the least, that they use -aright the “alen” and other lawful measure for everything, as the law -demands, especially as regards butter, wine and beer, flour or malt, -honey or tar, so that no one deals false or with deceit with another. - -“He who does so intentionally shall have sinned as greatly against the -state as if he had stolen goods of like value, whereas the bargain -becomes void, and damages moreover must be given to him who was deceived. - -“Let us now, Ye good men, eschew all malice and trickery, riot or -disturbance, quarrels and careless words: but let every man be the -other’s friend, without deceit. - - “Prizing unity - And old custom, - And abiding in God’s peace.” - -Some such proclamations were probably often made in the marts of the -Aegean, such as Aegina, when Greek, Phoenician and Etruscan met for -traffic under the control of some local potentate, and the protection of -the god of some neighbouring shrine. - -Passing to the islands of the Pacific we shall find shell money playing -an important part among the primitive peoples, such as those who inhabit -New Ireland, New Britain, the Pelew and the Caroline groups. It will -suffice for our purpose to describe the form in which it is employed in -New Britain. Mr Powell[26] tells us that the native money in New Britain -consists of small cowrie shells strung on strips of cane, in Duke of York -Island it is called Dewarra. It is measured in lengths, the first length -being from hand to hand across the chest with arms extended, second -length from the centre of the breast to the hand of one arm extended, the -third from the shoulder to the tip of the fingers along the arm, fourth -from the elbow to the tip of the fingers, fifth from the wrist to the -tip of the fingers, sixth finger lengths. Fish are generally bought by -the length in Dewarra unless they are too small. A large pig will cost -from 30 to 40 lengths of the first measure (fathom) and a small one ten. -The Dewarra is made up for convenience in coils of 100 fathoms or first -lengths; sometimes as many as 600 fathoms are coiled together, but not -often, as it would be too bulky to remove quickly in case of invasion or -war, when the women carry it away to hide. These coils are very neatly -covered with wickerwork like the bottom of our cane chairs.... At Moko -and Utuan they use another kind of money as well as this, the other being -a little bivalve shell, through which they bore a hole and string it on -pieces of native made twine[27]. It is also chipped all round until it is -a quarter of an inch in diameter and then smoothed down into even discs -with sand and pumice. Here we find strings of shells, which undoubtedly -in the first instance were used for personal adornment, converted into -a true currency. The simple savages whose possessions were exceedingly -few and scanty, equated their fish to strings of shells which formed -their only ornament, and when they got a more valuable possession in the -pig, they quickly learned to appraise that animal in shell worth, just -as the North American Indians learned to estimate the horse in _Wampum_. -Instead of shells the natives of Fiji are said to have employed whales’ -teeth as currency, red teeth (which are still highly prized) standing to -white ones somewhat in the ratio of sovereigns to shillings with us[28]. -Passing on to the mainland of Asia we shall find that the Chinese, who -in the course of ages have developed a bronze coinage of their own apart -from the influences of the Mediterranean people, had in early times an -elaborate system of shell money. Cowries appear in the _Ya-King_, the -oldest Chinese book, 100,000 dead shell fishes being an equivalent for -riches. Tortoise shell currency is also mentioned in the same book. The -tortoise of various kinds and sizes was used for the greater values -which would have required too many cowries. Tortoise shell is still -elegantly used to express coin. Several kinds of _Cypraea_ were used, -including the purple shell, two or three inches long; all the shells -except the small ones were employed in pairs. A writer of the second -century B.C.[29] speaks of the purple shell as ranking next after the -sea tortoise shells, measuring one foot six inches, which could only be -procured in Cochin China and Annam, where they were used to make pots, -basins and other valuable objects. So attached were the Chinese to these -primitive coins that the usurper Wangmang restored a shell currency of -five kinds, tortoise shell being the highest. From this time we hear no -more of cowries in China Proper, but they left traces of themselves in -the small copper coins shaped like a small Cypraea, called Dragon’s eye -or Ant coins[30]. It is doubtless to a similar survival that we owe those -curious silver coins made in the shape of shells which come from the -north of Burmah and of which there are several specimens in the British -Museum. They are about the size of a cowrie, and doubtless served as a -higher unit in a currency, of which the lower units were formed by real -shells. - -[Illustration: FIG. 4. Burmese silver shell money.] - -In 685 B.C. in parts of China pearls and gems, gold, knives and cloth -were the money, and under the Shou dynasty (1100 B.C.) we understand from -ancient Commentaries that the gold circulated in little cubes of a square -inch, and the copper in round, tongue-like plates by the _tchin tchu_, -while the silk cloth 2 feet 2 inches wide in rolls of 40 feet formed a -_piece_. - -In the _Shu King_, when in 947 B.C. commutation for punishment was -enacted, the culprit according to the offence was to pay 100, 200, 500 -or 1000 _hwars_, or rings of copper weighing 6 _ounces_. The Chinese -likewise used hoes as money, just as we shall find the wild people of -Annam doing at the present hour. But in the course of time the hoe became -a true currency and little hoes, such as that here figured, were employed -as coins in some parts of China (_tsin_, agricultural implements). The -copper knives which played so important a part in the development of -Chinese coinage will be dealt with more particularly in a later chapter. -In Marco Polo’s time cowries were in full use, as in the province of -Yunnan[31]. - -[Illustration: FIG. 5. Chinese hoe money.] - -On the borders of China and Tibet we may still find a state of things -not far removed from that existing in the China of 2000 years ago[32]. -The Tibetans, who in recent years employ Indian rupees, for purposes of -small change cut up these coins into little pieces, which are weighed by -the careful Chinese, but the Tibetans do not seem to use the scale, and -roughly judge of the value of a piece of silver. Tea, moreover, and beads -of turquoise are largely used as a means of payment instead of metal. - -Speaking of this same region (called by him Kandu), Polo says[33]: “The -money-matters of the people are conducted in this way: they have gold -in rods which they weigh, and they reckon its value by its weight in -_saggi_, but they have no coined money. Their small change again is made -in this way: they have salt which they boil and set in a mould, and every -piece from the mould weighs half-a-pound. Now eighty moulds of this salt -are worth one _saggio_ of fine gold.” Tea seems to have taken the place -of salt in modern times. - -Turning next to the southern frontier of China, we shall find among the -tribes of Annam a system of currency which strongly reminds us of that -found in the Homeric Poems. - -Among the Bahnars of Annam who border on Laos, “everything,” says that -excellent observer M. Aymonier, “is by barter, hence all objects of -general use have a known relationship: if we know the unit, all the rest -is easy. Here is the key: a _head_, that is to say, a male slave is -worth six or seven buffaloes, or the same number of pots (_marmites_; so -in Homer, _Il._ XXXIII. 885, an ox is estimated at a kettle); the buffalo -and the pot have the same value, which naturally varies with the size and -age of the animal and the size and quality of the pot. - -“A full-grown buffalo or a large pot is worth seven earthenware jars of -a grey glaze, after the Chinese shape, and with a capacity of fifteen -litres. One jar = 4 _muk_. (The _muk_[34] is an unit of account, but -originally meant some special article.) 1 _muk_ = 10 _mats_, that is to -say ten of these _hoes_, which are manufactured by the Cédans, and which -are employed by all the savages of this region as their agricultural -implement. The hoe is the smallest amount used by the Bahnars. It is -worth 10 centimes in European goods, and is made of iron[35].” Thus the -buffalo is worth 280 hoes, or a little more than an English sovereign, -since each hoe is worth a penny (10 centimes). The Bahnars have sheet tin -½ millim. thick cut into pieces 11 centim. square, to be used to ornament -sword-belts or to make earrings (iv. p. 390). A stick of virgin wax the -size of an ordinary candle = 1 hoe, a pretty little cane hat = 2 hoes; -a large bamboo hat = 2 hoes; a Bahnar knife = 2 hoes; a fine sword and -sheath = 1 jar, 1 _muk_, 3 hoes; a crossbow and string = 3 hoes; ordinary -arrows are sold at 30 for 1 hoe; arrows with movable heads, 20 for 1 hoe, -and poisoned arrows 5 for 1 hoe; a lance-head = 3 hoes; a lance with palm -handle = 4 hoes; a horse = 3 or 4 pots or buffaloes; a large elephant = -10 to 15 _heads_ (slaves). - -The same method of using the buffalo as the chief unit is employed by -the Moïs, among whom a slave is reckoned at 10 buffaloes. Again, among -tribes such as the Tjams, with whom the string of copper _cash_ (or -sapecs) borrowed from the Chinese, is employed as their lowest unit, a -full-grown buffalo = 100 strings;[36] the Mexican _piastre_ or dollar -circulates freely as in China, a small pig costs 10 strings, pork by -retail costs two strings per lb. (_livre_), ducks cost 1½ to 2 strings. A -large caldron costs 3 buffaloes; a handsome gong = 2 buffaloes; a small -gong = 1 buffalo; 6 copper platters = 1 buffalo; two swords = 1 buffalo; -2 lances = 1 buffalo; a rhinoceros’ horn = 8 buffaloes; a pair of large -elephants’ tusks = 6 buffaloes; a small pair = 3 buffaloes. When the wild -people have dealings with the more civilized peoples of the plain, who -employ the Chinese cash and silver dollars, a large buffalo = 100 strings -of cash, a small one = 50 strings; a fine horse = 100 strings; a she goat -= a piece of cloth. The Orang Glaï have often to buy elephants’ tusks, -at the rate of 8 buffaloes for a pair, or 8 bars of silver (640 francs). -The Szins of Kharang have often to pay a tax of a buffalo per hut, or -for the whole village 10 buffaloes, the horns of which must be at least -as long as their ears[37]. In Cambodia iron ingots[38] form a special -kind of money. These ingots are not weighed, but they are as long as from -the base of the thumb to the tip of the forefinger; they are in breadth -two fingers, and one finger in thickness in the middle, tapering off to -either end. - -Cowries and other shells seem to have gone out of use altogether among -these tribes, but we may recognize in the practice of reckoning the -_cash_ by the string a distinct survival of the olden time when shells -were so employed. It is of great importance to note that where silver has -come into use, its unit, the bar, is equated to the buffalo, the unit of -barter, just as we find the Homeric gold Talent equal to the ox. - -Next let us turn to India, and to the Aryans of the Rig Veda, who dwelt -in the north-west of the Punjaub at the time when we first meet them. -From their prayers and invocations it is easy to learn in what the wealth -of this simple folk consisted. One or two examples will serve for our -purpose: “The potent ones who bestow on us good fortune by means of cows, -horses, goods, gold, O Indra and Vaya, may they, blessed with fortune, -ever be successful by means of horses and heroes in battle[39].” -Again, “O Indra bring us rice cake, a thousand _soma_ drinks, and an -hundred cows, O hero. Bring us apparel, cows, horses and jewels, along -with a _mana_ of gold.” Yet once more: “Ten horses, ten caskets, ten -garments, ten gold nuggets (_hiranya pindas_) I received from Divodāsa. -Ten chariots equipped with side horses, and an hundred cows gave the -Açvatha to the Atharvans and to the Pāyu.” Even without further evidence -than that which we have already drawn from the wild people of Annam, we -might well assume that there were definitely fixed relations in value -between the cows, horses, gold, rice, and cloth of the Vedic people. But -absolute proof is at hand, for their close kinsmen, the ancient Persians, -have left us in the Zend Avesta ample means of observing their monetary -system. Thus we read in the ordinances which fix the payment of the -physician that “he shall heal the priest for the holy blessing; he shall -heal the master of an house for the value of an ox of low value; he shall -heal the lord of a borough for the value of an ox of average value; he -shall heal the lord of a town for the value of an ox of high value; he -shall heal the lord of a province for the value of a chariot and four; he -shall heal the wife of the master of a house for the value of a she ass; -he shall heal the wife of the master of a borough for the value of a cow; -he shall heal the wife of the lord of a town for the value of a mare; -he shall heal the wife of the lord of a province for the value of a she -camel; he shall heal the son of the lord of a borough for the value of an -ox of high value: he shall heal an ox of high value for the value of an -ox of average value; he shall heal an ox of average value for the value -of an ox of low value; he shall heal an ox of low value for the value of -a sheep; and he shall heal a sheep for the value of a meal of meat[40].” -So too in the fees of the Cleanser we read: “Thou shalt cleanse a priest -for a blessing; the lord of a province for the value of a camel of high -value; the lord of a town for the value of a stallion; the lord of a -borough for the value of a bull; the master of an house for the value of -a cow three years old; the wife of the master of an house for the value -of a ploughing cow; a menial for the value of a draught cow; a young -child for the value of a lamb[41].” Again in the chapter on Contracts: -“The third is the contract to the amount of a sheep, the fourth is the -contract to the amount of an ox, the fifth is the contract to the amount -of a man (human being), the sixth is the contract to the amount of a -field, a field in good land, a fruitful one in good bearing[42].” - -From these extracts it is plain that the ancient Persians had a system -of clearly defined relations in value between all their worldly gear, -whether the object was a slave or an ox, or a lamb or a field, precisely -like that existing at the present moment among the hill tribes of Annam. -But not simply was it between one kind of animal and another, but they -had evidently strict notions as regards the inter-relations in value -of different animals of the same kind; thus the ox of high value, the -ox of low value, the cow of three years old, or the bull all stood to -one another in a fixed relationship. We may without hesitation conclude -that the same system of conventional values prevailed among the ancient -Hindus. Nor can we doubt that articles of every kind, such as arrows, -spears, axes, and articles of personal use and adornment all had their -regularly recognized prices, and that the less valuable of them were used -as small change. Gold, no doubt, occupied an important place in relation -to the other forms of property in portions of fixed size or weight, as -in the days of Marco Polo. In mediaeval times in parts of India money -consisted of pieces of iron worked into the form of large needles, and in -some parts stones which we call cat’s eyes, and in others pieces of gold -worked to a certain weight were used for moneys, as we are told by Nicolo -Conti, who travelled in India in the 15th century[43]. If iron was so -employed at this late date we may well infer that bronze and afterwards -iron were probably so used by the ancient Indo-Iranian people. - -[Illustration: FIG. 6. Fish-hook money (_Larina_).] - -[Illustration: FIG. 7. Siamese silver bullet money: A. B. Early form as -simple piece of wire. C. Last stage of degradation.] - -Among the fishermen who dwelt along the shores of the Indian Ocean, from -the Persian Gulf to the southern shores of Hindustan, Ceylon and the -Maldive islands, it would appear that the fish-hook, to them the most -important of all implements, passed as currency. In the course of time it -became a true money, just as did the hoe in China. It still for a time -retained its ancient form, but gradually became degraded into a simple -piece of double wire, as seen in Nos. 3 and 4 of our illustration. In its -conventional form it is known as a _larin_ or _lari_, a name doubtless -derived from Lari on the Persian Gulf. These _larins_ made both of silver -and bronze were in use until the beginning of the last century, and -bear legends in Arabic character. Had the process of degradation gone -on without check, in course of time the double wire would probably have -shrunk up into a bullet-shaped mass of metal, just as the Siamese silver -coins are the outcome of a process of degradation from a piece of silver -wire twisted into the form of a ring and doubled up, which probably -originally formed some kind of ornament. The bullet-shaped _tical_ is -now struck as a coin of European form. Just as perhaps the silver shells -of Burmah became the multiple unit of a large number of real cowries, so -the fish-hook made of silver came into use as a multiple unit, when the -bronze fish-hook had already become conventionalized into a true coin. -The silver _larins_ of Ceylon weigh about 170 grs. troy, and those of -Southern India are said by Professor Wilson to weigh the same, although -some of them weigh only 76 grs. or less than half. As the rupee weighs -about 180 grs. the silver fish-hook may represent the usual unit employed -for silver, strong national conservatism requiring that the silver -currency should take the same form as the ancient fish-hook currency of -bronze[44]. There are still in circulation in Nejd in Arabia small bars -of silvered brass, which bear on the back Arabic inscriptions. It is -hardly possible to doubt that in these little pieces of metal we have the -last surviving descendants of the old fish-hook. In the Maldive Isles a -silver _larin_ was worth 12,000 cowries. - -[Illustration: FIG. 8. Silvered brass bars used as money in Nejd[45].] - -Advancing westward we find the Ossetes of the Caucasus at the present -moment employ the cow as their unit of value, the prices of all -commodities being stated as one, two, three or four cows, or even at -one-tenth or one-hundredth of the value of a cow. The ox is worth two -cows, and the cow is worth ten sheep. This people regulate compensation -for wounds thus: they measure the length of the wound in barley corns, -and for every barley corn which it measures a cow has to be paid[46]. -We can have little doubt that over all Hither Asia the same method of -employing the cow as the principal unit of value obtained. It is that -which we found among the Greeks of the Homeric Poems, who were in full -contact with Northern Asia Minor, and was almost certainly that of the -Semites who dwelt in the South. Just as we find the buffalo, and the -pots, bronze platters, arrows, lances and hoes standing side by side in -well defined mutual relation among the Bahnars of Cochin China, so we -find in Homer that whilst the cow is the principal unit, the slave is -employed as an occasional higher unit, and the kettle (_lebes_), the -pot (_tripous_), the axe and the half axe, hides, raw copper and pig -iron stand beside the cow as multiples or sub-multiples. When Ajax and -Idomeneus make a bet on the issue of the chariot race, the proposed wager -is a pot or a kettle[47], whilst from another passage we learn that the -usual prizes given at the funeral games of a chieftain were female slaves -and pots (Tripods). - -Passing from Greece into Italy we have no difficulty in proving that the -cow was the regular unit of value in that peninsula and the adjacent -island of Sicily. Down to 451 B.C. all fines at Rome were paid in cows -and sheep. By the Tarpeian Law these were commuted for payments in -copper, each cow being set at 100 asses, each sheep at 10 asses. As I -shall deal with the whole question of the Roman As at considerable length -later on I shall here simply note that the Italian tribes had evidently -the same system of adjusting the relations between their cattle and sheep -and their metals which we found among the Persians and modern Ossetes. In -Sicily it is clear that the cow had played the same part as elsewhere, -for we learn from Aristotle[48] that when the tyrant Dionysius burdened -the Syracusans by excessive taxation, they ceased in a great degree to -keep cattle, inasmuch as the unit of assessment was the cow. If then in -the 4th century B.C. at Syracuse, the most advanced community in Sicily, -the cow still continued to be the unit of assessment, _à fortiori_, at an -earlier period that animal must have been the monetary unit of the whole -island. - -From the Italians we pass on to their close kinsmen the Kelts. We are -told by Polybius[49] that when the Gauls entered Italy, their wealth -consisted of their cattle and gold ornaments, but although an argument -will be offered below to show that the cow was the monetary unit of both -Gauls and Germans, we have no definite evidence respecting the barter -system. But fortunately the Ancient Laws of Wales and Ireland afford -us ample insight into the Keltic system. Irish tradition goes back far -beyond the date at which the Brehon Laws were compiled, and from it we -get a glimpse of a system almost Homeric: thus we read in the _Annals of -the Four Masters_ under the year 106 A.D. that the tribute (_Boroimhe_, -literally cow-tax) paid by the King of Leinster consisted in 150 cows, -150 swine, 150 couples of men and women in servitude, 150 girls and the -king’s daughter in like servitude, 150 caldrons, with two passing large -ones of the breadth and depth of five fists[50]. As this tradition makes -no mention of payment in metals, but only of slaves, cattle and caldrons, -which doubtless stood to one another in well defined relations, we need -have no hesitation in assuming that the cow formed the chief unit of the -earlier, as it did of the later Kelts. - -The Welsh naturally adopted the monetary system which sprang up after the -reign of Constantine the Great in the Later Empire. Accordingly we find -in certain of their Ancient Laws[51] tables giving in _denarii_, _solidi_ -or _librae_ the values of various kinds of property. From these we can -learn with accuracy the relations in value which existed between various -kinds of property. Thus the calf from March (when the cows calved) to -November was worth 6 _denarii_, to the following February 8 _den._, -till May 10 _den._, till August of the second year 12, till November -14 _den._, till February 15 _den._, till February of the third year 28 -_den._ The heifer is then in calf, her milk is worth 16 _den._ Thus the -milch cow is worth 46 _den._, and up to August she is worth 48 _den._, -up to November 50 _den._, and up to May of the fourth year is worth -60 _den._ A month’s milk is worth 4 _den._; a bull calf 6 _den._, the -young ox when put to the plough is worth 28 _den._, when he can plough, -48 _den._, that is the same as the young milch cow of the same age; a -gelding is worth 80 _den._, a farmer’s mare 60 _den._, a trained horse -is worth half a _libra_; a bow with twelve arrows is worth 7 _denarii_ -and an _obolus_; a queen bee (_modred af_) is worth 24 _den._, the first -swarm 16 _den._, the second 12, the third 8; a foal is worth 18 _den._ to -24 _den._, a two year old 48 _den._, a three year old 96 _den._ A young -male slave (_iuvenis captivus_) is worth 1 _libra_, a slave both young -and of large stature (_captivus iuvenis et magnus_) is worth 1½ _libra_. -It would appear that the Welsh, when taking over the Roman system, had -adjusted their own highest barter-unit, the slave (probably female as -well as male), to the _libra_ or pound, the highest unit in the Roman -system. Of course slaves of exceptional strength or beauty would always -command a higher price. But the regulations for the value of cattle are -especially of interest, as shewing the extraordinary minuteness with -which pastoral peoples discriminate the values of animals of different -ages, and estimate the milk of a cow in proportion to her actual value. -The full-grown cow is worth exactly ten times the newborn calf, an -estimate which holds good just as much in 1890 as it did 1000 years ago, -for it is not a mere convention but is based upon a natural law. At the -present moment a calf is worth from 30 to 35 shillings, a cow from £15 to -£17. 10_s._ The yearling calf was worth one-sixth of the full-grown cow, -a relation which still holds good. - -The Irish Kelts borrowed their silver system from Rome at a period -probably before Constantine, as they seem never to have employed the -_libra_ and _solidus_, but simply the _uncia_ (_unga_) and _scripulus_ -(_screapall_), adding thereto a subdivision called the _pinginn_ or -penny, borrowed doubtless from the Saxon invader at a later period. -Thus 1 unga = 24 screapalls; 1 screapall = 3 pinginns. They equated the -principal silver unit, the _uncia_, to the old chief barter-unit, the -cow (_bo_). As elsewhere, however, the slave formed occasionally the -highest unit, and was reckoned nominally at three cows. The slave woman -(_cumhal_, _ancilla_ in Latin writers) was in course of time used as a -mere unit of account. - - Slave woman (_cumhal_, _ancilla_) = 3 ounces (_unga_) - Full-grown cow (_bo mor_) = 1 ounce = 24 screapalls - Heifer now in third year (_samhaisc_) = ½ ounce = 12 screapalls - Heifer of second year (_colpach_) = 6 screapalls - Yearling (_dairt_) = 4 screapalls - A cow’s milk for summer and harvest = 6 screapalls - A sheep = 3 screapalls - A goat’s milk for summer and harvest = 1¾ pinginn - A sheep’s fleece = 1½ pinginn - A sheep’s milk = ½ pinginn - A kid (_meinnan_)[52] = ⅔ pinginn. - -Here again the yearling is worth one-sixth of the cow. Gold was abundant -among the ancient Irish, (almost certainly obtained in large quantities -from the Wicklow mountains,) and passed from hand to hand in the form of -rings, which were weighed on a system different from and probably far -older than that employed for silver (see Appendix A). - -Passing to the Teutonic peoples we find traces of the same ancient -practice. For according to one system a _mancus_ of silver (a mere -unit of account) corresponded with the value of an ox. Similarly the -_pound_ (_libra_) was generally regarded as the silver equivalent of the -worth of a man[53]. But the strongest proof is that Charlemagne in his -dealings with the Saxons found it necessary to define the value of his -_solidus_ of 12 pence (_denarii_) by equating it to the value of an ox -of a year old of either sex in the autumn season, just as it is sent to -the stall. In the same law we find a list of regulation prices for other -commodities, such as oats, honey, rye, similar to those already quoted -from the Welsh laws[54]. The English word _fee_, which originally meant -an ox, as is shown not only by the German _Vieh_, which still retains its -original meaning, and by such expressions in Anglo-Saxon as _gangende -feoh_, is in itself a proof that cattle served as the most generally -recognized form of money. It might be expected that much the same state -of things existed among the Scandinavian peoples. Their chief media of -exchange were cows, and woollen cloths, slaves, and gold ornaments. By -the laws of Hakon the Good penalties could be paid in cows, provided that -they were not too old, in slaves, provided they were not under fifteen -years of age, in cloths, and in weapons[55]. - -Gold and silver were employed by the northern peoples in the form of -rings. - -This has led people to talk much about _ring money_ as if it was a true -currency, circulating like the stamped money of later times. The truer -view seems to be that these rings, whether employed by the ancient -Egyptians or the prehistoric inhabitants of Mycenae, the Kelts or -Teutons, were nothing more than ornaments and passed in the ordinary -way of barter, having a recognized distinct relation to other forms -of property, such as cattle and slaves. It has been the custom in all -countries for the person who desires to have an article of jewellery -made to give to the goldsmith a certain weight of gold or silver, out of -which the latter manufactures the desired ornament. Such is the practice -at the present day in India; you give the goldsmith so many gold mohurs -or sovereigns, or rupees, as the case may be; he squats down in your -verandah, and with a few primitive tools quickly turns out the article -you desire, which of course will weigh as many mohurs or sovereigns as -you have given him (provided that you have stood by all the time, keeping -a sharp look-out to prevent his abstracting any of the metal). That in -like fashion gold ornaments for ordinary wearing purposes were regularly -of known weights in ancient times is shown clearly by the account of the -presents given to Rebekah by Abraham’s servant, ‘a gold earring of half -a shekel weight and two bracelets for her hands of ten shekels weight’ -(Genesis xxiv. 22). The same word appears in Job xlii. 11: ‘Then came -there unto him all his brethren and all his sisters and all that had -been of his acquaintance before ... every man also gave him a piece of -money and every one an _earring_ of gold.’ Consequently Rebekah’s golden -ring (whether it was to adorn her nose or ear) of half a shekel weighed -65 grains, being half the light shekel or ox-unit. We are not told the -weight of the earrings contributed by his sympathetic kinsfolk for the -afflicted patriarch, but it is evident that they were of a uniform -standard. No doubt such rings had from time immemorial passed in the -ordinary course of barter from hand to hand. This is strongly supported -by a piece of evidence produced independently of the previous suggestion -by Dr Hoffmann of Kiel, who has showed[56] that _betzer_ (בצר) the -word used for gold in Job xxii. 24-25 (_bĕtzĕr_) and in Job xxxvi. 19 -(_b’tzar_), from a comparison of its cognates in Hebrew and Arabic -means simply a _ring_, which through the extended meaning _ring-gold_ -came finally to be used as a name for the metal simply. To take another -example from a very different region, the golden ornaments of the ancient -Irish (of which numerous specimens exist in the Museum of the Royal Irish -Academy) were made according to specified weight. Thus queen Medbh is -represented as saying: ‘My spear-brooch of gold, which weighs thirty -ungas, and thirty half ungas, and thirty crosachs and thirty quarter -[crosachs].’ O’Curry, _Manners and Customs of Ancient Irish_, iii. 112. -But we need not go beyond Greek soil itself for such illustrations. The -well-known story of Archimedes and the weight of the golden crown, which -led to the discovery of specific gravity, is sufficient to show that the -practice in Greece was such as I describe. - -[Illustration: FIG. 9. Rings found in the tombs of Mycenae.] - -The rings seen on Egyptian monuments (of which we give a representation -in a later chapter) are of round wire; those found by Schliemann in the -tombs of Mycenae[57] (Fig. 9) consist both of round wire rings like the -Egyptian, and likewise of spirals of quadrangular wire. As _finger_ rings -(δακτύλιοι) are not mentioned in Homer, it has been assumed that the -Homeric Greeks did not employ rings at all. Hence in a famous passage -where the ornaments made by Hephaestus for the goddesses are described, -we find mention of brooches, _bent spirals_ (ἕλικες) ear-drops[58], and -chains. Helbig[59] explains the _helikes_ as a kind of brooch made of -four spirals, such as are worn in parts of Central Europe, but it is -difficult to believe that people who were using brooches with pins and -necklaces would not have known and employed the far simpler ring. Again, -why should we find two distinct words for brooches coming thus together? -Is it not far more likely that in the spirals of Mycenae we have the real -_bent helikes_ of Homer? These spirals would serve not only for finger -rings, but might be used in the hair, or more probably still were used -as a means of fastening on the dress, being passed through eyelet holes -or loops, on the principle of the modern key ring[60]. On comparing them -with the Scandinavian spiral (Fig. 1) the reader will see that this -primitive form of employing gold was widely diffused over Europe. The -Scandinavians used such ornaments of _bent_ wire (O.N. _baugr_, A.S. -_beag_ from root BUG, _to bend_) very commonly, beside oxen and other -property, as media of exchange. Thus both _beag_ in Anglo-Saxon, and -_baugr_ in Old Norse became used as general names for treasure. Thus -_baugbrota_ (cf. _hring brota_), literally _ring-breaker_, was used as -an epithet of princes, meaning _distributor of treasure_[61]. - -[Illustration: FIG. 10. Nos. 1, 2, found in Tipperary; 3, Scandinavian; -4, 5, found in Co. Mayo; 6, 7, 8, ordinary Irish type.] - -The same spirals of quadrangular wire were probably employed by the -Kelts, as that shown in Fig. 10, No. 3 was found in Ireland; Nos. 4 and 5 -are of quadrangular wire but are simple hoops, whilst in Nos. 6, 7, 8, we -get the regular Irish type of a round wire not completely closed[62]. The -latter probably represent a more advanced state of art, as their makers -must have had considerable metallurgic skill, No. 8 being made of gold -plated over a copper core. - -As we shall see further on, the Egyptian rings are made on a standard -almost identical with the Homeric talent, and I have shown elsewhere that -the rings from Mycenae were made on almost the same standard[63]. I shall -endeavour to show in an Appendix that the Irish rings also show evidence -of being made on a definite standard, whilst it has been long well known -that the Scandinavian rings and armlets have likewise a standard of their -own. - -When occasion arose they cut off a piece of this bent wire (for it was -really nothing more), and gave it by weight. Such a piece was called a -_scillinga_, and is the direct ancestor of our own _shilling_[64]. It -is not unlikely also that the ancient inhabitants of Portugal employed -similar pieces of wire, as Strabo tells us that the Lusitanians have -no money, but that they employ silver wire, from which they cut off a -portion when necessary[65]. - -We now pass on to Africa, where we shall find most varied systems of -currency. Thus on the West Coast of Africa the _bar_ is the unit. In fact -all merchandise is reckoned by the bar[66], which now at Sierra Leone -means 2_s._ 3_d._ worth of any kind of commodity, although originally -it meant simply an iron bar of fixed dimensions, which formed the chief -article of exchange between the natives and the earliest European -traders. In other parts of the same region axes serve as currency; these -are too small to be really employed as an implement, but are doubtless -the survival of a period not long past when real axes served as money. -Thus we get a complete analogy to the hoe money of the Chinese and the -fish-hook currency of Ceylon and the Maldive Islands. In Calabar they -formerly employed bunches of quadrangular copper-wire as currency. Each -wire was about 12 inches long, and they were of course meant to be made -into necklets and armlets[67]. - -[Illustration: FIG. 11. Axe Money (West Africa).] - -In other parts of the West Coast, as in the Bonny River territory, iron -rings very closely resembling in shape the bronze fibulae found in -Ireland, which probably were armlets, are employed as money. Those which -I have seen seem too small to be used as bracelets, and are now probably -a true money, retaining the old conventional shape (see Fig. 12)[68]. - -[Illustration: FIG. 12. Old Calabar copper-wire formerly used as money.] - -In the region of the Upper Congo brass rods are employed as currency -for articles of small value. This wire, made at Birmingham, about the -thickness of ordinary stair-rod, is sent out in coils of 60 lbs., and is -then cut into pieces of a foot long[69]. Short brass rods and armlets -are also largely exported from Birmingham for the African trade. - -[Illustration: FIG. 13. - -1. Bronze Irish Fibula found in Co. Cork. - -2. Bronze Irish Fibula found in King’s Co. - -3. Iron Manilla from W. Africa. - -4. Iron Manilla used as money in Bonny River Territory.] - -There is no absolute standard length—and thus while 36 inches is the one -most commonly used, the length varies from 32 to 36 inches. - -They go out in boxes containing 100, in straight lengths, and soft to -admit of their being wound into armlets, &c. - -The diameter of the rod varies from ³⁄₁₆ in. to about ⅜ in.—but a rod -weighing about 24 oz. to 3 ft., and ⅜ in. thick, is the one most often -made. - -Arm rings are made from solid brass rod about ⁷⁄₁₆ in. thick and are -usually 2½ in. to 3½ in. in diameter—they are also made in large -quantities from brass tubes of ½ in. to ⅝ in. diameter, more frequently -from ⁹⁄₁₆ in., the rings being from 2½ in. to 3½ in. in diameter, and -weighing from 2½ to 4 oz. each[70]. - - * * * * * - -Slaves and ivory tusks form the chief units in the same region. The slave -usually is worth a tusk. In other parts pieces of precious wood of a red -colour, each piece being a foot long, were employed as currency[71]. - -When we come to regions where the ox can live we at once find that animal -occupying a foremost place. Thus when the Cape of Good Hope was first -colonized, the Hottentots employed cattle and bars of iron of a given -size as currency[72], and at the present moment the cow is the regular -unit among the Zulus, ten cows being the ordinary price paid for a wife, -although as in Homeric Greece fancy prices are paid by the chiefs for -ladies of uncommon attractions. But our chief interest must centre in -the peoples north of the Equator, who from time immemorial have been in -contact with the ancient civilization of the Mediterranean. - -Thus among the Madis of Central Africa, a pure negro tribe, cattle form -the chief wealth; a rich man may have as many as 200 head, a very poor -one only 3 or 4. The average number possessed by one man is from 30 to -40. They keep the milk in gourds. - -“A regular system of exchange is carried on in arrows, beads, bead -necklaces, teeth necklaces, brass rings for the neck and arms, and -bundles of small pieces of iron in flat, round, or oval discs. All these -different articles are given in exchange for cattle, corn, salt, arrows, -etc. The nearest approach to money is seen in the flat, round pieces of -iron which are of different sizes, from three-quarters to two feet in -diameter and half an inch thick. They are much employed in exchange. -This is the form in which they are kept and used as money, but they -are intended to be divided into two, heated and made into hoes. They -are also fashioned into other implements, such as knives, arrow-heads, -etc. and into little bells hung round the waist for ornament or round -wandering cows’ necks. Ready-made hoes are not often used in barter. -Iron as above-mentioned is preferred and is taken to the blacksmith to -be fashioned according to the owner’s requirements. Any tools may be -obtained ready made from a smith, and can be used in barter when new. - -“Compensation for killing a woman or any serious crime must be paid for -in cattle. No cowries are used as coins in this district, no measure of -weight, quantity or length is used. The payment for a wife must be made -in cows of a year old, or in bulls of two or three years[73].” - -But it is in Darfour and Wadai that we find the primitive system in its -fullest form. Wives are bought with cows, 20 of which with a male and -female slave are the usual price of a wife, hence the Darfouris prefer -daughters to sons. Hence the proverb that girls fill the stable, but boys -empty it, which recalls the _cow-winning maidens_ of Homer (παρθένοι -ἀλφεσίβοιαι). There is absolutely no metal of any kind in Darfour, except -that which is imported. Having no money, they accept certain articles as -having a certain monetary value. - -Facher was the first place in Darfour which had anything like a currency; -it consisted of rings made of tin, which were employed in the purchase -of every-day necessaries of life. These rings are called _tarneih_ in -Darfouris. There are two kinds, the heavy ring and the light ring; -the light serves for buying the most trivial articles. For purchasing -articles of value they have the _toukkiyeh_, a piece of cotton cloth six -cubits long by one broad. There are two kinds of this stuff, _chykeh_ -and _katkât_. Four pieces of the former and 4½ pieces of the latter are -worth a Spanish dollar. Buying and selling is also carried on by means -of slaves: thus one says, “this horse is worth 2 or 3 _sedâcy_ (a name -given to a negro slave, who measures six spans from his ankle to the -lower part of his ear)[74].” A _sedaciyeh_ is a female negro slave of the -same height. A _sedâcy_ is worth 30 _toukkiyeh_, or six blue _chauter_, -or 8 white _chauter_ or six oxen, or 10 Spanish pillar dollars, the only -coined money known in Darfour, where it is called _abou medfa_, i.e. -_cannon_ piece, the pillars being taken for cannons. The inhabitants -of Kobeih employ beads for money, which are called _harich_. They are -green and blue and circulate in strings of 100 each. This bead takes -the place of the tin ring (_tarneih_) used at Facher in the purchase of -cheap commodities. The _harich_ as money is employed in numbers of from -5 to 100 beads (the string), from one string to ten and indefinitely -further[75]. - -The _toukkiyeh_ is worth in the markets mentioned 8 strings of _harich_. -Thus a _sedâcy_ is worth 240 strings. At Guerly and its environments the -_falgo_ or stick of salt almost as big as one’s finger is employed. This -salt is obtained artificially, and when liquid is poured into little -moulds of baked clay. This salt is sold by the _falgo_, not by weight, -and one buys by 1, 2 or 3 _falgo_ according to the value of the article. - -At Conca tobacco is used as money. At Kergo, Ryl, and Chaigriyeh articles -of moderate value are bought with hanks of cotton thread. These threads -are ten _ells_ long, and there are only 20 threads in each hank. For -common articles raw cotton with the pods attached is given; it is not -weighed but simply estimated by guess. At Noumleh onions are employed -as money for common articles, and the _rubat_ or hank of thread, and -_toukkiyeh_ for the more valuable, whilst the _chauter_ and dollar are -unknown. - -At Ras-el-Fyk[76] the hoe (_hachâchah_) serves as currency. It is simply -a plate of iron fitted with a socket. A handle is fitted into this -socket, and one has an implement suited for chopping the weeds in the -corn fields. Purchases of small value are made with the hoe from 1 to 20: -above that amount the _toukkiyeh_ is employed and likewise the _chauter_. - -At Temourkeh they use as moneys cylindrical pieces of copper (called -_damleg_) for articles of some value, whilst a kind of glass bead called -_chaddour_ is used for small articles. Near Ganz, the eastern part of -Darfour, the principal article of exchange is the _doukha_ for articles -of moderate value. They give it by the handful, or by the double handful -up to the amount of half a _moda_; whilst as elsewhere articles of value -are bought by the _toukkiyeh_ or dollar. In a very great number of places -merchandise is exchanged against oxen; thus the horse is worth 10 to 20 -oxen. - -Accordingly while each district of Darfour has some peculiar form of -currency for small change the higher currency is the same everywhere, the -piece of cloth, the ox, the slave[77]. - -In the region of Wadai the same shrewd Arab tells us that cattle are -kept by even the most barbarous tribes[78]. Thus the Fertyt tribe, who -go in a state of almost complete nudity, and thus have no need of cloth, -possess large herds of cattle, which are not branded, but each owner -distinguishes his cattle by giving a peculiar shape to their horns as -soon as they begin to grow. In the less barbarous communities of Wadai -slaves and beads are employed as currency as well as cattle. The bead -used is called the _mansous_. It is of yellow amber and of different -sizes. Number 1 is so called because one string (containing 100 beads) -weighs one _rotl_ (pound) of 12 ounces; Number 2 because two strings -weigh a _rotl_; Number 3 because 3 strings make a _rotl_ and so on. The -first is the most costly of all beads. Often a single bead of this sort -(_soumyt_) is worth two slaves; if it is abundant each bead is worth a -slave. - - - - -CHAPTER III. - -THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE OX AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GOLD. - - And round about him lay on every side - Great heapes of gold that never could be spent, - Of which some were rude owre not purified - Of Mulciber’s devouring element. - Some others were new driven and distent - Into great Ingowes and to wedges square, - Some in round plates with outen ornament, - But most were stampt and in their metal bare - The antique Shapes of Kings and Kesars straunge and rare. - - SPENSER, _Faerie Queen_, II. vii. - - -Let us now take a general survey of the results of our observations. -First of all it is apparent that the doctrine of a primal convention -with regard to the use of any one particular article as a medium of -exchange is just as false as the old belief in an original convention at -the first beginning of Language or Law. Every medium of exchange either -has an actual marketable value, or represents something which either has -or formerly had such a value, just as a five-pound note represents five -sovereigns, and the piece of stamped walrus skin formerly employed by -Russians in Alaska in paying the native trappers represented roubles or -blankets[79]. - -To employ once more the language of geology, we have found evidence -pointing to certain general laws of stratification. In Further Asia we -have found a section which presents us with an almost complete series of -strata, whilst in other places where we have been only able to observe -two or three layers, we have nevertheless found that certain strata -are invariably found superimposed upon others, just as regularly as the -coal seams are found lying over the carboniferous limestone. As soon as -the primitive savage has conceived the idea of obtaining some article -which he desires but does not possess by giving in exchange to its owner -something which the latter desires, the principle of money has been -conceived. Shells or necklaces of shells are found everywhere to be -employed in the earliest stages. When some men began to make weapons of -superior material, as for instance axes of jade instead of common stone, -such weapons naturally soon became media of exchange; when the ox and the -sheep, the swine and the goat are tamed, large additions are made to the -circulating media of the more advanced communities; then come the metals; -the older ornaments of shells and implements of stone are replaced by -those of gold (and much later by silver) and by weapons of bronze as -in Asia and Europe, and by those of iron in Africa. Copper and iron -circulate either in the form of implements and weapons, such as the axes -of West Africa, the hoes of the early Chinese and modern Bahnars, and the -ancient Chinese knives, all of which remind us of the axes and half-axes -in Homer; or in the form of rings and bracelets, like the manillas of -West Africa and the ancient Irish fibulae; or else in the form of plates -or bars of metal, ready to be employed for the manufacture of such -articles, as we saw in the case of the iron bars of Laos, the iron discs -of the Madis, and the brass rods of the Congo. Again we are reminded of -the mass of pig-iron, which Achilles offered as a prize[80]. - -It is of the highest importance to observe that such pieces of copper and -iron are not weighed, but are appraised by measurement. We shall find -that it is only at a period long subsequent to the weighing of gold that -the inferior metals are estimated by weight. The custom of capturing -wives which prevails among the lowest savages is succeeded by the custom -of purchasing wives. The woman is only a chattel on the same footing as -the cow or the sheep, and she is accordingly appraised in terms of the -ordinary media of exchange employed in her community, whether it be in -cows, horses, beads, skins or blankets. Presently male captives are -found useful both to tend flocks and, as in the East and in the modern -Soudan, to guard the harem. With the discovery of gold, ornaments made at -first out of the rough nuggets supersede other ornaments, and presently -either such ornaments or portions of gold in plates or lumps are added -to the list of media, and the same follows with the discovery of silver. -Such ornaments or pieces of gold and silver are estimated in terms of -cattle, and the standard unit of the bars or ingots naturally is adjusted -to the unit by which it is appraised. Thus we found the Homeric talent, -the silver bar of Annam, the Irish _unga_ all equated to the cow, and the -Welsh _libra_, Anglo-Saxon _libra_, similarly equated to the slave. With -the discovery of the art of weaving, cloths of a definite size everywhere -become a medium, as the silk cloth of ancient China, the woollen cloths -of the old Norsemen, the _toukkiyeh_ of the Soudan, and the blanket of -North America. This fact once more recalls Homer and makes us believe -that the robes and blankets and coverlets which Priam brought along with -the talents of gold to be the ransom of Hector’s body all had a definite -place in the Homeric monetary system[81]. - -We have seen the Siamese piece of twisted silver wire passing into a -coin of European style, and we shall find that the Chinese bronze knife -has finally ended by becoming a _cash_, just as we have already found -the Homeric talent of gold appearing, in weight at least, as the gold -stater of historical times. Thus in every point the analogy between what -we find in the Homeric Poems and in modern barbarous communities seems -complete. We may therefore with some confidence assume that we are at -liberty to fill up the gaps in the strata of Greek monetary history which -lie between Homer and the beginning of coined money on the analogy of -the corresponding strata in other regions. This assumption, resting on a -broad basis of induction and confirmed, as we shall see, by a good deal -of evidence special to Greece and Italy, will be found to explain the -origin, not only of weight standards in those countries, but also of the -Greek _obol_ and Roman _as_, as well as of the types on the oldest coins, -such as the cow’s head of Samos, the tunny fish of Olbia and Cyzicus, the -axe of Tenedos, the tortoise of Aegina, the shield of Boeotia, and the -silphium of Cyrene. - -Let us now turn to the races who both in modern and in ancient times -have dwelt around the basin of the Mediterranean and Black Sea, whether -in Asia Minor, Central Asia, Europe or Africa. In what did their wealth -consist? When we first meet in history the various branches of the Aryan, -Semitic, and Hamitic races, they are all alike possessed of flocks -and herds. To deal first with the Aryans; we have already had ample -evidence that such was the case with the early Greeks. The ox plays a -foremost part, and they likewise possessed sheep, goats and swine, whilst -slaves formed also an important commodity. Further east again, in the -Zend-Avesta the cow is found playing the principal part in every phase -of the primitive life there unfolded, both as the chief article of value -and in reference to their religious ceremonies. Still further to the -east we find from the Rig-Veda that among the ancient Hindus the same -important _rôle_ was assigned to the cow. Turning now to Mesopotamia we -find that in the time of Abraham the keeping of herds and flocks was -the chief pursuit of the Semites. Passing on to Egypt, the hoary mother -of civilization, we find evidence that although “every shepherd was an -abomination to the Egyptians,” yet the worship of their great divinity -Apis (Hapi) under the form of a bull and the worship of the sacred ram -indicate that at a period preceding the invasion of the Hyksos the -Egyptians regarded the ox and the sheep with love and veneration. Whether -the Egyptians came from Asia into the valley of the Nile, or whether they -came from some region of Africa more to the south, one thing at least -is certain, and that is that in either case they came from a country -eminently fitted for the rearing and keeping of cattle. The functions of -the ox became limited under altered conditions, and their ancient esteem -for the cow as one of their chief means of subsistence survived only -in religious observances. So too in modern India the reverence for the -sacred cow amongst a people who regard as an abomination the eating of -beef is a survival from the time when in a more northern clime cattle -formed the principal wealth of their forefathers. - -In the Soudan, as we have seen to this day, slaves and oxen are the chief -kinds of property. Crossing back to Europe we find the Italian tribes -represented in the earliest records as a cattle-keeping people. The -story of their invasion of Italy took the form of their driving before -them a steer and following obediently to whatever new home it might lead -them[82]. - -The same holds of the more northern peoples. When the Gauls entered the -plains of Northern Italy they drove before them vast herds of cattle. -Caesar found the Britons keeping large numbers of cattle, and especially -those in the interior of the island subsisting almost entirely on their -produce[83]. Strabo writing about A.D. 1, mentions hides as among the -articles exported from Britain to the Continent[84]. - -The linguistic argument fully supports the literary evidence. All the -Aryan or Indo-European peoples possess a common name for the cow. The -Sanskrit _gaus_, Greek βοῦς, Lat. _bos_, Irish _bo_, German _kuh_, Eng. -_cow_, taken together indicate that before the dispersion of the various -stocks (whether the original home of the Aryans was in Northern Europe, -as Latham first suggested, or in the Hindu Kush, as Prof. Max Müller -maintains) they all possessed the cow. This is further supported by -the name for the bull which is found amongst various stocks, the Greek -ταῦρος, Lat. _taurus_, Irish _tarb_, and the name of the _ox_, which -corresponds to the Sanskrit _uksha_, and finally the name of _steer_[85]. -Here then we have undoubted evidence of the universal possession of -cattle by the Aryans at a very early period. - -Archaeology lends its support likewise. We have already found in the case -of the Greeks the cow used as a unit of currency side by side with gold. -This leads us to the question of the precious metals, which in course of -time have come to be almost the sole medium of exchange. In the case of -the Greeks we saw reason to believe that the barter-unit was older than -the metallic. Is this the case universally? The evidence, I think, which -I shall adduce will lead us to this belief. - -First of all it is certain that man must have been acquainted with the -ox long before he ever gathered a grain of gold from the brook. When -primaeval man first stood on the plains of Europe and Asia vast herds of -wild cattle met his eye on every side. The process of domestication was -long and slow, but yet in all the ancient refuse heaps of Scandinavia and -Germany, whilst the remains of the ox are found in plenty there is yet no -trace of gold. - -At this point it will be well to remind the reader that the area occupied -by the cattle-keeping races whom we have enumerated was continuous. -There was no insuperable barrier between Indian and Persian, Persian and -Mede, Mede and the dweller in Mesopotamia, or again, between Persian -and Armenian, Armenian and the Scythian who lived in his ox-waggon on -the plains of what is now Southern Russia: the Scythian was in contact -with the tribes of the Balkan Peninsula, who in turn were in contact -with the Greeks and the dwellers along the valley of the Danube, who in -their turn joined hands with the peoples of Italy, Helvetia and Gaul. -Hence the value of cattle would be more or less constant from one end -of this entire region to the other. The purchasing power of the cow -might be greater in some parts than in others, just as with ourselves a -sovereign has the same value from Land’s End to John o’Groats, although -the purchasing power of the sovereign as regards the necessaries of life -may differ widely in different places within the limits of Great Britain. - -It is only when some impassable natural barrier intervenes that there -will be a difference in the value of the unit of barter. Thus, in the -case of Britain we cannot suppose that the value of oxen was necessarily -the same there as it was on the Continent. If it was it would be merely -a coincidence. The difficulty of transporting live cattle in such ships -as the Gauls or Britons possessed would have been too great to permit of -such a free circulation of the unit as would have kept its value exactly -even on both sides of the Straits. In fact it was only with the invention -of steam that facilities for transmarine cattle-trading came in which -could tend to level the value on both sides of an arm of the sea. In the -earlier half of this century cattle were extraordinarily cheap in Ireland -in proportion to the prices which they fetched in England, but yet the -difficulty and expense entailed in sending them across in sailing ships -effectually prevented the export. When the first steamers began to convey -cattle from Ireland to England the profits were enormous, although the -freight of a single cow cost, I believe, several pounds. Steam-power -has done much to equalize prices, but still there is a considerable -difference in the value of cattle on both sides of the Irish Sea. But -where no impassable barrier of sea or forest intervened, we may fairly -assume the ox carried much the same value from Northern India to the -Atlantic Ocean. - -We have already proved in the case of most of the peoples with which we -have to deal that the ox was the unit of value. We have likewise found -that these primitive peoples, whilst employing a cow or ox of a certain -age as their standard of value, had adjusted accurately to this unit -their other possessions: for instance, the heifer of the second year bore -a distinct value relatively to the cow of the third year, so likewise -the calf of the first year and the milk of a cow for a certain period. -These thus acted as submultiples of the standard unit, and as they were -the same in kind and only differed in degree, the various sub-units of -the cow remained in constant proportion to the chief unit and to one -another. On the other hand, when there was a distinction in kind between -animals, as between oxen and sheep, the relative value would probably -differ according to the scarcity or abundance of either kind of animal, -which difference would probably arise from a difference in the nature of -the pastures and climate. Thus we have found in some places ten sheep -regarded as the equivalent of an ox, in others again eight. The same -holds good of goats. In the case of these smaller animals we have seen -the same fixed scale of values according to age, and the same method -of rating the value of the milk of an ewe or the goat as we find in -the case of the cow. Amongst people who possessed horses, camels and -asses, the same principle holds good, horses and camels on account of -their great value being treated as higher units for occasional use, just -as the elephant is regarded at present in parts of Further India. The -slave, as we have before remarked, played an important part as a higher -unit or multiple of the ox, the average slave having a fixed value, -whilst of course in the case of female captives of unusual beauty a -fancy price would be paid. As climate and pasture would not affect the -keeping of slaves, and as human beings were fairly universally spread -over the area of the ox, the probabilities are that it was almost as easy -proportionally to get slaves as oxen, and to keep the one as to keep the -other from being stolen. Thus there would be more or less of a constant -ratio between slaves and oxen. There would be a tendency likewise to -regulate the number of slaves by the amount of work to be done, and as -this work in the pastoral stage is almost entirely that of the neatherd, -the shepherd, the swineherd and the goatherd, the number of _male_ slaves -at least would be to a certain extent conditioned by the extent of the -flocks and herds. Such we may infer from the picture of the household of -Ulysses in the Odyssey was the practice in early Greece. The faithful -swineherd Eumaeus, and his fellow the good neatherd, with the rascally -goatherd Melanthius, and their underlings, seem, with the addition -perhaps of a few house slaves who would assist in tilling the chieftain’s -demesne (_temenos_), to have comprised all the menservants. The master of -the house worked hard himself in his field and at various handicrafts, -as we find Ulysses boasting of his expertness both as a ploughman and -mower; he was also a skilled carpenter, having with his own hands built -the chamber of Penelope and constructed a cunningly wrought bedstead[86]. -Hence the amount of help to be required from _male_ slaves, exclusive -of their duties as herdsmen, would be but insignificant. When we come -to deal with the question of _female_ slaves, the conditions of their -number seem at first sight entirely different. The question of polygamy -here comes in, and we must bear in mind that they were acquired not -merely as servants to perform menial duties, but likewise to be wives -and concubines. It is evident then that the number of such attendants -will depend on the inclination and wealth of the house-master. But here -again the problem is simplified, for inasmuch as his wealth consisted in -cattle, a man’s power to purchase handmaidens depended on the amount of -his kine. Thus at the present day the number of women owned by a Zulu -depends entirely on the number of cattle he possesses. Hence there was -likely to be a fairly universal ratio in value between female slaves and -oxen, over such a region as we have sketched above. The facility too -in transporting human chattels from one place to another would be an -important element in keeping the price almost the same over all parts of -the area. It is a very ancient principle with the slave captor and slave -dealer to sell their captives far away from their original home. Among -our Anglo-Saxon forefathers the slave from beyond the sea was always -worth more than a captive from close at hand[87]. The explanation of -this fact was suggested by Dr Cunningham, and the proof of it was found -by Mr Frazer in Further India; for there the slave brought from a great -distance is always more valuable than one who comes only a short way from -his native land, as the possibility of the former’s running away and -succeeding in escaping is so much less than that of the latter. This too -seems to be the true explanation of the fact that in Homer we regularly -find persons sold into slavery beyond the sea. Achilles sold the son -of Priam to Euneos the son of Jason of Lesbos[88], the nurse Eurycleia -had been brought from the mainland, Eumaeus the swineherd had been sold -to Laertes by the Phoenicians who had captured him with his nurse in -his distant home[89]. This constant tendency to sell in one country the -captives taken from another would do much to equalize prices everywhere, -and the price being paid in oxen the ratio in value between oxen and -_female_ as well as _male_ slaves would tend to be constant. - -We have now reviewed the ordinary kinds of wealth amongst primitive -pastoral people, but we have touched but lightly as yet on the subject of -the metals. - -We saw above that the two earliest kinds of currency consisted either -of some article of absolute necessity, such as the skins of animals -in the colder climates, or of some form of personal ornament, which -being both universally esteemed as well as durable and portable will be -readily accepted by all members of the community. It is of pre-eminent -importance that it be universally esteemed. Travellers who have ignored -this principle have found out its truth to their cost in Central Africa -in modern times. As the chief currency consists of glass and porcelain -beads, which the traveller must carry with him or starve, the European is -too apt to assume that provided the beads are bright and gaudy in colour -all sorts will be taken with like readiness by the natives. Sir Richard -Burton in a valuable appendix to his _Lake Regions of Central Africa_ -warns travellers against this dangerous error. The African has his own -firmly rooted canons of aesthetics, and will take as payment only those -sorts of beads which he considers suitable and becoming. Again, some -explorers brought supplies of cheap Birmingham trinkets, thinking that -they would captivate the negro eye, but they proved a complete commercial -failure, for the natives much prefer trinkets and jewellery of their own -manufacture, and which are more in keeping with their standard of good -taste. Again, the Arabs of the Soudan will not take gold as payment, in -consequence of which our army in the late expedition had to take with -them large and inconvenient supplies of silver dollars, coined for the -purpose. The Maria Theresa dollar is the recognised currency in that -region, not because of any notions as regards currency properly speaking, -but because the Arab’s taste lies in silver ornaments for himself, his -weapons and his horse. He values then the silver because of its utility -as an ornament, whilst gold he cannot employ to the same advantage. - -I have thus digressed in order that it may be clearly seen that mankind -were not seized with the _sacra fames auri_ from the very first moment -when the eye of some wild hunter or nomad first lighted on a gold nugget -as it glistened under the sunlight in the stream. - -A considerable period may have elapsed after mankind became acquainted -with gold or silver before man cast away his necklets or bracelets of -shells such as have been found along with the most ancient remains of the -human race yet discovered in Europe, and put on his person in their stead -similar ornaments beaten out of the gold from the brook. It is perfectly -reasonable to assume that the primitive Aryan or primitive Semite, who -wore ornaments of shells, used these as instruments of barter, or even -currency, in the same way as we have found the peoples of Asia and Africa -using their strings of cowries, the aborigines of North America their -wampum belts, and the Fijians their whales’ teeth. - -In what particular region mankind first employed the precious metals to -adorn his person, it is of course impossible for us to say. But beyond -all doubt already in Egypt at the very dawn of history gold was playing -an important part. The question of the relative dates at which the metals -were first employed by man is one of great interest and importance in -studying the history of human development. Of the four chief metals, -gold, silver, copper and iron, we have no difficulty in deciding that -iron is most certainly the latest to come into use. It is only within -historical time that implements and weapons of iron have superseded -those of copper and bronze, at least within the area occupied by the -great civilized races. The reason for this is obvious: iron is not found -native, but must be obtained by a difficult process of smelting, and even -when obtained requires great skill to make it available for use. The -Greeks of the Homeric Poems were still in the later bronze age, although -iron was known and employed for weapons and implements. But as we have no -immediate need to discuss the date of the introduction of iron, we may -pass on to the three remaining metals. - -It is obvious that if a metal is found naturally in such a condition that -it can be immediately wrought into various forms for ornament or utility, -such a metal is likely to have been employed at a much earlier period -than one which is rarely if ever found in a native condition. Now silver -is a metal which is rarely found pure, and considerable metallurgical -skill is needed to render it fit for use. On the other hand gold and -copper are both found in a pure state. We may then on this ground alone -infer that mankind was acquainted with gold and copper before they as yet -had learned the art of working silver ore. It next comes to be a question -of the priority of gold or copper. The probabilities will undoubtedly be -in favour of that metal which is most universally found native, and which -is the most likely by its hue to attract the eye, and which is the most -easily worked. On all these counts gold can claim priority over copper. -Still copper is found native in various countries, Hungary, Saxony, -Sweden, Norway, Spain and Cornwall. - -It is of course quite possible that in a region where gold is not native -and copper is, the latter may have been the first metal known to the -aboriginal inhabitants. This can be well illustrated from the case -of iron and copper in Central Africa. The negroes never had a copper -or bronze age, but passed directly into the iron age, for the very -sufficient reason that no native copper was found in their country, and -consequently they had no metal suited for implements until they had -learned to smelt iron. Gold of course on the other hand was known to them -from the most remote period. Finally, from a famous modern occurrence -we may come to the general conclusion that wherever gold is a natural -product of the soil there it has been the first metal to come under -the observation of man. The great gold-field of California was first -discovered on a memorable Sunday morning, when the eye of a lounger who -was smoking his pipe by the side of Captain Sutter’s millrace happened to -light on some glittering body in the sandy bottom of the stream. This was -the first scrap of gold found in California, and whilst that fertile land -has produced many natural treasures besides gold within the scarcely more -than forty years which have since elapsed, its gold it will be observed -was the earliest of its metals, both from the nature of its deposit and -from the brilliancy of its colour, to attract the attention of man. In -certain parts of Southern Europe, notably parts of Southern Italy and -Southern Greece, where copper is found but not gold, copper perhaps may -have been known before gold, and certainly before silver. It will be -important to bear this in mind with reference to a stage in our future -arguments. - -That silver came under men’s notice at a later time than either gold -or copper can be put beyond doubt by historical evidence. In the Rig -Veda, where gold (_heranya_) is already well known and likewise copper -(for there can be no doubt that the _ayas_ of the Veda, Lat. _aes_, -means copper), silver is entirely unknown; the word _rayatam_, which in -later Sanskrit means silver, does indeed occur, but only as an adjective -applied to a horse and meaning _bright_. Again, we know as a matter of -fact that it was only at a comparatively late period that the famous -silver mines of Laurium in Attica were developed. At least Plutarch -(_Solon_, ch. 16) tells us that, owing to the scarcity of silver coin, -Solon reduced the amount of the fines levied and also of the rewards -for killing a wolf or wolf-cub, the former to five drachms, the latter -to one drachm, the rewards representing the value of a cow and a sheep -respectively. If they had already learned to work that “well of silver, -the treasure-house of their land,” in the time of Solon (596 B.C.), -there certainly could have been no such dearth of silver. Finally let us -take a comparatively modern case, that of the Aztecs of Mexico. When the -Spanish conquerors reckoned up their great tale of treasures found in the -royal palace, whilst the gold amounted to the large sum of _pesos de oro_ -162000 lbs., the silver and silver vessels only weighed the small sum -of 500 marks[90]. Yet this was in the country that is now known as the -richest silver-producing region that the world has ever seen. - -We thus find a people in a highly advanced state of civilization, who had -invented a calendar, had devised a system of picture-writing, who had -actually a currency in gold-dust, as we have found, and who were skilled -and artistic craftsmen in gold, and yet who were scarcely able to make -the slightest use of the silver, with which almost every crevice in their -native hills was charged. - -We may thus with safety rest in the conclusion that silver only comes -into use at a stage always and probably much later than gold. - -We have been thus led to the conclusion that gold is known to man at a -far earlier stage than silver; furthermore that copper is also prior in -discovery and use to silver owing to its natural form of deposit, and -that, although in a region where gold does not exist, copper may have -been the first of the metals to come under human notice, yet wherever -gold-bearing strata are found, there is a great probability that gold -was the first metal known. Schrader (_op. cit._ p. 174) has discussed -the evidence from the Linguistic Palaeontological point of view, and -whilst much of what he says is interesting, there are some points in -his conclusions which shake one’s faith in the infallibility of the -Linguistic method for determining disputed points in archaeology. Gold -he considers was known to the Egyptians from the remotest times, and so -also to the Semites of Asia. As gold is found in abundance in the tombs -of Mycenae (circ. B.C. 1400) he considers that just about that time the -Greeks had acquired a knowledge of gold from the Phoenicians. The Greek -_Chrysos_ (χρυσος), _gold_, is derived, according to many scholars, from -the Phoenician equivalent for _charutz_, the Hebrew name for the same -metal. - -There is plainly no relationship between the Egyptian name _Nub_ and the -Semitic appellation. The question, however, may arise as to whether, -even granting that _chrysos_ is derived from _chârûz_, it follows that -the Greeks had no knowledge of gold prior to their contact with the -Phoenicians. It is the skilful manufacture of a metal into beautiful and -useful articles which gives it its real value. Hence arises the high -esteem in which the cunning workman is held in early times. In Homer -he is ranked along with the _prophet_, a sufficient proof in itself of -the great importance attached to his functions. Again, in the Homeric -Poems all articles of gold and silver of especially fine workmanship, if -they are not the work of the divine smith Hephaestus himself, are the -productions of the Sidonian craftsmen. The priest Maron gave Odysseus, -amongst other presents, seven talents of well-wrought gold. Whether this -took the form simply of rings we cannot tell, but plainly the value of -the gift is enhanced by the epithet. From these considerations it seems -not unreasonable to suppose that the Greeks, although possessing a name -of their own for gold, may have adopted a Phoenician name, because they -obtained the fine-wrought ornaments of that metal which they prized so -highly from the Semite traders. - -If any one thinks that this is a mere suggestion unsupported by analogy, -my answer is not far to seek. The Albanian word for gold is φλjορι[91], -so called because the first coined gold moneys of the middle ages with -which they became acquainted were those of Florence. Now I think Dr -Schrader will hardly maintain that the Albanians were unacquainted -with gold as a metal until sometime in the mediaeval period they first -obtained it from the Florentines. What took place in the case of the -Albanians may have taken place again and again at earlier periods. A rude -nation already acquainted with a certain metal receives by trade from a -more advanced people the same metal wrought into various shapes and forms -for personal decoration or use, and along with the superior articles -it takes over the name by which the makers of those objects of metal -described them. - -These considerations well serve to show how unsafe is the basis afforded -by Linguistic Palaeontology alone on which to build any theory of -ethnical development. Let us now take another case where Schrader and -his followers dogmatize without the slightest suspicion that the facts -of recorded history may step in and rudely upset their conclusions. -Schrader[92] holds that the Kelts were not acquainted with gold until -their invasion of Italy in the beginning of the 4th cent. B.C. His -argument is that the Celtic word for gold (Irish _or_, Cymric _awr_) is -a loan-word from the Latin _aurum_. As the Sabine form of the latter -is _ausum_, and the change of _s_ to _r_ did not take place in Latin -until the fifth century B.C., and as the change of primitive _s_ into -_r_ does not take place in the Keltic languages, he infers that it -was only after the change in the form of the word had taken place in -Latin that the Gauls became acquainted with the metal. Yet who will, on -reflection, maintain that the Gauls had not already learned the use of -gold from the Etruscans with whom they had been in contact long before -they ever reached the Allia or sacked Rome? The Italian dialects were -still employing the form of the word with _s_. Why should the Gauls -have taken the form of the word with which they must have come least in -contact in their invasion of Italy in preference to that used amongst the -other Italians? Finally comes the irresistible evidence of Polybius that -when the Gauls invaded Italy their only possessions consisted of their -cattle and an abundance of gold ornaments, both of which could be easily -transported from place to place[93]. - -Again, we can argue forcibly that it is contrary to all experience for -primitive peoples to suddenly exhibit so strong a predilection for -metals, or objects of which they have not had previous knowledge, as the -Gauls showed in their rapacious demands that the ransom of Rome should -be in gold. The legend that Brennus threw his sword into the scales, and -ordered them to make up its weight in addition to the stipulated sum, -shows, if it is true, that the Gauls were well acquainted with the art -of weighing, which would be only gained from a long knowledge of the -precious metals. The solution of the difficulty involved in the Keltic -_or_ can be readily found. The Iberians in Spain had long been skilled in -the working and use of the precious metals. Tradition told how Colaeus -of Samos, the first of the Greeks who ever sailed to Spain, brought -back a fabulous amount of precious metal, and that the Phoenicians when -they first traded in that region found silver so plentiful that in -their greed for gain, when the ship could hold no more, they replaced -their anchors by others made of that metal. The Phocaeans had traded -with Iberia and Gaul from the end of the 7th century, Massalia had been -founded by this bold people about 600 B.C. Are we to suppose that in -all those centuries when the Kelts are in constant contact with the -Iberians, and when already all Keltike, Helvetia, Northern Italy and even -perhaps ‘the remote Britanni,’ were in constant touch with the traders -of Massalia, the Kelts waited to learn the use of gold and silver until -B.C. 400? The Basque name for gold is _urrea_. It is quite possible that -the Keltic name was obtained from the Iberians, whom they found already -in possession of Western Europe. But there is another alternative which -is probably to be preferred. As we found the Albanians calling gold by -a name derived from the gold coins of Florence, so the Kelts may have -adopted the Latin names for gold used by their Roman conquerors. This is -made almost certain by the fact that _aura_, in old Norse, derived from -Latin _aurum_, became the regular word for treasure, although no one will -deny that the Teutonic peoples had already _gold_ and its cognates as -terms of their own for the metal. Everyone is familiar with the influence -exercised by the Roman coinage even in the countries of the East, where -Rome met with a civilization hoary in age before Romulus founded Rome, -and from which Rome herself had ultimately derived the art of coining. -Yet by the time of Christ the Roman _denarius_, the _penny_ of our -Authorized Version, had already asserted itself in the Greek-speaking -provinces of the East, and became in later days, when the rule of Rome -and Constantinople fell before the Arab conquerors, under the form of -_dinar_, the standard coin of the great Mahomedan Empires. Did then -in like fashion the Roman form of the name for _gold_, which in all -probability varied but little from the cognate Gaulish word, supplant at -a comparatively early period that native form? - -The same argument may be urged in reference to the silver. The Irish -form is _airgid_, according to some a loan-word, being simply the Latin -_argentum_. We have already seen that it is not possible that the Kelts, -in constant contact with the Iberians who were so rich in silver, could -have remained in ignorance of that metal. The Gaulish form of the name -for silver was plainly in Roman times almost the same as the Latin, as is -shown by _Argentoratum_, the ancient name of Strasburg. It is plain then -that before the Roman Conquest the Gauls had a town called by the name -for _silver_, whilst the Irish form has no nasal, the Gaulish coincides -completely with the Latin. Is it not possible, that in this case too a -native Keltic name, a close cognate of Latin _argentum_, whose lineal -descendant is seen in the Irish form, may have been assimilated to the -Latin form? But there is plenty of evidence from other quarters to show -that the mere existence of a foreign name for a particular object in -any language is no proof that the object in question came into use for -the first time along with the borrowing of the name. When the Franks -conquered that portion of the Roman empire to which they gave their name, -they must have had Teutonic words of their own for _silver_ and _gold_, -closely related to our own forms of the words. Yet whilst many Teutonic -words lingered and became absorbed into what became in process of time -the French language, their names for the metals disappeared and the Latin -derivatives remained in possession. - -Again, we get another instance of such borrowing in the case of our -own _penny_, old English _pendinga_, _penning_, German _Pfennig_. The -philologists seem agreed in recognizing this as a loan-word from the -Latin _pecunia_. Yet money was familiar to the northern peoples long -before they ever came into contact with even the advanced posts of the -Empire. The use of rings and spirals of gold as a form of currency in -Scandinavia is well known; our word _shilling_ seems to mean no more -than portions of such a coil of gold or silver wire cut off, to be used -as small change. But as the first coined money with which they became -familiar was the currency of Rome, they seem to have taken the generic -Roman name for money as their own expression for the Roman silver coins -with which they became familiar, just as the Latin _aurum_ under the form -of _aura_ (_eyrir_) became in old Norse the general term for coined money -or treasure in money. - -We may ask why did the Kelts especially choose the Roman form of the name -for gold, if they were then for the first time getting a name for the -substance then (according to Schrader) first known to them? Before they -ever reached Latium they had been in contact with peoples in Northern -Italy who undoubtedly were well acquainted with gold. The Etruscans were -a wealthy people, who coined gold pieces before Rome had struck coins of -any kind[94]. The Umbrians on the east side, the ancient Italic race who -had in the days before the Etruscan Conquest held all Northern Italy up -to the Alps, which was hence known to the earliest Greek geographers by -the name of Ombriké[95], were, beyond all doubt, acquainted with the use -of gold, and had a name for it probably the same as the Sabine _ausum_. -Why then did the Gauls remain entirely ignorant of gold and of a name for -it when they had been in constant contact with those peoples who had most -undoubtedly abundance of the metal and names of their own for it? Until -some sufficient answer is given to the objections here raised, we must -on every logical and scientific ground refuse our assent to an argument, -the sole basis of which is philological. It may not be inappropriate also -here to remark that it is most desirable in all historical enquiries to -rely as little as possible on Etymology. From the days when the Stoics -laid such importance on arguments based on the _originatio verborum_ -down to the present time reasonings based on such foundations have been -as a rule founded on the sand. Comparative Grammar as yet can hardly be -described as a science. New principles and laws are brought to light each -year, and, although of course the solid _residuum_ of what may now be -regarded as more or less positive knowledge is slowly growing in bulk, -those laws which were the shibboleth of Philologists a decade ago, are -now rudely hurled from their preeminence. The only sound scientific -method in historical research is to employ linguistic science as merely -ancillary to our enquiries. - -We have now seen the importance of the ox over the whole area of Europe, -Asia and Northern Africa, in which those ancient peoples dwelt of whom -history has preserved for us some knowledge. We have likewise found -that over the same area gold was known and played an important part -from a very remote antiquity. This proof has depended of course almost -entirely on the literary remains and archaeological evidence. Political -Economists, when discoursing on the oft-vexed question of monetary -standards, lay down as one of the reasons why gold has been found so -convenient, that it is universally found. Whether that fact is of much -importance in modern times, when the facilities of communication are so -great, may perhaps be doubted (especially when we see some of the largest -stocks of gold existing in countries like England and France, where -there has been no production of gold for many years), but most certainly -in early times it was of great importance, as we shall see, that the -supplies of gold were not all concentrated in one or two places, but that -at many points in all the different countries which came within the area -of the ancient world, nature had had her treasure-houses. - -To begin in the East, we shall first find that in all Central Asia there -are rich auriferous deposits in many places. The stories told of the -gold-digging ants and of the Griffins and Arimaspians are familiar to all -readers of Herodotus. That historian (III. 102-5) gives an explanation of -how the Indians are so rich in gold. To the north of India lies a region -desert and waste by reason of sand. Close to this desert dwells an Indian -tribe, who border on the city of Kaspaturos, and the land of Paktuiké, -dwelling to the north of the other Indians, who live in the same manner -as the Bactrians, and are the most valiant of the Indians. These men go -on expeditions in search of gold. In this desert and in the sand are -ants, which are in size smaller than dogs, but larger than foxes. As -these ants make their habitations under ground they carry up the sand -just as the ants in Greece do, and they are very like the latter in -form. But the sand which is carried up is of gold. The Indians then make -expeditions in quest of this sand, each man having yoked three camels. -He then relates how the Indians time their arrival at the ant region so -as to reach the ant-diggings at the hottest time of the day, which in -that region is the early morning. The ants are then not to be seen for -they have returned into their burrows to avoid the heat of the sun. The -Indians hastily fill the sacks they have brought with the precious sand, -and depart with all speed, as the ants from their keen sense of smell -quickly detect their presence, and at once give chase. Their speed is -such that though the camels are as swift as horses, the Indians would -never manage to return in safety, unless they succeed in getting a good -start whilst the ants are still assembling from their various habitations. - -This story has been very ingeniously explained in modern times by Lassen -(_Alt-Ind. Leben_) and others. Lassen pointed out that a kind of gold -brought from a people of Northern India was called _pipilika_ ‘ant’ -(_Mahābhārata_ 2, 1860) and that it was probable that the story referred -to a kind of marmot which to this very day lives in large communities on -the sandy plateaus of Thibet. On the other hand more recent explorations -in Thibet show us that there are still communities of gold-diggers, who -in the rigour of the Himalayan winter clothe themselves in skins and -furs, which are drawn up right over their ears in such a fashion that -they present at first sight the appearance of large shaggy dogs[96]. -Whichever explanation may be right, it may be inferred that from a very -early time the region north of the Panjab afforded vast supplies of gold. -The remark of Herodotus (III. 105) that it was from this source that the -Indians obtained their wealth, and that there was not much gold mined in -their own land, is probably correct. It is beyond all doubt that the gold -of Thibet at all times found its way largely into what is now the Panjab. -We need have little hesitation in believing that from a very remote -epoch the rude tribes of the Himalaya must have been acquainted with the -gold-dust, which lay in rich deposits in the various mountain streams. - -To come towards the west, the great wealth of the Persian kings seems -to have been derived from the basin of the Oxus, which was famous in -antiquity for its golden sands. Thus in the _Book of Marvels_ (a work -ascribed to Aristotle and largely composed of extracts from his writings) -it is stated that the river Oxus in Bactria carries down nuggets of -gold many in number[97]. But the region from which Herodotus thought -that in his time came the greatest supply of gold was the Oural-Altai -region of Central Asia. The Greek Colonies on the northern coast of the -Black Sea, the most important of which was Olbia at the mouth of the -river Borysthenes, had a large and lucrative trade with the Scythians, -who inhabited the wide plains of that bleak region. The Scythians were -rich in gold which they obtained from the still remoter country of the -Issedones, that people who, though righteous in all other respects, had -the singular fashion of devouring their dead fathers. The Issedones -again obtained by barter the gold from the Arimaspians, a race who had -but one eye, and were hardly human[98]. They in turn, so report went, -obtained the precious article not by traffic, but by theft from the -gold-guarding griffins, who occupied the land where the gold was found. -At least Herodotus says, “How the gold is produced I cannot truly tell, -but the story is that the Arimaspians, people with one eye, carry it -off from the Grypes[99].” He describes elsewhere (IV. 17) this region, -which lay beyond the Scythians, where the cold was so great that the -ground was frozen hard for eight months of the year, and that it was even -cold in the summer season, that the air was so full of feathers that -no one could see, by which, as Herodotus very properly explains, the -thick falling feathery flakes of snow were meant, and that the cattle -could not grow horns. All this seems to point beyond all doubt to the -Ural and Altai ranges. Unquestionably there was a well-established trade -route extending from the Black Sea through the country inhabited by the -Scythians proper, which Herodotus describes as consisting of plains of -rich soil, a true description of the fertile steppes of Southern Russia. -Then beyond this lay a large area of rugged, stony land, inhabited by a -people called Argippaei, who, males and females alike, were born bald. -Their territory formed the lower part of a range of lofty mountains. They -were a peaceful and a harmless race, dwelling in tents of white felt in -the winter. It was easy to learn about them and their country from the -Scythian traders who held intercourse with them, as likewise from the -Greeks from the factories of the Borysthenes, and from the other Greek -trading ports on the Euxine. No man could say of a truth what lay to the -north of the “Baldheads,” as on that side rose the lofty, impassable -range of mountains, but Herodotus had heard (but did not believe) that -according to the “Baldheads” a race of men having the feet of goats dwelt -there[100], a legend which may be plausibly rationalized into a simple -statement that a race of mountain-folk, sure-footed as the wild goat, -inhabited the mountains. But on their east the existence of the Issedones -was an established fact. - -It is plain then that from a date lost in the distance of time the -gold of the Ural-Altaic region had been worked and exported, and -that consequently it was known and prized by all the tribes who came -within the influence of this wide district. The Scythians in the fifth -century before Christ were engaged in regular trade with this region, -and possessed abundant store of the prized substance. This is shown by -Herodotus in a very remarkable passage wherein he describes the burial -of a Scythian king. After recounting the ceremonials he thus proceeds: -“In the open space round the body of the king they bury one of his -concubines, first killing her by strangling, and also his cupbearer, -his cook, his groom, his lacquey, his messenger, some of his horses, -firstlings of all his other possessions and some golden cups; for they -use neither silver nor copper[101].” From this passage we learn the -interesting fact that the Scythians, although possessing great quantities -of gold and being able to work it into articles of use, were yet ignorant -of silver and copper, which nevertheless, as we know now, exist in large -deposits in the Ural region. This is one of several cases which we shall -have to notice which go far to prove that the knowledge and working of -gold preceded not only that of silver, but also that of copper. - -The remoteness of the age at which some branch of the Turko-Tartar -family who dwelt in the Altai region, first discovered the treasures -which Nature had stored up there, is evidenced, as Schrader (following -Klaproth) rightly points out (p. 253), by the fact that among all the -branches of that widespread family of languages, from the Osmanli Turks -on the Dardanelles to the remote Samoyedes on the banks of the Lena, -the same word for gold is found in slightly varying forms, _altun_, -_altyn_, _iltyn_, etc., which can hardly be etymologically separated from -_Altai_, the locality from which it first became known in far-off days. -In the ancient graves of the Tschudi in the Altaic districts, have been -found abundance of gold and silver utensils which according to Sjögren -(Schrader 136), exhibit the representation of the Griffin of Greek fable. - -Before passing further west into Europe we shall complete our survey -of the gold-fields of Western Asia. One of the most beautiful of Greek -stories hangs around the eastern end of the Black Sea, where lay the -land of Colchis, the goal which Jason and his fellow Argonauts sought -in their quest of the Golden Fleece. In the Homeric poems the voyage -of the ship Argo is referred to as an event which had taken place in a -past generation. In the time of the geographer Strabo (B.C. 63-A.D. 21) -gold was still found in Colchis in a district occupied by a tribe called -Soanes, scarcely less famous for their personal uncleanliness than their -neighbours the Phtheirophagoi (Lice-eaters) who bore this appellation -from the filthiness of their habits. “It is said that in their country -the mountain torrents bring down gold, and that the barbarians catch -it in troughs perforated with holes, and in skins with the fleece left -on, from which circumstance they say arose the fable of the Golden -Fleece[102].” - -Strabo’s explanation, which seems from his words to have been the current -one in his day, is extremely plausible, and it appears highly probable -that from the first dawn of history the torrent-swept treasures of the -Colchian land were well known to the dwellers in both Asia Minor and -Europe. But this was not the only place in Asia Minor where gold was -found. We shall have occasion again and again to refer to the Electrum of -Sardis, obtained from the sand of the river Pactolus which flowed down -from Mount Tmolus. Scholars are familiar with the account which Herodotus -gives of these gold deposits, but probably the most convenient thing for -our present purpose will be to quote Strabo’s enumeration of the kings -and potentates of antiquity in Asia and Europe who were famous for their -wealth, as he has added in each case the source from which their wealth -was obtained. The current account as given by Callisthenes and others -was, “that the wealth of Tantalus and the Pelopidae was derived from the -mines of Phrygia and Sipylus, whilst the wealth of Cadmus came from the -mines of Thrace and Mount Pangaeum, but that of Priam from the gold-mines -at Astyra in the vicinity of Abydus, of which even now there are still -scanty remnants. But the quantity of earth cast up is vast, and the -diggings are proofs of the ancient mining operations. But the wealth of -Midas came from the mines round Mount Bermion, whilst that of Gyges and -Alyattes and Croesus came from the mines in Lydia. But in the district -between Atarneus and Pergamus there is a deserted city, with places -containing worked-out mines[103].” This passage gives a good picture of -the gold-fields which in ancient days were worked round the shores of the -Aegean. - -In the time of Strabo some of them were already worked out and gave but a -scanty yield, for he says, “above the territory of the people of Abydus -lies in the Troad Astyra, which now belongs to the people of Abydus, a -ruined city, but aforetime it was independent, possessing gold-mines, -now affording but a scanty yield, as they are exhausted, just like the -mines on Mount Tmolus in the neighbourhood of the Pactolus.” The latter -district was still productive in the days of Herodotus, who declared -that the land of Lydia had few marvels to chronicle except the gold-dust -that is borne down from Tmolus[104]. Strabo too, elsewhere[105], when -describing the river system of this part of Asia Minor says, “the -Pactolus flows from Tmolus, carrying down that ancient gold-dust from -which they say that the famous wealth of Croesus and of his ancestors -became renowned. But now the gold-dust has failed, as has been stated.” - -It is interesting to observe that according to tradition the wealth -of Midas, the king of Phrygia, who is perhaps more famous for his -ass’s ears than his riches, came from the Bermion Mount in that part -of Macedonia, which was occupied in historical times by the powerful -tribe of the Bryges. This in itself is an interesting indication of the -intimate connection and close communication between the countries and -peoples on both sides of the Dardanelles from the earliest epoch. There -were on either side lands gifted by nature with stores of wealth, as -well as possessing the portals of either continent. Hence the Hellespont -and Bosphorus have ever been the seat of rich cities, and have ever been -regarded amongst the greatest of prizes in the struggles of the nations. - -It is possible that the ancient legend connecting the wealth of Priam of -Troy with the mines of Astyra, still worked in Strabo’s days, may serve -to explain the real cause of that invasion of the Achaeans, which in all -probability did occur, although on what form or at what time we know not, -and around which there grew in the mouths of the rhapsodists the tale of -Troy Divine. In all our enumeration of gold-mines we do not find a single -one allotted to Greece Proper. The wealth of Cadmus, the old Phoenician -founder of Thebes, who was said to have introduced the art of writing -into Hellas, came, according to Strabo’s tradition, from Thrace and the -mines of Pangaeum. As Cadmus is the typical wealthy potentate of Northern -Greece, so the line of Pelops are the typical wealthy potentates of -Peloponnesus. Their wealth, like that of Cadmus, is adventitious, for it -is the product of the mines of Phrygia and Mount Sipylus. This is quite -consistent with the statement of Thucydides that “those Peloponnesians -who have received the clearest accounts by tradition from the men of -former time declare that Pelops first by means of the mass of wealth -with which he came from Asia to men who were poor, having acquired for -himself power although he was a new-comer, gave occasion for the land to -be called after him.” - -Of the three cities which are called rich in gold by Homer, two are in -Hellas proper, namely Mycenae in Peloponnesus, and the Minyan Orchomenus -in Boeotia. Gold has been found in abundance in the prehistoric tombs -at Mycenae, thus confirming the ancient tradition. This gold, beyond -doubt, was imported from outside Greece, and we may without hesitation -accept the view of the Greeks themselves that it came from Asia Minor. -The story of the wealth of Cadmus, who came to Boeotia as Pelops did -to Peloponnesus is equally in harmony with the Homeric tradition of -a great wealthy city in Boeotia. Dr Schliemann excavated the remains -of Orchomenus, as he did those of Mycenae, and of the ancient city at -Hissarlik, but his labours unfortunately gave no confirmation of the -accounts of the ancient wealth of Orchomenus. The reason probably was -that he came many centuries too late, as the great prehistoric tomb known -as the Treasure-house of the Minyans had long since been repeatedly -plundered and ransacked; not even one bronze plate of those that once -had probably lined its walls was left. Still less likely was it that any -vestige of gold would have escaped the rapacity of the spoiler. - -The wealth of Northern Greece, then, by the earliest tradition is -connected with the rich gold regions of Thrace, which, if we accept -the same tradition, must have been worked from the remotest age. The -connection of the Cadmus legend with this region points clearly to very -early Phoenician trade in the days when as yet the Phoenicians had -undisputed mastery over the Aegean Sea and the Hellenes had not begun to -develop maritime enterprize. - -As a matter of fact the name of the island of Thasos, which lay off the -Thracian shore, was directly ascribed to a Phoenician settler. In the -time of Herodotus the Thasians had a large revenue both from the mines -on the mainland and from those in their own island. For he tells us that -“from the gold-mines of Scapte Hyle they had a revenue on the average of -eighty talents, and from those in Thasos itself a lesser one, but yet so -good that the Thasians enjoyed exemption from taxation on produce and had -a yearly revenue from the mainland and the mines together of two hundred -talents on the average, but when the revenue was at its maximum, it was -three hundred talents. And I myself likewise saw these mines, and by far -the most wonderful were those which the Phoenicians who had colonized the -island along with Thasos had opened up, it was this Phoenician _leader_ -Thasos who gave his name to the island. These Phoenician mines lie in -the part of Thasos between the district of Aenyra and Coenyra; a great -mountain has been upturned in the search[106].” But the most famous -mines on the mainland of Thrace were those of Mount Pangaeum, Crenides, -and Datum. Strabo gives a succinct account of this wealthy district: -“There are other cities round the gulf of the Strymon, as for instance -Myrcinus, Argilus, Drabescus, Datum. The last-named has very excellent -and fruitful land and shipbuilding-yards, and mines of gold, from which -comes the proverb a _Datum of riches_, just like _loads of wealth_.” And -in another passage he says that, “there are very numerous gold-mines at -Crenides[107]. The city of Philippi is now seated close to the Pangaeum -Mount. And the Pangaeum Mount too has mines of gold and silver, and so -has the region both on the other side of and on this side the Strymon as -far as Paeonia. And they say likewise that those who plough the Paeonian -land find some morsels of gold.” - -It was in a struggle with a Thracian tribe, the Edonians, for the -possession of the mines at Datum that Sophanes, the son of Eutychides -of Decelea, who had distinguished himself above all other Athenians at -the battle of Plataea, was killed[108]. The possession of Thasos and -the coast of Thrace was not the least important means by which Athens -held her supremacy in Greece, and when Philip (360-336 B.C.) finally -got supreme control over all this region, and built his new capital of -Philippi, his path of conquest was henceforward made easy by the golden -Philippi, the _regale nomisma_ of Horace, - - Diffidit urbium - Portas uir Macedo, et subruit aemulos - Reges muneribus. - - (_Carm._ III. 16. 13.) - -Passing on now to Southern Asia we find that there gold was found in -Carmania (the modern Kerman) on the Persian Gulf. Strabo states on the -authority of Onesicritus that in Carmania a river carries down gold-dust, -and that there is likewise a mine of dug gold and of silver and of -copper[109]. - -That there was gold in Arabia is placed beyond doubt by various notices -in antiquity. “He shall live and unto him shall be given of the gold of -Sheba (Saba[110]),” says the Psalmist (Ps. lxxii. 13), showing that the -inhabitants of Palestine regarded that country as a source from which the -gold-supply came. - -Strabo and Diodorus give somewhat similar accounts of the gold found -along the Red Sea littoral. The former, describing the land of the -Nomads who live entirely by their camels, which they employ for warfare -and for travelling, and on whose milk and flesh they subsist, says: “a -river flows through their land which carries down gold-dust, but they -have not skill to work it up. Now they are called Debae[111]; some of -them are nomads, others are tillers of the soil. But I do not mention -the numerous names of the tribes on account of their uncertainty and -outlandish pronunciation. Next to them come more civilized men, who -inhabit a more genial soil. For it is well supplied with both river and -rain water. And dug gold is produced in their land, not from dust but -from nuggets of gold, which do not need much refining. The smallest -nuggets are of the size of olive-stones (?) (πυρὴν), the medium-sized -are as big as medlars, and the largest are of the size of chestnuts (?) -(κάρυον). Having perforated these they pass a thread of flax through -them in alternation with transparent stones and make themselves chains, -and put them round their necks and wrists. And they offer their gold for -sale to their neighbours likewise at a cheap rate, giving thrice as much -gold as they get copper in exchange and twice as much gold as they get -silver in exchange, for they have not the skill to work the gold, and the -metals which they receive in exchange are rare in their country and more -necessary for life[112].” - -This is a most interesting and important passage, as it brings us face -to face with primitive peoples in the very earliest stage of the use of -metals. The Nomads do not possess skill enough to work the gold-dust of -their river, although evidently aware of its existence. Their neighbours -being more favoured by the nature of their gold deposit are able to use -the metal in the way in which we may with safety conclude that mankind -everywhere first employed it. Accustomed to use ornaments of shells -made into rude beads, they had no difficulty in adapting for like use -the small lumps of native gold. They readily pierced the soft metal -and making the nuggets into beads used them to form their necklets and -armlets. But although this people had made some progress in the working -of gold, they were incapable of working copper and silver. We shall -have to return to this passage hereafter. Let us now hear Diodorus in -reference to the same region. - -He speaks of it in two separate places in his Collections, first in his -Second Book, when giving a brief general statement of Arabia and its -natural products, and again in the Third Book, when he is giving a more -detailed account of the tribes who dwelt along the shores of the Red Sea -or, as he called it, the Arabian Gulf. - -The first passage runs thus (he has just been describing certain -quarries): “There are mines in Arabia likewise of the gold that is termed -‘fireless.’ It is not refined down from gold-dust as in other countries, -but it is obtained straightway on being dug up in size like unto -chestnuts, and so fiery in colour that the most precious stones when set -in it by the craftsmen make the most lovely of ornaments. And so great -abundance of all sorts of cattle is found in the country that many tribes -having chosen a pastoral life are able to get a comfortable subsistence, -and being completely furnished with the plenteousness derived from -their herds, they even have no need of corn in addition[113].” In his -second reference, after describing the hill district, where lay the -Mount Chabinus, densely clad with forests of all kinds of trees he says: -“The land which comes next to the mountain region those Arabs called -Debae inhabit. Now these people are camel-keepers and make use of this -animal for all the most important affairs in life. For from them, they -fight against their enemies and conveying their wares on the backs -of these effect successfully all their business, and they subsist by -drinking their milk, and they range over the whole region on their fleet -camels. Now about midway in their land flows a river which brings down -so much shining gold-dust that the alluvial mud deposited at its mouth -positively glitters. Now the natives are completely unskilled in the -working of the gold, but they are hospitable to strangers, not to all -comers, but to those alone who come from Boeotia[114] and Peloponnesus -because of a certain ancient affinity of Heracles with their nation, a -tradition of which in legendary fashion they relate they have received -from their forefathers. The next region is settled by the Alilaean and -Gasandan Arabs, not being torrid, like those near it, inasmuch as it is -often overcast with soft dense clouds, and from these arise snowstorms -and seasonable rains which make the summer season temperate. And the -land is capable of producing everything and surpasses in excellence, yet -it does not meet with proper attention, owing to the ignorance of the -folk. And finding gold in the natural cavities in the earth they collect -it in quantities, not that which is obtained by fusion from gold-dust, -but that which is native and from the circumstance called ‘fireless.’ -And as to size the smallest piece found is similar to an olive-stone, -whilst the largest is not much less than a walnut. And they wear it round -their wrists and necks when it is perforated, the nuggets alternating -with transparent stones. But since this kind of metal is plentiful with -them, but copper and iron are scarce, they barter these wares with the -traders at an equal rate[115].” Strabo probably got his information from -Artemidorus, who is his chief authority for everything connected with the -Red Sea. Diodorus, whose authority is Agatharchides, substantially agrees -with Strabo in all the main facts, such as the name of the tribe who -cannot work up the gold-dust, whilst he adds the names of the Alilaeans -and Gasandans, which are not given by Strabo[116]. - -From Arabia we naturally pass on to Egypt. We have already seen that -the archaeologists assign reasons for supposing that the Egyptians were -acquainted with gold from the remotest ages. The Egyptian word for gold -is _nub_, from which the name Nubia, _i.e._ _El Dorado_, is commonly -derived. Having fresh in our minds the interesting fact noticed above (p. -69) that the universal word for gold in use amongst the Turko-Tartaric -races is probably derived from the Altai, the source from which they -first got the metal, we are tempted to reverse the ordinary doctrine, and -to derive the Egyptian name for gold from that of the region whence they -first obtained it. The principle of naming products after the region or -place from which they have been first brought is too well known to need -illustration. Instances are familiar in all languages: _Cappadocae_, -the Latin name for lettuce; _Persica_ from which has come our _peach_, -through the French; Indian corn, india-rubber, etc. are sufficient -examples. The negroes of Eastern Africa call a certain kind of cloth -_Merikano_, _i.e._ American. Perhaps, then, the name _nub_ is rather a -word of this class, and Nubia is not like Gold Coast, which belongs to -the category of names formed by epithets applied in consequence of some -article already well known having been found there. - -Strabo (p. 821), describing Meroe, that large and fertile island formed -by the Nile, says: “the island has many great mountains, and some of -its inhabitants are shepherds, some hunters, and some husbandmen. And -there are likewise copper-diggings and iron-works, and gold-mines, and -varieties of valuable marbles. It is shut off from Libya by great sands, -from Arabia by unbroken heights, and from the upper region from the south -by the junctions of the rivers, Astaboras, Astapus, and Astasobus. On -the north the Nile flows all the way to Egypt in that tortuous fashion -which I have described.” This island virtually coincides with the modern -province of Atbar. It is probably to this same region that Diodorus -refers in his famous description of the Egyptian gold-mining. Although -the passage is one of considerable length, it is of such interest and -importance that it is perhaps advisable to give it in full: “On the -confines of Egypt, Arabia which marches with it, and Ethiopia is a spot -possessed of many great mines of gold, where the gold is got together -with much suffering and expense. Since the earth is black and has -lodes and veins of quartz of surpassing whiteness, and which excel in -brilliancy all those natural objects which are noted for their lustre, -those who are in charge of the mining works by the numbers of the -labourers prepare the gold. For the kings of Egypt collect together and -consign to the gold-mines those who have been condemned for crime, and -who have been made captive in war, and furthermore those who have been -ruined by false slanders, and who owing to an outburst of anger have been -cast into prison, sometimes only themselves, but sometimes likewise with -all their kindred, at one and the same time both exacting punishment from -those who have been condemned, and obtaining great revenues by means -of those who are engaged in the labour. Those who have been consigned -to the mines, being many in number and all bound with fetters, toil at -their tasks continuously both by day and all night long, getting no -rest, and jealously kept from all escape. For guards composed of foreign -soldiers, and who speak languages which differ from theirs, are set over -them, so that no one is able by association or any kindly intercourse to -corrupt any one of the warders. The hardest of the earth which contains -the gold they burn with a good deal of fire, and make soft, and work it -with their hands, but the soft rock and that which can easily yield to -stone chisels or iron is worked down by thousands of hapless beings. And -the craftsman who distinguishes the stone takes the lead in the whole -process, and he gives instructions to the workmen. And of those who have -been appointed to this misery those who surpass in bodily strength cut -with iron pickaxes the glittering rock, not by bringing skill to bear -upon their tasks, but by mere brute force, and they hew out galleries, -not in a straight line, but according to the vein of the glittering rock. -They then living in darkness owing to the bends and twists in the pits -carry about lamps fitted on their foreheads, and changing in many ways -the posture of their bodies according to the peculiarity of the rock -throw down on the floor the fragments that are being hewn, and this they -do unceasingly under the severity and stripes of an overseer. But the -boys who have not yet reached manhood going in through the shafts into -the excavations in the rock, laboriously cast up the rock that is being -thrown down bit by bit, and convey it to the place outside the mouth of -the shaft into the light. But the men who are more than thirty years old -take a fixed measure of the quarried stone, and pound it in stone mortars -with iron pestles until they reduce it to the size of a vetch. From these -the women and older men receive the stone now reduced to pieces the size -of a vetch, and as there is a considerable number of mills there in a -row, they cast the stone upon them, they stand beside them at the handle -in threes or twos, they grind until they have reduced the measure given -them to the fineness of wheaten flour. And since they are all regardless -of their persons, and have not a garment to cover their nakedness, no -one who saw them could refrain from pitying the hapless creatures owing -to their excessive misery. For there is absolutely no consideration nor -relaxation for sick, or maimed, for aged man, or weak woman, but all are -forced to toil on at their tasks until, worn out by their miseries, they -die amid their toils. Wherefore the unhappy beings regard the future as -more to be dreaded than the present owing to the excess of punishment, -and expect death as more to be longed for than life. - -“But finally the craftsmen get the ground-up stone, and complete the -process. For they rub the ground-up quartz on a broad board placed on a -slight incline, pouring water on it. Then the earthy part of it, melting -away by the action of the liquid, flows down along the sloping board, -but the part that contains the gold adheres to the board owing to its -weight. Repeating this process frequently at first with their hands they -gently rub it, but after this pressing it lightly with delicate sponges -they take up by these means the soft and earthy part until the gold-dust -is left in a state of purity. - -“Finally other craftsmen, taking over the collected gold by measure and -weight, put it into earthenware pots, and in proportion to the amount -they put in a piece of lead and lumps of salt and furthermore a small -quantity of tin, and they add barley bran. Then having made a well-fitted -cover and having laboriously smeared it over with mud, they bake it in -kilns for five days and as many nights continuously. Then after letting -it cool, they find none of the other things in the vessels, but get the -gold in a pure state with but a slight reduction in quantity. With so -many and so great sufferings is the production of gold at the frontiers -of Egypt completed. For Nature herself makes it plain, I think, that -gold is produced with toil, is guarded with difficulty, is most eagerly -sought for, and is enjoyed with mixed pleasure and pain. The discovery of -these mines is of very ancient date, inasmuch as it was made known by the -ancient kings[117].” - -Such then is the vivid picture drawn by the humane Diodorus of the -horrible torments of the unhappy bondsmen who worked these famous mines, -sufferings only to be paralleled by the miseries endured by the miners -in Spain under Roman rule, by the Indians in the mines of Peru under -the yoke of the Spaniard, and by the helpless sufferers under Muscovite -cruelty who at this hour endure a living death in the mines of Siberia. - -For our immediate purpose it is interesting to notice that the Egyptians -from a far back time obtained an abundant supply of gold from the -confines of their own territory, and doubtless drew a further supply from -those rich gold districts along the Red Sea of which we have just spoken. - -Whilst in the latter case we had a most instructive instance of the -first attempts to utilize the metals made by men, so in the case of -Egypt we find an example of the most elaborate and scientific process of -gold-mining known to the ancients. For we shall find that the process -employed in Spain by the Romans for refining the crude gold was not -nearly so elaborate as that employed by the Egyptians. - -It is of course quite possible that supplies of gold either in the form -of dust or of rings may have reached Egypt from the interior of Africa, -but of that we have not as far as I am aware any historical record. For -the negroes who are depicted in Egyptian paintings bringing tribute of -gold rings might have brought them from Nubia or from a region on the -coast of the Mediterranean further west. It is indeed a fact of great -interest that down to the present day gold in the shape of rings or links -is brought to Massowah on the Red Sea from Sennaar (Nubia). This is the -best of the three qualities which reach Massowah; the second quality is -Abyssinian gold, “in grains or beads,” and the third is also Abyssinian -gold “in ingots.” Thus two most ancient ways of using gold are employed -in this region still, for the gold in grains or beads reminds us at once -of the story of its being employed by the Debae to form necklaces[118]. - -Once more let us advance westward, and notice the last gold-field on the -continent of Africa. That gold was obtained by the Carthaginians from a -district in North Africa is put beyond doubt by a passage of Herodotus -(IV. 195), who, after describing a certain people called the Gyzantes, -who coloured themselves red with raddle, and ate apes, says that “the -Carthaginians declare that opposite this people lies an island named -Cyraunis, two hundred stades long (25 miles) but narrow in breadth, with -a crossing from the mainland; the island is full of olives and vines, and -there is a lake in it from which the native maidens by means of birds’ -feathers smeared with pitch take up gold dust out of the silt.” Whatever -may be the exact spot meant on the coast of the Libyan nomads we may at -least conclude that there is a distinct indication that the Carthaginians -were well acquainted with gold deposits in this quarter. Whether or not -the Carthaginians and in later times the Romans may have obtained by -caravans across the desert supplies of gold from the great gold-bearing -regions of West Africa, we have no means of judging, but it is on the -whole probable that they did. The voyage of Hanno, the Carthaginian -admiral, along the western side of Africa can hardly have failed to make -known to them the existence of rich gold fields, even if they had been -previously ignorant of them; but it is still more likely that it was -the knowledge of such an Eldorado far away beyond the great Sahara that -induced them to send out the expedition. - -It has often happened in the history of both ancient and modern commerce -that the products of a certain region are known long before travellers -or merchants from civilized lands have ever reached the country that -produces them. Thus the merchants of Marseilles were probably familiar -with the tin brought from Devon and Cornwall across Gaul before the -famous Pytheas ever coasted round Spain and Gaul and visited our shores. -Again, in modern times, it is only within the last thirty years that -the source of that most familiar of drugs, Turkey rhubarb, has been -discovered. - -By whatever means they may have learned its existence the following -passage of Herodotus (IV. 196) puts it beyond all doubt that the -Carthaginians in the fifth century B.C. traded by sea for gold to the -west coast of Africa, and that consequently the savages of that region -must have been long acquainted with the metal: “The Carthaginians,” he -says, “also relate the following: there is a country in Libya and a -nation beyond the Pillars of Heracles, which they are wont to visit, -where they no sooner arrive than forthwith they unlade their wares, and -having disposed them after an orderly fashion along the beach, leave them -and returning aboard their ships, raise a great smoke. The natives, when -they see the smoke, come down to the shore, and laying out to view so -much gold as they think the worth of the wares, withdraw to a distance. -The Carthaginians upon this come ashore and look; if they think the gold -enough, they take it and go their way, but if it does not seem to them -sufficient, they go aboard once more and wait patiently. Then the others -approach and add to their gold, till the Carthaginians are content. -Neither party deals unfairly with the other, for they themselves never -touch the gold until it comes up to the worth of the goods, nor do the -natives ever carry off the goods till the gold is taken away[119].” - -Let us now retrace our steps to Europe and take up our investigation at -the point from which we diverged into Asia. We found Thrace and Thasos to -have been for many ages an inexhaustible source of gold. We must now pass -on from the Balkan peninsula to the Italian. - -Although according to Helbig (_Die Italiker in der Poebene_, p. 21) no -traces of gold have as yet been found in the lake-dwellings of Northern -Italy, which were erected and occupied by the Umbrians, who occupied -all that region until conquered by the Etruscans[120], we cannot take -this negative evidence as at all conclusive proof that the inhabitants -of these dwellings were utterly ignorant of gold and its use. Helbig -has shown that the inhabitants of the lake-dwellings were in the bronze -age at the time of the Etruscan conquest, which can be hardly placed -later than B.C. 1100. Bronze implements are found in the remains. But -as a matter of fact ornaments of gold are not generally found in the -ruins of the habitations of the living, but rather in the tombs of the -dead. That certainly has been the case at Mycenae, at Spata, on Mount -Hymettus in Attica, in the island of Thera, and at Ialysus in Rhodes. -Contrast the wealth of gold ornaments found in the tombs at Mycenae with -the complete absence of that metal in the palace at Tiryns. Of course -it may be urged on the other side that at Hissarlik amid the ruins of -a burnt city great treasure in gold and silver has been found, and we -must undoubtedly admit that in certain cases such as that of a city -suddenly destroyed by a fire before there was time either for the owners -to remove or the enemy to pillage the valuables therein, there is the -possibility of finding such remains. If we were to apply this negative -method consistently we must conclude that Orchomenus, which Homer called -“rich in gold,” was inhabited by men who were not yet acquainted with -that metal, and we should I believe be constrained to arrive at the same -conclusion in the case of Nineveh and Babylon. At least Sir Henry Layard -discovered scarcely a fragment of any articles of gold in the course of -his excavations on the site of those two cities, which nevertheless we -have the strongest grounds for believing were amongst the wealthiest of -those of ancient days. In dealing with the question of Northern Italy we -cannot separate it from the contiguous region of Switzerland or Helvetia. -Dr Keller, in his well-known work on the Lake-dwellings (p. 459), gives -instances where gold has been found in lake-dwellings amongst remains -that indicated the owners to have been in the bronze period. Of course it -may be said and said with truth that the lake-dwellings of Switzerland -continued to be occupied down to a time posterior to those found in -the Aemilia. But when we find that a gold ornament has been found in a -dwelling of neolithic age, we have a positive proof not simply of the -knowledge, but probably of the skill requisite to manufacture the metal. -If any upholder of the negative method urges that gold has been found -very sparingly in these lacustrine dwellings, let him remember that the -existence of one single object of gold in these remains is sufficient to -demolish all his argument. The objects found in the lakes are chiefly -débris, the offal of the house, bones of animals, which had formed the -food of the former owners, broken and disused implements, and such like. -Ornaments of gold were not likely to have been flung into the bottom of -the lake for the purpose of getting rid of them. Such precious articles -were probably handed down with great care from generation to generation, -and possibly in later days gold that once graced the neck or arms of -prehistoric men and women has reappeared time after time in the form of -coins, first the rude imitations of the staters of Philip of Macedon, -again under the form of Roman _aurei_, and perhaps even bore the impress -of some mediaeval monarch at a later time. There have been issues of -coins both in ancient and modern times of which not a single specimen -is at present known; yet if any one were to argue from this against the -truth of the documentary evidence, the spade of a peasant by turning up a -single coin might on the moment wreck all his logic. The sum of positive -knowledge which we obtain from this discussion is therefore that some -people who inhabited Switzerland in what is called the neolithic age (a -vague and often misleading phrase) were acquainted with the use of gold -ornaments. Could we but fix the inferior limits of this neolithic age, we -should at least obtain an approximate date before which gold was already -known. But it is most probable that stone, bronze and even iron long -continued to be used side by side in the same areas. The man who had no -articles to barter for bronze continued to use stone implements of his -own manufacture, whilst his more fortunate coeval used weapons made of -the superior but more costly material. - -Granting now that bronze implements made their way from the Mediterranean -into the middle and north of Europe, brought most likely by traders from -the more civilized shores of the Aegean, let us ask ourselves how did the -men of the neolithic stage obtain them. Did the kindly Phoenician trader -generously bestow as free gifts these articles on the barbarians of the -West? Does the trader of today among the isles of Melanesia lavish for -mere thanks his wares upon the natives who gather round him on the beach? -In Homer those Phoenician shipmen are described by an epithet, which by -the mildest interpretation means _knaves_. The men who brought bronze got -some valuable objects in exchange for it. Such objects must be portable: -slaves, gold, silver, copper, tin, skins and furs would probably form -the main objects of barter. If we make use of the philological method -of Schrader and his school, there can be no doubt that copper was known -to the Italians before ever a Phoenician keel grated against their -shores, for the Latin _aes_ is as we said a true Aryan word. There is no -suspicion of borrowing here from the Semitic as there is in the case of -the Greek _chalkos_. In such a case as this the philological argument -has some distinct force; for whilst, as I argued, it is easy to realize -a state of things under which a native name for a particular substance -already known may give place to a foreign one, on the other hand it is -difficult to see how a people who are receiving such a substance for -the first time from foreigners, and who would therefore naturally apply -to it a term obtained from the foreigners’ language, could afterwards -replace this name by one which is found applied to the same substance by -a cognate people dwelling thousands of miles away from them. The Italians -therefore probably had copper from a very early age. But we have already -seen good reason for believing that a knowledge of gold precedes that -of copper whenever both are found in the same area. We saw that the -Scythians, who got copious store of gold from the Ural-Altai region, made -no use of copper in the fifth century before our era, although copper -is found abundantly in the same area. From this we may infer with some -probability that the Italian stock were acquainted with gold sooner than -with copper. We may apply the same argument to gold in Italy as we did to -_copper_. _Aurum_ (older _ausum_), the Latin word for gold, is plainly -not borrowed, as is perhaps the Greek _chrysos_, from the Semites. Hence -it cannot be maintained that it was only with the Phoenicians that the -knowledge of gold reached Italy. - -It now only remains for us to see if the Italians had the means within -their reach of discovering gold. No one I suppose will dispute that the -Italian stock entered the peninsula from the north, driving before them -older occupants. They must then have either entered Italy by the head -of the Adriatic, coming round from the valleys of the Balkan peninsula, -or through the Alpine passes. If they came from the first quarter it is -impossible to suppose that a people in close contact with the tribes who -occupied the Balkan peninsula, and who as we have seen above must have -been acquainted with gold from a remote time, could have remained without -a knowledge of the metal. On the other hand it will be seen from the -following evidence that there was every opportunity for the discovery -of gold in the Alpine valleys. Strabo gives various notices of the gold -workings of this region. “Polybius states that in his own day in the -vicinity of Aquileia, in the territory of the Taurisci of Noricum, was -found a gold mine so productive that on clearing away the surface dirt -to a depth of two feet gold which could be dug was straightway found, -and that the pit did not exceed fifteen feet, and that part of the -gold was pure on the spot, being the size of a bean or a lupin, only -one-eighth being lost in refining, whilst some of it required a process -of smelting which, though more elaborate, was still very remunerative. -When the Italians worked them along with the barbarians for a space of -two months, straightway gold coin went down one-third in value throughout -the whole of Italy; but when the Taurisci became aware of this they -expelled their partners and held the monopoly. But now all the gold mines -are in the hands of the Romans. And there too, just as in Iberia, the -rivers in addition to the dug gold produce gold dust, but not in such -quantities[121].” - -In another passage, speaking of the town of Noreia in Noricum, he says -“this district possesses productive gold-washings and iron-works[122].” - -Moving on again westwards, we easily find strong evidence of active -gold-mining in the Alpine regions. All the granite strata on the southern -side of the High Alps from the Simplon to Mont Blanc are auriferous. -Not only have extensive mining operations been carried on at different -points down almost to the present day, but the mines were beyond all -doubt vigorously worked, not merely in Roman but in pre-Roman days. -In the district of La Besse, at the foot of Mont Grand on the right -bank of the Cervo between Biella and Ivrea, are still to be seen very -extensive traces of gold washings and gold diggings[123]. These are no -other than the once famous mines of Victumulae alluded to by Strabo -when, in speaking of this region, he says that “there is not now as -much attention bestowed on the mines as there used to be, because the -mines in the country of the transalpine Kelts and in Spain are more -profitable, but formerly they were well worked, since at Vercelli there -was a gold-digging. Vercelli is a village near Ictumulae which is itself -a village, and both of them are in the vicinity of Placentia[124].” So -important were these mines that Pliny[125] says there existed a Censorian -law relating to them, by which it was provided that the capitalists who -farmed the mines were not to employ more than 5000 workmen. - -There are also traces of ancient gold-washings on the Cervo, on the -Evenson, a small stream which comes down from Monte Rosa, and which falls -into the Doria at Bardo, and likewise on the Doria itself from Bardo -down to its junction with the Po. This latter region was anciently the -territory of the powerful and wealthy tribe of the Salassi. The traces -I speak of are beyond doubt the remains of the gold-workings described -by Strabo. “The territory of the Salassi contains gold mines, which the -Salassi, when aforetime they were strong, kept possession of, just as -they had likewise the control of the passes (_i.e._ the Great and Little -St Bernard). The river Durias (Doria) gave them very great assistance in -their gold washing, and on this account dividing over many places the -water into many side-channels they used to empty completely the main bed -of the river. - -“This was of service to them in their quest of gold, but it did harm to -the cultivators of the plains below, who were being deprived of the means -of irrigation, since the river was not able to water their land from the -others having possession of the stream in its upper course. From this -cause there were incessant wars between the two peoples. But when the -Romans got the mastery the Salassi were expelled from the gold-mines and -from their territory, but still being in possession of the mountain, they -used to sell the water to the farmers who had hired the gold-mines, and -with whom there were constant quarrels because of the grasping conduct -of the contractors[126].” This passage shows plainly that for a very -long period before the Roman Conquest the Salassi had not merely worked -the gold of their mountains, but had attained to very considerable -engineering skill in so doing. Further, in this region have been found -gold coins bearing the inscriptions _Prikou_, etc. in one of the North -Etruscan alphabets. These coins were most probably struck by the Salassi, -who were probably not Kelts, but a remnant of the ancient Rhaetian -stock[127]. - -Passing northwards by the Pennine Alps, the regular road in ancient days -from Italy into Switzerland, into the valley of the Rhone, the so-called -_Vallis Poenina_, the modern Canton of Valais, we come to the Helvetii, -whom Posidonius of Apamea, the famous Stoic philosopher who travelled -in Western Europe about 100-90 B.C., describes as “wealthy in gold.” -This gold was probably derived from the same Alpine region. The Helvetii -struck both silver coins in imitation of the silver coins of Massalia -with the Lion type, and gold ones after the type of Philip’s staters. -We may now pass on to Gaul Proper, many peoples of which were famous -for their wealth, especially the Arverni, who have left their name in -Auvergne, and the Tectosages, whose chief town was Tolosa (Toulouse). -The former, whose original home was on the upper waters of the Loire, -probably had no gold in their native mountains (for if they had, Strabo -would hardly have failed to mention it), but in the second century B.C. -they became the most powerful state of Central and Southern Gaul, for -“they extended their dominion even as far as Narbo (Narbonne) and the -borders of the territory of Massalia (Marseilles), and they likewise -had the control of all the tribes as far as the Pyrenees, and as far -as the Ocean and the Rhine. And it is said that Luerius, the father of -Bituitus, who fought against Maximus and Domitius (121 B.C.), came to -such a pitch of wealth and luxury that on one occasion, making a display -of his riches to his friends, he drove on a waggon through a plain -sowing broadcast gold and silver coin, while his friends followed him -gathering it up[128].” It was the Arverni who first[129] struck gold -coins in imitation of the gold staters of Philip II., a fact explained -by the passage just quoted, which shows that their empire extended up -to the frontiers of the great Greek emporium of Massalia, by which they -would be brought into immediate contact with all kinds of Greek currency; -furthermore their conquests put them in possession of those districts -where we have direct evidence of the existence of gold fields[130]. - -Again Strabo says: “The Tectosages adjoin the Pyrenees, and to a slight -extent they likewise touch upon the northern side of the Cevennes -(Κέμμενα), and they occupy a land rich in gold[131].” It is no doubt -with reference to the same region that Strabo, whilst describing the -Spanish gold-mines, remarks incidentally that “the Gauls advance the -claims of the mines in their country, both those in the Cevenne mountain -and at the foot of the Pyrenees, themselves[132].” Beyond doubt from -those mines came “the gold of Tolosa,” those vast treasures which were -plundered by the Roman General Caepio. They were said to have amounted -to fifteen thousand talents of unwrought gold and silver. There was a -current story that, for laying sacrilegious hands on the consecrated -treasure, misfortune dogged the steps of Caepio and his family, he -himself dying in exile and his daughters, after lives of degradation, -coming to a shameful end. This was the account given by one Timagenes, -who also stated that the treasure of Toulouse was part of the spoil taken -by the Gauls from the temple of Delphi in 279 B.C., the Tectosages as he -alleged having formed part of the invading host. This story doubtless -is due to the circumstance that one of the three tribes of Gauls who -settled in Asia Minor (the “foolish Galatians” of St Paul’s Epistle) was -called by the same name as the Tectosages of Gaul (the other two being -called Trocmi and Tolistobōgii). The treasures were partly stored in -shrines or sacred enclosures, partly deposited in the sacred lakes. There -can be little doubt that Posidonius was right (as Strabo also thought) -in considering them ancient native offerings, not spoils of war. He -put forward the good argument that at the time of the attack on Delphi -the temple there was bare of treasure, as it had been plundered by the -Phocians in the Sacred War some seventy years before, that any treasure -that remained was distributed among many, and that it was not likely that -any of the Gauls returned to their own land, since after their retreat -from Greece they broke up and were scattered into various regions. This -is confirmed by what Diodorus tells us in a remarkable chapter: “The -Kelts of the interior have a singular peculiarity with respect to the -sacred enclosures of the gods. For in the temples and sacred enclosures -consecrated in their country gold is deposited in quantities, and not one -of the natives touches it owing to superstition, although the Kelts are -excessively avaricious[133].” This passage seems to explain thoroughly -the real nature of the treasures of Tolosa; they were doubtless ancient -votive offerings under a taboo, not, as Timagenes imagined, some of -the treasure of Delphi, dedicated to appease the wrath of Apollo, with -additions from the private resources of the Tectosages themselves. In -the same chapter Diodorus says that “there is no silver at all found in -Gaul, but gold in abundance, of which the natives get supplied without -mining or hardship. The currents of the rivers, which are tortuous in -their course, beat against the banks formed by the adjacent mountains, -and bursting away considerable hills, fill them with gold dust. This the -persons who are engaged in the workings collect, and they grind or break -up the lumps which contain the gold dust. Then having washed away the -earthy part with water, they transfer the gold to furnaces for smelting. -In this fashion heaping up quantities of gold, not only the women but -likewise the men employ it for adornment. For they wear bracelets round -their wrists and arms, and thick torques of solid gold round their necks -and rings of remarkable size, and moreover breastplates of gold.” The -statement regarding silver is not accurate, as the more careful and -trustworthy Strabo mentions silver mines in various places in Gaul. -Finally, in the land of the Tarbelli, an Iberian tribe of Aquitania, -who dwelt in the extreme south-west corner of Aquitania on the shore of -the Bay of Biscay, there were extremely productive gold-mines. “For in -spots dug only to a shallow depth are found plates of gold that sometimes -require little refining, and the rest consists of dust and nuggets which -involve but little working[134].” - -I have purposely gone somewhat minutely into the gold-fields of ancient -Gaul, and the story of the sacred treasures. For I think that no one who -considers carefully the statements of Posidonius, Strabo, and Diodorus, -can help regarding as wholly inaccurate the conclusion of Schrader, based -on the Irish word _or_, that the Keltic peoples were not acquainted -with gold until the fourth century B.C. The sacred treasures point to a -ceremonial consecration of gold extending back through untold ages. - -[Illustration: FIG. 14. ANCIENT BRITISH COINS. - -A. Coin of Iceni. - -B. Common type with plain obverse[135].] - -It must also be borne in mind that in the treasure of Tolosa there was -a good proportion of silver which probably came from the silver mines -mentioned by Strabo[136] as existing in the land of the Ruteni and -Gabales (Γαβάλεις), two peoples of Aquitania, whose names are represented -by the modern _Rovergue_ and _Gevaudan_. As the working of silver is -so much later than that of gold, it is impossible to believe that if -the Gauls in Italy only learnt the use of gold in the 4th century B.C. -we should find consecrated treasures of silver, evidently of ancient -date, at Tolosa in the time of Servilius Caepio. It is also important -to observe that it is among the Iberians of Aquitania, not the Kelts, -that we find silver mines being worked. The former people were entirely -free from Roman influence, and we shall see shortly that there is the -strongest evidence for believing that the Iberians south of the Pyrenees -were acquainted not merely with gold but with silver, centuries before -ever Brennus stood in the Roman Forum. But before we cross the Pyrenees, -we shall conclude our survey of the ancient gold fields of Europe in the -north-west by glancing briefly at Britain. When Julius Caesar invaded -the island he found the natives using gold not simply as ornaments, but -in the shape of coins, for he says, “They have great numbers of cattle, -they use for money either bronze, or coins of gold, or rods of iron of -a fixed standard of weight. Tin is produced there in the inland, iron -in the coast districts, but the supply of the latter is scanty; the -copper which they use is imported[137].” Caesar’s statement is fully -confirmed by the existence of ancient British coins, chiefly in gold -and copper; although silver coins are likewise found, they are for the -most part imitations of the types of Roman denarii, whilst the gold are -the descendants of the Philippus, from which the Gauls got their chief -gold type. All the Britains did not employ coins, but only the Belgic -tribes in the south and east, who had crossed over at a comparatively -late period. About a century before our era a king of the Suessiones -(_Soissons_) by name Divitiacus ruled over all Northern France and a -large part of Britain[138]. Coins similar in type and weight are found -on both sides of the Channel, indeed the French numismatists claim them -as struck in Gaul, whilst their English brethren have maintained that -they are of British origin. Those found in Kent are regarded by Dr Evans, -in his _Coins of the Ancient Britons_, as the prototypes of the whole -British series. Hence we may infer that the Belgic invaders brought the -Philippus type of coin into Britain, as it is most probable that the time -when the same coins were in circulation on both sides of the Straits of -Dover corresponds with the period when Divitiacus held sway on both sides -of the sea[139]. Strabo substantiates Caesar’s account; “It (Britain) -produces wheat and cattle, and gold and silver and iron. These are -exported from it, also hides and slaves and good hunting dogs. But the -Kelts employ even for their wars these, and their own native dogs[140].” - -There can therefore be no doubt that gold was found in Britain although -we are not told in what particular part. Gold is still found in Wales -and in several parts of Scotland, although not in sufficient quantity to -be worth working. Two observations remain to be made on the statements -of Caesar and Strabo. Caesar tells us definitely that whilst they used -copper as money, they had to import that metal. He omits all mention of -silver, whilst Strabo, writing half-a-century later, speaks of it as a -British product. I have remarked already that the silver coins of the -Britons are all late, and exhibit as a rule Roman influence. It would -therefore seem as if the working of silver had developed some time after -Caesar’s invasions. Thus once more we have an instance of gold in full -use long before silver. But what is still more important, though the -Britons are in the bronze period and are actually using copper money, -they have to import that metal, although copper is actually found native -in Cornwall. It still remained undiscovered in Strabo’s time to judge by -his silence, but as he is equally silent about tin, which was known long -before, we cannot press the argument _ex silentio_. However, it is of -great importance to find a people who possess gold and copper in a native -state, already working the gold long before they have even discovered -the copper. This is completely in harmony with what we have already seen -in the case of the Scythians and Arabs of the Red Sea coasts. At a later -stage we shall have to notice the rods or bars of iron used as currency -by the Britons in connection with a similar practice elsewhere. - -The writers of the classical age have left us no information respecting -Ireland save that the people practised polyandry, and ate each -other[141]. Nevertheless there is abundant evidence to show that there -were large deposits of gold on the east side of Ireland, in the Wicklow -Mountains, and that the natives from a very early period wrought it into -ornaments of various kinds. The vast quantity of gold ornaments to be -seen in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy is a proof of its abundance. - -We shall now return to Aquitania and the Bay of Biscay, from which we -digressed to Britain, and coming into Northern Spain enter that region -which was to the Greek of the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. what the -Spanish Main was to the Europeans of the sixteenth and seventeenth -centuries. It seems beyond doubt that when the Phoenicians first reached -the Spanish coasts the natives were fully acquainted with both gold and -silver. Tradition told how the Phoenicians found the native Iberians -feeding their horses from mangers made of silver, and that after having -filled every available portion of their ship with freight of treasure, -they replaced their anchors by others made of silver. Colaeus of Samos -in the eighth century B.C. had been the first of all Greeks to reach -Tartessus, the Tarshish of Holy writ, having been carried away by a -storm when on a voyage to Egypt, and driven right through the Straits of -Gibraltar, “under some guiding providence,” says Herodotus[142]: “for -this trading town was in those days a virgin port” (_i.e._ unfrequented -by merchants). “The Samians in consequence made a profit by their return -freight, a profit greater than any Greeks had ever made before, except -Sostratus, son of Laodamas, of Egina, with whom no one else can compare.” -From the tenth part of their gains, amounting to six talents, the Samians -made a brazen vessel. At a later period the Phocaeans made great profit -by trade with Iberia, which at that time meant East Spain as opposed to -Tartessus, as well as with the Tartessians. The king of this people, by -name Arganthonius, who reigned over them for eighty years, and attained -to the patriarchal age of one hundred and twenty, became such a friend of -the Phocaeans that he invited them to settle in his land, perhaps through -motives of policy, wishing to have their support against the Phoenicians -of Gadeira, or Gades (_Cadiz_), the most ancient of all the daughter -cities of Tyre. When he did not succeed in persuading the Phocaeans, -afterwards having learned from them of the great growth of the power of -the Medes, he gave them treasure to enable them to fortify their city -with the strong wall by means of which they were to withstand Harpagus, -the general of Cyrus, until they launched their ships, and embarked their -wives and children, with that firm resolution to be free, which has made -their name memorable through the ages[143]. - -The evidence of these passages is sufficient to show that already in -the seventh century B.C., not simply the gold, but likewise the silver, -of the Spanish peninsula was known to and wrought by the Iberians, the -oldest race of whom written history affords any traces in the west of -Europe. - -We shall now deal with the actual localities and mines described for us -by the ancient writers. Strabo once more is our chief helper: he seems -as usual for all statements about the mines of the west to have drawn -his information chiefly from Posidonius, although he likewise makes use -of Polybius and others. “Posidonius averred that in the country of the -Artabri, who are the most remote people in Lusitania towards the north -and west [occupying the present province of Galicia], the earth crops -out in silver, tin and white gold (for the gold is mixed with silver), -and that the rivers carry down this earth, and that the women scrape -it up with hoes and wash it in sieves into a box[144].” Here we have a -description of the method employed by the natives in the remote regions -of the north-west of Spain about 100 B.C., before Roman influences had -time to affect them, and we may not unreasonably infer from it that the -same process was universal amongst the Iberians and Celtiberians of Spain. - -In his general description of Spain Strabo declares that nowhere in the -world down to his day was such plenty of gold, silver, copper and iron -to be found as in Turdetania, the district named after the Turdetani, -one of the two great tribes into which the Turti were divided [from the -name of Turti it is probable that Tartessus, the Greek name for this -region, as also for the Baetis (_Guadalquivir_), and also the Phoenician -_Tarshish_ were formed]. “Not merely is the gold got by mining but it -is swept up. The rivers and torrents carry down the golden sand, which -in many localities is likewise to be found in places where there is no -water, but there it is invisible, but in those that water flows over the -gold dust gleams out. And flushing with water that has to be fetched the -arid spots, they make the gold dust glitter, and by digging wells and by -devising other means they get out the gold by washing the sand, and what -are called gold washings are now more numerous than the gold diggings. -But they say that in the gold dust are found nuggets sometimes even -half a pound in weight (βὼλους ἡμιλιτριαίας) which they term _palae_, -which need but little refining, and they say likewise that when stones -are split little nuggets like teats are discovered, and when the gold -is refined and purified with a kind of earth which contains alum and -vitriol, the residuum is electrum. When this residuum, which consists -of a mixture of gold and silver, is again refined, the silver is burnt -away and the gold remains. But the gold is very fusible, and on this -account it is melted with chaff rather than with coal, because the flame -being gentle acts moderately upon a metal which is yielding and easily -fused, whereas the charcoal causes excessive waste by melting it too -much by its violence, and detracting from it. In the river-beds the -sand is swept up and then washed in troughs beside the river; or else a -well is dug, and the earth that is brought up out of it is washed. They -make the furnaces for the silver high, that the smoke from the ore may -be carried up into the air: for it is noisome and pestilential[145].” -Then he adds that “some of the copper works are called gold mines, from -which people infer that gold was formerly dug from them. Posidonius, when -praising the number and excellence of the mines, refrains from none of -his wonted rhetoric, but warms up with hyperboles, for he says he cannot -doubt the truth of the story that once on a time when the woods caught -fire, the earth having been melted, inasmuch as it was permeated with -silver and gold, boiled out on to the surface over the whole mountain, -and that a whole hill was a mass of money heaped up by the bounteous -hand of fortune. And to speak generally (he says) any one who saw these -regions would say that they were Nature’s perennial store chambers or -Sovereignty’s inexhaustible treasure house. For not merely the surface -but the under-soil is rich (πλουσία—ὑπόπλουτος), and with those people -it is not Hades who dwells in the region beneath the earth, but Pluto -(Πλούτων). So spake he in a fine figure as though he himself too were -drawing from a mine his diction in copious store. There was a saying -of Phalereus in reference to the eagerness of the miners of Laurium in -Attica, that they dug as continuously and earnestly as if they expected -to drag up Pluto himself. This saying Posidonius quotes anent the energy -and vigour of those who worked the Spanish mines, for they cut deep and -winding galleries, and by means of ‘Egyptian pumps’ combated the springs -which burst into the workings[146].” - -So rich were the silver mines of New Carthage (_Cartagena_) that in the -time of Polybius (140 B.C.) 40,000 men were employed in working them for -the Roman State, and the daily out-put was reckoned at 25,000 drachms, or -roughly speaking about 3,000 ounces Troy. - -Diodorus Siculus[147] gives an account of mines and mining in Spain, -which, as it is clearly derived from the same passage of Posidonius -as the account of Strabo, is worth quoting, especially as it gives -probably _in extenso_ what Strabo has summarized. For although it more -particularly refers to the discovery of silver mines, yet it is very -relevant to our subject, since silver invariably is later in point of -discovery than gold; thus if we can fix at an early period an inferior -limit for the knowledge of silver in Spain, we may with confidence fix -the inferior limit for the knowledge of gold at a still earlier epoch. -Diodorus has been describing the range of the Pyrenees, which like all -the early geographers he represents as running north and south, and thus -proceeds: “Since there are on them (the Pyrenees) many forests dense -with trees, they say that in ancient times the whole mountain region -was completely burned by some shepherds having cast away a firebrand. -Then since the fire kept burning on for many days continuously, the -surface of the earth was burned and the mountains from the circumstance -were called Pyrenaean (Πυρηναῖα, _scorched_), and the surface of the -burnt region flowed with much silver, and since the natural ore had -been smelted, there ensued many lava-like streams of pure silver. But -inasmuch as the natives did not understand the use of it, the Phoenicians -trading with them, and having learned about the occurrence, bought the -silver for some small return in other wares; accordingly the Phoenicians -by conveying it to Greece and to Asia and all the rest of the world -acquired great wealth. And so covetous were the merchants that though -their ships were fully freighted, when much silver still remained over -they cut out the lead that was in their anchors and replaced it with -silver. The Phoenicians by means of such trade increased greatly and sent -out many colonies, some to Sicily and the adjacent islands, others to -Libya, others again to Sardinia and Spain. But many years afterwards the -Spaniards, having become acquainted with the peculiarities of silver, -started remarkable mines. Wherefore as they prepared very excellent -silver in very great quantities they used to get great revenues.” -Diodorus then gives a detailed account of the working of the shafts -and winding galleries which followed the course of the veins of gold -and silver, the difficulties caused by the bursting in of springs and -subterranean streams, and the ways in which the miners overcame this -latter obstruction by means of the Egyptian pumps. But Diodorus, as a -patriotic Sicilian, takes care to tell his reader that this pump was -invented by Archimedes, the famous mathematician of Syracuse, when, in -the course of his travels, he paid a visit to Egypt. Finally, he gives a -short but graphic picture of the sufferings of the wretched slaves who -were bought wholesale by the mine owners and endured incredible miseries -until death, the only friend they had to look to, came to end their -sufferings. Strabo, the stoic, is silent on this point, which here, as in -Egypt, so strongly moved the heart of Diodorus. - -The story of the discovery of silver by the burning of the woods at first -savours of the mythical, but there is really good reason for believing -that there is in it a solid nucleus of truth. Tin was unknown in Sumatra -until in 1710[148] it was discovered by the accidental burning down of a -house (an incident which recalls Charles Lamb’s delightful account of the -discovery of Roast Pig). It is highly probable that it was owing to some -such accident that men first became acquainted with silver, as that metal -is rarely if ever found native. It may well be therefore that mankind has -learned the art of smelting metalliferous ore from observing the results -of some such conflagration as that described by Posidonius. - -Finally, we shall turn to Pliny the Elder for a moment. That industrious -collector has given us a minute account of the various methods of -mining carried on in Spain in his time, but as that is beside our -present purpose I shall only quote a short passage, in which we get -some interesting technical expressions relating to gold-mining. After -detailing the method of washing soil containing gold by bringing streams -of water to bear on it, just as we found the Salassi doing in the -valley of the Doria, by which process he says 20,000 lbs. of gold were -annually obtained in Asturia, Gallaecia, and Lusitania, he proceeds: -“Gold obtained by shafting (_arrugia_) does not require refining, but -is straightway pure. Nuggets of it are found in this way; likewise in -pits nuggets are found exceeding ten pounds each. The Spaniards call -them _palacrae_, others _palacranae_. The same people term the gold -dust _balux_[149].” Here then we have an interesting group of technical -terms, _arrugia_, _palacra_ or _palacrana_ and _balux_. The latter forms -at once remind us of Strabo’s _palae_ (πάλαι), and we can have little -doubt that _palacra_ and _pala_ are simply dialectic variants, just -as _palacrana_ evidently was considered by Pliny to be a bye-form of -_palacra_. Corssen has sought to find a Latin etymology for _arrugia_, -connecting it with _runco_, _ruga_, but it is hardly possible to regard -it as otherwise than Spanish, especially as this appears to be the only -place where it is found. _Balux_ (also _baluca_) is undoubtedly a native -Iberian term. On Schrader’s principles we might at once argue that as -the technical words for gold-mining and for the different kinds of gold -are native Spanish words, it is beyond doubt that the Spaniards were -acquainted with gold and knew the art of working it before any foreign -traders brought that metal to them. Without dogmatizing in this fashion -and keeping to our more cautious principles we may say that the evidence -of those words is strongly in favour of such a conclusion, unless a -Semitic origin be sought for those terms, which is highly improbable. For -we know beyond doubt that the Spanish mines were worked for centuries -before ever a Roman soldier passed the Ebro. Unless then the technical -terms were introduced by the Greeks (which they were not, as Strabo -considers _pala_ a native word) or by the Phoenicians, they are ancient -Iberic terms connected with gold from its first discovery. We saw that -in the Red Sea the first form in which gold was utilized by the Arabs -was that of nuggets used as rude beads. The _palae_ of the Iberians may -represent the same period of development as well as the same kind of -gold. From the traditions given us by the ancient writers there can be -little doubt that the art of mining silver was of extremely ancient date -in Spain. The founding of Gadeira (Cadiz) is placed at 1100 B.C. and -the tradition of Posidonius regards the Phoenician colonies in the west -as long posterior to their trading for silver with the rude natives. If -this tradition could be relied on, silver must have been known to the -Spaniards in the twelfth century B.C. And there is no reason to doubt the -story. At Mycenae gold and silver were found along with Baltic amber. The -two former prove that amongst the civilized races around the Aegean the -precious metals were abundantly used, the latter that the trade routes -across Europe from the Baltic and North Sea to the Adriatic were already -in use. Accordingly there is no improbability in the supposition that in -the twelfth century B.C. the shipmen of Tyre traded for silver to North -Eastern Spain as well as to Northern Italy for amber. If the knowledge of -silver came so early in Spain, much earlier must that of gold have been. - -Let us now take a general survey of the region over which we have -travelled. In the far east we had both the literary evidence of the Rig -Veda and the evidence of the traditions and legends handed down by the -historians to show that well back in the second millennium B.C. the gold -deposits of Thibet were known and worked. Silver is as yet unknown to -the people of the Rig Veda. Again in the region of the Altai and Oural -mountains, the tale of the “Arimaspian pursued by a griffin” pointed -to great antiquity for gold-mining in this district; the barbarous -Massagetae[150], who occupied the modern Mongolia and Sangaria, were -rich in gold; and to the west the Scythians, who used neither silver nor -copper, had abundant store of gold. These tribes stretched right across -Russia until they touched on the west the Getae and the other tribes of -the great Thracian stock. Gold must early have been known throughout all -Thrace. Greek tradition and history unite in demonstrating the great -antiquity of the first Phoenician gold-seeking in Thasos and on the -mainland. The evidence in Greece itself puts it beyond doubt that gold -was in use 1500 years B.C. The Balkan Peninsula was occupied on the -north-west by Illyrian tribes, some of whom, like the Dardani, dwelt -interspersed among the Thracian clans. The Illyrians inhabited all the -northern end of the Adriatic, and originally much of the east side of -all Italy, although under the pressure of the Umbrians and Kelts they -had been almost completely crushed out of the Italian Peninsula, only -maintaining themselves in the extreme southeast where the Messapians -remained independent of both Italian and Greek alike. The Keltic tribes -were their neighbours in Noricum, where they had succeeded the ancient -Rhaetian stock, the survivors of which, like the Salassi, had managed -to maintain themselves in the fastnesses of the Alps. We found strong -evidence that these Rhaetians must long have known the art of working -gold, for they had devised elaborate pieces of engineering work for the -purpose of developing their gold fields; added to this was the fact that -gold as an ornament seems to have been used by the inhabitants of the -Swiss lake dwellings in the neolithic age. The Kelts must have been in -contact with this people for a considerable time before they ever invaded -Italy; again in Spain we found every token of great antiquity in the -working of gold and silver. Again, before they invaded Italy, the Kelts -must have been long in contact with the Iberians of what in later days -was Aquitania, for the Keltic conquest of Northern Spain can hardly be -placed later than in the fifth century B.C., and it is most probable that -that conquest only took place after long and stubborn struggles. The -Kelts too in Southern Gaul must have come in contact with the Ligyes (or -Ligurians), whose territory at one time extended from the Iberus (Ebro) -along the coast of the Mediterranean to the frontiers of Etruria. The -Ligurians had been in touch with the Iberians on their western border; -in fact the two races had blended to a considerable degree, and since -they had also had communication with Etruscans, Phoenicians and Greeks -(with the last from at least 600 B.C., when Massilia was founded in -their country), it is impossible to suppose that this people could have -remained ignorant of the use of gold. The Kelts thus at every point along -their southern front, as they advanced, must have been for centuries in -full knowledge of gold before they ever entered Rome. Add to this the -fact that when they entered Italy they appear to have brought nothing -but their gold ornaments and their cattle, and that in Gaul it had been -the habit to dedicate great piles of the precious metal in the sacred -precincts of their divinities. - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -PRIMAEVAL TRADE ROUTES. - - -There can be little doubt that from the extreme West of Europe to -Northern India, or rather to China and the Pacific shore, there was -complete intercourse in the way of trade, from the most remote epochs. -In the lake dwellings of Switzerland are found implements of Jade, a -stone which is not found at any spot in Europe; in fact the nearest point -from which the material was fetched must have been Eastern Turkestan -on the borders of China[151]. If in neolithic days such communication -existed between Further Asia and Western Europe, it is not unreasonable -to suppose that when gold, an article existing in almost every country -across the two continents, came into use, a like facility of intercourse -must have existed. In one of the passages of Herodotus which I have given -above we had explicit information respecting a trade route extending from -the Greek factories on the northern shores of the Black Sea through the -medium of the Scythians right away to the remote region of the Altai. -On the other hand there is good evidence for the existence of a great -trade route from the Black Sea westward up the valley of the Danube, -and so reaching the head of the Adriatic; and again, there is equally -good reason for believing that from the mouth of the Po there ran a -similar route across Northern Italy through Liguria and Narbonese Gaul -and into Spain. In reference to the first of these routes we may quote -a tradition preserved in the Book of Wonderful Stories before alluded -to. It is there stated that once on a time travellers who had voyaged -up the Danube finally by a branch of that river which flowed into the -Adriatic made their way into that Sea. It is there alleged[152] that -“there is a mountain called Delphium between Mentorice and Istriana, -which has a lofty peak. Whenever the Mentores who dwell on the Adriatic -mount this crest, they see, as it appears, the ships which are sailing -into the Pontus (Black Sea). And there is likewise a certain spot in the -intervening region in which, when a common mart is held, Lesbian, Chian -and Thasian wares are set out for sale by the merchants who come up from -the Black Sea, and Corcyraean wine jars by those who come up from the -Adriatic. They say likewise that the Ister, taking its rise in what are -called the Hercynian forests, divides in twain, and disembogues by one -branch into the Black Sea, and by the other into the Adriatic. And we -have seen a proof of this not only in modern times, but likewise still -more so in antiquity, as to how the regions there are easy of navigation -(reading εὔπλωτα). For the story goes that Jason sailed in by the -Cyanean Rocks, but sailed out from the Black Sea by the Ister.” - -The story of the meeting between the traders from the Black Sea and -Adriatic has every mark of probability, whilst we are possibly justified -in regarding the legend of Jason as evidence that for long ages the -Greeks knew that up the valley of the Danube traders from the Pontus made -their way. Doubtless too it was with a view to tapping the trade of this -very route that the trading factories like Istropolis were founded on the -Danube. - -The branch of the Danube flowing into the Adriatic can only mean that -travellers from the Danube by passing up one of its tributaries would -reach a point from which it was but a short journey to the Adriatic -shore. But a famous story in Herodotus will yield us more efficient -aid. To the Greeks of the fifth century B.C. the extreme north was -represented by the land of those happy beings the Hyperboreans, just -as the furthest south was represented by the sources of the Nile. Thus -Pindar sings: “Countless broad paths of glorious exploits have been cut -out one after another beyond Nile’s fountains and through the land of the -Hyperboreans[153].” - -Some of the oldest legends of the young world’s prime cluster around -this shadowy region. Herakles had wandered there in quest of the hind of -the golden horns, consecrated to Artemis Orthosia by Taygeta[154]; “In -quest of her he likewise beheld that land behind the chilling north wind; -there he stood and marvelled at the trees.” The judge at the Olympic -festival placed round the locks of the victor “the dark green adornment -of the olive, which in days of yore Amphitryon’s son had brought from -the shady sources of the Ister, a most glorious memorial of the contests -at Olympia, when he had won over by word the Hyperborean folk that are -the henchmen of Apollo[155].” The hero Perseus too had reached that land -where no ordinary mortal could find his way. “Neither in ships nor yet -on foot wouldst thou find out the marvellous ways to the assembly of -the Hyperboreans, but once on a time did the chieftain Perseus enter -their houses and feast, having come upon them as they were sacrificing -glorious hecatombs of asses to the god. Now Apollo takes continuous and -especial delight in their banquets and hymns of praise, and he laughs as -he beholds the rampant lewdness of the beasts[156].” - -Herodotus felt puzzled where to place the Hyperboreans; “For concerning -Hyperborean men neither the Scythians say anything to the point nor any -other of those that dwell in this region, save the Issedones. But as I -think, not even do they say anything to the point; for in that case the -Scythians too would have told it, as they tell about the one-eyed people” -(the Arimaspians[157]). “But a certain Aristeas, the son of Caÿstrobius, -a man of Proconnesus, alleged in a poem that under the influence of -divine afflatus he had reached the Issedones, and that beyond them dwelt -the Arimaspians who have but one eye, and that beyond these are the -gold-guarding griffins, and beyond these the Hyperboreans, stretching to -the sea[158].” But where Pindar and Herodotus hesitated, the priest of -Apollo at Delos stepped in with an explicit statement of that “marvellous -road” which Pindar said no one could find by sea or land. Accordingly -Herodotus has to resort to the men of Delos for his information about -the Hyperboreans: “Much the longest account of them is given by men of -Delos, who have alleged that sacred objects bound up in wheaten straw are -brought from the Hyperboreans to the Scythians, and that the Scythians -receive them and pass them on to their neighbours upon the west, who -continue to pass them on until at last they reach the Adriatic, and -from thence they are sent on southwards. First of the Greeks do the men -of Dodona receive them, and from them they travel down to the Melian -Gulf and cross over to Euboea, and city sends them on to city as far as -Carystus. The Carystians take them over to Tenos without stopping at -Andros; and the Tenians convey them to Delos.” Then he adds a further -story that on the first occasion the Hyperboreans sent two maidens, -Hyperoché and Laodicé, with five male protectors, but as they died at -Delos, and returned home no more, they for this reason “bring to their -borders the sacred objects packed up in wheaten straw and lay a solemn -injunction on their neighbours, bidding them send them forward to another -nation, and the men say that being forwarded in this fashion they arrive -at Delos[159].” - -From the various passages quoted we may draw the probable conclusion that -there was a well-defined trade route existing for untold ages between the -heart of Asia, the valley of the Danube and the head of the Adriatic. -The nameless poets who framed the legends of Herakles and his wanderings -would certainly make the hero travel by the routes where both in their -own time and from tradition they knew of the existence of highways from -nation to nation. Thus in his journey to the Hyperboreans Herakles is -represented as having visited the shady forests of the Danube, which -points to the same road as that assigned to the Hyperborean maidens by -the Delian tale. Finally it may not be farfetched to conjecture that -the sacrifice of hecatombs of asses may be taken as evidence that the -Hyperborean legend points to a people of Central Asia, which is the -natural habitat of the wild ass. However, as it seems that there was an -annual sacrifice of asses to Apollo at Delphi[160], we must be careful -not to lay much stress on this argument, although it is quite possible -that a vague knowledge of a far-off region where asses abounded and were -sacrificed may have given the Greeks the idea that the Hyperboreans were -worshippers of their own god Apollo, at whose altar like offerings were -made. - -Having seen some reasons for believing that before the beginning of -history there was a well-defined route from Central and perhaps Further -Asia across Southern Russia to the valley of the Danube, and then by -one of the valleys of its tributaries to within a short distance of the -Adriatic, whence after crossing the watershed it reached the head of -that sea, we are now in a position to enquire whether we have similar -evidence for the further continuance towards the west of this highroad of -nations. We have had occasion already to remark that the legends of the -Voyage of the Argo in quest of the Golden Fleece, and the journeyings of -Herakles and such-like stories, really represent the earliest knowledge -of the regions which lay far away to the east and north-west. There is -no tale of the hero Herakles more famous than that of his travelling -to the very marge of Ocean, where in the Pillars of Hercules he left -an imperishable record of his wayfaring for the men of aftertime. His -object, so goes the story, was the capture of the famous kine of the -giant Geryon who dwelt in the island of Erythia, in after years the site -of Gaddir, or Gadeira as the Greeks called it, the Gades of the Romans, -and the modern Cadiz. Many vague stories relating to the early ethnology -of Western Europe and Northern Africa cycle round this expedition[161]. -But for our present purpose it is only the fabled route by which he went -with which we are concerned. As might naturally be expected that part -of Italy with which the Greeks seem first to have become acquainted -was the district lying in the Adriatic around the mouths of the Po -(Eridanus). The reason why they came thither is not far to seek. They -doubtless simply followed the example of the Phoenicians who probably -had long traded thither to obtain both the highly prized golden amber -from the Baltic, and the red amber of Liguria, called from that region -Lingurium, or _ligurion_, a name for which the Greeks found a strange -etymology which connected it with the lynx[162]. According to Herodotus, -“the Phocaeans were the first of the Greeks who made long voyages and -discovered Adria, Tyrsenia (Etruria), Iberia and Tartessus” (I. 163). -The trade routes to the amber coasts of the north have long been well -known; they passed over the Alps, crossed the Danube at Passau, Linz -or Presburg, and proceeded then either to Samland or to the vicinity -of Jutland[163]. As these northern routes crossed that which came up -the valley of the Danube, we see that by this route there was complete -communication between the Black Sea and the Adriatic. In later times -we know that active trade was carried on with all Northern Italy from -Marseilles along by the Ligurian shore, for the coinage of Massalia, -and the barbarous imitations of it struck by the peoples of what was -afterwards known as Cisalpine Gaul, formed the currency of that region -until the Roman Conquest. But once more the Book of Wonderful Stories -comes to our aid: “They say that from Italy into Keltiké, and the land -of the Keltoligyes and Iberians, there is a certain road called that -of Herakles, by which if any journey, whether Greek or native, he is -protected by those who dwell along it, that he may suffer no wrong. For -those in whose vicinity the wrong is done have to pay the penalty.” Here -we have a clear instance of a well-defined caravan route, connected by -Greek tradition with the name of Herakles, which was placed under a kind -of taboo, so that all travellers could use it with impunity. We may then -conclude that as from Central Asia there was unbroken communication -with Northern Italy, so likewise from Northern Italy there was from -remote ages a definite trade route into Gaul and Spain, and that these -routes were in turns connected with the great routes which lead from the -Mediterranean to the Baltic and North Sea. - -[Illustration: FIG. 15. Barbarous imitation of Drachm of Massalia.] - - - - -CHAPTER V. - -THE ART OF WEIGHING WAS FIRST EMPLOYED FOR GOLD. - - -We have seen in the preceding pages that from the Atlantic seaboard right -across into Further Asia the ox was universally spread, and from a period -long before the daybreak of history already formed the chief element of -property amongst the various races of mankind which occupied that wide -region. We have likewise seen that gold was very equally distributed over -the same area, being ready to hand in the still unexhausted deposits in -the sands of rivers. And lastly we have seen that from the most remote -times there was complete communication for purposes of trade between -the various stocks. For whilst peoples in the pastoral and nomad stage -do not dwell together in large communities they nevertheless are within -touch of one another. No better illustration of this can be found than -the relations between Abraham and Lot as set forth in Genesis (xiii. 5 -_sqq._): “And Lot also, which went with Abram, had flocks, and herds, -and tents. And the land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell -together: for their substance was great, so that they could not dwell -together. And there was a strife between the herdmen of Abram’s cattle -and the herdmen of Lot’s cattle: and the Canaanite and the Perizzite -dwelled then in the land. And Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no -strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and -thy herdmen; for we be brethren. Is not the whole land before thee? -separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, -then I will go to the right: or if thou depart to the right hand, then -I will go to the left. And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the -plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before the Lord -destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the Lord, like the -land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar. Then Lot chose him all the -plain of Jordan; and Lot journeyed east: and they separated themselves -the one from the other. Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan, and Lot -dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward Sodom.” -But although, from the necessity of finding sufficient pasturage for -their flocks and herds, they had parted from one another, they remained -within touch. For we find that no sooner had Lot and his possessions been -carried away by Chedorlaomer and his confederates, after the overthrow of -the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah, than Abraham at once hears of his mishap -and hastens to his rescue (xiv. 13 _sqq._). - -The picture here given may be taken as holding good for a large part -of Asia and Europe. There is a great intermingling of various races -and untrammeled intercourse between the various communities. Thus we -find that Abraham was able to journey from Haran into Egypt with his -flocks and herds and suffered harm or hindrance of no man. Nay, a still -stronger proof of the safety and freedom of intercourse is that when -Abraham entered Egypt, although afraid that if it were known that Sarah -was his wife the Egyptians might murder him, yet he had no fear that -they would take her away by force if she was supposed to be his sister. -Thus, when his princes told Pharaoh that the Hebrew woman was fair to -look on, though the king commanded her to be taken into his house, he -did not act with high-handed violence against the stranger, but “he -entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he -asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and she asses, and camels.” -And when Pharaoh discovered that she was really Abraham’s wife, although -on account of Abraham’s mendacity the Lord had “plagued Pharaoh and his -house with great plagues because of Abraham’s wife,” he did not, as he -might very justly have done, take a summary vengeance upon him, “he -commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, -and all that he had.” (Gen. xii. 12-20.) - -Such then being the general distribution of cattle and sheep, and such -again the distribution of gold, we can have little hesitation in -coming to the conclusion that the ox, which we have evidence to show -was the chief unit of value in all those countries, had the same value -throughout, and in like manner that gold would have almost the same value -over all the area in which we have shown that it was so impartially -apportioned out by Nature. From this it follows that if the unit of gold -was fixed upon the older unit, the ox, the same quantity of gold would be -found serving as the metallic unit throughout the same wide area. - -If then it can be proved that throughout the area in which those weight -standards arose from which all the known systems of the ancient, -mediaeval, and modern world were derived, the same gold-unit is found -everywhere, and that wherever evidence is to hand, this unit is regarded -as equal in value to a cow or ox, the truth of our hypothesis will have -been demonstrated. For it would be impossible that such an occurrence -should be a mere coincidence if found repeated in different areas. -Furthermore, if it can be shown that in cases at a comparatively late -historical period peoples who were borrowing a ready-made metallic system -from more civilized neighbours, have found it impossible to do so without -adjusting or equating such metallic standard to their own unit of barter, -we may infer _a fortiori_ that it would have been impossible for any -people to have framed a metallic unit for the first time for themselves -without any reference to the unit of barter. But as we have already -proved that the unit of barter is in every case earlier in existence than -even the very knowledge of the precious metals, it follows irresistibly -that the metallic unit is based on the unit of barter. We have also -given reasons for believing that gold was the first of the metals known -to primitive man, but as yet we have not proved that the metals are the -first objects to be weighed. If this can be proved, and if furthermore -it can be proved that before silver or copper or iron were yet weighed, -gold has been weighed by that standard, which we find universal in later -times, we have still more closely narrowed down our argument and put it -beyond all reasonable doubt that weighing was first invented for traffic -in gold, and since the weight-unit of gold is found regularly to be the -value of a cow or ox, the conclusion must follow that the unit of weight -is ultimately derived from the value in gold of a cow. - -If we begin in modern times and reflect on the articles which are usually -sold by weight, we find at once that the more valuable and less bulky the -commodity, the more regularly is it sold and bought by the medium of the -scales and weights; furthermore, on enquiry we find that many kinds of -goods which are now sold by weight were formerly sold simply by bulk or -measure. At the present moment corn is generally sold by weight (though -sometimes still by measure), although the nomenclature connected with its -buying and selling shows beyond doubt that formerly it was sold entirely -by dry measure. The English coomb, the Irish barrel, the bushel and the -peck are indubitable evidence. The selling of live cattle by weight has -only lately been adopted in some markets in this country; but go back -to a more remote period, and you will find that even dead cattle were -not sold by weight. Thus we see that it is only in a comparatively late -epoch that two of the chief commodities on which human life depends for -subsistence have been trafficked in by weight. Nothing now remains but -man’s clothing, weapons, ornaments, fuel and furniture. - -The more primitive the condition of life, the more scanty and rude is -the household furniture, and as even in modern times timber is not sold -by weight, beyond all doubt the same must hold good in a still stronger -degree of a time when wood could be had for the mere trouble of sallying -forth with an axe and cutting it. The same argument applies cogently -to the question of fuel. For even though coal is now sold by weight, -both coal and coke are still sold in some places at least in name by -the chaldron, a fact that indicates that it was only when facilities -increased for weighing large and bulky commodities that such a practice -came into vogue. Similarly, although firewood is now sold by weight on -the Continent, beyond all doubt at a previous period it was uniformly -sold by bulk, as peat or turf is now sold in Cambridgeshire, in Scotland, -and in Ireland. - -Weapons and ornaments and utensils now only remain. To take the -last-named first, at no period have vessels of earthenware been sold by -weight. On the other hand those of metal, especially when made of copper -and iron, are usually sold in this fashion, although vessels of iron and -tin are commonly sold by bulk, or according to their capacity, thereby -following, as we shall shortly see, a most ancient precedent. The value -of ornaments largely consists in the artistic skill displayed in their -manufacture, hence weight is not employed in estimating their value -except when the material is gold or silver, and therefore possesses a -certain intrinsic value apart from the mere workmanship. We may therefore -infer that in early times no decorative articles save those in metal -were valued by weight. Next comes the question of weapons, one of the -most important sides of ancient life. Of course gold and silver are -unfit for weapons and implements, save in the case of the gods, as for -instance the chariot of Hera, with its wheel-naves of silver and its -tires of gold[164]. The spear-head and sword-blade must be made from -tougher and cheaper metals. Hence copper or bronze (copper alloyed with -tin) in the earlier periods which succeeded the stone age, and iron at -a later time, have mainly provided mankind with weapons of offence and -defence. But precious as copper and bronze and iron were to the primitive -man, we do not find them sold by weight: a simple process was employed; -the crude metal was made into pieces or bars of certain dimensions, so -many finger-breadths or thumb-breadths long, so many broad, so many -thick, just as wooden planks are now sold with us, when the value of a -piece of timber is estimated by its being so many feet of inch board, or -half-inch board, and of a fixed width. Lastly we come to the question -of clothing. Skins of course were sold by bulk, the hide of an ox or a -sheepskin having generally a fixed and constant value. Even when sheep -came to be shorn, the fleece was set at an average value. But beyond all -doubt among the peoples who dwelt around the Mediterranean the practice -of weighing wool was of a most respectable antiquity. Such, too, was the -practice all through the middle ages in England and on the Continent. -We have abundant specimens still left of the weights carried by the wool -merchants, slung over the back of a pack-horse. - -Having said so much by way of preliminary, we can now adduce testimony -in support of our thesis. Once more let us start with the Homeric Poems. -The weighing of gold is already in vogue, but the highest unit known is -the small talent, the value of an ox, weighing 130-5 grs, or 10-15 grs -more than a sovereign. Silver is not yet estimated by weight, although -large and handsome vessels of that metal are described and have their -value appraised. But it is not by their _weight_ that their value is -estimated, but by their _capacity_. Thus as first prize for the footrace -Achilles gave “a wine-mixer of silver, wrought, and it held six measures, -but it surpassed by far in beauty all others upon earth, since cunning -craftsmen, the Sidonians, had carefully worked it, and Phoenician men -brought it over the misty deep.” (_Iliad_, XXIII. 741 _sqq._) Here we -have a vessel wrought in silver evidently of considerable size, but it -is simply by its content that its size and value are expressed. Among -the lists of prizes in the same book we find the size of vessels made -of copper or bronze similarly indicated. Thus the first prize for the -chariot race consisted of a woman skilled in goodly tasks; and a tripod -with ears, which held two and twenty measures; whilst the third prize -was a _lebes_ or kettle which had never yet been blackened by the fire, -still with all the glitter of newness, which held four measures. So, -too, in the case of iron. As the prize for the Hurling of the Quoit, -Achilles set down a mass of pig iron, which he had taken from Eetion. -It is a piece of metal as yet unwrought, so that here if anywhere its -size and value ought to be reckoned by weight, since no account has to -be taken of workmanship. But Achilles, instead of saying that it weighs -so many talents or minae, describes its value in a far more primitive -fashion. “Even if his fat lands be very far remote, it will last him five -revolving seasons. For not through want of iron will his shepherd or -ploughman go to the town, but it (the mass) will supply him[165].” - -Thus of the four chief metals mentioned in the Homeric Poems, gold alone -is subjected to weight. But the scales are used for another purpose -still. In the Twelfth Book of the _Iliad_ there is a curious simile -wherein a fight between the Trojans and Achaeans is likened to the -weighing of wool: “So they held on as an honest, hardworking woman holds -the scales, who holding a weight and wool apart lifts them up, making -them equal, in order that she may win a humble pittance for her children: -thus their fight and war hung evenly until what time Zeus gave masterful -glory to Hector, Priam’s son[166].” - -Without doubt one of the first uses to which the art of weighing -was applied was that of testing the amount of wool given to female -slaves[167], or in this case perhaps to a freed woman, to make sure that -they would return all the wool when spun into yarn, and not purloin any -portion for themselves. Thus in the older Latin writers we constantly -find allusions to the _pensum_ (_pendo_ = to weigh), the portion of wool -_weighed_ out to the slave. It is quite possible that in the sale of -wool the more ancient conventional fashion of estimating the fleece as -worth so much in other familiar commodities long continued for mercantile -purposes, the weighing of the wool in small portions being only used as a -check on the dishonesty of the spinners. At all events we have found wool -estimated by the fleece in mediaeval Ireland, at a time when weights are -in common use for the metals. - -Such then is the condition of things in the Homeric Poems. Gold is -transferred by weight and by weight wool is apportioned out for spinning. - -Let us now turn to the Old Testament and find what are the objects which -are dealt in by weight. All transactions in money are thus carried -on, as for instance the purchase by Abraham of the Cave of Machpelah -from Ephron the Hittite when “Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver, -which he had named in the audience of the sons of Heth, four hundred -shekels of silver, current _money_ with the merchant” (Gen. xxiii. 16). -So likewise in Achan’s confession: “I saw among the spoils a goodly -Babylonish garment, and two hundred shekels of silver, and a wedge of -gold of fifty shekels weight” (Joshua vii. 21). And so too in the Book -of Judges (viii. 26) the weight of the rings taken from the Midianites -and given to Gideon was “a thousand and seven hundred shekels of gold; -beside ornaments, and collars, and purple raiment that was on the kings -of Midian, and beside the chains that were about their camels’ necks.” -And again David bought the threshing-floor of Oman the Jebusite for -six hundred shekels of gold by weight (1 Chron. xxi. 25), although the -same purchase is described in 2 Samuel (xxiv. 24) as being effected for -fifty shekels of silver. In Solomon’s time gold has become exceedingly -abundant, and we find it reckoned by talents and minae (pounds). For -“king Solomon made a navy of ships in Ezion-geber, which is beside Eloth, -on the shore of the Red sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram sent in -the navy his servants, shipmen that had knowledge of the sea, with the -servants of Solomon. And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence -gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought it to king Solomon” (1 -Kings ix. 26-8). And after the story of the Queen of Sheba’s visit and -her gift to the king of “an hundred and twenty talents of gold, and of -spices very great store, and precious stones,” we read that “the weight -of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and -six talents of gold, beside that he had of the merchantmen, and of the -traffick of the spice merchants, and of all the kings of Arabia, and of -the governors of the country. And king Solomon made two hundred targets -of beaten gold: six hundred shekels of gold went to one target.” Spices -such as myrrh, cinnamon, calamus and cassia (Exod. xxx. 23) were sold -by weight, being as costly as gold. The familiar description of Goliath -of Gath, the weight of whose coat of mail “was five thousand shekels of -brass,” and whose “spear’s head weighed six hundred shekels of iron,” -will serve to show that articles in the inferior metals were at that time -estimated according to weight by the Hebrews and their neighbours, the -Philistines. Of the weighing of wool we find no instance, but it is quite -possible that it was from the practice of weighing wool that Absalom when -he “polled his head, (for it was at every year’s end that he polled it: -because the hair was heavy on him, therefore he polled it:) he weighed -the hair of his head at two hundred shekels after the king’s weight” (2 -Sam, xiv. 26). But it is perhaps more probable that the habit of weighing -a child’s hair against gold or silver to fulfil a vow (which was almost -certainly Absalom’s motive) may have suggested the employment of the -scales for wool[168]. - -Finally, once in the prophet Ezekiel do we find food weighed, but -evidently under special circumstances: “And thy meat which thou shalt -eat shall be by weight, twenty shekels a day: from time to time shalt -thou eat it. Thou shalt drink also water by measure, the sixth part of -an hin: from time to time shalt thou drink” (iv. 10, 11). In any case we -should expect to find traces of later usage in the writers of the age of -the prophets, but from the directions regarding the amount of water, it -is evident that we cannot take this passage as a proof of the ordinary -practice of the time. - -Unfortunately our oldest records of Roman life and habits go back but a -short way before the Christian era, and hence we cannot get much direct -information as regards the first objects which were sold by weight. We -have already seen that in the time of Plautus (_flor._ 200 B.C.) the -habit prevailed of weighing wool out to the women slaves. - -However, from the legal formula used in the solemn process of conveyance -of real property (_res mancipi_) _per aes et libram_, we may perhaps -infer that the scales were used for none but precious articles such as -copper, silver and gold. That they were used for those metals there can -be little doubt. On the other hand, as we find all kinds of corn sold -at a later period by dry measure, such as the _modius_ or bushel, we -may with certainty conclude that such too had been the practice of the -earlier period. - -From the literary remains then of the Greeks, Hebrews and Latins, it is -beyond all doubt that in the early stages of society nothing is weighed -but the metals and wool (for the apportioning of tasks). In this the -records of all three nations agree, whilst from Homer we learn that the -Greeks were using gold by weight, when as yet neither silver, copper nor -iron was sold or appraised by that process. - -To proceed then to a people compared to whom the Greek and Hebrews in -point of antiquity of civilization are but the upstarts of yesterday. The -Egyptians seem to have used weight exclusively for the metals; the _Kat_ -and its tenfold the _Uten_ seem always used in connection with metals, -whilst corn is always connected with measures of capacity. The following -instances taken from the list of prices of commodities given by Brugsch -(_History of Egypt under the Pharaohs_, II. p. 199, English Transl.) will -suffice for our purpose: a slave cost 3 _tens_ 1 _Kat_ of silver; a goat -cost 2 _tens_ of copper; 1 _hotep_ of wheat cost 2 _tens_ of copper; 1 -_tena_ of corn of Upper Egypt cost 5-7 _tens_ of copper; 1 _hotep_ of -spelt cost 2 _tens_ of copper; 1 _hin_ of honey 8 _Kats_ of copper. Even -drugs were not weighed by the Egyptians in the time of Rameses II. The -physicians prescribed by measure, as we learn from the Medical papyrus -Ebers[169]. - -Passing then to the far East, we naturally are curious to learn whether -the oldest literary monument of any branch of the Aryan race, the -Rig-Veda, throws any light on our question. We get there but meagre -help: but yet, scanty as it is, it is of great importance. As we saw -above the Indians of the Vedic age were still ignorant of the use of -silver, although possessing both gold and copper. Now, whilst we have no -evidence bearing upon the latter metal, there are two very remarkable and -important words used in connection with gold which beyond doubt refer to -the weighing of that metal. In the _Mandala_ (VIII. 67, 1-2; 687, 1-2) -a hymn commences: “O India, bring us rice-cake, a thousand Soma-drinks, -and an hundred cows, O hero, bring us apparel, cows, horses, jewels along -with a mana of gold.” Again, “Ten horses, ten caskets, ten garments, ten -_pindas_ of gold I received from Divodāsa. Ten chariots equipped with -side-horses, and an hundred cows gave Açvatha to the Atharvans and the -Pāyu” (_Mandala_, VI. 49, 23-4). As we shall have occasion later on to -deal with the terms _manâ_ and _hiranya-pinda_ at greater length, it -will suffice our present purpose to point out that we have a distinct -mention of a weight of gold in the expression _manâ hiranyayâ_. In only -these two passages have we any allusion to weighing, and in both it is -in direct connection with gold. The Aryans of the Veda are beyond all -doubt in a far less civilized state than the Egyptians, Hebrews, Greeks -or Romans of the historical period. Hence we may without danger infer -that they did not use weight for any cereals they may have cultivated. -Therefore we may, with a good deal of probability, conclude that we have -got a people who had already a knowledge of the art of weighing before -they were acquainted with either silver or iron, and that this people -used the scales for gold and nothing else. This, taken in connection with -the fact that in Homer, although silver is known, the weighing of metals -is confined to gold, leads us irresistibly to conclude that gold was the -first of all substances to be weighed, or, to put it in a different way, -the art of weighing was invented for gold. - - - - -CHAPTER VI. - -THE GOLD UNIT EVERYWHERE THE VALUE OF A COW. - - -We have now proved four things: (1) the general distribution of the -ox throughout our area, (2) its universal employment as the unit of -value throughout the same region, (3) the equable distribution of gold -throughout the same countries, and (4) that gold is the first of all -commodities to be weighed. Our next step will be to show that gold was -weighed universally by the same standard, and that this standard unit in -all cases where we can find record was regarded as the equivalent of the -ox or the cow. - -We have already seen that the gold talent of the Homeric Poems, which was -in use among the Greeks before the art of stamping money had yet become -known, weighed about 130 grains troy (8·4 grammes). In historical times -gold was always weighed on what was called the _Euboic_ (or Euboic-Attic) -standard. Thus when Thasos began to strike gold coins in 411 B.C. after -her revolt from Athens they weighed 135 grs. Unless this had been the -time-honoured unit employed for gold in that island so famous for its -mines the Thasians would hardly have employed it. Certainly they would -not adopt it simply because it was the standard of the hated Athenians, -especially as they had a different standard for silver. - -The gold coins of Athens struck a few years later are on the same -standard of 135 grs, and when Rhodes at the beginning of the fourth -century B.C. began to coin gold, she used the same unit, although she -employed for silver the unit of 240 grs. Cyzicus also, although coining -her well-known electrum _Cyzicenes_ on the Phoenician standard, used the -unit of 130 grs for pure gold. - -[Illustration: FIG. 16. GOLD STATER OF PHILIP OF MACEDON.] - -This standard, as we shall presently see, virtually remained unchanged -for gold down to the latest days of Greek independence. It likewise -prevailed in Macedonia and Thrace. For when Philip II. coined the gold -from the mines of Crenides into staters on the so-called Attic standard -of 135 grains, he did nothing else than employ for the first gold coinage -of his country the unit which had there, as in Greece Proper, prevailed -for many ages for the weighing of gold. For since gold was first coined -in that region about 350 B.C., and yet silver coins had been current -in Thrace and Macedon since about 500 B.C., it would be absurd to -suppose that there was no unit by which gold in ingots or rings could be -appraised. - -I have shown elsewhere that the rings found by Dr Schliemann at Mycenae -were probably made on a standard of 135 grains troy. It is natural to -suppose that if within the area of Greece Proper gold rings were fixed -according to a definite standard, and that standard the Homeric talent, -the Macedonians and Thracians would possess a similar unit in the -fifth century B.C. But there is a small piece of literary evidence to -show that the Macedonians were acquainted with the gold unit, which we -already know as the Homeric ox unit. Eustathius tells us that “three gold -staters formed the Macedonian talent[170].” Whether Mommsen is right in -thinking that this name was given to the talent in Egypt in consequence -of its having been introduced by the Lagidae (themselves Macedonians) -or not, it equally indicates that from of old such a talent, confined -in use to gold, and the threefold of the Homeric ox-unit, had existed -in Macedonia. Hence Philip II. did not require to go to Athens to seek -for a standard for his new gold coinage. Passing into Asia we find there -the shekel as the Daric (Δαρεικός), the normal weight of which is 130 -grains troy. This standard prevailed all through the Persian empire, thus -extending into the countries now represented by Afghanistan and Northern -India. Numismatists have pointed out the fact that Philip coined his -staters some five grains heavier than the rival gold currency of the -Persian empire, as if to enhance the estimation of his new coinage. This -explanation is perhaps over subtle; at all events it is interesting to -find the successors of Alexander the Great in the Far East, the kings -of Bactria, coining their staters not on the standard of 135 grains, -but rather on that of 130, in other words following the native standard -which the Daric simply represented as a coin. Thus Dr Gardner[171] in -his Table of Normal Weights makes the Bactrian stater of what he calls -the Attic standard weigh 132 grains and the drachm 66 grains, and it is -also admitted that from the time of Eucratides the Greek kings of Bactria -adopted a native standard. - -[Illustration: FIG. 17. PERSIAN DARIC.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 18. GOLD STATER OF DIODOTUS, KING OF BACTRIA.] - -This new standard seems to be identical with that called by metrologists -the Persian, on which [silver] coins were struck in all parts of -the Persian empire, notably the Sigli stamped with the figure of the -Persian king, which must have freely circulated in the northern parts -of India that paid tribute to the king. Whether the reason given for -the use of this standard is right or not, we may see hereafter, when a -different explanation will be offered to the reader. That great Indian -archaeologist, General Cunningham[172], goes further, and maintains “that -the earliest Greek coins of India, those of Sophytes, are struck, not on -the Attic standard, but on a native standard which is based on the _rati_ -or grain of _abrus precatorius_.” Whatever may be the ultimate decision -of this dispute, it is enough for our purpose that whilst undoubtedly a -native silver standard sooner or later replaced the Attic, so likewise -the Attic standard, if used for gold, did not remain at its full weight -of 135 grains, but rather approximated to that of the native standard of -the Daric (130 grains). It is almost certainly a native standard which -appears as the weight of the _gold piece_ (_suvarṇa_) in the tables of -weights given in the Hindu treatise called _Līlāvati_, written in the -seventh century A.D., before the Muhammadan conquest of India, and which -we shall notice presently at greater length. This _suvarṇa_ is the only -unit for gold mentioned in the tables, and its weight can be demonstrated -to be about 140 grs troy. That the gold unit only varied 10 grains in the -course of 10 centuries is very remarkable. - -Let us now return to the ancient peoples of Further Asia Minor and -Northern Africa. The Phoenicians and their neighbours in historical -times seem to have used the double of the unit of 130 grains. It is -quite possible that this doubling of the unit can be explained by a -simple principle, which will likewise fit in with the threefold of the -same unit, which we have just now had to deal with under its name of -Macedonian Talent. But how far this double unit prevailed in earlier -times among the Semites it is not easy to tell. However, the evidence -to be derived from the Old Testament is in favour of the priority of -the unit of 130 grains. But this is not all our evidence. The Egyptian -hieroglyphic inscriptions give us considerable information regarding -the currency not simply of Egypt itself but likewise of neighbouring -countries. For when Egypt was at the zenith of her glory great conquerors -like Thothmes III. and Rameses II. (the Sesostris of Herodotus) carried -their arms into all the surrounding lands and reduced them to the -position of tributary vassals. Many of the tablets which recount their -exploits contain the tale of the spoil, and describe it as consisting -amongst other things of gold rings. - -[Illustration: FIG. 19. EGYPTIAN WALL PAINTING SHOWING THE WEIGHING OF -GOLD RINGS[173].] - -The wall paintings which still survive the inroads of time, and the still -ruder hands of Arabs or tourist, constantly exhibit representations of -the payment of tribute. Again and again we see the tribute money in the -form of rings being weighed in scales, “on which solid images of animals -in stone or brass in the shape of recumbent oxen took the place of our -weights[174].” Erman gives several representations of such weighing -scenes (pp. 611-12), and infers from the fact that the weigh-master and -his scales are always present at such payments, that the scales were the -ordinary medium of such payments. Mere pictures however do not tell us -anything about the weight of the rings therein pourtrayed. Fortunately -however we have examples of such rings. Brandis[175], who was the first -to seek for the unit on which these rings were fashioned, thought that -they followed the heavy shekel (260 grs.), the double of our common -unit. On the other hand F. Lenormant[176] thinks that they are really -based on the light shekel, or rather on a lighter variety of the light -shekel, of about 127 grains, and he is followed in this by Hultsch[177]. -For our purpose it matters not whether the rings were made on the simple -unit or its double, for there are not really two separate standards but -simply one and the same. It is hardly likely that the Pharaohs would -have done otherwise than the kings of Persia at a later time, who made -their subject countries pay their tribute in the recognized currency of -the kingdom, the gold being reckoned (as Herodotus says) by the Euboic -talent, the silver by the Babylonian talent. There can then be but little -doubt that these gold rings give us either actually the old Egyptian -standard, or a standard so closely related to it that there was to all -intents and purposes no material distinction between them. - -Schliemann noticed a resemblance between some of the rings found -at Mycenae and those represented in Egyptian paintings. It is not -preposterous to suppose that the rings of Mycenae represent a kind of -ring both in form and weight which was employed by the peoples of Asia -Minor and Egypt, as well as in Greece. The contact between Egypt and Asia -Minor is so close, communication so free, that it would be in itself most -unlikely that any wide divergence of currency would exist in earlier -times, whilst on the other hand her relations with the people of Ethiopia -and Libya were likewise so close that they forbid any other conclusion. -This is proved by the statement of Horapollo that the _Monad_ (μονάς), -which the Egyptians held to be the basis of all numeration, was equal to -two drachms, that is, to 135 grs.[178] - -Passing westward let us try and learn something from the early coinage -of Italy. Unfortunately, with the exception of the Greek cities of -Magna Graecia, all Italian mintages are of a comparatively late date. -The Etruscans were probably the first of the non-Hellenic inhabitants -to coin money, but unhappily their gold coins are of rather uncertain -date. However, it is worth noticing that these coins are probably thirds, -sixths and twelfths of the unit 130-5 grains, the weights respectively -being 44 grs., 22 grs., 11 grs. This view borrows considerable additional -probability from the fact that the silver coins with plain reverses, -which very possibly belong to the same age as the earlier gold, are -struck on the standard of 135 grains. Whilst in the latter case the -Etruscans can be said to have struck their coins on the Euboic-Syracusan, -or Attic-Syracusan, or Euboic-Attic standard which was in use at -Syracuse, it cannot be so alleged with respect to their gold. For not -only are the subdivisions of the unit unknown to the Attic or Syracusan -gold, but the coins bear numerals, 𐌣 = 50, 𐌡𐌢𐌢 = 25, 𐌢𐌠𐌠< = 12½, 𐌢 = 10, -which are found respectively on the coins of 44, 22, 11 and 9 grains, -while on others again which weigh 18 grains we find the numeral 𐌡 = 5 -grains[179]. Here then we have clear indications of a native Etruscan -gold currency, existing prior to Greek influence and able to hold its -own when the art of coining, and the very coin types themselves, were -borrowed from the Greeks. - -The Carthaginians were the close allies of the Etruscans in the struggle -for the maritime supremacy of the Western Mediterranean against the -Greeks, especially the bold Phocaeans, who gained over the fleet of both -peoples a “Cadmean victory” at Alalia in Corsica (537 B.C.). - -The first Carthaginian coinage was issued in the Sicilian cities, -especially Panormus, at a comparatively late date, certainly not earlier -than 410 B.C. As this coinage was entirely under Greek influences of -comparatively late date, we cannot of course get any direct evidence from -it as regards the original Phoenician standard. Carthage herself did not -issue coins until about a century later, B.C. 310[180]. Hence we have no -data of an early date. The gold coins struck in Sicily are didrachms -of about 120 grains troy, with various subdivisions. This is usually -described as the Phoenician standard, or rather the Phoenician gold -standard of 260 grains considerably reduced. But the full unit of 240 is -never found in the coins, and although we get coins of 2½ drachms (= 147 -grains), it is more natural to regard the didrachm of about 120 grains as -the real unit, in other words the slightly lowered common unit, which we -already found fixed at about 127 grains in the Egyptian rings. In Sicily -and Magna Graecia we are fairly certain that the unit was in early times -that of 130 grains. But whether this was native or brought in by the -Greek colonists, it is impossible to prove. All that we know for certain -is that there was in Sicily and Magna Graecia, a small talent used only -for gold; which was equivalent to three Attic gold staters, or in other -words the threefold of our Homeric ox-unit. Thus an ancient writer -says “the Sicilian talent had a very small weight; the ancient one, as -Aristotle says, 24 _nummi_, the later 12 _nummi_. But the _nummus_ weighs -three half obols[181].” From this it is plain that the ancient form of -this talent weighed 36 obols, that is, six drachms, or three staters. - -Lastly, let us glance at those peoples who lay between Northern Italy and -the Bay of Biscay. Although we have no direct evidence as to the unit by -which the Gauls reckoned that gold of which, as we saw above, they had -great store, before they came under the influence of either Phoenician, -Greek, or Italian, we can perhaps make a justifiable inference from the -fact that when the Gauls proceeded to strike gold coins in imitation of -the gold stater of Philip of Macedon, they did not, as might have been -expected, follow also the weight unit (135 grs.) of that coin. For as a -matter of fact scarcely any of the Gaulish imitations exceed 120 grains -troy[182]. It would appear then that the Gauls had already at that -time a gold unit in use, somewhat lighter than the usual weight of our -“ox-unit,” although we cannot of course ignore the possibility of its -being the form of the Phoenician gold standard, which we found above was -employed by the Carthaginians both in Sicily and Africa; in other words -it may be maintained that the Gauls followed the standard on which the -Phocaeans of Massalia struck their _silver_ coinage. As, however, the -coins of Massalia were drachms of about 55 grains the probability is not -very high that the Gauls had no gold standard of their own for gold until -they got one from the _silver_ of Marseilles. - -The Teutonic tribes who likewise issued imitations of the Philippus also -followed a standard of 120 grs. for coins, from which it is likely that -they as well as the Gauls employed a unit of 120 grs. for gold before -they ever began to strike money. - -We have now taken a survey of the most ancient gold standards we can find -throughout the wide regions through which the common system of weights of -after years prevailed, extending in our range from the heart of Asia to -the shores of the Atlantic. - -Our results will best be seen in the following table: - - Grains. - Egyptian gold ring standard 127 - Mycenaean 130-5 - Homeric talent (or “Ox-unit”) 130-5 - Attic gold stater (the sole standard for gold) 135 - Thasos 135 - Rhodes 135 - Cyzicus 130 - Hebrew standard 130 - Persian Daric 130 - Macedonian stater 135 - Bactrian stater 130-2 - Indian standard (7th cent. A.D.) 140 - Phoenician gold unit (double) 260 - Carthaginian 120 - Sicily and Lower Italy 130-5 - Etruscan 130-5 - Gaulish unit 120 - German 120 - -A glance at the table will suffice to show the truth of the proposition -which we laid down as the object of this chapter, viz., that over the -whole of the area with which we are dealing, the same unit with but -little variations and fluctuations was employed for the weighing of gold. - -Having proved the universal employment of the ox as a chief unit of -barter, the universal distribution of gold, the priority of that metal -both in discovery and in being weighed, and finally, in the preceding -pages, the remarkable fact that to all intents and purposes the same -unit of weight during many centuries was employed in its appraising, we -advance to our next proposition, that this uniformity of the gold unit -is due to the fact that in all the various countries where we have found -it, it originally represented the value in gold of the cow, the universal -unit of barter in the same regions. - -It will of course be hardly possible for us to find data for a direct -proof that in all the countries given in our table as employing the gold -unit, that unit really represented the value of the ox. In some cases we -shall be able to produce a fair amount of evidence more or less direct, -whilst in others owing to the necessity of the case the evidence will be -almost wholly inferential. Finally we shall be able to bring forward a -very cogent form of proof by demonstrating the absolute necessity felt -by barbarous persons of equating a ready made weight standard, which is -being taken over from their neighbours, to the older unit of barter, -and likewise the necessity felt by semi-civilized peoples under certain -circumstances, even when long accustomed to the use of coined money, of -returning to the animal unit as a means of fixing the standard of their -coinage. - -Starting first with the Greeks, we have already seen at an early stage in -this work that the talent of the Homeric Poems was the equivalent of the -ox, the older barter name being as yet the only term used in expressing -prices of commodities, and the term talent being confined to the small -piece of gold. - -Passing next to the Italian Peninsula and Sicily, although possessed of -certain definite statements as regards the value in _copper_ of an ox -in the fifth century B.C., nevertheless, owing to the uncertainty which -still exists as regards the relative value of gold, silver and copper at -Rome, we shall encounter considerable obstacles in our attempt to find -the value of an ox in _gold_. - -As Dr Theodore Mommsen[183] has laid down certain propositions in -reference to inter-relations in value of the metals at Rome, which were -generally received until a very recent period, when Mr Soutzo[184], in -a clever brochure, put forward views of a widely different character -which have met with the approval of some competent critics, and as the -matter is still _sub judice_, I think it best, after briefly giving the -historical evidence for the value of cattle, to give the views of both -these writers. - -The Law known as Aternia Tarpeia (451 B.C.) dealt with questions of -penalties; certain notices of it fortunately preserve for us some -valuable material. Cicero[185] says, “Likewise popular was the measure -brought forward at the Comitia Centuriata in the fifty-fourth year -after the first consuls (451 B.C.) by the consuls Sp. Tarpeius and A. -Aternius concerning the amount of the penalty.” To the same law Dionysius -of Halicarnassus refers[186]: “They ratified a law in the Centuriate -Assembly in order that all the magistrates might have the power of -inflicting punishment on those who were disorderly or acted illegally -in reference to their own jurisdiction. For till then not all the -magistrates had the power, but only the Consuls. But they did not leave -the penalty in their own hands to fix as much as they pleased, but they -themselves defined the amount, having appointed as a maximum limit of -penalty two oxen and thirty sheep. And this law continued to be kept in -force by the Romans for a long time.” Festus (_s.v._ _Peculatus_ p. 237 -ed. Müller) says: “Peculation (_peculatus_), as a name for public theft, -was derived from _pecus_ ‘cattle,’ because that was the earliest kind of -fraud, and before the coining of copper or silver the heaviest penalty -for crimes was one of two sheep and thirty oxen. That law was enacted by -the Consuls T. Menenius Lanatus and P. Sestius Capitolinus. As regards -which cattle, after the Roman people began to use coined money, it was -provided by the Tarpeian Law that an ox should be reckoned at 100 asses, -a sheep at 10 asses.” - -Again Aulus Gellius[187] has a curious notice, too long to quote in full, -which ends “on that account afterwards by the Aternian Law ten asses were -appointed for each sheep, one hundred for each ox.” - -Cicero and Dionysius are probably right (as Niebuhr thinks) in saying -that Tarpeius and Aternius fixed the number of animals. C. Julius and -P. Papinius, who were Consuls in 429 B.C., to whose reckoning of fines -(_aestimatio multarum_) Livy refers (IV. 30), probably changed the -penalties in cattle into money equivalents. Festus and Gellius have -evidently muddled their authorities, having interchanged the words -_sheep_ (_ovium_) and _cows_ (_bovum_). But the important thing is that -both are agreed in giving the value of the cow at 100 asses. - -Now Dr Hultsch (_Metrologie_², 19. 3), following Mommsen, shows that -gold being to silver as 12½:1, the small talent, called the Sicilian, -of which we have just spoken, confined exclusively to gold, would be -exactly equivalent to a Roman pound of silver (135 × 3 × 12½ = 5062 -grains of silver; whilst the Roman lb. = 5040 grs.). Since at Rome, -previous to the reduction of the As in 268 B.C., a _Scripulum_ of silver -was equivalent to a pound of copper or as _libralis_, and there are 288 -_Scripula_ or _scruples_ in the pound, it follows that the pound of -silver or its equivalent the Sicilian gold talent was worth 288 _asses -librales_. This gold talent = 3 Attic staters (or ox-units), therefore -1 Attic stater = 96 _asses librales_. But we learned from Festus and -Gellius that the value of the cow fixed in 429 B.C. was 100 asses. From -this it appears that the value of the ox on Italian soil at this period -was almost exactly the same as the traditional value which it had in the -Homeric Poems, and which it continued to have in the Delian sacrifices in -later times. The mere difference between 96 and 100 asses calls for no -elaborate comment. It is enough to remark after Hultsch, that the further -we go back the cheaper copper appears to be in relation to silver. This -fact will easily explain any discrepancy. Thus Mommsen’s view that -silver was to copper as 288:1 gives us a most interesting result. - -Let us now turn to Mr Soutzo’s view on the same subject. He maintains -that at no time was the relation between silver and copper greater than -120:1, basing his argument on the assumption (which we shall find to -be against the statements of the ancient writers) that when the first -silver _denarius_ or 10-_as_ piece was coined in 268 B.C., as the _as_ -at that time weighed only two _unciae_, or one-sixth of a pound, silver -was to copper as 120:1. He also argues from the fact that in Egypt, under -the Ptolemies, the same relations existed between silver and bronze. He -likewise maintains that the relation between gold and silver in Italy and -Sicily at this period was as 16:1, from which it follows that gold was to -copper as 1920:1. This of course gives us as the value of a cow about 390 -grains of gold, that is about three gold staters, or ox-units. We would -certainly be able to prove that at no time or place in the ancient world -was a cow of so great a value in gold. - -I shall refrain from any discussion of the merits of either view for -the present. I will only add one observation: Mr Soutzo (p. 17) regards -the Italian weight standards as borrowed from the East, and starts -with bronze as the earliest stage in the history of the weights. The -only clearly defined unit of Roman growth according to him is the -Centupondium, which he says is the same as the Assyrian talent. From -this the Romans obtained their own libra or pound by dividing their -talents into 100 parts instead of 60. We shall find hereafter that this -is an untenable position, but meantime it is interesting to find the -Centupondium, or sum of 100 _asses_ taken by an unprejudiced writer as -the basis of the Roman system in the light of the fact that the ancient -Roman value of the cow is likewise 100 _asses_. If Mr Soutzo was right, -our thesis finds complete support, as it would plainly appear in that -case that, although the Italians received their weight-unit ready made, -they found it nevertheless necessary to equate the new metallic unit so -obtained to the cow, the older unit of barter. - -In Sicily we have an opportunity not merely of finding the approximate -value of a cow in gold without having to deal with the disturbing -question of the relative value of copper and silver, but also of showing -that Soutzo’s relation of 120:1 as that between silver and copper in -early Italy must certainly be wrong, and that Mommsen’s view is in the -main correct. The famous Sicilian poet Epicharmus has left us a line: -“Buy me straightway a nice heifer calf for ten _nomoi_[188].” As regards -the value of the _nomos_, or _nummus_ (νόμος or νοῦμμος), Pollux supplies -us with some definite information. - -In passage (IX. 87) already quoted he says: “Yet the Sicilian talent was -the least in amount, the ancient one, as Aristotle says, weighed four and -twenty _nummi_, but the later one twelve; now the _nummus_ is worth three -half obols.” These three half obols plainly mean the ordinary half obols -of the Attic standard. As the Attic drachm is 67½ grains (normal), 65 -grains in actual coins, the ⅙ or obol = 11 grains roughly speaking; three -half obols therefore weigh 16½ to 17 grains. Accordingly, if we take the -weight of the _nummus_ or _litra_ at 16 to 17 grains of silver, we shall -not be wide of the mark. The price then of a good heifer calf was 10 -_nummi_ or 160 to 170 grains of silver. The term _moschos_ (calf) is used -rather vaguely by various Greek writers, but fortunately by the aid of -the Sicilian poet Theocritus, we are certain that it means a calf of the -first year not yet weaned; for he speaks[189] of putting the _moschos_ to -the cows to suck. From what we have seen (p. 32) of the relative values -of cattle of different ages, it is tolerably certain that no full-grown -cow would be worth less than six or more than ten calves of the first -year. Hence the Sicilian cow, at the end of the sixth century B.C., must -have been worth from 960-1020 to 1600-1700 grains of silver. We cannot -tell exactly what was the ratio between gold and silver in Sicily or -Italy at this time, but as we find it was 14 to 1 in Attica in 440 B.C., -the probability is that it was not very far from that in Sicily. It -certainly must have been at some point between 15:1 and 12:1. Taking it -at 12:1, the value of the cow would range from 80 to 141¾ grains of gold, -whilst in the ratio of 15:1 the range is from 64 to 113 grains of gold. -It is thus absolutely certain that the value of a cow in Sicily in the -sixth century B.C. must lie within the limits of 64 to 141 grains, and -if the calf of Epicharmus is a suckling, the range in the value of the -cow must be from 113 to 140 grains. This is all we require for practical -purposes, and it will be admitted that the value of a cow in Sicily comes -very close to our Homeric ox-unit of 130-5 grains. - -We are now in a position to test the truth of Mr Soutzo’s hypothesis. -It will be conceded that at the beginning of the fifth century B.C., -the cow must have had about the same value both in Italy and Sicily. -The cow in Italy was worth 100 Roman pounds of copper, in Sicily about -1650 grains of silver. If Soutzo is right in saying that silver was to -copper as 120:1 on multiplying 1650 by 120 we ought to get a result in -copper corresponding to 100 Roman pounds: 1650 × 120 = 198000. Taking the -Roman pound before it was raised at about 5000 grs. the Sicilian cow was -worth 39 pounds of copper (198000 ÷ 5000 = 39). It is absurd to suppose -that even at any time the Italian cow could have been worth 2½ times -the Sicilian. Let us now apply the same test to Mommsen’s doctrine, and -multiply 1650 grs. of silver by 300. (I take this as being more likely -than 288 to have been the relation between copper and silver in the fifth -century B.C.). 1650 × 300 = 495000 ÷ 5000 = 99 pounds of copper. The -result is too striking to admit of our coming to any other conclusion -than that Mommsen is right. - -Next let us examine his doctrine that in ancient Italy gold was to -silver as 16:1. Mr Soutzo[190] supports this view by three arguments: -(1) that when Rome in the course of the Second Punic War issued gold -coins for the first time, gold was to silver as 16:1; (2) Mr Head[191] -has shown that at Syracuse under the despot Dionysius (405-345 B.C.) -gold was to silver as 15:1; (3) that certain symbols on the gold coins -of Etruria when interpreted as referring to silver _litrae_ give the -proportion between the metals as 16:1. The same answer can dispose of -the first two arguments. The state of affairs both at Rome in B.C. 207, -and at Syracuse under Dionysius, was quite exceptional. Rome was in -a state of bankruptcy, her subjects largely in revolt, the Lex Oppia -(215 B.C.) prevented women from wearing more than half an ounce of -gold ornaments[192]. It is therefore irrational to treat as normal the -relation found to exist between the metals at such a crisis. - -Similarly at Syracuse the relations between the metals were completely -upset by the wild conduct of Dionysius, who forced his subjects to take -coins of tin at the same rate as though they were silver. Moreover -any evidence to be drawn with reference to the ratio between silver -and gold at Syracuse in the time of Dionysius is completely nullified -by the fact that in the reign of Agathocles (B.C. 307) gold was to -silver as 12:1[193]. It is evident therefore that if in 207 B.C. gold -was to silver all over Italy as 16:1, there must have been a great -appreciation of gold. Are we not then justified in regarding the ratio -of 16:1 as exceptional, and that of 12:1 as the more regular? That great -fluctuations in the relations of the metals did take place in Italy, we -know from a statement of Polybius that in his own time in consequence of -the great output of gold from a mine in Noricum gold went down one-third -in value. Silver was scarce in Central Italy, for it was only after the -conquest of Magna Graecia that Rome found herself in a position to issue -a silver currency. On the other hand there must have been a large and -constant supply of gold coming down from the gold-fields of the Alps in -exchange for the bronze wares of Etruria. Now as at Athens, where silver -was so plenty and gold in earlier days scarce, the ratio was never higher -than 15:1, it is impossible to suppose that in Northern and Central -Italy, where the conditions were contrariwise, the ratio can ever have -been in ordinary times higher than 12:1. - -It is quite possible that after the Gauls got possession of Northern -Italy, the supply of gold which reached Etruria and Latium may have been -considerably reduced, and this would perfectly explain the relation -existing at a certain period between gold and silver coins in Etruria, -supposing that Soutzo’s interpretation of the symbols is correct. But as -we have no literary evidence to check off any deductions drawn from the -coins, it is impossible for us to say whether the symbols on the gold -pieces refer to units of silver or bronze. - -[Illustration: FIG. 20. “REGENBOGENSCHÜSSEL” (ancient German imitation of -the Stater of Philip of Macedon).] - -Returning to the Kelts, the close kinsfolk of the Italians, the reader -will recollect that the Gauls struck their imitations of the stater of -Philip of Macedon on a standard of 120 grs., 15 grains lower than the -weight of the archetype. Now similar but still more barbarous imitations -of Philips gold stater are found in Germany. These Rainbow dishes -(_Regenbogenschüsseln_), as they are popularly termed in allusion to -the picturesque superstition that a treasure of gold lies at the foot -of the rainbow, and also to their scyphate form, are found in especial -abundance in Rhenish Bavaria and Bohemia. Like the Gaulish imitations -of the Philippus from which they are copied, they follow a standard -of 120 grs. (and like the Gauls the Germans struck quarters of this -coin, a division wholly unknown to the Greeks)[194]. In the region just -indicated dwelt the ancient Alamanni, and there can be no doubt that -it was this people who issued the coins found there. Now the Alamanni -were among the barbarians who after having overrun the provinces of the -Roman Empire, committed to barbarous Latin their immemorial laws and -institutions. In the Laws of the Alamanni the best ox is estimated at -five _tremisses_[195], that is 1⅔ _solidi_, or in other words 120 grs. of -gold, the medium ox = 4 _tremisses_ = 96 grs. The coincidence that the -value of the ox in gold is the actual weight of the coins of the Alamanni -is too striking to admit of any other explanation than that the gold -coins of this people were struck on the native standard, the ox-unit. -The Keltic and Teutonic tribes were so intermixed that we may plausibly -infer that the Gauls had reduced the weight of the Philippus to 120 grs. -because owing to gold being less plentiful and cattle more abundant to -the north of the Alps, from a very remote time the ox-unit throughout -Gaul and Germany was slightly lower than along the Mediterranean. - -In the Laws of the Burgundians the value of an ox is set at 2 _solidi_ = -144 grs. of gold[196]. This of course is considerably more than that of -the Alamannic ox, but when we consider the late period at which the laws -of the Barbarians were compiled, and the various recensions which they -underwent, the strange fact is that the ox should have varied so little -in its relation to gold from the Homeric ox-unit of at least 1000 B.C. - -Passing into Scandinavia we once more, even so late as the eighth century -A.D., find the same strange agreement in value. In the ancient Norse -documents (where the cow is the unit of value as we have already seen) it -is reckoned at 2½ öres (ounces) of silver = 1078 grains. But we likewise -know from the same sources that gold stood to silver as 8:1; accordingly -the cow was worth 134 grs. of gold[197]. - -Besides the Hellenes and Italians there was another people who strove -for the mastery of all the Western Mediterranean. The ancient city of -Tyre had sent out many colonies into the far West, when the nascent -power of Hellas had already begun to assert its superiority in the -Aegean. Trade grew and flourished between the colonies and the mother -city in Phoenicia; thus there was unbroken intercourse between remote -Gades and her Eastern mother until after the destruction of the latter -(720 B.C.). Henceforward the headship of the Phoenician cities of the -West falls into the hands of Carthage, the scene of the last great act -and final catastrophe in the drama of Phoenician history. At the very -time, nay some say on the very day, when the Greeks of the East were -destroying the host of Xerxes in the Strait of Salamis, the Hellenes -of the West led by brave Gelon of Syracus were repelling a great army -of Carthaginians before the walls of Himera, and during the third and -fourth centuries B.C. the Greeks of Sicily lived in constant danger from -the Carthaginians, who held the western part of the island with their -factories of Lilybaeum, Drepanum and Motyé, until at last they were -finally expelled from the island by the resistless might of Rome (241 -B.C.). - -Could we but learn the estimate put upon the ox by the Phoenicians -or Carthaginians, we would get a fair index to its value over a wide -extended area. For as in earlier times the Phoenician influence extended -from Tyre to Gades, linking both east and west, so in later days Carthage -extended her power over all North Africa from the Pillars of Herakles to -the confines of Egypt, and over Southern Spain. - -Some forty years ago the longest Phoenician inscription yet known was -found at Marseilles. The inscription seems to have belonged to a temple -of Baal, and contains directions touching sacrifices and certain payments -to be made to the officiating priest. Chemical analysis of the stone -has demonstrated that it is of a kind not found in France, but known -in North Africa. Hence M. Renan thought that it had been brought as -ballast in some ship. The names of two Suffetes stand at the head of -the inscription, which seems along with other evidence to point to its -having been engraved at Carthage. On palaeographical grounds its date -is placed in the fourth century B.C., but why it came to Massalia seems -still inexplicable. It is possible that in the fourth century B.C. there -was a considerable body of Carthaginians resident at Massalia, just as on -the other hand we know that there was a large Greek community residing at -Carthage. If that were so, the Carthaginians would naturally keep up the -worship of Baal at Marseilles, and would regulate the temple worship in -accordance with the practice of the mother city. The stone in that case -may have been imported to serve as an official declaration of the rules -to be observed in sacrifices. Movers and Kenrick regarded the sums of -money named in connection with the victims as composition for the animals -named, whilst the editors of the _Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum_ (Vol. -I. Pt. I. p. 217) regard them as fees to be paid to the priests for -the performance of the sacrifices, saying that it is analogous to the -directions for the burnt offerings, peace offerings and thank offerings -contained in Leviticus i-vii. The few lines of the inscription with which -we are concerned I shall translate from the Latin version given in the -_Corpus_. - -“Concerning an ox, whether it is a whole burnt offering, or deprecatory -offering or a thank offering, there shall be to the priests ten shekels -of silver, and if it is a whole burnt offering, in addition to the fees -this weight of flesh, three hundred; and if it is a peace offering the -first cuts and additions, the appurtenances thereof, and the skin and the -entrails, carcase and the feet, and the rest of the flesh shall belong to -the giver of the sacrifice. - -“Concerning the calf without horns, concerning an animal which is not -castrated, or a ram, whether it is a whole burnt offering, or a peace -offering, or a thank offering, there shall be to the priests five shekels -of silver, and if it be a whole burnt offering in addition to the fee -this weight of flesh, one hundred and fifty. - -“Concerning a he-goat or a she-goat, whether it is a whole burnt -offering, etc. there shall be to the priest one shekel of silver two -_zer_. - -“Concerning a sheep or kid or goat, whether it is etc., there shall be -etc. ¾ shekel one [_zer_] of silver. - -“Concerning a tame bird, or wild bird, ¾ shekel and two _zer_.” - -Let me here remark that in Leviticus there is no mention whatsoever -made of any fees to the priest, also that whilst according to the above -version the giver of the victim gets the skin, in Leviticus (vii. 8) -it is the priest who gets it as his perquisite, as seems also to have -been the practice in Greece. For we know that the Spartan kings, who -in their capacity of priests offered all sacrifices at Sparta, always -got the skins as their payment[198]. That the sums mentioned are really -the prices of the victims is made almost certain by the fact that at -the famous Phoenician temple of Aphrodite at Eryx in Sicily the victims -were kept ready by the priests to be sold to worshippers who wished to -sacrifice, as we know from a curious story told by Aelian[199]. - -Whilst it would be of great importance for my purpose to have been able -to regard the sums mentioned in the inscription as the actual value set -upon the animals, even if we simply regard them as fees they still give -us some aid. For as it is most unlikely that the fee for sacrificing -would exceed the value of the victim to be sacrificed, we thus can obtain -a minimum limit of value. We may then safely assume that the value of the -ox was not less than 10 shekels of silver. On the other hand we shall -find from Exodus what must have been the maximum value among the Hebrews -at a comparatively late date. As the Punic ox cannot have been worth less -than 1350 grs. of silver, and the Hebrew not more than 1760 grs., it is -almost certain that the value of the ox at Carthage lay between these -limits. - -The pieces of silver mentioned in the inscription are probably ordinary -silver didrachms of the Attic standard. The Carthaginians had coined -silver in Sicily on the Attic standard from about 410 B.C., but issued -no silver coins at Carthage itself until after the acquisition of the -Spanish Silver Mines (241 B.C.), although gold, electrum, and bronze -coins were minted. In Greece Proper in the 4th century B.C. gold was to -silver as 10:1; we may therefore not be far wrong if we assume a similar -ratio between the metals to have held at Carthage about the same period. -That silver was scarce is shown by the fact that they did not coin it, -although issuing gold, electrum and bronze. Ten silver didrachms would -therefore = 1 gold didrachm of 135 grs., which is of course our ox-unit. -This is a remarkable result, and of itself would make one believe that -the sum represents the real value of an ox, which the practice at Eryx -puts beyond doubt. We know that at Athens the people who were bound to -provide the public sacrifices supplied very wretched oxen, so we need not -be surprised to find precautions taken by the priests of Baal to ensure -that proper animals should be provided for the altar, especially as they -themselves got a share of the flesh. - -Next let us see if that most ancient of all known civilized lands, -Egypt, can produce from her store of monumental records any evidence -for our purpose. Professor Brugsch[200], in his _History of Egypt under -the Pharaohs_, gives from inscriptions a list of the prices of various -commodities about 1000 B.C.: a slave cost 3 _ten_ 1 _ket_ of silver; -an ox 1 _ket_ of silver (= 8 _ten_ of copper); a goat cost 2 _ten_ of -copper; 1 pair of fowls (geese?) cost ⅓ _ten_ of copper; 1 _hotep_ of -wheat cost 2 _ten_ of copper; 1 _tena_ of corn of Upper Egypt cost 5-7 -_ten_ of copper; 1 _hotep_ of spelt 2 _ten_ of copper; 1 _hin_ of honey -8 _ket_ of copper; 50 acres of arable land 5 _ten_ of silver. Of course -there must be more or less uncertainty about some of these statements -owing to the imperfect knowledge which we as yet possess. At first sight -the reader naturally wonders how it is possible to calculate the value -of the ox as here given, which is only 1 ket of silver, that is, the -Egyptian ox of 1000 _B.C._ was only worth 140 grains of _silver_, whilst -an ox hitherto has been worth about the same amount in _gold_. At first -sight this is enough to stagger us, but a moment’s reflection makes the -matter very intelligible. We have already noticed (p. 59) that at a -certain stage in the history of the metals silver was far scarcer than -gold, and that its rarity combined with its beauty no doubt made it to -be eagerly sought and held in great esteem. We saw that the Arabs of the -Soudan down to the present day prefer silver to gold; whilst in the -earlier part of the present century when Japan was opened to European -commerce the Japanese eagerly exchanged gold for silver at the rate of -one to three, and even less, as they possessed no native silver, and were -charmed with the beauty of the little known metal[201]. Marco Polo also -tells us that “in the province of Carajan (the modern Yunnan) gold is so -plenty that they give a saggio of gold for only six of the same weight -of silver;” and of the province of Zardandan, five days west of Carajan, -he says, “I can tell you they give one weight of gold for only five of -silver[202].” - -It is almost certain that in all countries at one stage silver must have -been of higher value than gold; afterwards as its production became -greater, it became equal in value, and finally, little by little, -much less valuable, until at last the relation between the metals is -1:22. Of course we must add that there must have been always certain -fluctuations, according as a sudden increase of output of one or other -of the metals altered temporarily their relations. We have evidence that -silver in early times in Egypt was held in higher esteem than gold. Thus -Erman[203] says that according to ancient Egyptian notions silver was the -most costly of the precious metals; for they always in an enumeration -mention it before gold, and in the tombs ornaments of silver are of far -rarer occurrence than those of gold. This circumstance is simply and -sufficiently explained (thinks Erman) by the fact that Egypt herself -possesses no deposits of silver, but must have obtained the metal from -Cilicia. Under the 18th dynasty (1400 B.C.), the Phoenicians supplied -Egypt with silver and under the new empire the supply had so increased -that it was now evidently cheaper than gold, for the later texts always -name silver after gold, just as we do. We have previously noticed the -paucity of silver articles in the tombs at Mycenae which are commonly -dated 1400 B.C. - -It is therefore reasonable to suppose that towards the end of the Second -Millennium B.C. gold and silver were almost of equal value, not alone -in Egypt, but in other parts likewise of the ancient world. The great -supply of silver had not yet been obtained which in the 10th century -B.C. made silver at Jerusalem like stones. “As for silver,” says the -sacred writer, “it was nothing accounted of in the days of Solomon” (900 -B.C.)[204], who had “made silver and gold at Jerusalem as plenteous -as stones[205].” By this time silver had become very cheap in Egypt -likewise. At least if we can at all rely on the author of the books of -Chronicles. For the king’s merchants “fetched up and brought forth out of -Egypt a chariot for six hundred shekels of silver, and an horse for one -hundred and fifty: and so brought they out horses for all the kings of -the Hittites and the kings of Syria[206].” - -The shekel here meant is probably that of 130-135 grains, while the -price of the ox in Brugsch’s list is 1 ket or 140 grains. At a moderate -computation this would make a horse worth 150 oxen, if our documents were -contemporary. But from lists of relative prices in ancient and modern -times it is preposterous to suppose that at any time or in any place -such a remarkable difference in value existed between the horse and the -cow. From this it follows that if Brugsch is right in his translation of -his Egyptian text, the latter must date from several centuries before -1000 B.C., when as yet silver was of the same or almost the same value -as gold. Finally, we have no means of knowing the age of the ox, but as -it is equal in value to only four goats, it is possible that it was not -a full-grown animal. I have dealt with this point at some length, and -have little positive gain to show, but it is necessary to put before the -reader all data which may aid in our search, and still more necessary to -do so in the case of evidence which seems to present serious difficulties. - -Unfortunately for us the Old Testament gives very scanty information on -the question of the cost of various commodities, and in no place do we -get any information regarding the price of cattle. For in the account of -the purchase of the threshing-floor and oxen of Oman the Jebusite by king -David, there is a discrepancy in price between the Second Book of Samuel -(xxiv. 24) and First Chronicles (xxi. 25), the former making the sum 50 -shekels of silver, the latter “six hundred shekels of gold by weight,” -and in any case, as we do not know the number of oxen used in threshing -or the value of the floor and threshing instruments, it is impossible -for us to draw any inference. In the Book of Exodus, however, we obtain -the value of a slave, from which we may at least get an approximate idea -of the value of an ox: “If the (wicked) ox shall push a manservant or -a maidservant; he (the owner of the ox) shall give unto their master -thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned” (xxi. 32). Here, -as in the ancient laws of Wales and elsewhere, the value of the male and -female slave is the same, and thirty shekels or pieces of silver seems to -have been the conventional price of a slave among the Hebrews. To this -Zechariah (xi. 12) seems to allude, “So they weighed for my price thirty -pieces of silver,” in reference to which the Evangelist writes: “Then was -fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they -took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom -they of the children of Israel did value” (Matt. xxvii. 9). The average -slave among the Homeric Greeks (as we saw above) was worth about three -oxen, amongst the Irish three, among the modern Zulus about 10, and among -the wild tribes of Annam seven (pp. 24-5). Allowing three oxen as the -value of a slave among the Hebrews, the ox is worth 10 shekels (ancient) -= 1300 grains of silver = 130 grains of gold, taking gold to silver as -10:1, which at an early period was probably the regular ratio in parts -of Asia Minor. The result thus reached gives us once more the Homeric -ox-unit as the value of the Hebrew ox. It is certain that it cannot have -been higher, although we cannot show that it may not have been less. - -The cow is estimated in the Commentary on Vendîdâd, Fargard, IV. 1-2 at -12 _stirs_ or _istirs_. - -Our task must be now to find out the weight of this _istir_. _Istir_ or -_stir_ is identified with Greek στατήρ (as _dirham_ is with Greek δραχμή). - -The Pahlavi Texts, translated by Dr West, naturally afford us the -readiest means of discovering our object[207]. - - THE VALUE OF A COW - - I II III IV V VI - ----------+----------+---------+----------+------------+--------+------- - Sins or | Shayast | XI. 1 | XVI. 1-3 | XVI. 5 |Spiegel |Spiegel - equivalent| I. 1 | | | |Rivaya |Rivaya - good works| | | | | | - ----------+----------+---------+----------+------------+--------+------- - Srôshô- | |1 dirham | |3 coins and | | - Karanam | | 2 mads | | a half | | - | | | | | | - Farmån |weight of |3 dirhams|3 coins of|a Farmant is|7 stirs |8 stirs - | 4 stirs | of 4 | 5 annas | a Srôshô- | | - | and each | mads |some say, | Karanâm | | - | stir has | | 3 coins | | | - | 4 dirhams| | | | | - | | | | | | - Agerept |1 dirham |33 stirs |53 dirhams|16 stirs |12 stirs| - | | | | | | - Avôirîst |1 dirham |the |73 dirhams|25 stirs |15 stirs| - | | weight | | | | - | | of 33 | | | | - | | dirhams | | | | - | | | | | | - Aredûs |30 stirs |30 stirs |30 stirs |30 stirs | | - | | | | | | - Khôr |60 stirs |60 stirs | |60 stirs | | - | | | | | | - Bâzâî |90 stirs |90 stirs | |90 stirs | | - | | | | | | - Yât |180 stirs |180 stirs| |180 stirs | | - | | | | | | - Tanâpûhar |300 stirs |300 stirs| |300 stirs | | - -There are in the Shayast-la-Shayast various lists of sins and good works. -These sins or good works are put in the golden balance and weighed, in -which case the _stir_ is a weight, whilst in other cases we have a money -evaluation. As much confusion arises from variations in the lists, it -will be best to tabulate the different lists, and thus get a synoptic -view of the whole. - -On looking at the table, we find that all our authorities are in complete -harmony as to the amounts of the last five; Aredûs is 30 _stirs_, Khôr -= 60, Bâzâî = 90, Yât = 180, and Tanâpûhar = 300 _stirs_. Let us first -consider these. We must remember that on the third night after death the -soul is judged by having its sins and good works weighed, and according -as the one or other predominates, is the ultimate destiny of the soul -foul or fair. It is thus essentially a scale of _weights_, not of -_coins_. The arrangement of the numbers at once speaks for itself. 30 -_stirs_ = ½ _mina_ on the Babylonian system, as will be seen on p. 251. -60 _stirs_ (Khôr) = 1 _mina_, 90 _stirs_ (Bâzâî) = 1½ _minae_, 180 (Yât) -= 3 _minae_, and finally we get 300 _stirs_ (Tanâpûhar) = 5 _minae_. -What then is the weight of the _stir_? It is none other than the light -Babylonian shekel (130 grains Troy). - -Now let us approach the bewildering tangle of the first four degrees. -It is evident that there are mistakes of numerals in some cases, e.g. -in Column I., where the Agerept and Avoîrîst are made equal, both being -only ⅟₁₆ of the first degree or Farmân, and also in Col. II. we have the -Agerept greater than the Avoîrîst and Aredûs. But in Columns III. IV. and -V. we get some elements of regularity. Two of them at least introduce -coined money, thus giving us an indication that it is owing to the -constant effort to make the lower weight conform to the monetary units -of the various periods at which the Commentaries were written that the -confusion has in great part arisen. We find the Farmân = 3 _dirhams_ of 4 -_mads_, to 3 coins of 5 annas, and to 3½ coins. Dr West, calculating the -anna on the basis of the old rupee of Guzarat (Pt. III., p. 180), makes -the coin of Col. IV. = 50 grains Troy, the old rupee being less than its -present weight (180 grains). The Farmân in this case is 150 grains. The -3 _dirhams_ of 4 _mads_ each probably are the same in amount. So too -are the three coins and a half of Col. IV. In which case each coin must -weigh 43 grains (150 ÷ 3½ = 42⁶⁄₇), that is the regular weight of the -_dirhams_ struck by the Arab conquerors of Persia. Comparing Cols. III. -and IV., we shall find the Agerept worth respectively 53 _dirhams_ and 16 -_stirs_, the Avoîrîst set at 73 _dirhams_ and 25 _stirs_. We find then a -very close approximation in comparative values. The same proportion for -all practical purposes exists between the coin of 5 annas (50 grains) -and the coin of 43 grains, as between the 53 _dirhams_, and 16 _stirs_ -and 73 _dirhams_ and 25 _stirs_. But it is evident that in Col. III. the -coin of 5 annas is a thing quite distinct from the _dirhams_ mentioned in -the same table, or else why is there a difference in nomenclature? The -_dirham_ is probably the usual _dirham_ of 43-40 grains. But as we find -53 of these _dirhams_ = 16 _stirs_ of Col. IV. accordingly the _stir_ -of Col. IV. = 132 grains Troy, which is plainly the Babylonian shekel, -and 73 _dirhams_ = 25 _stirs_. This gives an average for the _stir_ of -126 grains Troy, which again points directly to the light shekel of 130 -grains Troy, or in other words to the weight of the Daric. Another piece -of evidence in the same direction is the fact that the Sassanide kings -struck their silver coins on the so-called Attic standard, which of -course was identical with that in use from the earliest times in Asia, -as the standard of the Daric. The founder of the Sassanide Dynasty, -Ardeshir, struck his first gold coins on this standard (staters of -135-0), whilst all the silver coins of this dynasty are half-staters (65 -grains) of the same standard. The statement in Col. I. that each _stir_ -has four _dirhams_ probably refers to a later period, when 4 _dirhams_ of -the ordinary Muhammedan standard (43 grains Troy) were equivalent to a -rupee (180-170 grains). - -If it should be objected that the _istir_ of the Avesta is the old Persic -silver standard of 172 grains, my reply is that as it is evident from -what we have seen above that in this _weight_ system there were _sixty_ -staters in the _mina_, this must be the _weight_, not the silver _coin_, -as there were only _fifty_ staters in the _money_ mina. - -The ox of the Zend-Avesta according to tradition is therefore rated at -12 _stirs_ or staters of 130 grains of silver each. From the time of -Alexander right down to the third century after Christ it is probable -that all through the Eastern Mediterranean and Asia Minor gold was to -silver as 12:1. If this were so, the ox of the Avesta was worth 130 grs. -of gold, that is the weight of a Daric, and of the Homeric ox-unit. - -Such then are the approximate results that we have been able to obtain -regarding the value in gold of an ox in various parts of the ancient -world. Of course I do not pretend that they have the same force as if -they represented the value of the ox everywhere in one particular epoch, -or as if we had found the ox directly equated to gold in every case. But -on the other hand the persistency of prices in semi-civilized countries -is a fact well known: for example, prices have changed but very slightly -in India[208] during a long course of years, for although the silver -rupee has sunk to about two-thirds of its nominal value in exchanges for -gold, it purchases as much as ever in India. It is likely therefore that -the conventional value of the ox would have remained unchanged for a -long period of time, and the fact that our approximate values taken from -various countries and from various centuries so closely coincide is a -strong indication that such was the case. - -Savages are still more conservative in their ideas of the relative value -of certain articles; and when once a standard price has been fixed for -certain commodities, it is almost impossible to get them to change. - -Thus I am told by Mr W. H. Caldwell that, when he gave half-a-crown to -a Queensland black for the first specimen of a certain kind of animal -brought into camp, henceforth he had to pay the same amount for every -specimen, even when they came in considerable numbers. So with the early -men of Asia and Europe who first possessed cattle, and later on gold. -Once a certain amount of gold was taken as the recognized value of a cow -of certain age, the idea would become strongly rooted that so much gold -was the proper equivalent of a cow. And it would only be in the lapse of -centuries and with the development of cities and general commerce that -the price of cattle would begin to fluctuate. - -But even when such variation in price arose, it made no difference as -regards the weight standard. The unit had already long been fixed and it -remained unaltered, just as the beaver skin of account still means only -two shillings, although a real beaver skin is now worth many times that -amount. - -Another reason why the price of cattle would remain stationary would be -that in early times as all the cows were kept under more or less similar -conditions of food, and there was no attempt at the development of -superior breeds, there would be little difference in the value of animals -of the same age. - -The connection between the cow and the gold unit is rendered all the -more probable not merely by the fact so often noticed that the words -for _money_ in different languages originally meant _cattle_, but by -the remarkable fact that the earliest known weights are in the form of -cattle. The relation between _weight_ and money must always be close, -but it comes still more prominently into view, when as yet there is no -coinage, but gold and silver pass by weight alone. If then the value of a -cow formed the first gold unit, we can at once understand why the first -weights took the form of oxen and sheep. - -It was not for mere artistic reasons, for whilst such animal weights -appear on Egyptian paintings, the numerous known Egyptian weights are of -a very conventional form, as we shall find below. Doubtless the horns and -ears made a cow’s head exceedingly ill-suited for a weight, and in course -of time utility prevailed over the traditional idea that the weight unit -ought to take the shape of the animal, whose value in gold it was meant -to represent. - -The following table sums up briefly the results of this chapter: - - Homeric ox-unit = 130-135 grains of gold. - Roman ox (5th cent. B.C.) = 135 ” ” - Sicilian (5th cent. B.C.) = 135 ” ” - Ancient German = 120 ” ” - Ancient Gaulish = 120 ” ” - Phoenician? (4th cent. B.C.) = 135 ” ” - Egyptian (1500 B.C.?) = 140 grains of silver = 140 grains - of gold(?). - Hebrew = 130 grains of gold. - Zend-Avesta = 130 ” ” - Burgundian = 140 ” ” - Alamannic = 120 ” ” - Scandinavian[209] (8th cent. A.D.) = 128 ” ” - -As has been remarked before, I do not include the values of the ox or cow -in the ancient Laws of Wales or Ireland, since from the insular position -of Britain and Ireland the principle that we must have unbroken touch -between the various peoples in order to have a constant unit does not -apply. There could be no free flow of trade in cattle between Britain and -the continent until the development of steam navigation. - -It is worth noting that the value of a buffalo at the present day among -the Bahnars of Annam is almost the same as that of the ancient ox. The -buffalo is reckoned at 280 hoes[210], that is 28 francs = £1. 2_s._ 4_d._ -Taking gold at the rate of twopence per grain, the value of the buffalo -in gold is 134 grs. Troy. - - - - -CHAPTER VII. - -THE WEIGHT SYSTEMS OF CHINA AND FURTHER ASIA. - - Subiectos Orientis orae - Seras et Indos. - - HOR. _Carm._ I. 12. 56. - - -We have now found that within the area where our weight standards arose -the ox was universally diffused, and regarded as the chief and most -general form of property and medium of exchange; that over the same area -gold was found to be more or less equally distributed in antiquity; -that the metallic unit is found in all cases adapted to the chief unit -of barter, whether that be ox or reindeer, beaver skin, or squirrel, as -soon as peoples have learned the use of metal; and finally that over our -special area from the Atlantic to Central Asia the cow at various times -and places retained a value which fluctuated only from 120 to 140 grains -of gold. When therefore we recall the fact, also pointed out above, -that the gold unit employed from Gaul to Central Asia was one that only -fluctuated from 120 to 140 grains, and when we recollect further that -this unit in the ancient Greek Epic is called not a talent but an _ox_, -when prices, and not merely the actual ingots of gold are mentioned, -the conclusion follows that not merely in Greece but in all the other -countries the gold unit represented originally simply the conventional -value of the cow as the immemorial unit of barter. - -Next follows an important question, How was the primitive weight standard -fixed? In other words, how did mankind arrive at the general opinion that -a weight of gold of about 130 English grains was the equivalent to the -conventional value of the animal? - -If we could but discover a region in which the weight and monetary -systems still in use are essentially independent of our Graeco-Asiatic -standards, and where it could be proved that the monetary system is an -independent native development, and where this development is of such -recent date that the record has been preserved in a written document, not -merely reaching us in the dim form of a tradition, blurred and broken in -the long and misty space of years that lie between us and those who first -shaped our system, we would undoubtedly discern more clearly the stages -of its evolution. - -The Chinese empire with the neighbouring peoples who have participated -in its civilization afford us just the case which we desire. It will be -seen from what follows that not merely the monetary system of China, but -her weight system is of an origin almost wholly unaffected by Western -influences. - -We saw above that the earliest form of money in Greece took the form of -_spits_ or small rods of copper, no doubt of a specified size; we found -in Annam that iron hoes, in mediaeval India iron formed into large-sized -needles, in modern times in Central Africa pieces of iron of given -dimensions, bars of iron among the Hottentots and among the peoples of -the West Coast of Africa, brass rods of fixed length in the region of -the Congo, and pieces of a precious wood likewise of fixed dimensions, -have served or do still serve as media of exchange, and as units by which -the values of other commodities are measured. In all these cases mere -_measure_ not _weight_, is the method of appraisement. As the archaic -Greek “spit” or _obolus_ of bronze eventually became a round bronze -coin, familiar to us as Charon’s fee, and in still later times under the -abbreviation _ob_. as the accountant’s symbol for a half-penny, as _d._ -(_denarius_) denotes the penny, so we shall find that the common Chinese -copper coins pierced with a square hole in the centre have had an almost -identical history. - -At the time when the Chinese made their great invasion into South-eastern -Asia (214 B.C.) they still were employing a bronze currency under the -form of knives, which were 135 millimetres (5⅖ in.) in length, bearing -on the blade the character _minh_, and furnished with a ring at the -end of the handle for stringing them. Under the ninth dynasty (479-501 -A.D.) they used knives of the same form and metal, but 180 millim. (7⅕ -in.) in length, furnished with a large ring at the end of the handle and -inscribed with the characters _Tsy Kú-u Hoa_. Next the form of the knife -was modified, the handle disappeared, and the ring was attached directly -to the blade, but now as weight was regarded of importance, its thickness -was increased to preserve the full amount of metal, and the ring became a -flat round plate pierced with a hole for the string[211]. Later on these -knives became really a conventional currency, and for convenience the -blade was got rid of, and all that was now left of the original knife -was the ring in the shape of a round plate pierced with a square hole. -This is a brief history of the _sapec_ (more commonly known to us as -_cash_) the only native coin of China, and which is found everywhere from -Malaysia to Japan[212]. - -[Illustration: FIG. 21. CHINESE KNIFE MONEY (showing the evolution of the -modern Chinese coins).] - -Except where foreign coins such as American silver dollars are employed, -all payments in silver and gold are made by weight, the only money -being the copper _cash_. The Chinese metric system, like our own, is -based on natural seeds or grains of plants. Thus ten of a kind of seed -called _fên_ (the Candarin) probably placed sideways make 1 _ts’un_ (the -Chinese inch[213]), just as our forefathers based the English inch on 3 -barleycorns placed lengthwise. So with their monetary system, - - 10 _li_[214] (copper cash) = 1 _fên_ (_Candarin_) of silver. - 10 _fên_ = 1 _chi’en_ (_mace_). - 10 _chi’en_ = 1 _liung_ (or _tael_ or Chinese ounce). - -This _liung_ or, as it is more commonly called, _tael_ is the maximum -monetary weight. Hence we hear always of payments in silver as being 1000 -or 2000 ounces and so on, but never in the higher commercial units of the -_catty_ or pound, and _pical_ or hundredweight, to which we shall come -immediately. But though the Chinese never employed any coinage of gold or -silver, beyond all doubt they have possessed and employed both metals for -almost an incalculable time in the form of ingots of rectangular shape, -and of very accurately fixed dimensions. The maximum unit employed in -commercial relations between China, Cochin-China, Annam and Cambodia is -the _nên_ or _bar_. It is of course among her less advanced neighbours -that we can best see how the system developed and worked. For whilst -China herself now reckons exclusively by the _tael_ or ounce, Annam and -Cambodia still employ ingots of fixed weights and dimensions as metal -units almost to the present time. Thus when Msg. Taberdier in 1838 -published his account of the money of Annam, they had no coins except -the ordinary cash or _sapec_ with a square hole in its centre, and which -is there made of zinc and called _dong_[214], they had no coinage in the -proper sense of the term. However they employed ingots of gold and silver -of a parallelopiped shape. Five sizes of ingots were employed for both -gold and silver alike. - - GOLD. - - 1. _Nên-Vang, loaf of gold_ = 10 _lu’ong_ or _taels_ - (ounces). - 2. _Thoi-Vang_ or _Nua Nên-Vang_ = 5 _lu’ong_. - 3. _Lu’ong-Vang, nail of gold_ = 1 _lu’ong_ (39·05 grammes). - 4. _Nua-Vang, half nail of gold_ = ½ _lu’ong_. - 5. The quarter _lu’ong_ = ¼ _tael_ (9·762 gram.). - - SILVER. - - 1. _Nên-bac, loaf of silver_ = 10 _lu’ong_ or _taels_. - 2. _Nua Nên-bac, half loaf of silver_ = 5 _lu’ong_. - 3. _Lu’ong_ or _Dinh-bac, nail of silver_ = 1 _tael_. - 4. Half _Lu’ong, half nail_ = ½ _tael_. - 5. Quarter _Lu’ong_ = ¼ _tael_ (9·762 gram.). - -The lowest unit then was the quarter _nail_ of 152½ grains troy, whilst -the largest was the _nên_ of 6500 grains. These ingots did not circulate -freely but were generally kept in wealthy families as reserve treasure. - -In very similar manner in Greece and Italy gold and silver, fashioned -into talents and bars or wedges, were employed side by side with the -bronze _oboli_ or _spits_ which served as the ordinary currency of -every-day life. - -We have now seen that the highest unit employed for silver and gold is -the _Nên_ or bar of ten _taels_ or ounces. Before going further it will -be convenient to describe briefly what we may term the Chinese system of -_avoirdupois_ weight. Then we shall give the system borrowed from the -Chinese and used in Cambodia and Cochin-China. - - _Chinese._ - - 10 _fên_ = 1 _ch’en_ (mace). - 10 _ch’en_ = 1 _liang_, _tael_ or ounce. - 16 _tael_ = 1 _chin_, commonly known as catty, = 1⅓ lbs. English. - 100 catties = 1 _tan_ or _shih_, commonly known to us as the _picul_ - (= 133⅓ lbs. English). - - _Cambodia._ Money system. - - 60 cash or sapecs of zinc = 1 _tien_. - 10 _tien_ = 1 string. - 10 strings = 1 _nên_ or bar of silver (90 francs). - -The _nên_ is an ingot of silver of parallelopiped form, which is -invariably worth 100 strings of zinc cash[215]. This _nên_ is subdivided -for money of account as follows: - - 1 _nên_ (375 grammes) = 10 _denh_. - 1 _denh_ = 10 _chi_. - 1 _chi_ = 10 _hun_. - 1 _hun_ = 10 _li_. - -They employ a coin of silver called a _prac-bat_ or _preasat_, worth 4 -strings or ⅟₂₅ _nên_[216]. - -The Mexican piastre, which circulates also, is worth on the average about -6 strings of cash. - -1 gold ingot = 16 _nêns_ of silver. - -The half ingot of gold is also used = 8 ingots of silver. - -The unit of commercial or _avoirdupois_ weight is the _catty_ (called by -the Cambodians the _neal_) or pound. - - 1 _neal_ (catty) (600 grammes) = 16 _tomlongs_ or _taels_ (ounces). - 1 _tomlong_ (37·5 grammes) = 10 _chi_ (of 3·75 grammes). - 1 _chi_ = 10 _hun_. - -The preceding weights are plainly borrowed from the Chinese, whilst the -following are regarded as native in origin. - - 1 _pey_ = 0·292 grammes. - 4 _pey_ = 1 _fuong_ (1·174 grammes). - 2 _fuong_ = 1 _slong_ (2·344 grammes). - 4 _slong_ = 1 _bat_ (9·375 grammes). - 4 _bat_ = 1 _tomlong_ (37·5 grammes). - -For heavy merchandise they employ the _hap_ or _picul_. - -There are three varieties of _picul_: (1) that of the weight of 40 -strings of cash (= 100 catties), (2) that of 42 strings, (3) that of 45 -strings. - -It will be noticed that the first-mentioned is simply the standard of the -Chinese _picul_ of 133⅓ lbs. English, whilst the others are native. - -In Annam we found that the ingots of gold and silver, consisting of ten -_luongs_ or _nails_, were called _nên_. The _luong_ was equal in weight -to the Chinese _liung_, and Cambodian _tomlong_, and was also called -_dinh_ (_dinh-bac_, _nail of silver_), thus being identical with the ten -_denh_ into which the Cambodian _nên_ or bar is divided. - -In Laos[217] we again find the Chinese _picul_ as the highest weight -unit. It is divided into 100 catties (here called _Chang_) of 600 grammes -each (1⅓ lb. Eng.). - - 1 _picul_ = 100 _catties_. - 1 _catty_ (_chang_) = 10 _damling_ (60 grammes). - 1 _damling_ = 4 _bat_ (15 grammes). - 1 _bat_ = 4 _chi_ (3·75 grammes). - 1 _chi_ = 10 _hun_. - -All these or their equivalents are used as money of account. “If there is -but little coin in Laos,” says M. Aymonier, “there are monies of account -in abundance.” In the south-west of the country, Bassak and Attopoeu, -Cambodian currency is employed, and they count by the _nên_ or bar of -silver. - - 1 _nên_ = 10 _denhs_ (money of account). - 1 _denh_ = 10 strings of _cash_. - -The _string_ is also money of account and is worth the same as the string -of Annam, which is equal to the _sling_ or Siamese franc (which is worth -75 or 80 centimes). The _nên_ is also divided into 100 _chi_, and as -there are 100 strings in the _nên_, the string of cash is equivalent to -a _chi_ of silver (3·75 gram.). The Siamese coins known also to Cambodia -were the weight and money units of the ancient Cambodians, who probably -weighed their precious metals. In Laos all of them except the _tical_ -are only monies of account. The _tical_ or _bat_ which under the ancient -round form[218] was called _clom_ in Cambodia is actually struck as a -small piastre in Cambodia and Siam in imitation of European money. This -_tical_ is worth 4 Siamese _slings_, but the only monetary division of it -known in Laos is the local _lat_ or small ingot of copper. - - 4 copper _lats_ = 1 silver _tical_ (= 4 _sling_ = 3 francs). - 4 _tical_ = 1 _damling_. - 20 _damling_ = 1 _catty_ (_chang_). - 50 _catties_ = 1 _picul_. - -The _chang_ or _catty_ of silver is a double one, hence 50 _catties_ of -silver are equal to 100 _catties_ of ordinary commercial weight. - -The _catty_ of silver thus weighs 1200 grammes instead of 600 grammes. - -They likewise use the _moeun_ of silver = 10 _changs_ = ⅕ _picul_, -but more generally the _moeun_ is used as a measure of capacity which -contains 20 _catties_ of shelled rice, but as a measure of capacity it -varies and is sometimes equal to 20 _catties_, sometimes to 25 _catties_ -of rice. That it really is a measure of capacity incorporated at a -later date into the weight system like our own _bushels_, _barrels_ -and _quarters_, is made probable by the fact that in the provinces of -Tonlé, Ropon, and Melou Préy they employ a _tramem_ or _bag_ containing -10 Cambodian _catties_, and in the province of Siphoum the _moeun_ is -sometimes the name given to a bag or pannier of a cubit in depth, and a -cubit in width at the mouth. It is usually called _kanchoen_ (_pannier_), -and contains 25 _catties_ of rice, and 36 _kanchoen_ make a _cartload_. - -We learn from another part of Laos an interesting fact which also throws -some light on the development of the larger weight units from measures of -capacity. For since in some parts of that country the cocoanut is used -as the measure of capacity, and as _neal_, the native Cambodian name for -the _catty_, means simply a cocoanut, it looks as though this was the -real origin of the catty universally employed over all Further Asia. -This likewise gives us the reason why the catty of silver is twice the -weight of a catty of rice. If a weight unit is derived from a measure -of capacity, according to the nature of the substance or liquid with -which the measure is filled, the weight unit derived will be heavier or -lighter, just as the Irish barrel of wheat is 6 stones heavier than the -barrel of oats. A cocoa-nut, or bamboo-joint filled with silver will give -a far heavier weight unit than if it is weighed when filled with rice. - -We have now had a survey of the monetary and weight systems of China, -Annam, Cambodia and Laos, and everywhere found that the _nên_ or bar -of 10 _taels_ is the highest known metallic unit, and that except in -Laos the counting of money even by the catty or pound is unknown, the -Chinese themselves only employing the _tael_ as their highest monetary -unit, the catty being kept as in Annam and Cambodia itself for ordinary -goods. This is borne out by the practices in the weighing of gold. In -Attopoeu, the region where gold is found, 8 _chi_ (= 2 _ticals_ or _bats_ -= 4 _slings_ = 30 grammes) are exchanged for a bar of silver (= 100 -_chi_ = 375 grammes). M. Aymonier thinks that the gold _bat_, that is -to say the weight in gold of a _tical_ (15 grammes, 234 grains Troy), -must have been the unit for weighing gold, as formerly it was necessary -to give a gold _bat_ in order to marry a girl of the blood royal. This -gets considerable support from the fact that in Sieng-Khan the gold _bat_ -has only the weight of a _sling_ or _chi_ (58½ grains Troy), that is the -quarter of a _tical_, and the weight of the _tical_ or _bat_ is called a -_damling_. In fact they hardly reckon gold in any other way than by this -small _damling_ which is only the weight of a _tical_ (234 grains Troy). -In reference to my argument that as gold is the first of all things to -be weighed, the primitive weight unit is certain to be small, as no -man has, as a rule, any need to weigh his gold by the hundredweight or -large mercantile talent, this fact that the highest unit for weighing -gold in Attopoeu is so small, not even reaching the weight of the -Graeco-Phoenician heavy gold shekel or double ox-unit of 260 grains, is -of considerable importance. - -This region supplies us with yet another point which can help to clear -up the history of early metallic currency. The iron ingots which come -from the Cambodian provinces of Kompong Soai form a special kind of -money. These ingots are not weighed, but they have the length of the -space between the base of the thumb and the tip of the forefinger, they -are in breadth two fingers, and one finger in thickness in the middle, -thinning off to either end. Three of these ingots = 1 _chi_ = 1 _sling_ = -1 string of cash; thus 12 ingots = 1 _tical_ of silver. These ingots are -also counted by bags of 20; thus 1 _nên_ or bar of silver = 15 bags = 300 -ingots of iron. - -At Bassak the iron ingot is replaced by the _lat_, the copper ingot -of Laos, which varies in value in the different moeungs (provinces) -according to its size. Here is a remarkable confirmation of my contention -that it was only at a period considerably later than the weighing of gold -that the scales were employed for copper and iron, the catty being kept -as in Annam and Cambodia for ordinary goods. - -We can now make a further advance in our quest of the first beginnings of -money and weights in this interesting region. There are many wild tribes -in Annam and Laos, who still employ no method save that of barter, when -dealing one with another, although when they touch on the more civilized -regions they have to conform their native systems in some degree to the -more developed currency of their neighbours, from whom they have to -procure the few luxuries of their simple life. We saw above that among -the wild tribesmen all articles have a well-defined relationship to each -other, some particular article being usually taken as the common measure -of all the rest, or rather two or three so that they may have units for -estimating their more common as well as their more valuable possessions. -So in Annam the buffalo often serves as the general unit of value for the -more valuable articles. Thus a large chaldron is worth three buffalos, -a handsome gong two buffalos, a small gong one buffalo, six copper -dishes one buffalo, two lances one buffalo, a rhinoceros horn eight -buffalos, a large pair of elephant’s tusks six buffalos, a small pair -three buffalos[219]. Thus the buffalo which takes the place of the ox -in China and South-Eastern Asia, is used as the commercial unit in like -fashion as we found the ox employed among the Homeric Greeks, the ancient -Italians, the ancient Irish, and the modern Ossetes. But the Annamites -themselves employ as currency the silver bar and string of cash as we saw -above: accordingly when the hill tribes have dealings with the people of -the plain the full grown buffalo is reckoned at a bar of silver, or, its -equivalent, 100 strings of cash[220], while the small buffalo is set at -fifty strings. - -Thus the Orang Glaï have often to buy a pair of elephant’s tusks at -the cost of eight buffalos or eight bars of silver. Taxes are paid in -buffalos; thus the Tjrons of Karang pay a buffalo for each house, or -compound for the whole village by a payment of ten buffalos whose horns -are at least as long as their ears[221]. Here then we find that exactly -as the ancient Irish when they borrowed the Roman system of _unciae_ -and _scripula_ (_unga_ and _screapall_) equated the ounce of silver to -their own unit, the cow, so we find these wild tribes of Annam forced to -adapt their primitive unit to the metallic unit of their more cultured -neighbours. Again, the Bahnars of Annam, who dwell on the borders of -Laos, have much the same system. With them the highest unit is the -_head_, _i.e._ a male slave, who is estimated, according to his strength, -age and skill, at 5, 6, or 7 buffalos, or the same number of kettles, as -the buffalo and the kettle have the same value, which naturally varies -with the size and age of the animal and the quality of the kettle. A full -grown buffalo, or a large kettle, is worth seven glazed jars of Chinese -shape with a capacity of 10 to 15 litres each. One jar is worth 4 _muks_. -The _muk_ was originally the name of some special article, but now is -simply used as a unit of account. Each _muk_ is worth 10 _mats_, or iron -hoes, which are manufactured by the Cédans, and which form the sole -agricultural implement of the wild tribes of all these regions. This hoe -is the smallest monetary unit used by the Bahnars, and is worth about one -penny in European goods. This _mat_ or hoe serves them as small currency -and all petty transactions are carried on by it. Thus a large bamboo hat -costs 2 hoes, a Bahnar knife 2 hoes, ordinary arrows are sold at 30 for -1 hoe and so on. A large elephant is worth from 10 to 15 “_heads_” or -slaves, whilst a horse costs 3 or 4 kettles or buffalos. When we read of -such a state of human society we seem to be transported back into that -far away Homeric time, and as we hear of slaves, and kine, chaldrons and -kettles we think of the old Epics with their tale of slaves valued in -beeves, and “crumple-horned shambling kine, and tripods” and “shining -chaldrons.” In the light of such analogies we at last can understand the -significance of the 10 axes and 10 “half-axes” which formed the first and -second prizes in the _Iliad_[222] when Achilles “set out for the archers -the dark-hued iron, and put down 10 axes and 10 half-axes.” Who can doubt -that these axes and half-axes played much the same part in the Homeric -system of currency as the hoes do at this present moment in that of the -Bahnars of Annam? Probably such too were the 12 axes which Penelope[223] -brought out from the treasure chamber to serve as a target for the -suitors in their contests with the bow of Ulysses. The hoe is thus the -lowest unit of currency among the Bahnars. From the known interrelations -of all the articles of daily life it is easy to estimate how many hoes -any even of their more costly possessions is worth. Thus the full-grown -buffalo = 7 jars = 28 _muks_ = 280 hoes, or about £1. 3_s._ 4_d._ of our -money. All these transactions require no use of weights, being reckoned -by bulk or tale. But now comes the most interesting feature for us, a -people in the complete stage of barter, but who actually possess, work -and traffic in gold. - -In all the streams on the side next Laos the wild people wash gold, -men, women and children all alike joining in this laborious industry, -and employ as ‘cradles’ little baskets made of bamboo. The gold is sold -in dust at the _rate of the weight in gold of one grain of maize for -one hoe_. Here then we have finally run to ground one of the principal -objects of our quest. We have a primitive people, who carry on all -their trade by means of barter, who have no currency in the precious -metals, but who employ as their most general unit of small value the -iron hoe. They are found to weigh one thing and one only, namely gold, -and for that purpose they do not employ any weight standard borrowed -from China or Annam, but equate a certain amount of gold to the unit of -barter, and then fix as a constant that amount of gold by balancing it -against a grain of the corn that forms one of the chief staples of their -subsistence. Nature herself has supplied man with weights of admirable -exactitude ready to his hand in the natural seeds of plants, and as soon -as he finds out the need of determining with great care the precious -substance which he has to win with toil and hardship from the stream, he -takes the proffered means and fashions for himself a balance and weights. - -We saw that a buffalo was worth 280 hoes; it is therefore an easy task -for a Bahnar to tell its worth in gold. It was equally simple for the -first Aryan or Semite who framed the gold shekel standard to compute -the exact amount of gold which would represent the value of an ox. But -perhaps we have not reached the earliest stage of all in the development -of a standard for the sale of gold. I ventured to put forward in 1887 the -suggestion that the way in which the amount of gold which represented -the value of a cow was first fixed approximately was by _measuring_ -it in some way, as for instance by taking the amount which would fit -in the palm of the hand, somewhat in the fashion that rustics measure -gunpowder or shot for a gun. What was then but a mere guess may be now -regarded as fairly certain. That excellent observer, M. Aymonier, notes -that the Tapak tribe, who live at a distance of six days’ journey from -Attopoeu, wash gold. The women wade into the streams (after having first -carefully placed five flowers or five leaves at the foot of a tree close -by the stream to ensure good luck). Each dips a water-tight bag into the -sand at the bottom of the stream, and after a long series of rewashings -and cleansings at last gets the gold dust in a state of purity[224]. -The savages carry it to Attopoeu, and sell it at the rate of 9 _chi_ -of gold for a _nên_ or bar of silver (= 100 _chi_). The relative value -in Attopoeu is 8 _chi_ or two _bats_ of gold to one bar (= 100 _chi_) -of silver, or as they express it one _tical_ of gold is changed for 12 -_ticals_ of silver. “The _tical_ of gold is,” it is said, “equivalent to -the weight of 32 grains of a peculiar kind of rice of the country, with -large grains and of a red colour, which is called ivory rice.” Here we -have the weighing by natural grains as before, but Aymonier adds (p. 35) -that “the natives relate that gold was formerly so abundant that without -_weighing it people were content to measure_ it. A little stick of gold -an inch broad and a span long _was exchanged against a buffalo_.” - -We found the Bahnars equating a small quantity of gold to their smallest -unit of barter, the hoe; now we find that in the wild parts of Laos the -unit of gold, before weights of natural grains were employed, was based -by measurement upon the buffalo, the chief unit of barter. Thus we have -found among the remote peoples of Further Asia the very method of fixing -a metallic unit, which I have endeavoured to prove was that followed by -the Aryan and Semitic races in arriving at that shekel of gold, which was -the common standard of all the civilized peoples of the ancient world, -and which was the parent of all our mediaeval and modern systems. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII. - -HOW WERE PRIMITIVE WEIGHT UNITS FIXED? - - Ordiar ex minimis. - - _Carm. de ponderibus._ - - -We have seen that the Chinese system of weights is based upon natural -seeds of plants, and we have actually found the wild hillsmen of Annam -and Laos weighing their gold dust by grains of maize and rice. But it may -be urged by the advocates of a Babylonian scientific origin based on the -one-fifth of the cube of the royal ell, which in turn is based upon the -sun’s apparent diameter, that the Chinese names of weights are merely -conventional terms taken from the name of certain seeds, and on the other -hand that the mere fact that a very barbarous people like the Bahnars -of Annam weigh their gold dust by grains of rice is no evidence that -people in a higher stage of culture were content with such rude metric -standards. I propose to show in this chapter that it has been the actual -practice of peoples as far advanced in civilization as the ancient Greeks -or Italians, to employ seeds as weights down to the present day in Asia, -that it was the general practice in the middle ages, that it was likewise -the practice of the Romans of the empire, of the Greeks, and finally that -such too was the practice of the Assyrians themselves at a period long -before the bronze Lion weights were ever cast, or the stone Duck weights -were carved. If I succeed in proving this proposition, the doctrine that -the art of weighing was scientific must give place to the contention that -it was purely empirical. - -As we have found among the barbarians of Asia the first beginnings of the -art of weighing by the employment of grains of rice and maize, it is best -for us to take first in order some other Asiatic countries lying towards -the same region. - -The great islands of the Indian Archipelago, singularly rich in all -endowments of nature, have for ages enjoyed a high degree of culture. -Conveniently placed, they have received all the advantages of contact -with the civilization of China, India, and even that of the Arabs from -the distant west of Asia. Never were people more favourably situated -for obtaining foreign systems of weights and measures, if they felt so -disposed, than the Malays of Java and Sumatra and the other islands of -the Indian Archipelago. That admirable observer, John Crawfurd, writing -in 1820 says[225]: “In the native measures everything is estimated by -bulk and not by weight. Among a rude people corn would necessarily be -the first commodity that would render it a matter of necessity and -convenience to fix some means for its exchange or barter. The manner in -which this is effected among the Javanese will point out the imperfection -of their methods. Rice, the principal grain, is in reaping nipped off -the stalk with a few inches of the straw, tied up in sheaves or parcels -and then housed or sold, or otherwise disposed of. The quantity of rice -in the straw which can be clenched between the thumb and the middle -finger is called a _gagam_ or handful, and forms the lowest denomination. -Three _gagams_ or handfuls make one _pochong_, the quantity which can be -clenched between both hands joined. This is properly a sheaf. Two sheaves -or _pochongs_ joined together, as is always the case, for the convenience -of being thrown across a stick for transportation, make a double sheaf -or _gedeng_. Five _gedengs_ make a _songga_, the highest measure in some -provinces, or twenty-four make an _hamat_, the more general measure. From -their very nature these measures are indefinite and hardly amount to more -accuracy than we employ ourselves when we speak of sheaves of corn. In -the same district they are tolerably regular in the quantity of grain or -straw they contain, but such is the wide difference between different -districts or provinces, that the same nominal measures are often twice, -nay three times as large in one as in another. For the _hamat_ or -larger measure perhaps about eight hundred pounds avoirdupois might be -considered a fair average for the different provinces of Java. This may -convey some loose notion of the quantities intended to be represented. -For dry and liquid measures they may naturally have recourse to the shell -of the cocoanut and the joint of the bamboo which are constantly at hand. -The first called by the Malays _chupa_ is estimated to be two and a half -pounds avoirdupois. The second is called by some tribes _kulch_ and is -equal to a gallon, but the most common bamboo measure is the _gantung_, -which is twice this amount. To those exact and business-like dealers, -the Chinese, and in a less degree to the Arabs and people of the east -coast of the Indian Peninsula, the Indian islanders are chiefly indebted -for any precision we find in their weights. In all the traffic carried -on between the commercial tribes and foreigners, the Chinese weights, -though occasionally under native names, are constantly referred to. The -lowest of these, called sometimes by the native name of Bungkal, but more -frequently by the Chinese name of Tahil [_tael_], varies from twenty-four -pennyweights nine grains to thirty pennyweights and twenty grains. Ten -of these make a _kati_ [_catty_] or about twenty ounces avoirdupois; -one hundred _katis_ make a _pikul_ or 133⅓ lbs. avoirdupois, and thirty -_pikuls_ make one _koyan_. Of these the _kati_ and the _pikul_, because -they are constantly referred to in considerable mercantile dealings, are -the only well-defined weights. The _koyan_ by some is reckoned at twenty -_pikuls_, by others at twenty-seven, twenty-eight and even at forty. The -Dutch are fond of equalizing it with their own standards and consider it -as equal to a _last_ or two tons. - -“The _Bahara_, an Arabic weight, is occasionally used in the weighing of -pepper, but its amount is very indefinite, for in some of the countries -of the Archipelago it amounts to 396 lbs., and in others to 560 lbs.” - -Elsewhere he says[226], “The _picul_ is strictly a Chinese weight as -its amount shews, though the term happens in this case to be native. Its -meaning in the vernacular languages is a natural load or burthen, and -when used in this primitive sense it, without reference to the Chinese -weight, is not found to exceed eighty pounds avoirdupois.” This is a fact -of great importance as we shall see when we come to the development of -the _mina_ and _talent_ of Graeco-Asiatic commerce. - -Finally Crawfurd says, “The nice question of weighing gold, the only -native commodity which could not be estimated by tale or bulk, has given -rise to the use of weights among the natives themselves. Grains of rice -are still occasionally used in the weighing of gold in the neighbourhood -of the gold mines in Sumatra” (p. 274). - -I have quoted at full length these passages in order that the reader -may accept with fuller confidence statements so instructive as regards -the origin of weight, the first object to be weighed, and the origin -of the _picul_, or as we may call it the _talent_ of Eastern Asia. -Nine years before Crawfurd wrote there had appeared William Marsden’s -admirable _History of Sumatra_[227]. He gives us far fuller information -on the subject of gold than Crawfurd has done. Thus he writes: “In -those parts of the country where traffic in this article (gold dust) -is considerable, it is employed as currency instead of coin; every man -carries small scales about him, and purchases are made with it so low -as to the weight of a grain or two of _padi_. Various seeds are used -as gold weights, but more especially these two: the one called _rakat_ -or _saga-tim-bañgan_ (_Glycine abrus_ L or _abrus maculatus_ of the -Batavian trans.), being the well-known scarlet pea with a black spot, -twenty-four of which constitute a _mas_, and sixteen _mas_ (mace) a -_tāil_ (_tael_): the other called _saga puku_ and _kondori batang_ -(_Aden anthera pavonia_ L), a scarlet or rather coral bean much larger -than the former, and without the black spot. It is the candarin weight -of the Chinese, of which one hundred make a tāil and equal, according -to the tables published by Stevens, to 5·7984 gr. Troy, but the average -weight of those in my possession is 10·50 Troy grains. The tāil differs -however in the northern and southern parts of the island, being at Natal, -Padang, Bencoolen and elsewhere twenty-six pennyweights six grains. At -Achin the _bangkal_ of thirty pennyweights twenty-one grains is the -standard. Spanish dollars are everywhere current and accounts are kept -in dollars, _sukus_ (imaginary quarter dollars) and _kepping_ or copper -cash, of which four hundred go to the dollar. Besides these there are -silver _fanams_, single, double and treble (the latter, called _tali_), -coined at Madras, twenty-four _fanams_ or eight _talis_ being equal to -the Spanish dollar, which is always valued in the English settlements at -five shillings.” - -He adds that copper is sold by weight (_picul_), and that tin, which was -accidentally discovered in 1710 by the burning of a house, is exported -for the most part in small pieces or cakes called _tampangs_, sometimes -in slabs (p. 172), and furthermore they purchase bar iron by measurement -instead of by weight (p. 176). - -Several points of great importance are to be noticed in the foregoing -statements. Firstly, that whilst for foreign trade with the Chinese -they employ the Chinese weight, which we know always by its Malay name -of _picul_, a well-defined weight standard of 133⅓ lbs. avoirdupois, -they had evidently a native unit of weight, their own _picul_, which -simply means and actually was as much as a man can carry on his back, -and which, as we saw, rarely exceeds 80 lbs. avoirdupois. This seems to -give us an insight into the manner in which the most primitive highest -weight unit is arrived at. A man’s load is one of those natural standards -which will vary according to race and climate, and the conditions under -which the load has to be borne. Thus, the average weight of the load -borne by a dock porter who has to endure the strain for only some few -yards, will of course be far higher than that carried by the porters -of travellers in Central Africa, where the load has to be borne day -after day on a march of several hundred, or a thousand miles. Thus in -the case of the Madis, a pure negro tribe, the average load seems to -be about 50 pounds, which they can carry “20 miles a day for eight or -ten consecutive days without shewing any signs of distress[228].” The -Chinese, the superiors in science of all Eastern Asia, have carefully -adjusted this “_load_,” and it makes, as we have seen above, their -highest weight unit. Its particular amount is probably due to the -fact that, having carefully fixed the weight of the smaller units, -the candarin, the mace, the _liung_ or _tael_, and the _catty_, their -pound, they simply took the hundredfold of the _chang_ or _catty_ as the -standard for their highest unit, and thus that which at an earlier stage -was just as vague and fluctuating as the _picul_, or back-loads in use -still among the less-advanced peoples of the Indian Archipelago, became -a fixed scientific unit. Secondly, we must notice that the Malays have -not followed the Chinese in the subdivisions of the _catty_. For whilst -in China 16 _taels_ or ounces go to the catty, the Malays follow more -strictly the decimal system, and make their catty simply the tenfold -of the _tael_ or ounce. This same method of division we found already -in Annam, and not only in Annam but also in Cambodia and Laos we found -the silver _nên_ or bar, invariably consisting of ten such parts, -corresponding in weight to the Chinese _tael_, sixteen of which go to the -catty. - -It would appear, then, that here we have a combination of units of weight -and units of capacity. The higher gold and silver unit, the _nên_, is -simply the tenfold of the lower unit, the _tael_ or ounce, while the -_catty_, which is never employed in China in estimating gold or silver, -but is a genuine commercial unit, was probably originally some natural -unit of capacity. We saw strong evidence of this in Cambodia, where the -name for this weight is _neal_ or cocoanut, and we have just found the -cocoanut as the chief unit of dry measure amongst the Malays of the -Indian Seas. It was probably found that 16 times the _tael_ or ounce -came nearer to the weight of the contents of a cocoanut or bamboo joint -(whatever kind of matter they may have weighed in it for this purpose, -whether rice, or water), than the original 10 ounces, which formed the -_bar_, the highest genuine weight unit. Sixteen was likewise a convenient -number, its factors being numerous, and it could be divided in four -portions, each of which contained four other units. It will presently be -a question as to whether similar influences have not produced our pound -avoirdupois, with its 16 sub-multiples. - -M. Moura found a difficulty regarding the Cambodian _neal_ or cocoanut -_catty_; because a _neal_ of rice only weighs half the weight, at which -the _neal_ is rated as a weight. But we saw in Java that the _chapa_ -or cocoanut measure is estimated at 2½ pounds avoirdupois. It is then -not improbable that some liquid or substance far heavier than rice was -used to fill the cocoanut, when the value of its contents was being -ascertained by weighing so as to serve as a general unit. The same -variation in weight, owing to the different nature of its contents, -has, as mentioned before, given rise in Ireland to _barrels_ of various -weights. Thus a _barrel_ of wheat contains 20 stone avoirdupois, a -_barrel_ of potatoes 24 stone, a _barrel_ of barley 16 stone, and a -_barrel_ of oats 14 stone. This diversity simply arose from comparative -lightness or heaviness of the different commodities which were measured -by one and the same unit of capacity: the barrel itself, having been -fixed by a process of measurement, similar to that by which the milk-pan -was regulated among the Welsh, and the pannier among the natives of Laos. -The principle by which higher units of capacity or weight are formed is -likewise well illustrated by the instance given above of the _cartload_ -of rice, which is simply regarded as the multiple of the pannier or bag, -which forms the smaller unit for rice. The size of the _cartload_ would -be conditioned by the size of the cart usually employed, which in turn -would depend on a variety of other things, such as the nature of the -country, or its roads, or the kind of animals employed for draught. The -vagueness in amount of the _koyan_ or multiple of the _picul_ noticed by -Crawfurd, may thus meet with a reasonable explanation. - -We may now return to the mainland of Asia, where we shall find in the -weight system of the Hindus at least one remarkable point of affinity -with that of Sumatra. Marsden has told us that the _rakat_ or scarlet -pea with a black spot is one of the chief weights employed for gold in -Sumatra. This _rakat_ is none other than the _ratti_, which is usually -taken as the basis of the modern Hindu weight system. “This weight,” says -that eminent scholar Colebrooke[229], “is the lowest denomination in -general use, commonly known by the name _ratti_, the same with _rattika_, -which, as well as _ṛaktika_, denotes the red seed as _kṛishnala_ -indicates the black seed of the _gunjá_-creeper.” Mr Thomas has shown the -true weight of the _ratti_ is 1·75 grains[230]. - -Many different standards have been used in India for various purposes, -one for the weighing of gold, another for the weighing of silver, another -used by jewellers, and yet another by the medical tribe, but all alike -start from the _ratti_. - -“The determination of the true weight of the _ratti_ has done much both -to facilitate and give authority to the comparison of the ultimately -divergent standards of the ethnic kingdoms of India. Having discovered -the guiding unit, all other calculations become simple, and present -singularly convincing results, notwithstanding that the bases of all -these estimates rest upon so erratic a test as the growth of the seed of -the _gunjá_-creeper (_Abrius precatorius_) under the varied influences of -soil and climate. Nevertheless the small compact grain, checked in early -times by other products of nature, is seen to have the remarkable faculty -of securing a uniform average throughout the entire continent of India, -which only came to be disturbed when monarchs like Shîr Shâh and Akbar -in their vanity raised the weight of the coinage without any reference -to the numbers of _rattis_, inherited from Hindu sources, and officially -recognized in the old, but entirely disregarded and left undefined in the -reformed Muhammadan mintages[231].” We shall learn shortly that in its -uniformity the _ratti_ does not differ from other seeds such as wheat and -barley. Probably, however, the fact that the _gunjá_-creeper was found -everywhere in India gave it its position of a universal standard. Those -who wish to study the elaborate systems of later times employed in India -can consult the works of Colebrooke and Thomas already referred to. - -The legislators Manu, Yájnavalkya, and Nárada trace all weights from -the least visible quantity which they concur in naming _trasareṇu_ and -describing as the very small mote, “which may be discovered in a sunbeam -passing through a lattice.” Writers on medicine proceed a step further, -and affirm that a _trasareṇu_ contains 30 _paramáṇu_ or atoms. The -legislators above-named proceed from the _trasareṇu_ as follows: - - 8 _trasareṇus_ = 1 _likshá_, or minute poppy-seed. - 3 _likshás_ = 1 _raja-sarshapa_, or black mustard-seed. - 3 _raja-sarshapas_ = 1 _gaura-sarshapa_, or white mustard-seed. - 6 _gaura-sarshapas_ = 1 _yava_, or middle-sized barley-corn. - 3 _yavas_ = 1 _kṛishnala_, or seed of the _gunjá_. - -But as we want to learn what was the actual usage of the Hindus, instead -of dealing with the mere theoretic statements of late authors, I shall at -once quote in full the tables given in the _Līlāvati_ of Brahmegupta, who -wrote his Algebra and Arithmetic about 600 A.D.[232] - -MONEY (_by tale_). Twice ten cowries[233] are a _cácíní_; four of these -are a _pána_, sixteen of which must here be considered as a _dramma_, and -in like manner a _nishká_ as consisting of sixteen of these. - -WEIGHT. A _gunjá_ (or seed of _Abrus_), is reckoned equal to two -barley-corns (_yavas_). A _valla_ is two _gunjás_ and eight of these -are a _dharana_, two of which make a _yadyanaca_. In like manner one -_dhataca_ is composed of fourteen _vallas_. - -Half ten _gunjás_ are called a _másha_ by such as are conversant with -the use of the balance; a _karsha_ contains sixteen of what are called -_máshas_, a _pala_ four _karshas_. A _karsha_ of gold is named _suvarṇa_. - -This is quite in harmony with the _weight_ of _gold_ as given by the -legislators: - - 5 _kṛishnalas_ or _raktikas_ = 1 _másha_. - 16 _máshas_ = 1 _karsha_, _aksha_, _tolaka_, or - _suvarṇa_. - 4 _karshas_ or _suvarṇas_ = 1 _pala_ or _nishká_. - 10 _palas_ = 1 _dharana_ of gold. - -Yájnavalkya adds that according to some 5 _suvarṇas_ = 1 _pala_. - -All the authorities seem agreed in regarding the term _suvarṇa_ as -peculiar to gold, for which metal it is also a name. - -We learn thus that the Hindu standards were fixed by means of natural -seeds, and at no period do they, clever mathematicians as they were, -seem to have made any effort at obtaining a mathematical basis for their -metric systems. - -We also observe that the weight known as the _suvarṇa_ or _gold_ weight -_par excellence_ is the weight of a _karsha_ or 80 _gunjás_, which, if we -take the _gunjá_ = 1·75 grains Troy, gives the weight of the _suvarṇa_ as -140 grains. I have already (p. 127) taken the original Hindu gold unit -as not far from this amount. From the _Līlāvati_ we may now with little -misgiving assume it to have been such. - -Lastly, let us observe that the barley-corn appears as the basis of the -system in the tables of Brahmegupta and Bhascara, although the _ṛaktika_ -evidently overmasters it in the course of time. This is very interesting, -for it indicates that the Hindus had learned the art of weighing in a -comparatively northern region, where barley was the chief cereal under -cultivation. If the system had been invented in the more southern parts -of India, the grain of rice, the staple of life in the southern regions, -would certainly have appeared as the sub-multiple of the _ṛaktika_, -instead of the barley. As a matter of fact, rice-grains seem to have -been occasionally used locally, for Colebrooke remarks that “it is also -said that the _ṛaktika_ is equal in weight to four grains of rice in the -husk.” This supposition is completely in accord with what we found in -Persia, where the modern weight system for gold, silver and medicine -runs thus: - - 3 _gendum dsho_ (barley-corn) = 1 _nashod_. - 4 _nashod_ (a kind of pea, lupin?) = 1 _dung_. - 6 _dung_ = 1 _miscal_[234]. - -Although the _miscal_ and _habba_ denote Arabic influence, we may, -without straining probabilities, conjecture that the use of the -_barley-corn_ here as well as in India, where we found it at a period -anterior to Muhammadan conquest, indicates that in Persia it existed -likewise from the earliest times. The close relationship between the -ancient Hindus and ancient Persians makes it all the more likely. It is -also pointed out that formerly the _nashod_ was divided into _three_ -instead of four grains. As the Arabs divide their _karat_ into four -_habbas_, it is all the more likely that the 3 barley-corns = 1 _nashod_ -belong to the ancient system. - -The Arab weight system is based on the grain of wheat, four of which -make a _karat_ (the seed of the carob or St John’s Bread)[235]. -Occasionally in the Arab writers mention is made of a karat divided into -3 _habbas_[235]. The weight of the karat remains unchanged, but the -grains in this case are barley grains, since, as we shall see presently, -3 grains of barley are equal to 4 grains of wheat (·063 × 3 = ·047 × 4). - -It will now be most convenient for us to begin in the extreme west, and -once more from that work back towards the coast of the Aegean Sea, in -which our chief interest must always be centred. - -Whether the Kelts of Ireland had any indigenous weight system or not, we -have no direct evidence, although we do know as a fact that when Caesar -landed in Kent he found the Britons employing coins of gold and bronze, -and bars (or according to some MSS. _rings_) of iron adjusted to a fixed -weight. However the earliest Irish documents reveal that people using -a system of weights for silver directly borrowed from the older Roman -system (although it is likely that they had a native standard for gold). -As the _solidus_ and _denarius_ became the chief units of Europe from the -time of Constantine the Great (336 A.D.), the Irish probably received -their system at an earlier date. - - 1 _unga_ (_uncia_) = 24 _screapalls_ (_scripula_). - 1 _screapall_ = 3 _pingiuns_. - 1 _pingiun_ = 8 grains of wheat[236]. - -When we pass to England, the very word _grain_ which we employ to express -our lowest weight unit, would of itself suggest that originally some -kind of _grain_ or _seed_ was employed by our forefathers in weighing, -but as the grain in use among us is the _grain Troy_, and as we have not -yet learned its origin, it will not do to argue vaguely from etymology. -But a little enquiry soon brings us to a time when the grain Troy did -not as yet form the basis of English weights, and when a far simpler -method of fixing the weight of the kings coinage was in vogue. It was -ordained by 12 Henry VII. ch. V. “that the bushel is to contain eight -gallons of wheat, and every gallon eight pounds of wheat, and every -pound twelve ounces of Troy weight, and every ounce twenty sterlings, -and every sterling to be of the weight of thirty-two grains of wheat -that grew in the midst of the ear of wheat according to the old laws of -this land[237].” Going backwards we find that in 1280 (8 Edward I.) the -penny was to weigh 24 grains, which by weight then appointed were as much -as the former 32 grains of wheat. By the Statute _De Ponderibus_, of -uncertain date but put by some in 1265, it was ordained that the penny -sterling should weigh 32 grains of wheat, round and dry, and taken from -the midst of the ear. Going back a step still further we find that by the -Laws of Ethelred, every penny weighed 32 grains of wheat[238], and as the -pennies struck by King Alfred weigh 24 grains Troy, we may assume without -hesitation that they were struck on the same standard of 32 grains of -wheat. Thus from Alfred (871-901) down to Henry VII. (1485-1509), we -find the penny fixed by this primitive method, and the actual weight of -the coins, as tested by the balance at the present day, affords proof -positive of the method. - -But all the standards of mediaeval Europe (with the exception of the -Irish) were based on the gold _solidus_ of Constantine the Great[239]. -The _solidus_ (itself weighing 72 grains Troy or ⅟₇₂ of the Roman pound) -was divided into 24 _siliquae_. The _siliqua_, or as the Greeks called it -_keration_ (κεράτιον, from which comes our word _carat_), was the seed -of the _carob_, or as it is often called, _St John’s Bread_ (_Ceratonia -siliqua_ L). Thus the lowest unit in the Roman system, as it is usually -given, is found to be the seed of a plant. The same holds of the Greek -system, for the _drachma_ is described as containing 18 _kerata_ or -_keratia_, whilst according to others “it contains three _grammata_, but -the _gramma_ contains two _obols_ and the _obol_ contains three _kerata_, -and the _keras_ contains four _wheat grains_[240].” From this we see that -the _keration_ or _siliqua_ was further reduced to 4 _sitaria_, or grains -of wheat, whilst from another ancient table of weights[241] we learn that -the _siliqua_ likewise equals 3 barley-corns (_siliqua grana ordei_ iii). -Hence it appears that 3 barley-corns = 4 wheat grains. Thus both Greek -and Roman systems just like the English and Irish take as their smallest -unit a grain of corn. This also throws important light on the origin of -that mysterious thing, the Troy grain. We saw above (8 Edward I.) that -at the time of its introduction into England that 24 grains Troy = 32 -grains of wheat, that is the Troy grain stands to wheat grain as 3:4. -But as we have just seen that the _siliqua_ = 3 barley-corns, and also -= 4 wheat-corns, it follows that 3 barley-corns = 4 wheat-corns. And as -3 Troy grains = 4 wheat-corns, it likewise follows that 3 Troy grains = -3 barley-corns, or in other words, the barley-corn and Troy grain are -the same things. It thus appears that the Troy grain is nothing more -than the barley-corn, which was used as the weight unit in preference -to the grain of wheat in some parts of the Roman empire. Furthermore -this relation between barley-corns and wheat-corns can be proved to be a -fact of Nature. In September, 1887, I placed in the opposite scales of a -balance 32 grains of wheat “dry and taken from the midst of the ear,” and -24 grains of barley taken from ricks of corn grown in the same field at -Fen Ditton, near Cambridge, and I thrice repeated the experiment; each -time they balanced so evenly that a half grain weight turned the scale. -The grain of Scotch wheat weighs ·047 gram, the Troy grain = ·064, ·047 × -4 = 188, ·064 × 3 = 192. Practically 4 wheat grains = 3 Troy grains. - -Before passing from the Greek and Roman standards I may add that even -higher denominations than the _siliqua_ were expressed by the seeds of -plants. The Romans made the lupin (_lupinus_) = 2 _siliquae_ and under -its Greek name of _thermos_ (θερμός), it was assigned a like value -(_Metrol. Script._ I. 81). In the _Carmen de Ponderibus_ (_Metrol. -Script._ II. 16), 6 grains of pulse (_grana lentis_) are made equal to -6 _siliquae_, and a like number of grains of spelt are given a similar -value. - -We next advance towards the East and take up the Semitic systems. We -have already had occasion to touch upon that of the Arabs when dealing -with the modern Persians. “There can be little doubt,” says Queipo (I. -360), “that the Arab system of weight was based on the grain of wheat.” -The _habba_ was their smallest unit. Four _habbas_ are equal to 1 -_karat_, the latter of course representing the _keration_ or _siliqua_, -and the former the 4 _sitaria_ or _wheat-grains_, which we saw were -its equivalent. This is the most ordinary value given to the karat in -Makrizi and the other Arabic writers on Metrology, but occasionally -we find the karat made equal to only 3 grains, which of course are -barley-corns. We saw above that in the Persian system the _nashod_ was -formerly divided into 4 _habbi_ of ·048 gram (which is plainly the weight -of the wheat-grain), whilst now it is divided into 3 grains each of ·063 -which represents the barley-corn, or in other words the Troy grain of -·064 gram. Of course the objection might be raised that as the Arabs -had borrowed their higher denominations such as the _dirhem_ (δραχμή) -and _dinar_ (_denarius_, δηνάριον), from the Greeks and Romans, and as -their standard weight the _mithkal_ is nothing more than the _sextula_ -or ⅙ of the Roman ounce, employed in the eastern Empire under the name -of _exagion_ (ἐξάγιον, whence comes the _saggio_ of Marco Polo), so too -their wheat-corns and barley-corns were not of their own devising, but -likewise adventitious. After what we have seen above (p. 166) to be the -practice of primitive people in the selling of gold, a traffic in which -the Arabs had been engaged for many ages, it would seem hardly necessary -to reply to such an argument, but as a more complete answer can be given -in the course of the last portion of this enquiry, we shall deal with it -in that place. - -We now come to the Assyrians themselves, from the discovery of whose -weights in the shape of lions and ducks, the whole modern theory of a -scientific origin for all the weight standards of the Greeks as well as -Asiatics and Egyptians has had its origin. But even within this sacred -precinct of _à priori_ metrology the irrepressible grain of corn springs -up vigorously, although almost choked by the abundant crop of tares which -have been sown around it. If we find that a Semitic people, who were -the ancients of the earth before Pelops passed from Asia into Greece, -or Romulus had founded his Asylum, employed the wheat grain as their -lowest weight unit, we may then well argue that ages before the birth of -the Prophet and the Arab conquest of Egypt and Syria, the Semitic folks -employed grains of corn to form their lowest weight unit. - -M. Aurès[242], a well-known Assyrian metrologist, has recently set forth -the Assyrian system in its latest and most advanced stage. Following the -veteran Assyriologist, M. Oppert, he finds that the Assyrians used a -denomination lower than the obol. In the Museum of the Louvre there is -a small Assyrian weight of the “duck” kind, which bears on its base the -Assyrian character of 22 _grains_ ½. The ideogram translated _grain_ is -evidently meant to represent some kind of corn with a rounded end. The -weight of this object is ·95 gram (14⁶⁄₇ grains Troy). The weight is a ¾ -obol, and therefore 30 grains went to the obol. This is the obol of the -heavy Assyrian system, of which we shall presently speak. For the sake of -clearness, I take M. Aurès’ table. - - 30 grains = 1 obol. - 6 obols = 1 drachm. - 2 drachms = 1 shekel. - 10 drachms = 1 “stone.” - 60 ” = 1 _light_ mina. - -For our present purpose it is quite sufficient to call attention to the -fact that this grain which forms the lowest unit of the Assyrian scale -weighs ·042 gram (·95 ÷ 22·5) which is a very close approximation to -the weight of the _wheat-grain_ (·047). Making allowance for some loss -which the weight may have sustained, it seems impossible to doubt that -we have here the wheat-grain being used to form the smallest unit as it -is in the modern Arabic system. The double obol of the Assyrians weighs -30 grains; we shall also find that the Hebrew _gêrâh_ or obol (twenty of -which made a shekel), weighed exactly 15 _grains of wheat_, that is the -Hebrew _gêrâh_ is the light obol which stood side by side with the heavy -obol of 30 grains in the Assyrian system. Let us treat the matter from a -slightly different point of view: As the _light_ Assyrian obol contained -15 _Assyrian_ grains, the _light_ shekel contained 180 _Assyrian_ grs. -But as we know that this light Assyrian shekel weighed 8·4 grams, or -131 grains _Troy_, and as we know that the _Troy_ grain is really the -barley-corn and likewise that 3 barley-corns = 4 _wheat_ grains, it is -obvious that 131 grains Troy = 175 _wheat_ grs. nearly, a very close -approximation to the 180 _Assyrian_ grs. Again as 180 _Assyrian_ grs. = -8·4 grams, the _Assyrian_ grain weighed ·046 gram, that is almost exactly -the weight of a _wheat_ grain (·047 gram). - -But let us see for a moment in what fashion M. Aurès accounts for the -presence of corn-grains in a system so elaborately scientific as he and -his school maintain. - -Starting as usual with the old assumption that all weight standards come -from the measures of capacity and all measures of capacity in their turn -are derived from the linear measures, he proceeds thus: The Assyrian -ideogram which represents _tribute_, likewise represents _talent_. -Tribute being paid in corn, no doubt the idea of weight first arose as -the people carried their quota of corn on their backs to the receipt of -custom. They accordingly weighed the measure (_bar_), which contained -the proper amount of corn and took it as their weight unit, and then -proceeded to make subdivisions of it. When their weight system was thus -fixed, for convenience instead of going to the trouble of adjusting -weights they took 30 grains of corn which would be just equivalent to -the weight of an obol. After the many historical instances quoted in the -preceding pages in which the methods of appraising the value of corn and -other dry commodities have been set out, and also the manner in which -corn grains have been employed for fixing the higher standard, as for -instance in the adjustment of the English bushel in the reign of Henry -VII., the reader will feel that M. Aurès has simply inverted the true -order of events, and that as we found the natives of Annam and the Malays -of the Indian Archipelago making their first essay in weighing by means -of a grain of maize, or rice, or _padi_, so the ancient inhabitants of -Mesopotamia made their first beginning, and as we have found everywhere -that gold, the most precious of objects, was the first thing to be -weighed, and as it only existed in small quantities, thus requiring but a -very small unit of weight, so the Assyrians likewise began to weigh gold -first of all, employing the natural seeds of corn, and only in process of -time arrived at higher units by multiplying the smaller. - -To all the evidence collected from Asia and Europe we can likewise add a -fact of great importance from Africa. We saw that it was highly probable -that the Carthaginians traded for gold to the West Coast of Africa, and -beyond all reasonable doubt the natives of the Gold Coast have for ages -been acquainted with that metal. Now it can be proved that these peoples, -whilst employing no weights for any other mercantile transaction, used -the seeds of certain plants for weighing their gold; thus Bosman writing -two centuries ago says, “Having treated of gold at large, I am now -obliged to say something concerning the gold weights, which are either -pounds, marks, ounces or angels.... We use here another kind of weights -which are a sort of beans, the least of which are red spotted with black -and called Dambas; twenty-four of them amount to an angel, and each of -them is reckoned two stiver weights; the white beans with black spots or -those entirely black are heavier and accounted four stiver weights: these -they usually call Tacoes, but there are some which weigh half or a whole -gilder, but are not esteemed certain weights, but used at pleasure and -often become instruments of fraud. Several have believed that the negroes -only used wooden weights, but that is a mistake; all of them have cast -weights either of copper or tin, which though divided or adjusted in a -manner quite different to ours; yet upon reduction agree exactly with -them[243]”. - -I am informed by Mr Quayle Jones, Chief Justice of Sierra Leone, that -at the present day, a seed called the _Taku_, (with a black spot) is -employed by the natives of the Gold Coast for weighing gold. He also -tells me that small quantities of gold are measured by a quill in -ordinary dealings in the market[244]. I learn from another private source -that 6 Takus = 1 ackie (20 ackies = 1 ounce). From Bosnian’s equating the -bean with the red spot to 2 stiver-weights, we can deduce its weight as -2 grs. troy; this result combined with the colour of the bean would make -us a _à priori_ conclude that the Damba was the _Abrus precatorius_, so -familiar to us already under its Hindu name of _ratti_. - -Here we have a primitive people with a weight system of their own based -on the Damba and Taku, just as the Hindu is based on the _ratti_, and -here too we have another proof that the first of all articles to be -weighed is gold. From Bosman we also learn that gold in small quantities -was not always weighed, for he says of the inferior gold which was mixed -with silver or copper, that it is cast into fetiches (small grotesque -figures). “These fetiches are cut into small bits by the negroes of one, -two, or three farthings. The negroes know the exact value of these bits -so well at sight, that they never are mistaken, and accordingly they sell -them to each other without weighing as we do coined money[245].” This -recalls the practice as regards silver among the Tibetans at the present -day. - -Crossing to the eastern side of Africa we find the natives of Madagascar -employing a system, the basis of which is a grain of rice. “The Malagasy -have no circulating medium of their own. Dollars are known more or less -throughout the island: but in many of the provinces trade is carried on -principally by an exchange of commodities. The Spanish dollar, stamped -with the two pillars, bears the highest value. For sums below a dollar -the inconvenient method is resorted to in the interior, of weighing the -money in every case. Dollars are cut up into small pieces, and four iron -weights are used for the half, quarter, eighth, and twelfth of a dollar. -Below that amount, divisions are effected by combinations of the four -weights, and also by means of grains of rice, even down so low as one -single grain—“Vary vray venty,” one plump grain, valued at the seven -hundred and twentieth part of a dollar”[246]. The grain of rice therefore -weighs ⁵⁄₉ gr. troy (·036 gram). As gold is not found in Madagascar[247] -the natives could not weigh it first of all things; but they have carried -out the principle of taking silver, the most precious article they -possessed, as the first object to be weighed. - -In this chapter, therefore, we have sought the method by which weight -standards are fixed among primitive and semi-civilized peoples; we have -studied the system or systems of China, Cochin-China, Cambodia, Laos -and the great Islands of the Indian Ocean. Everywhere we have received -the self-same answer, everywhere the lowest unit is nothing more than -a natural seed or grain. We found in two places in the area studied, -amongst the Tapaks of Annam and the Malays of Sumatra, the art of -weighing in its earliest infancy; only one product, gold, as yet being -weighed, and the weight unit employed for it being a grain of rice or -maize. We found that this smallest natural unit of gold was amongst the -Bahnars equated to the smallest unit of barter in use among them, the -hoe, whilst their highest unit was the buffalo; and that by a simple -process based on the known relation existing in value between the -hoe, the _muk_, the jar, and the buffalo, there was no difficulty in -arriving empirically at the exact value in gold of a buffalo. We found -also that the two higher units of weight the _picul_, and the _catty_, -which in almost every case were found to be confined to the ordinary -merchandise, were beyond reasonable doubt not originally multiples of the -lower the _tael_, but were really natural units obtained by a totally -different process; the _picul_ being the amount which an average man can -conveniently carry on his back, the _catty_, as seen especially in the -case of the _neal_ of Cambodia, being nothing more than the cocoa-nut -shell used as the ordinary measure of capacity, as a gourd of a certain -kind is employed at Zanzibar, as the hen’s egg was employed by the -Hebrews and also by the ancient Irish, as the cochlea or mussel shell -was taken by the Romans as the basis of their measures of capacity, and -as possibly the gourd itself under its name of _Kyathos_ formed the -lowest unit of capacity among the Greeks. We saw clearly that the catty -has never become a weight-unit for precious metals among the Chinese, -Annamites or Cambodians; the first named never having used any higher -unit for such purpose than a bar of ten _taels_, and at the present day -for the most part contenting themselves with the _tael_ or ounce, whilst -the two latter still use the _nên_ or bar with its subdivisions into -10 _denhs_, or in other words, use as their highest monetary unit the -tenfold of the _tael_ or ounce. We likewise found that in Annam among -the less advanced peoples there was considerable evidence to show that -the _bat_ or tical was originally the highest unit used for gold, and -that this name _bat_ was applied to weights of different amount; thus -the _chi_ which in commercial weight is only the quarter of a _bat_, is -itself called the gold _bat_. The _bat_ itself was the third of the -_tael_. We also found the bar of silver, the common monetary unit at the -present moment, equated to the buffalo, the common unit of barter among -the Bahnars, and finally we had a distinct tradition that not so long ago -the wild tribesmen who win the gold dust from the sands of their native -brooks did not as yet even weigh the metal by means of the grains of -maize which are now employed, but that they measured off a small rod of -gold an inch long as the equivalent of a buffalo. - -From all these facts it seems easy to trace the history of the -development of weight standards in Further Asia; the first stage in -trafficking in gold seems to be one purely by measure, then comes that -of weighing by means of grains of corn, the weight in gold of one or -more grains of corn being taken in the ordinary way of barter like other -articles in the common scale of exchange. A multiple of the higher unit -the _bat_ was formed, possibly based on the slave as the multiple of -the buffalo. This multiple is threefold of the _bat_, in that respect -offering a strange analogy to the gold talent of Sicily, Magna Graecia, -and Macedonia, which is the threefold of the Homeric ox-unit, and which, -as I have conjectured, may have represented the value of a slave, as -we certainly know as a fact that the highest unit in the Irish system, -the _cumhal_, which represented the value of three cows or three ounces -of silver, was neither more nor less than an _ancilla_ (or ordinary -_slave-woman_): the tenfold of this _tael_ was the highest unit employed -for either gold or silver by the most advanced peoples in this region, -and is very well known as the _nên_ or bar. All other goods were -long appraised by measurement, the lowest unit of capacity being the -cocoa-nut or the joint of the bamboo, the former known certainly to the -Cambodians, the latter to the Chinese, whilst both are equally familiar -to the Malays. The weight of the contents of the bamboo or cocoa-nut was -presently taken, the standard employed being the _tael_, or highest unit -yet employed for the precious metals. The weight of the contents would -depend on the nature of the substance or liquid employed, for instance -rice or some other kind of grain, or water. Thus the Chinese equate their -catty to 16 taels; no doubt too convention came in at a later stage, and -even though the contents might not actually weigh 16 taels, it was found -convenient for practical purposes to regard some suitable multiple of the -tael, such as 16, as the legal weight of the catty. A similar process was -carried out in the case of the _picul_ in the more advanced communities; -a _load_ was equated to the most convenient multiple of the catty, and as -it was found that 100 catties gave a sufficiently near approximation to -the ordinary load which a man could carry on his back, 100 catties were -made the legal contents of the _picul_ of trade. - -We also learned how currency in baser metals such as copper or iron takes -its origin. The history of the ordinary copper _cash_ of the Chinese, -which can be clearly traced step by step, brings us back to a time when -a bronze knife, one of the most requisite articles of daily life, formed -the ordinary small currency of the Chinese, just as the Greek _obolos_ -originally was an actual _spike_ made of copper or iron, and just as the -Bahnars of Annam still use the hoe as their lowest monetary denomination, -an implement likewise similarly employed by the Chinese at an early -period, as miniature hoes at one time used as true currency put beyond -doubt. We also saw the negroes of Central Africa employing iron made into -pieces ready to be cut into two hoes, and we also found those on the West -Coast of Africa and the Hottentots employing bars of iron in a raw state, -as a kind of currency. We also saw one most important feature possessed -by all those in common, viz. the fact that in the determination of the -value of the bar, the ingot, the piece of iron made in the shape of two -hoes, and the bronze knife, not weight but linear measurement based on -the parts of the human body, was the method invariably employed. - -We then advanced to Western Asia and Europe and found everywhere -alike the weight standards fixed by means of the seeds of plants. The -process likewise was made perfectly plain. We did not find the highest -denomination taken as the unit and the lowest reached by a long process -of subdivisions, and finally for convenience sake described as consisting -of so many grains of corn, as the brilliant French _savant_ assumes in -the case of the Assyrians: on the contrary we found that the bushel of -Henry VII. was reached by first fixing the weight of the penny sterling -by means of 32 grains of wheat, round and dry and “taken from the -midst of the ear of wheat after the old laws of the land.” Again the -Irish Kelts did not say that the _unga_ or ounce must contain so many -_screapalls_, and each _screapall_ so many _pingiuns_, but they proceeded -in quite the reverse way first fixing the weight of the _pingiun_ by -eight grains of wheat. We may then well assume that such too was the -process among Greeks, Romans, Arabs and Hindus. Brahmegupta, and the -legislators quoted above support this view by starting always with the -smallest unit. It is only when we come to the system of Babylon we are -asked to reverse the process, to admit that the idea of weights began -with corn, the very commodity of all others which, according to all -the instances previously quoted, was the last to be valued by weight, -and which even amongst ourselves at this present moment can hardly be -said to be regarded as an article appraised by weight. But furthermore -if the Assyrians regarded the Talent as their unit, and their lesser -denominations as its subdivisions, why did not the maker of the weight -mentioned above inscribe it as ¾ obol, or by some other term to indicate -that it was essentially regarded as a fraction of a higher denomination, -and not as a multiple of a lower? But the ancient Assyrian who made the -weight must plainly have regarded it in the latter light, for otherwise -he would not have engraved on it 22 _grains_ ½, actually resorting to -the fraction of a grain. The only reasonable explanation of his conduct -is that he was as firmly impressed with the idea that the basis of his -system was the grain of corn (wheat) as were Brahmagupta, or Henry VII.’s -parliament with the idea that the barley-corn and wheat-corn were the -bases of their respective systems. If the objection be raised that the -grains of corn were only devised in days long after the scientific fixing -of weight standards, my answer is that if it was necessary to employ -natural seeds as a means of determining the accuracy of scientifically -obtained units, _à fortiori_ it was necessary for mankind to have -employed such seeds as their first step in the establishing of a system -of weights. - -No simpler idea connected with weight could have struck the primitive -mind. The difficulty experienced by savages in counting beyond 3 or 4 -is met by them by the use of counters. We are all familiar with the use -of _pebbles_ or small stones among the Greeks and Romans. Our own word -_calculate_ is simply an adaptation of the Latin _calculare_ to count by -pebbles (_calculi_). Some nations, probably all, have been unable to form -abstract names for their numerals, and the name of the concrete object -which they habitually employed as a counter has become firmly embedded -as a suffix in the names of their numerals. Thus the Aztec numerals end -in _tetl_, a _pebble_, because they employed small stones as counters. -Similarly the Malays whom we found weighing gold by means of grains -of _padi_ employ that word as a numeral suffix, because they employed -grains of rice for their _calculations_ or, to speak more accurately, -_seminations_. In the case of this people we find coincident the most -primitive forms of numeration and of weighing, both processes being -carried on by means of the same simple instrument, which Nature put ready -to hand in the corn which formed their daily sustenance. - -If any one still maintains that the Indian Islander or Tapak of Annam -learned the art of weighing by grains from the Chinese, and would -maintain that the latter either invented for themselves or borrowed -from Babylonia a scientifically devised weight system, I will go a step -further and try to produce some evidence of the process by which weight -standards are arrived at, by seeking instances in a region so isolated as -to be beyond the reach of all suspicion of having borrowed from Babylon. - -From what I have said above, we cannot expect to find any such community -in the Old World. The New World on the other hand supplies us with -what we desire. When the Spaniards under Cortes, conquered the Aztecs -of Mexico, that people, although in a high state of civilization, had -as yet no system of weights. In consequence of this want the Spaniards -experienced some difficulty in the division of the treasure, until they -supplied the deficiency with weights and scales of their own manufacture. -There was a vast treasure of gold, which metal, found on the surface or -gleaned from the beds of rivers, was cast into bars, or in the shape -of dust made part of the regular tribute of the southern provinces of -the empire. The traffic was carried on partly by barter, and partly by -means of a regulated currency of different values. This consisted of -transparent quills of gold dust, bits of tin cut in the form of T, and -bags full of cacao containing a specified number of grains[248]. - -From this we get an insight into the first beginnings of weights. Some -natural unit (and by natural I mean some product of nature of which all -specimens are of uniform dimension) is taken, such as the quill used -by the Aztecs. The average-sized quill of any particular kind of bird -presents a natural receptacle of very uniform capacity. These quills of -gold-dust were estimated at so many bags containing a certain number -of grains. The step is not a long one to the day when some one will -balance in a simple fashion quills of gold dust against seeds of cacao, -and find how much gold is equal to a nut. Nature herself supplies in -the seeds of plants weight-units of marvellous uniformity. If any one -objects to my assumption that the Aztecs were on the very verge of the -invention of a weight system, my answer is that another race of America, -whose political existence ceased under the same cruel conditions as that -of their Northern contemporaries, I mean the Incas of Peru, who were -in a stage of civilization almost the same as that of the Aztecs, had -already found out the art of weighing before the coming of the Spaniards, -although they were inferior to the Mexicans in so far as they had not -a well-defined system of hieroglyphic writing, nor of currency such as -the latter possessed. Scales made of silver have been discovered in Inca -graves[249]. The metal of which they are made shows that they were only -employed for weighing precious commodities of small bulk. - -Unfortunately I can find no record of weights having been found along -with the silver scales in the Inca graves. If the weights were simply -natural seeds, they would easily perish, or even if perfect when the -tombs were opened, would be simply regarded as part of the ordinary -supply of food placed with the dead in the grave. But I forbear from -laying the slightest stress on negative evidence of such a kind. - -But beyond doubt we have on the American continent, far removed from -connection with Asia, a series of facts closely harmonising with what we -have found in Further Asia, and also among the peoples of Hither Asia, -Europe and Africa. The Aztecs are still measuring gold, but the Incas -have invented the balance. The Incas have no alphabet, the _quipus_ as -yet being their greatest advance towards a means of keeping a record of -the past. It follows that it is possible for the human race to invent a -system of weighing before it has made any advance in letters or science. -Hence it is logical to infer that the civilized races of Asia and Europe -could have discovered a means of weighing gold long before the Chaldean -sages made a single step in their astronomical discoveries, or a single -symbol of the cuneiform syllabary had as yet been impressed on brick or -tablet. - - _Weights of various grains._ - - grammes - Troy Grain ·064 - Barley ·064 - Wheat ·048 - Rice ·036 - Carob ·192 = 3 barley = 4 wheat - Lupin ·384 = 2 carobs - Maize (ordinary) ·128 = 2 barley - Ratti ·128 = 2 barley - Rye ·032 = ½ barley - - - - -CHAPTER IX. - -STATEMENT AND CRITICISM OF THE OLD DOCTRINES. - - Nec Babylonios - Tentaris numeros. - - HOR. _Carm._ I. 11. 2. - - -We now proceed to the statement and criticism of the old doctrines of -the origin of metallic currency and weight standards. To enter into an -elaborate account of the various shades of doctrine held by the followers -of Boeckh would be useless and wearisome, for as they all alike are -agreed in starting from an arbitrary scientifically obtained unit, it -matters not as far as my object is concerned. Certain metrologists lay -down that Egypt borrowed her system from Babylon, whilst others[250] -again declare that Egypt is the true mother of weight standards, and -this battle is raging hotly at the present moment. Thus but recently -Professor Brugsch has written a vigorous article (in the _Zeitschrift für -Ethnologie_[251]) to prove that the Chaldeans borrowed their system from -Egypt. But the Assyriologists were not prepared to assent to a doctrine -which placed the Babylonians in an inferior position. Accordingly Dr -C. F. Lehmann (_Zeitschrift für Ethnologie_, 1889, p. 245 _seqq._) has -made an elaborate defence of the original doctrine first propounded -by Boeckh and developed and expounded by Dr Brandis and Dr Hultsch. -This Assyrio-Egyptian struggle for pre-eminence has at present no -importance for our enquiry, as it is based almost entirely on _à priori_ -assumptions, although when we come eventually to deal with the question -of efforts at systematization which arose at a later stage in the -evolution of weight and measure standards, it will be necessary for us -to examine the respective claims. At present we are engaged in searching -for an historical basis, and as both the Assyriologists and Egyptologists -alike unite in deriving all weights from a deliberate scientific attempt -on the part of a highly civilized people, they are perfectly agreed in -the principle, the soundness of which it is the object of the present -investigation to test. The ablest exponent in this country of the German -theory is Dr B. V. Head, who has given an admirable summary of the -position of that school in his Introduction to his great work, _Historia -Numorum_ (p. xxviii.). To ensure a fair statement of the doctrine for the -reader, it will be better for me to give here Mr Head’s exposition in -preference to any summary of my own, as any statement by the critic of -the doctrine to be criticized is always liable to the suspicion of being -_ex parte_ and consequently inadequate. Such a suspicion is avoided by -letting as far as possible our opponents state their position in their -own words. - -“For many centuries before the invention of coined money there can be no -doubt whatever that goods were bought and sold by barter pure and simple, -and that values were estimated among pastoral people by the produce of -the land, and more particularly in oxen and sheep. - -“The next step in advance upon this primitive method of exchange was a -rude attempt at simplifying commercial transactions by substituting for -the ox and the sheep some more portable substitute, either possessed of -real or invested with an arbitrary value. - -“This transitional stage in the development of commerce cannot be more -accurately described than in the words of Aristotle, ‘As the benefits -of commerce were more widely extended by importing commodities of which -there was a deficiency, and exporting those of which there was an excess, -the use of a currency was an indispensable device. As the necessaries of -Nature were not all easily portable, people agreed for purposes of barter -mutually to give and receive some article which, while it was itself a -commodity, was practically easy to handle in the business of life; some -such article as iron or silver, which was at first defined simply by -size and weight, although finally they went further and set a stamp upon -every coin to relieve them from the trouble of weighing it, as the stamp -impressed upon the coin was an indication of quantity.’ (_Polit._ I. 6. -14-16, Trans. Welldon.) - -“In Italy and Sicily copper or bronze in very early times took the place -of cattle as a generally recognized measure of value, and in Peloponnesus -the Spartans are said to have retained the use of iron as a standard -of value long after the other Greeks had advanced beyond this point of -commercial civilization. - -“In the East, on the other hand, from the earliest times gold and silver -appear to have been used for the settlement of the transactions of daily -life, either metal having its value more or less accurately defined in -relation to the other. Thus Abraham is said to have been ‘very rich in -cattle, in silver and in gold’ (Gen. xiii. 2, xxiv. 35), and in the -account of his purchase of the cave of Machpelah (Gen. xxiii. 16), it is -stated that ‘Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver which he had named in -the audience of the sons of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, current -with the merchants.’ - -“As there are no auriferous rocks or streams in Chaldaea, we must infer -that the old Chaldaean traders must have imported their gold from India -by way of the Persian Gulf, in the ships of Ur frequently mentioned in -cuneiform inscriptions. - -“But though gold and silver were from the earliest times used as measures -of value in the East, not a single piece of coined money has come down -to us of these remote ages, nor is there any mention of coined money in -the Old Testament before Persian times. The gold and silver ‘current -with the merchant’ were always weighed in the balance; thus we read that -David gave to Ornan for his threshing-floor [including oxen and threshing -instruments] 600 shekels of gold by weight (1 Chron. xxi. 25). - -“It is nevertheless probable that the balance was not called into -operation for every small transaction, but that little bars of silver -and of gold of fixed weight, but without any official mark (and therefore -not coins) were often counted out by tale, larger amounts being always -weighed. Such small bars or wedges of gold and silver served the purposes -of a currency, and were regulated by the weight of the shekel or the mina. - -“This leads us briefly to examine the standards of weight used for the -precious metals in the East before the invention of money. - - -“_The metric systems of the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Assyrians._ - -“The evidence afforded by ancient writers on the subject of weights and -coinage is in great part untrustworthy, and would often be unintelligible -were it not for the light which has been shed upon it by the gold and -silver coins, and bronze, leaden and stone weights which have been -fortunately preserved down to our own times. It will be safer, therefore, -to confine ourselves to the direct evidence afforded by the monuments. - -“Egypt, the oldest civilized country of the ancient world, first claims -our attention, but as the weight system which prevailed in the Nile -valley does not appear to have exercised any traceable influence upon the -early coinage of the Greeks, the metrology of Egypt need not detain us -long.... - -“The Chaldaeans and Babylonians, as is well known, excelled especially -in the cognate sciences of arithmetic and astronomy. On the broad and -monotonous plains of Lower Mesopotamia, says Professor Rawlinson, -where the earth has little to suggest thought or please by variety the -‘variegated heaven,’ ever changing with the times and the seasons, would -early attract attention, while the clear sky, dry atmosphere, and level -horizon, would afford facilities for observations so soon as the idea of -them suggested itself to the minds of the inhabitants. The records of -these astronomical observations were inscribed in cuneiform character -on soft clay tablets, afterwards baked hard and preserved in the royal -or public libraries in the chief cities of Babylonia. Large numbers of -these tablets are now in the British Museum. When Alexander the Great -took Babylon, it is recorded that there were found and sent to Aristotle -a series of astronomical observations extending back as far as the -year B.C. 2234. Recent investigations into the nature of these records -render it probable that upon them rests the entire structure of the -metric system of the Babylonians. The day and night were divided by the -Babylonians into 24 hours, each of 60 minutes, and each minute into 60 -seconds—a method of measuring time which has never been superseded, and -which we have inherited from Babylon, together with the first principles -of the science of astronomy. The Babylonian measures of capacity and -their system of weights were based, it is thought, upon one and the same -unit as their measures of time and space, and as they are believed to -have determined the length of an hour of equinoctial time by means of -the dropping of water, so too it is conceivable that they may have fixed -the weight of their _talents_, their _mina_, and their _shekel_, as well -as the size of their measures of capacity, by weighing or measuring the -amounts of water, which had passed from one vessel into another during a -given space of time. Thus, just as an hour consisted of 60 minutes and -the minute of 60 seconds, so the talent contained 60 minae, and the mina -60 shekels. The division by sixties or sexagesimal system, is quite as -characteristic of the Babylonian arithmetic and system of weights and -measures, as the decimal system is of the Egyptian and the modern French. -And indeed it possesses one great advantage over the decimal system, -inasmuch as the number 60, upon which it is based, is more divisible than -10. - -“About 1300 years before our era the Assyrian empire came to surpass -in importance that of the Babylonians, but the learning and science of -Chaldaea were not lost, but rather transmitted through Nineveh by means -of the Assyrian conquests and commerce to the north and west as far -as the shores of the Mediterranean Sea. Let us now turn to the actual -monuments. Some thirty years ago Mr Layard discovered and brought home -from the ruins of ancient Nineveh a number of bronze lions of various -sizes which may now be seen in the British Museum. With them were also a -number of stone objects in the form of ducks[252].” - -From this double series of weights Mr Head infers that there were two -distinct minae simultaneously in use during the long period of time which -elapsed between about B.C. 2000, and B.C. 625. “The heavier of these two -minae appears to have been just the double of the lighter. Brandis is -probably not far from the mark in fixing the weight of the heavy mina at -1010 grammes, and that of the light at 505 grammes. - -“It has been suggested that the lighter of these two minae may have been -peculiar to the Babylonian, and the heavier to the Assyrian empire; but -this cannot be proved. But nevertheless it would seem that the use of the -heavy mina was more extended in Syria than that of the lighter, if we may -judge from the fact that most of the weights belonging to the system of -the heavy mina have in addition to the cuneiform inscription an Aramaic -one. - -“The purpose which this Aramaic inscription served must clearly have been -to render the weight acceptable to the Syrian and Phoenician merchants -who traded backwards and forwards between Assyria and Mesopotamia on the -one hand, and the Phoenician emporia on the other. - - -“_The Phoenician traders._ - -“The Phoenician commerce was chiefly a carrying trade. The richly -embroidered stuffs of Babylonia and other products of the East were -brought down to the coasts, and then carefully packed in chests of -cedarwood in the markets of Tyre and Sidon, whence they were shipped by -the enterprising Phoenician mariners to Cyprus, to the coasts of the -Aegean, or even to the extreme West. - -“Hence the Phoenician city of Tyre was called by Ezekiel (xxvii.) ‘a -merchant of the people for many isles.’ - -“But the Phoenicians in common with the Egyptians, the Greeks and the -Hebrews etc. with whom they dealt were at no time without their own -peculiar weights and measures upon which they appear to have grafted the -Assyrio-Babylonian principal unit of account or the weight in which it -was customary to estimate values. This weight was the 60th part of the -_manah_ or mina. - -“The Babylonian sexagesimal system was foreign to Phoenician habits. -While therefore these people had no difficulty in adopting the -Assyrio-Babylonian 60th as their own unit of weight or shekel, they did -not at the same time adopt the sexagesimal system in its entirety but -constituted a new mina for themselves consisting of 50 shekels instead -of 60. In estimating the largest weight of all, the _Talent_, the -multiplication by 60 was nevertheless retained. Thus in the Phoenician -system as in that of the Greeks 50 shekels (Gk. _staters_) = 1 Mina, and -60 Minae or 3000 shekels or staters = 1 Talent. - -“The particular form of shekel which appears to have been received by the -Phoenicians and Hebrews from the East was the 60th part of the heavier -of the two Assyrio-Babylonian minae above referred to. The 60th of the -lighter for some reason which has not been satisfactorily accounted for -seems to have been transmitted westwards by a different route, viz. -across Asia Minor, and so into the kingdom of Lydia. - - -“_The Lydians._ - -“‘The Lydians,’ says E. Curtius (_Hist. Gr._ I. 76), ‘became on land what -the Phoenicians were by sea, the mediators between Hellas and Asia.’ It -is related that about the time of the Trojan Wars and for some centuries -afterwards, the country of the Lydians was in a state of vassalage to the -kings of Assyria. But an Assyrian inscription informs us that Asia Minor, -west of the Halys, was unknown to the Assyrian kings before the time -of Assur-banî-apli, or Assurbanipal (circ. B.C. 666), who it is stated -received an embassy from Gyges, king of Lydia ‘a remote’ country, of -which Assurbanipal’s predecessors had never heard the name. Nevertheless -that there had been some sort of connection between Lydia and Assyria in -ancient times is probable, though it cannot be proved. - -“Professor Sayce is of opinion that the mediators between Lydia in the -west, and Assyria in the east, were the people called Kheta or Hittites. -According to this theory the northern Hittite capital Carchemish -(later Hierapolis) on the Euphrates, was the spot where the arts and -civilization of Assyria took the form which especially characterises the -early monuments of Central Asia Minor. - -“The year B.C. 1400 or thereabouts was the time of greatest power of the -nation of the Hittites, and if they were in reality the chief connecting -link between Lydia and Assyria it may be inferred that it was through -them that the Lydians received the Assyrian weight, which afterwards in -Lydia took the form of a stamped ingot or coin. - -“But why it was that the light mina rather than the heavy one had become -domesticated in Lydia must remain unexplained. We know however that one -of the Assyrian weights is spoken of in cuneiform inscriptions as the -‘_weight of Carchemish_.’ If then the modern hypothesis of a Hittite -dominion in Asia Minor turn out to be well founded, the _weight of -Carchemish_ might by means of the Hittites have found its way to Phrygia -and Lydia, and as the earliest Lydian coins are regulated according to -the divisions of the Light Assyrian mina this would probably be the one -alluded to. - -“From these two points then, _Phoenicia_ on the one hand and _Lydia_ -(through Carchemish), on the other, the two Babylonian units of weight -appear to have started westwards to the shores of the Aegean sea, the -heavy shekel by way of Phoenicia, the lighter shekel by way of Lydia.” - -So far I have thought it but right to give Mr Head’s exposition _in -extenso_, that the enquirer may be enabled to fully grasp the principles -of the orthodox school, before we enter on any criticism of them. I shall -now treat more summarily all that remains to be said. - -Let us briefly state the peculiar doctrines of two leading continental -metrologists. The veteran Dr Hultsch derives all standards of weight -thus: The royal Babylonian cubit was based on the sun’s apparent -diameter; the cube of this measure gave the _maris_, the weight in water -of one-fifth of which was the royal Babylonian talent, which was divided -into 60 _manehs_ (_minae_) and each mina in turn into 60 shekels. For -silver and gold however they formed their standard by taking _fifty_ -shekels to form a mina[253]: thus after elaborating with such care a -scientific system, they abandoned it as soon as they came to deal with -the precious metals. - -M. Soutzo[254] in a clever essay has maintained that all the weight -systems both monetary and commercial of Asia, Egypt, Greece, come from -one primordial weight the Egyptian _uten_ (96 grammes), or from its -tenth, the _kat_ (9·60 grammes). He ascribes the origin of these weights -to an extremely remote epoch not far perhaps from the time of the -discovery of bronze in Asia, and the invention of the first instruments -for weighing: he considers also that bronze _by weight_ was the first -money employed in Asia, Egypt, and Italy, and that everywhere the decimal -system of numeration has preceded the sexagesimal. - -The evidence which we have produced in the earlier part of this work has -I trust convinced the reader that gold, not copper, was the first object -to be weighed; M. Soutzo’s assumption that the _uten_ is the primordial -unit is upset even for the Egyptians themselves by the passage already -cited from Horapollo (p. 129). - - -_The invention of coinage._ - -The evidence of both history and numismatics coincides in making the -Lydians the inventors of the art of coining money. At first sight it -may seem surprising that none of the great peoples of the East, whose -civilization had its first beginning long ages before the periods at -which our very oldest records begin, should have developed coined money, -acquainted as they indubitably were with the precious metals, both for -ornament and exchange. But a little reflection shews us that it has been -quite possible for peoples to attain a high degree of civilization -without feeling any need of what are properly termed coins. Transactions -by means of the scales are comparatively simple, and as a matter of fact -we shall find hereafter that even after a coinage had been for centuries -established, men constantly had recourse to the balance in monetary -transactions, just as down to the present moment the Chinese, who have -enjoyed a high degree of culture for several thousand years, still have -no native currency but their copper cash, foreign silver dollars being -the only medium in the precious metals, whilst all important monetary -transactions are carried on by the scales and weights. I may here -likewise point out incidentally that where the supply of the precious -metals is only sufficient to meet the demand for personal adornment, the -establishment of a coinage in those metals will naturally be slow, whilst -on the other hand where there is so abundant a supply of the metals, that -there is more than sufficient for purposes of personal use, the tendency -to produce a coinage will be much greater. If we enquire what were the -metalliferous regions of Asia Minor, we at once find that Lydia above all -other countries was especially rich in gold, or rather a natural alloy -of gold and silver. The wealth of two Lydian kings, Gyges and Croesus, -which has been through the ages a proverb consisted of vast quantities of -this metal, which the Greeks called _electron_ (ἤλεκτρον) or _white gold_ -(λευκὸς χρυσός, Herodotus, I. 50). The ancients regarded it as almost -a distinct metal, doubtless because from their imperfect methods they -experienced the greatest difficulty in extracting the pure metal. The -pure gold in circulation in Asia Minor must have come from the valley of -the Oxus, or the Ural mountains. Thus Sophocles speaks of “the electron -of Sardis and the gold of Ind[255].” Even in the time of Strabo (A.D. -21), the process was regarded as so difficult that the great geographer -thinks it worth while to quote from Posidonius (flor. 90 B.C.), the -description of how the separation of the metals was effected (III. 146). -It is therefore natural to find in Lydia, the land of gold, the first -attempts at coined money. - -“So far as we have knowledge,” says Herodotus[256], “the Lydians were the -first nation to introduce the use of gold and silver coin.” - -This statement is fully borne out by the evidence of Xenophanes[257], -and also by the coins themselves, although some writers, _e.g._ Th. -Mommsen[258], have held that it was in the great cities of Ionia, Phocaea -and Miletus that money was first coined. “From the little we know of the -character of this people (the Lydians) we gather that their commercial -instinct must have been greatly developed by their geographical position -and surroundings, both conducive to frequent intercourse with the peoples -of Asia Minor, Orientals as well as Greeks.” - -About the time when the mighty Assyrian empire was falling into decay, -Lydia, under a new dynasty called the Mermnadae, was entering upon a new -phase of national life. - -“The policy of these new rulers of the country was to extend the power of -Lydia towards the West, and to obtain possession of towns on the coast. -With this object Gyges (who, according to the story told by Plato, was a -shepherd who owed his good fortune to the finding of a magic ring in an -ancient tomb, and who was the founder of the dynasty of the Mermnadae, -circ. B.C. 700) established a firm footing on the Hellespont, and -endeavoured to extend his dominions along the whole Ionian coast. This -brought the Lydians into direct contact with the Asiatic Greeks. - -“These Ionian Greeks had been from very early times in constant -intercourse, not always friendly, with the Phoenicians, with whom -they had long before come to an understanding about numbers, weights, -measures, the alphabet, and such like matters, and from whom, there -is reason to think, they had received the 60th part of the _heavy_ -Assyrio-Babylonian mina as their unit of weight or _stater_. The Lydians -on the other hand had received, probably from Carchemish, the 60th of the -_light_ mina. - -“Thus then, when the Lydians in the reign of Gyges came into contact -and conflict with the Greeks, the two units of weight, after travelling -by different routes, met again in the coast towns and river valleys of -Western Asia Minor, in the borderland between the East and the West. - -“To the reign of Gyges, the founder of the new Lydian empire as distinct -from the Lydia of more remote antiquity, may perhaps be ascribed the -earliest essays in the art of coining. The wealth of this monarch in the -precious metals may be inferred from the munificence of his gifts to -the Delphic shrine, consisting of golden mixing cups and silver urns, -amounting to a mass of gold and silver such as the Greeks had never -before seen collected together.” This treasure was called the Gygadas, -and is described by Herodotus[259]. - -“It is in conformity with the whole spirit of a monarch such as Gyges, -whose life’s work it was to extend his empire towards the West, and at -the same time to hold in his hands the lines of communication with the -East, that from his capital Sardes, situated on the slopes of Tmolus and -on the banks of the Pactolus, both rich in gold, he should send forth -along the caravan routes of the East and into the heart of Mesopotamia, -and down the river valleys of the West to the sea, his native Lydian ore -gathered from the washings of Pactolus and from the diggings on the sides -of Tmolus and Sipylus. - -“This precious merchandize (if the earliest Lydian coins are indeed -his) he issued in the form of oval-shaped bullets or ingots, officially -sealed or stamped on one side as a guarantee of their weight and value. -For the eastern or land-trade the _light_ mina was the standard by -which this coinage was regulated, while for the western trade with the -Greeks of the coast the _heavy_ mina was made use of, which from its -mode of transmission we may call the _Phoenician_, retaining the name -_Babylonian_ only for the weight which was derived from the banks of the -Euphrates.” - -To prevent misapprehension, it may be advisable to mention that the -standards here termed _Phoenician_ and _Babylonian_ are not to be -confounded with the _heavy_ and _light_ shekels already mentioned, but -are the standards derived from the latter specially for silver, in the -ways shown a little lower down. - -Modern analysis of electrum from Tmolus shows that it consists of 27 -per cent. of silver and 73 per cent. of gold[260]. It consequently -stood to silver in a different relation from that of pure gold. Thus -while gold stood to silver as 13·3:1, electrum would stand at 10:1 or -thereabouts. Mr Head considers that “this natural compound of gold and -silver possessed some advantages for coining over gold. In the first -place it was more durable, harder, and less liable to injury and waste -from wear. In the second place it was more easily obtainable, being -a natural product; and in the third place, standing as it did in the -proportion of about 10:1 to silver, it rendered needless the use of a -different standard of weight for the two metals, enabling the authorities -of the mints to make use of a single set of weights, and a decimal system -easy of comprehension and simple in practice” (p. xxxiv.). The second of -these reasons is probably the true one, the first being a good example -of the tendency of even the most able modern writers to ascribe to early -times ideas which are only the outcome of a far later period. The idea -of getting a metal which will be more durable in circulation is purely -modern, and not even received by Orientals in modern times. Thus the gold -mohurs of India down to their latest issue were of pure gold, free from -alloy (in consequence of which they are still sought after by the native -Hindu goldsmiths in preference to the English sovereign, as the addition -of alloy makes the latter less easy to work up into jewellery). - -I allude to this here because we shall find in the course of our enquiry -that most of the errors into which metrologists have fallen, are the -consequence of their failing to recognize the great gulf which is fixed -between the habits and ideas of a primitive community, slowly evolving -principles which are now part and parcel of the common heritage of -civilization, and an era like our own, when all progress is effected -by the development and application of scientific principles long since -discovered. - -Electrum was thus coined on the same standard as silver, one _talent_, -one _mina_ and one _stater_ of electrum being consequently equal to ten -_talents_, ten _minae_, or ten _staters_ of silver. The weight of the -electrum stater in each district would depend therefore on the standard -which happened to be in use there for silver bullion, or silver in the -shape of bars or oblong bricks, the practice of the new invention of -stamping or sealing metal for circulation being in the first place only -applied to the more precious of the two metals, electrum representing in -a small compass a weight of uncoined silver ten times as bulky and ten -times as difficult of transport. - -The invention was soon extended to pure gold and silver, and there is -good reason to believe that by the time of Croesus (568-554 B.C.) both -these metals were used for purposes of coinage in Lydia. - - -_The Greeks begin to coin money._ - -The clever Greeks of Asia Minor, who formed the portal through which so -many of the arts of the East reached the Western lands, were not slow to -adopt, and by reason of their superior artistic taste to improve, the -great Lydian invention. To the Ionic cities such as Phocaea and Miletus -we must probably ascribe the credit of substituting artistically engraved -dies for the rude Lydian punch-marks, and at a somewhat later period of -inscribing them with the name or rather the initial of the people or -potentate by whom they were issued. - -The official stamps by which the earliest electrum staters were -distinguished from mere ingots consisted at first only of the impress of -rude unengraved punches, between which the lump or oval-shaped bullet of -metal was placed to receive the blow of the hammer. Subsequently the art -of the engraver was called in to adorn the lower of the two dies, which -was always that of the face or _obverse_ of the coin, with the symbol of -the local divinity under whose auspices the currency was issued. - -As our object is to deal with coins from the point of view of metrology, -the short summary here given of the genesis of the art of coining will -suffice for our purposes. - - -_Weight standards._ - -“Silver was very rarely at this early period weighed by the same talent -and mina as gold, but, according to a standard derived from the gold -weight, somewhat as follows:— - -Gold was to silver as 13·3:1. This proportion made it difficult to weigh -both metals on the same standard. That a round number of silver shekels -or staters might equal a gold shekel or stater, the weight of the silver -shekel was either raised above or lowered below that of the gold. The -_heavy_ gold shekel weighed 260 grains Troy, being the double of the -_light_ gold shekel, which weighed 130 grains Troy (8·4 grammes). - - -THE SILVER STANDARDS DERIVED FROM THE GOLD SHEKEL[261]. - -I. From the _heavy_ gold shekel of 260 grains: - - 260 × 13·3 = 3458 grains of silver. - 3458 grains of silver = 15 shekels of 230 grains each. - -On the silver shekel of 230 grains the _Phoenician_ or Graeco-Asiatic -_silver_ standard may be constructed: - - Talent = 690,000 grains = 3000 staters (or shekels). - Mina = 11,500 grains = 50 staters. - Stater = 230 grains. - -II. From the _light_ gold shekel of 130 grains we get the so-called -Babylonian or Persian standard: - - 130 × 13·3 = 1729 grains of silver. - 1729 grains of silver = 10 shekels of 172·9 grains each. - -On the silver shekel or stater of 172·9 grains the _Babylonic_, _Lydian_, -and Persian _silver_ standard may be thus constructed:— - - Talent = 518,700 grains = 3000 staters = 6000 sigli. - Mina = 8645 grains = 50 ” = 100 ” - Stater = 172·9 grains = 1 ” = 2 ” - Siglos = 86·45 grains.” - -It is desirable “to take note of the fact that in Asia Minor and in -the earliest periods of the art of coining, (α) the heavy gold stater -(260 grains) occurs at various places, from Teos northwards as far as -the shores of the Propontis; (β) the light gold stater (130 grains) -in Lydia (Κροίσειος στατήρ) and in Samos (?); (γ) the electrum stater -of the Phoenician _silver_ standard, chiefly at Miletus, but also at -other towns along the west coast of Asia Minor, as well as in Lydia, -but never however in full weight; (δ) the electrum and silver stater of -the Babylonic standard, chiefly if not solely in Lydia; (ε) the silver -stater of the Phoenician standard (230 grains) on the west coast of Asia -Minor[262].” - -Here we may call attention to the fact that whilst Miletus struck her -electrum staters on the Phoenician _silver_ standard (their normal -weight being 217 grains), the Phocaeans always from the infancy of -coining employed for their electrum the _gold_ standard of the _heavy_ -shekel (260 grains). But the proper time for discussing why the Lydians, -Milesians and Phocaeans all struck their electrum coins of various -standards, will come further on in our enquiry. - - -_The coin-standards of Greece Proper._ - -Before we attempt to examine into the connection of the Homeric talent -or ox unit, and the ancient systems of the East, it will be advisable to -get a clear view of the coin-standards found in actual use in historical -times, and to understand the common doctrine of the derivation of the -same. As gold was not coined in Greece Proper until a comparatively late -period, owing doubtless to the fact that there was no great supply of -it to be had, and that all of it was required to meet the demand for -personal adornment, the entire early coinage of Greece (with some few -exceptions to be presently noted) consisted of silver. These silver -issues were all struck on either of two systems; (1) the Aeginean, or -Aeginetic, and (2) the Euboic, the stater of the former weighing about -195 grains, that of the latter about 135-130 grains. But it is a fact of -paramount importance that gold, whenever and wherever coined in Greece, -was always on the Euboic standard, and there is likewise every reason -to believe that gold bullion in the days before gold was coined was -computed according to the same standard. Such at least was undoubtedly -the case at Athens, as we learn from Thucydides[263], where he describes -the resources of Athens both in coined and uncoined metal, and in the -gold plates which overlaid the famous chryselephantine statue of Pallas -Athene, the masterpiece of Pheidias, and the glory of the Acropolis; and -such also, as we shall see, was the case, in the days of Solon. - -All ancient accounts are agreed in the statement that Aegina was the -first place in Hellas Proper which saw the minting of money. That island -was famous from old time as the meeting-place of merchants, and as such -under its ancient name of Oenone was glorified by Pindar[264]. Its -position rendered it a most convenient emporium, where the merchantmen -of Tyre met in traffic the traders from both Peloponnesus and northern -Greece. Tradition makes its population a very mixed one: “It was called -Oenone,” says Strabo, “in ancient times, and it was settled by Argives, -Kretans, Epidaurians, and Dorians[265].” According to a fragment of -Ephorus, to be referred to presently, it was owing to the barren nature -of the soil that the natives turned to trade. - -All Greek tradition is unanimous in representing Pheidon of Argos as the -first to coin money in Hellas Proper, and to have done so at Aegina. -Much obscurity enshrouds the history and the date of Pheidon, owing to -the conflicting accounts of the historians. For our immediate purpose -it would be quite sufficient to state simply that he cannot have lived -later than 600 B.C., but in consequence of some prevailing doctrines -with regard to the history of Greek weights being based on inferences -(probably quite unwarrantable) which have been drawn from the statements -given about this despot, we must take a more elaborate survey of the -sources. - -Pausanias[266], writing about 174 A.D. says that the Pisaeans in the -eight Olympiad (747 B.C.) brought to their aid Pheidon of Argos, who of -all despots in Hellas waxed most insolent, and that along with him they -celebrated the festival. But now comes the testimony of Herodotus[267], -who was writing circ. 440 B.C., and who tells us (VI. 127) that when -Cleisthenes the despot of Sicyon held the _svayamvara_ for his daughter -Agariste; amongst the suitors who came from all parts of Hellas, was -“Leocedes, son of Pheidon, the despot of the Argives, Pheidon, who -had made their measures for the Peloponnesians, and had of all Greeks -waxed to the greatest pitch of violence, he who expelled the Elean -presidents of the games and himself held the festival.” There cannot be -the slightest doubt that both Pausanias and Herodotus refer to the same -tyrant, but the dates are irreconcileable. As Cleisthenes, the Athenian -law-giver, was the son of Agariste, her wooing cannot have been much -earlier than 560 B.C., and consequently Pheidon must have reigned at -Argos shortly before 600 B.C. - -Weissenborn (followed by Ernst Curtius) has sought to cut the Gordian -knot by emending the text of Pausanias, thus reading 28th instead of -8th Olympiad, which would make Pheidon help the Pisaeans in the year -668 B.C. But even this drastic remedy is hardly sufficient to meet the -requirements of the statement of Herodotus. - -Our earliest authority for the tradition that Pheidon coined at Aegina -is a passage of Ephorus preserved by Strabo (VIII. 376)[268]: “Ephorus -says that in Aegina silver was first struck by Pheidon; for it had become -an emporium, inasmuch as its population, owing to the barrenness of -the land, engaged in maritime trade; whence trumpery goods are called -Aeginean ware.” According to another passage of Strabo, which may be -likewise from Ephorus, as it comes at the end of a long statement, -the first part of which Strabo expressly declares is taken from that -writer: (“They say) that Pheidon of Argos, who was tenth in descent from -Temenus, and who surpassed his contemporaries in his power, whence he -recovered the whole of the inheritance of Temenus, which had been rent -into several parts, and that he invented the measures which are called -Pheidonian and weights and stamped currency, both the other kind and that -of silver.” It must be carefully observed that this is the only ancient -passage which says a word about the invention of _weights_ by Pheidon. If -this statement can be taken as trustworthy we might very well conclude -that Pheidon was the person who introduced the decimal principle and -made 10 silver pieces instead of 15 equivalent to the gold stater. If -however this is an addition of Strabo[269], who wrote about A.D. 1-21, -and whose account of Greece Proper is the most defective portion of his -great work, we cannot let this passage weigh against that already given -from Herodotus, who is perfectly silent as regards the invention of -_weights_. Furthermore there is the fact that Strabo does not venture to -describe the _weights_ as called _Pheidonian_, but carefully limits that -appellation to the measures as we find also to be the case with Pollux, -when he is describing various kinds of vessels: “and likewise a Pheidon -would be a kind of vessel for holding oil, deriving its name from the -Pheidonian measures respecting which Aristotle speaks in his Polity of -the Argives[270].” Here again we find a clear mention of the Pheidonian -measures, coupled with the high authority of Aristotle’s treatise on the -Constitution of Argos in his great “Collection of Polities,” formed to -serve as the material from which to build his great philosophic work on -Politics. - -There is again no mention of Pheidonian _weights_ in the newly found -Polity of the Athenians (which seems beyond doubt the same as that -known to the ancients under the name of Aristotle), where it is stated -that “in his (Solon’s) time the measures (at Athens) were made larger -than those of Pheidon” (c. 10)[271]. Although the writer refers to the -Aeginetic coin-weights in the next clause, he does not refer to them as -the Pheidonian. - -Now let us pass on to a remarkable passage in the _Etymologicum Magnum_ -(_s.v._ Ὀβελίσος). - -“First of all men Pheidon of Argos struck money in Aegina; and having -given them (his subjects) coin and abolished the spits, he dedicated -them to Hera in Argos. But since at that time the spits used to fill -the hand, that is the grasp, we, although we do not fill our hand with -the six obols (spits) call it a _grasp full_ (δραχμὴ) owing to the -_grasping_ of them. Whence even still to this day we call the usurer the -spit-_weigher_, since by weights the men of old used to hand (money) -over[272].” The writer of this passage evidently regards Pheidon as the -first inventor of the art of coining but not of _weight_ standards. - -Finally the Parian Marble recounts that, “Pheidon the Argive confiscated -the measures ... and remade them and made silver coin in Aegina[273].” -Such then is the body of evidence which we possess, all pointing to -Aegina as the first place in Greece which saw a mint set up, and to -Pheidon of Argos as the first to establish that mint. As we have pointed -out above we have nothing but a very dubious statement of Strabo (which -is coupled with another most certainly wrong, _i.e._, that Pheidon was -the inventor of every other kind of money as well as silver) as regards -the invention of weights by Pheidon, although from the passage in -Herodotus already quoted, metrologists one after another have assumed -that the measures (μέτρα) meant a _metric system_ in the modern sense, -and have not hesitated to build on this somewhat crazy foundation an -elaborate Aeginetic system of weights and measures intimately related to -each other. - -We are then probably justified in assuming that Pheidon coined silver at -Aegina. The numismatic evidence coincides with the literary authorities. -The coins of Aegina are well known, for from first to last the symbol of -the sea tortoise (χελώνη, from which they are called in vulgar parlance -_tortoises_) is found on them. Why Pheidon set up his mint in Aegina -instead of in his own city of Argos is not very difficult to understand. -Argos was an inland town remote from the highways of commerce, and -little in contact with the merchants of the Levant. On the other hand -Aegina stood at the portal of central Greece, intercepting the trade of -Athens and Corinth; in later days Pericles called it the “eyesore of the -Piraeus.” It would be probably here that the Greeks first saw the new -invention of the East in the hands of the foreign traders, and it would -be here, in a great emporium, that the need of a currency would be most -felt. In an inland city like Argos or Sparta bars of bronze or iron would -serve well for the small commercial transactions of a very primitive -society, as we know that the iron currency actually did at Sparta in -historical times. E. Curtius suggested (_Numism. Chron._, 1870) that the -tortoise on the Aeginetan coins, which is the symbol of Ashtaroth who was -the Phoenician goddess both of the sea and of trade, may be an indication -that the mint was set up in the temple of Aphrodite, which overlooked -the great harbour of Aegina. Whilst his hypothesis as regards the origin -of the tortoise type on the coin is probably wrong, it is quite possible -that the coins were first struck in some temple, as we know that the -great shrines of the ancient world served as banks and treasuries, as for -example the temple of Athena at Athens, that of Apollo at Delphi, and -that of Juno Moneta at Rome. The temple priests of Delphi and other rich -shrines had at their command large stores of the precious metals, which -in the earliest times doubtless were in the shape of small ingots or -bullets, such as the gold talents mentioned in the Homeric Poems. - -The temple shrines of Delphi and Olympia, Delos and Dodona were centres -not merely of religious cult, but likewise of trade and commerce, just -as the great fairs of the Middle Ages grew primarily out of the feast -day of the local saint, merchants and traders taking advantage of the -assembling together of large bodies of worshippers from various quarters -to ply their calling and to tempt them with their wares. The temple -authorities encouraged trade in every way; they constructed sacred roads, -which gave facility for travelling at a time when roads as a general -rule were almost unknown, and what was just as important, they placed -these roads and consequently the persons who travelled on them under -the protection of the god to whose temple they led in each case, thus -affording a safe conduct to the trader as well as the pilgrim; again at -the time of the sacred festivals all strife had to cease, the voice of -war was hushed, and thus even amidst the noise of intestine struggles -and international strife, peace offered a breathing space for trade and -commerce. Hence the probability is considerable that the art of minting -money, that is, of stamping with a symbol the ingots or _talents_ of gold -or silver which had circulated in this simple form for centuries, first -had its birth in the sanctuary of some god. - -On the whole then we may assume that the bullet-shaped coins of Aegina, -which are undoubtedly the earliest coins of Greece Proper, are the -Pheidonian currency mentioned in the ancient authors and on the Parian -Marble. As silver was probably not at all plenty at Argos, but was -brought to Aegina by the traders, Pheidon had every motive for minting -at Aegina instead of at his own capital. The fact that the Romans -struck silver coins in Campania before they issued any at Rome affords -a curious parallel. A local supply of the metal offers the explanation -in each case. “It may be also positively asserted that none of the -Aeginetan coins are older than the earliest Lydian electrum money, and -that consequently the date of the introduction of coined money into -Peloponnesus must be subsequent to circ. 700 B.C. It follows that Pheidon -was not the inventor of money, for already before his time all the coasts -and islands of the Aegean must have been acquainted with the pale yellow -electrum coins of Lydia and Ionia[274].” - -What then was the standard on which these early coins of Aegina were -struck? - -The heaviest specimens of these Aeginetan staters or didrachms weigh over -200 grains Troy, but these seem somewhat exceptional. The best numismatic -authorities are agreed in setting the normal weight at 196 grains Troy; -the drachm consequently weighs 98 grains, and the obol about 16 grains. -The origin of this standard has caused much difficulty to metrologists. -For it is not the standard of the Babylonian gold shekel of 130 grains, -nor of the Babylonian silver shekel of 172 grains, nor again that of -the Phoenician silver shekel of 230 grains. Various solutions have been -proposed. Brandis[275] regards it as a raised Babylonian silver standard, -172·9 to 196 grains. Mr Head regards it as the reduced Phoenician -standard; “The weight standard which the Peloponnesians had received in -old times from the Phoenician traders had suffered in the course of about -two centuries a very considerable degradation[276].” Others, like Mr -Flinders Petrie (Encyclop. Britannica, _Weights and Measures_), regard it -as Egyptian in origin. According to Herodotus (II. 178) the Aeginetans -were on terms of friendly intercourse with Egypt; furthermore weights of -this standard have been found in Egypt. - -Again, Dr Hultsch (_Metrol._² p. 188) regards it as an independent -standard midway between the Babylonian silver standard (172·9 grs.) on -the one hand, and the Phoenician silver standard (230 grs.) on the other, -the old Aeginetan silver mina being equivalent in value to six light -Babylonian shekels of gold (130 × 6 = 780 grs. = 10300 grs. of silver), -assuming that in Greece as in Asia Minor gold was to silver as 13·3:1. - -All these theories labour under serious difficulties. Brandis’ theory was -overthrown easily as soon as attention was called to the well-defined -heavy series of Aeginetic coins, he having been led to his opinion by a -comparison of the heaviest specimen of the Babylonian standard with the -lightest of the Aeginetic. Here incidentally we may call the readers’ -attention to the fact that in numismatics the weight of the heaviest -specimens of any series must be regarded as the true index of the normal -weight, for whatever may have been the inclination to mint coins of a -weight lighter than the proper standard, we may rest assured that the -ancient mint-master was no more inclined than his modern representative -to put into coins of gold or silver a single grain more than the legal -amount. Hence it is a most faulty and fallacious method when dealing with -coin weights to take the average of a certain number of specimens as -the true standard. Out of 30 specimens 29 may have lost more or less in -weight by wear, whilst one may be a _fleur de coin_, perfect as at the -moment when it left the die. No one can doubt that the evidence of that -single coin as regards the standard is worth far more than that of all -the remaining 29 examples. I have thought it well to call attention to -this question of method as the vicious principle of arriving at standards -by taking the average is still found in works of men of great eminence. - -Next let us consider the probability of the derivation of the Aeginetic -standard from Egypt. The fact that weights of like standard have been -found in that country, although superficially plausible, in reality is -of little force as evidence of borrowing. For unless we find that the -Egyptians used those weights for weighing _silver_, even the _prima -facie_ case breaks down at once. As a matter of fact there is no evidence -up to the present that these weights were so employed, although there is -some evidence of their being employed for gold (Flinders Petrie, _op. -cit._). But even granting that the Egyptians used the same standard as -the Aeginetans for silver, it does not at all follow that there has been -borrowing on either side. On the principle laid down below it will be -seen that it is quite possible for two peoples to evolve a like _silver_ -standard perfectly independently of each other. But the real difficulty -which besets the theory of an Egyptian origin is that if the Aeginetans -were to borrow their standard from abroad, the people from whom they -would in all probability have obtained it were not the Egyptians, with -whom they had but slight relations directly, but rather the Phoenicians, -with whom they were in constant intercourse. - -It cannot be proved that at any time the Egyptians were a maritime -people trading round the coasts of Greece. There was undoubtedly -intercourse between Greece and Egypt, but that intercourse was through -the medium of the shipmen of Tyre. Why should then the Aeginetans adopt -a standard from abroad which differed from that of the Phoenicians -with whom they were in constant commercial relations? Again, if there -is any connection between the importation of weight standards and the -commencement of coinage, it may be urged that whilst it was from the -Phoenicians the Aeginetans learned the art which had been originated in -Asia Minor, or at all events from the Greeks of the coast of Asia Minor -who coined electrum money on the Phoenician standard, we ought naturally -to find the Greeks of Aegina using this standard for their earliest -coinage rather than a standard borrowed from Egypt, which most certainly -was very backward in developing the art of coining, seeing that it was -not until after the conquest of that country by Alexander the Great (B.C. -330) that money was there struck for the first time[277]. - -Passing by for the moment Mr Head’s view, let us next deal with that -of Dr Hultsch. This theory has the great merit of granting that the -Greeks were capable of evolving a _silver_ standard for themselves -from a knowledge of the relative value of gold and silver, whilst the -other theories assume that they borrowed blindly ready-made standards, -which they for some unknown reason either raised according to Brandis, -or degraded according to Head. But Dr Hultsch is met by two crucial -difficulties. (1) Why should the Aeginetans have taken six light -Babylonian shekels of gold and arbitrarily made them the basis of -their new silver standard? (2) But the fatal objection is that whereas -Hultsch’s theory depends on gold being to silver in the same relation -(13·3:1) in Greece Proper as it was in Asia Minor, as a matter of fact it -can be proved that the precious metals there stood in a very different -relation to each other. In the _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, 1887, I -gave some reasons for believing that in early times gold was to silver -in Greece in the relation of 15:1. For whilst gold was plentiful in -Asia, at no place in Greece Proper were there auriferous deposits. -Hence it is probable that gold had to silver a higher relative value -in Greece than it had in Asia. Certain archaeological discoveries -recently made at Athens add great strength to the view which I then put -forward. At a meeting of the Berlin Academy of Science in 1889 Dr Ulrich -Köhler discussed certain fragments of inscriptions which refer to the -famous statue of Athena, wrought in gold and ivory by Pheidias for the -Parthenon. By combining with a fragment published by M. Foucart (_Bullet. -de Corresp. Hell._ 1889, p. 171), another fragment previously copied by -himself, Dr Köhler arrived at the result that the fragments relate to -the purchase of materials for the construction of the statue, that is of -gold and ivory. The gold purchased is described both according to its -weight and according to the price (τιμή) paid for it in Attic silver -currency (whilst the ivory is only described by the value or price). The -sum paid for gold amounted to 526·652 drachms, 5 obols, the weight of the -gold being 37·618 drachms: from this we learn that the relative value of -gold to silver at that time was as 14:1. According to Thucydides (II. -13), forty talents of gold were used in the making of the statue, whilst -according to the more explicit statement of Philochorus the amount was -forty-four. The image was dedicated at the great Panathenaic festival of -the year 438 B.C. As not more than 10 to 11 talents of gold were used in -the three years to which the fragments refer, Köhler draws the inference -that the construction of the statue commenced in the same year as that of -the Parthenon (447 B.C.), and that Pheidias was engaged on his great work -for fully nine years. - -We thus know now the relative value of silver and gold in Attica about -450 B.C. But we must not regard this as the relation which existed -at earlier times. It was only after the Persian wars that Athens had -got possession of the island of Thasos with its rich gold mines, and -the equally rich districts on the Thracian coast. The fact of her -coming into the possession of such wealthy gold-producing regions -must have materially lowered the price of gold in Athens. We know how -the development of the mines of Pangaeum by Philip of Macedon in the -following century lowered the value of gold throughout Greece, for by the -time of Alexander the relative value of the two precious metals was as -10:1. In the sixth century B.C. gold was so scarce in Greece that when -the Spartans wanted to make a dedication in gold they had to send to Asia -to obtain a sufficient supply of the metal[278]. Hence if we conclude -that in earlier times the relative value of gold to silver in Greece -proper was as 15:1, we shall not be far from the truth. At all events it -is put beyond doubt that the relation was higher than that of 13·3:1, -and accordingly Dr Hultsch’s theory of the origin of the Aeginetic -silver standard, which is based on that relation falls at once to the -ground, unless he can shew that such a standard, based on six light gold -Babylonian shekels had been previously fixed in Asia or Egypt, and thence -adopted by the Greeks without any regard to the relative value existing -in Greece itself between the precious metals. But as a matter of fact Dr -Hultsch does not make any such attempt. Thus this essay at a solution -breaks down. - -On the other hand if we make the very slight and very probable assumption -that the early Greeks had formed a definite idea of the relative value -of gold and silver, which they would have determined exactly on the same -principle as they would arrive at a notion of the relative value of any -other two commodities, which they were in the habit of giving and taking -in exchange, that is by the simple principle of supply and demand, we -shall find a ready solution without having to resort to either Egypt or -Babylon. If gold was to silver as 15:1 in Greece, it follows that the -Homeric talent, the earliest Greek standard, being about 135 grains, ten -silver pieces of 202 grains each would be equivalent to _one_ gold unit. - - 135 × 15 = 2025 grs. of silver. - - 2025 ÷ 10 = 202·5 grs. of silver. - -This gives a singularly close approximation to the weight of the existing -coins of the Aeginetic standard of the earliest and heaviest kind. Taking -the Homeric talent at 130 grains of gold, by the same process we obtain -10 silver pieces each of the weight of 195 grains (130 × 15 = 1950; 1950 -÷ 10 = 195 grs.) - -The second standard which we find in Greece at the beginning of the -historical epoch was the Euboic. This standard was used for both _silver_ -and _gold_. The ordinary account of its origin is as follows: “From Ionia -possibly through Samos the Euboeans imported the standard by which they -weighed their silver. This standard was the light Assyrio-Babylonian -gold mina with its shekel or stater of about 130 grains. The Euboeans -having little or no gold transferred the weight used in Asia for gold -to their own silver, raising it slightly at the same time to a maximum -of 135 grains, and from Euboea it soon spread over a large part of the -Greek world by means of the widely extended commercial relations of the -enterprising Euboean cities. This may have taken place towards the close -of the eighth century and before the war which broke out at the end of -that century between Chalcis and Eretria, nominally for the possession of -the fields of Lelantum, which lay between the two rival cities”[279]. - -This Euboic standard of 135-130 grains is seen at once to be identical in -weight with the Homeric talent. - -Several difficulties (irrespective of the fact that there was no need for -the Greeks to borrow from Asia a standard which they themselves already -possessed from very early times) meet this theory. - -(1) If the Euboeans derived their standard from Ionia why did they not -rather adopt the Phoenician standards, on which we have already seen the -great Ionian cities based their coinages of gold, silver, and electrum? -Some very early electrum coins found at Samos (Head, _op. cit._ XLI.), -have suggested that that island formed the link. “The theory,” says Mr -Head, “that Samos was the port whence the Euboeans derived the gold -standard subsequently used by them for silver, rests upon the weight of -some very early electrum coins (about 44 grs.) which have been found in -the island of Samos, and of the earliest Euboean coins, Euboea and Samos -having been two of the greatest colonizing and maritime powers of the -Aegean Sea. Thus I think we may account for the fact that the towns of -Euboea, when they began to strike silver money of their own, naturally -made use of the standard which had become from of old habitual in the -island, precisely in the same way as Pheidon in Peloponnesus struck his -first silver money on the reduced Phoenician standard which was prevalent -at the time in his dominions.” But as a matter of fact the recognized -Samian coins are of the Phoenician standard (220 grs.) in its slightly -reduced state as found at Miletus (Head, _op. cit._ 515). This being so -it would indeed be strange if the Euboeans from occasionally coming in -contact with Lydian coins at Samos would have adopted that standard in -preference to that in use in the great cities of Ionia with which their -commerce directly lay. - -(2) Why did the Euboeans take the Lydian _gold_ standard of 130 grs. for -their own electrum and silver instead of the Lydian _silver_ standard of -172·9 grs.? According to Mr Head’s view, as we have seen above, the early -Lydian electrum was struck on the standard of 172 grs. (the so-called -Babylonian silver) when meant for circulation in the interior of Asia -Minor, but on the Phoenician standard for circulation in trade with the -Greeks of the coast of Ionia. - -(3) We may ask the question, why did the Euboeans if they were taking -over a ready-made standard which had no relation to any standard which -they themselves already possessed, adopt the _gold_ standard of 130 grs. -instead of the electrum and silver standard which was in use among all -the Greek cities with which they traded? - -We can now conveniently revert to the theory that the Aeginetan -_silver_ standard was a reduced Phoenician. Much has been written -about _degradation of coin weights_ and _reduced standards_. It may be -therefore well to clear our notions on the subject by asking ourselves -what do we mean by such terms. Both the terms and the process are equally -familiar to those at all acquainted with the history of mediaeval -coinage. The king then controlled, as for instance in England, the -mintage. If the sovereign thought fit to reduce the amount of silver in -the groat from 80 to 72 grains his subjects had no alternative but to -take the new and lighter pieces as equivalent to four pennies sterling. -The sovereign thus was able to relieve an exhausted treasury, making -a considerable profit off every groat and penny put into circulation. -Again, the impecunious monarch might resort to another method of making a -profit, by debasing the coinage, and might issue one such as the fourth -of Henry VIII., of exceeding base silver, and again his subjects could -simply grumble and take the new money. These groats and pennies passed -as such within the realm, but when the question of foreign exchange -came, the matter assumed an entirely new complexion. Would a shrewd -Flemish merchant from Antwerp accept a base or a reduced English groat -at the same rate for which it passed current in England? Of course he -did no such thing, and the scales were at once called into use, and the -silver changed hands not by tale, but by _weight_. Now the condition -under which such a degradation or debasing of the coinage as we have -described can take place is that a state or country shall be of such -considerable magnitude that it has room within its own borders to employ -a large amount of coin in internal trade without much necessity of -external commerce. Did such conditions exist among the Greek states of -antiquity? There is another condition, namely, sovereign power vested -in the hands of a monarch possessed of unlimited authority, who has a -direct personal interest in the profit to be made from the degradation -of the coinage, and who has power sufficient to enable him to force his -debased coinage on a reluctant people. Did such conditions exist in any -of the Greek states of antiquity? Nowhere in Greece Proper do we find -them fulfilled, but if we turn to Sicily we get a good example of the -practice so often followed in after centuries by the mediaeval monarchs. -The tyrant Dionysius there put an arbitrary value on gold in relation to -silver: for although this relation was probably not more than 12:1, this -despot raised it perforce to 15:1[280]. He also issued a coinage of tin, -according to Aristotle[281], which he perhaps forced his subjects to take -as equivalent to silver coins of like size. In later years again when -Timoleon liberated Syracuse and the democracy was once more restored, the -state issued a coinage of electrum instead of that of pure gold, which -had previously been in currency, by this means making a profit of 20 per -cent.[282] It is hardly necessary to point out that whilst this coinage -of Dionysius might pass for an artificial value within the dominions -of Syracuse, the moment a Syracusan came to make payment to a foreign -merchant, its factitious value vanished and the transaction took place -according to the current value of the metals. So as long as the English -penny remained of good weight and quality it found ready currency on the -continent, and the potentates of Flanders issued numerous imitations of -them known as _esterlings_, but when the English silver penny became -debased all foreign imitations ceased[283]. Now the Greek states of -Greece Proper were very small in extent, and seldom had a very strong -central authority. The area being limited it was absolutely necessary for -them to have constant dealings with their neighbours. It would have been -difficult for any government in republican times to have forced on its -citizens a debased silver currency, and even had this been possible, any -benefit derived therefrom would have been counterbalanced by the great -drawback arising to trade. If Athens had reduced her famous “Owls” or as -they were otherwise called “Maidens” (from the head of Pallas Athena), -by five grains, her credit would have suffered and her merchants have -gained nothing by it, as the balance would have been at once resorted to, -and allowance would have had to be made on each coin of the new debased -standard. We who live in modern times are too apt to forget the readiness -with which men in older days had resort to the scales, although at this -moment large transactions in gold between bankers and financiers are -carried out by weight. Only so late as the beginning of this century, -when the gold coinage of the country was in a wretched state, every -farmer and trader went to fairs in Ireland equipped with a pocket -balance (which was adjusted for the guinea, half-guinea, sovereign, -half-sovereign, and gold seven-shilling-piece). - -It is difficult then to see what it would have availed the Aeginetans to -have reduced the standard which they are supposed to have got from the -Phoenicians. - -Their island state was of diminutive proportions; they devoted themselves -almost entirely to traffick by sea, their island was an emporium where -strangers resorted. In all dealings with the Phoenicians they would have -to pay a drawback on their debased coin; for the cunning Phoenician -or Ionian was not likely to be beguiled into taking staters of 200 -grs. as equivalent to 230 grs. It is plain therefore that when we find -divergencies of standard these are not due to mere _degradation_, but -to some far more practical consideration, and this will be seen all -the more clearly when we shall find that whilst we have divergencies -in _silver_ standards, the gold standard which was in use in Greece -from Homeric times down to the Roman Conquest remains almost absolutely -without variation. But there are other and stronger objections against -the Phoenician origin of the Aeginetic standard. - -Now if we accept the doctrine that the Greeks received their -coin-standards across the sea from Asia, the _Aeginetic_ from the -Phoenician traders whose commerce lay with Aegina and Peloponnesus, -the _Euboic_ on the other hand from Lydia by way of the great Ionian -cities on the coast of Asia Minor, we become involved in a serious -difficulty. At the time represented in the Homeric Poems, there is not -as yet a single Greek colony on the coast of Asia Minor[284]. Miletus, -destined to be in after years the Queen of Ionia, and to be one of the -greatest centres of Hellenic commerce and culture, is as yet known only -as the city of the barbarous-speaking Carians[285]. Yet we find the -Greeks represented in these self-same poems as already in possession of -a standard for gold identical with the light Babylonian or Lydian gold -shekel (130 grs.). But again we find from the same source that the Greeks -were already in full commercial intercourse with one Asiatic people, -but not a people who could serve as a bridge between Lydia and Euboea. -Everywhere in the Homeric Poems we meet the shipmen of Tyre, who are -represented as bringing the products of the skilled artists of Sidon, -beautiful cloths, and cunningly wrought vessels of silver, articles of -jewellery, necklaces[286] set with amber (perhaps brought from the coasts -of the Baltic), and now and then as chance arose, kidnapping women and -children to sell as slaves in the marts of the Mediterranean[287]. - -If the Hellenes had got their standard from an Asiatic source, it must -have been the heavy gold shekel of 260 grains, which the Phoenicians -employed, and consequently the Homeric Talent would have weighed 260 -instead of 130 grains, or on the other hand if it be supposed that the -Greeks might borrow and use for their own _gold_ a standard used only for -_silver_ in Asia, the Homeric Talent ought to have weighed 225 grains, -that is the Phoenician silver standard, which, as we have seen, it -certainly did not. - -A further difficulty arises in reference to the _Euboic_ standard. No -one who reflects for a moment could venture to assert that Phoenician -trade and influence were limited to Southern Greece. Yet that virtually -is the tacit assumption made by those who derive the standard from Asia. -There is evidence to shew that the Phoenicians from a very early period -frequented Euboea, doubtless attracted by its copper mines (from which -perhaps the famous city of Chalcis derived its name)[288]. Round no -spot in Hellas do more legends cluster which connect it with Phoenician -colonists than Boeotia. It was here that Cadmus settled, and introduced -the Phoenician alphabet, it was here according to Greek tradition that -Herakles, who is so strongly identified with the Phoenician Melkarth, -had his birth. Why then should the Euboeans have been behind the rest of -Hellas in receiving the Phoenician standard, which, according to Mr Head, -as we saw above, did influence so powerfully the Ionic cities of the -Asiatic seaboard, with which their commerce was so largely connected? - -From these considerations it follows that before the Greeks came into -contact with either Phoenicians or Lydians they had a weight standard of -their own, the _Talanton_ of the Homeric Poems, based on the _cow_, which -was as yet only employed for the weighing of gold. - -This standard we have found to be identical with one of the two chief -standards employed in historical times for _silver_, and which from first -to last was the _only_ standard employed for gold in all parts of Hellas -Proper. - -As we have seen that gold was to silver in that region as 15:1, there was -not much difficulty in regarding fifteen _weights_ or staters of silver -as equivalent to one of gold of like weight. Hence there was not the same -need in Greece to devise a separate silver standard as there was in Asia, -where the relation of the precious metals stood as 13·3:1, a fact which -made simple exchange very difficult. On the other hand we have seen that -for the Aeginetans and Greeks, who used the so-called Aeginetic standard, -the decimal system, the simplest and most primitive method of reckoning, -had a powerful attraction. - -Primitive peoples perform all their calculations by means of counters, -using for such purposes their fingers and toes or seeds or pebbles. - -Nature herself has supplied man with the simplest and most convenient -of counters in his ten fingers. Hence naturally arises a preference -amongst primitive peoples for counting by tens, and this method, although -it has at times been supplanted partially (seldom altogether) by the -duodecimal and sexagesimal systems, which are superior by possessing a -greater number of submultiples than the decimal (_e.g._ 12 = 6 × 2, 4 × -3, whilst 10 = 5 × 2 only), was adhered to by the Egyptians all through -their history down to the latest Pharaohs. It may then perhaps be argued -that it was through Egyptian influence with Greece that a large part of -Greece adopted for their silver a standard based on the decimal system, -especially as certain traces of Egyptian influence in very early times -have been discovered of late. But as I have already pointed out above -when discussing the theory of an Egyptian origin for the Aeginetan -standard, because standards of like weight are found in two different -regions, it by no means follows that one has borrowed from the other. If -we can point out that in both Egypt and Greece there was a standard for -gold almost identical in weight, it is at once apparent that there was -no need for the Greeks to borrow from the Egyptians the idea of making -ten silver ingots or wedges equal to one gold; especially as the decimal -idea was next to that of five the simplest and most rudimentary form of -calculation known to mankind. It is certainly preposterous to suppose -that the Greeks were too barbarous at the time when they had attained a -knowledge of silver to devise such a simple process as that of taking -the fifteen ingots of silver, which from the natural laws of supply and -demand they regarded as the equivalent of one gold ingot of like weight, -and redividing them into ten new ingots of silver. This surely will -not seem an incredible feat for the early Hellenes to perform when we -recall to mind the extraordinary skill in arithmetic which is found among -some barbarous peoples. “In West Africa a lively and continual habit of -bargaining has developed a great power of arithmetic, and little children -already do feats of computation with their heaps of cowries[289].” To -imagine that the Greeks could not perform so simple a feat as that which -I propose is to assume that they were in a far lower condition of culture -and intelligence than the negroes of West Africa, rather resembling the -lowest known tribes of men, such as the aborigines of Australia and -the savages of the South American forests. To make such an assumption -respecting a race which has shewn such an unrivalled potentiality of -progress and development as the Greeks is absurd. - -At this point it will be convenient to take a general survey of our -results so far. We found in the Homeric Poems a twofold system of -currency, the gold Talanton, and the cow or ox, the latter alone being -employed to express values: we next found that the _Talanton_ was the -equivalent of the cow, the metallic unit being clearly the later in -origin, and being based on or equated to the older unit of barter. -Through the sacerdotal tradition of Delos we were enabled to fix the -value of the Homeric Talanton at 2 gold Attic drachms, or a Daric -(135-130 grains Troy). Next came the standards used in historical Greece. -(1) The Euboic (135 grains Troy) used for _silver_ in the great Euboic -towns, in Corinth, in Athens from the time of Solon, and as a matter of -course in the Chalcidian and Corinthian colonies, and employed as the -_sole_ unit for _gold_ in all parts of Greece Proper at all periods; (2) -the Aeginetic (200-195 grains) employed in Peloponnesus, in Boeotia and -Central Greece. We learned that the Euboic standard coincided with the -Homeric _Talanton_, thus finding the Greeks of historical times using the -same standard universally for _gold_ which they had employed long before -the introduction of the art of coining from Asia, and partly using this -same standard for silver, whilst in other states they employed a standard -for the latter metal, which was based on the gold unit, simply dividing -the amount of silver equivalent to it into ten parts instead of fifteen. - -We then put the question, “Is it rational to suppose that the Greeks -borrowed in the 7th century B.C. along with the art of coining from Asia -a standard which they themselves already long since possessed?” - -At the time when I first put this view forward, I was unable to offer any -concrete proof of the existence of such a standard on Greek soil before -the introduction of coined money, although the literary evidence was of -the strongest kind. Since then I have been enabled to obtain some data -of considerable importance. I have already (Chap. II.) described the -rings and spirals of gold and silver found at Mycenae, and shewn that -they were not improbably made on a standard of 135 grs. We have thus -found some definite evidence of the existence of a gold and possibly a -silver standard, corresponding to the standard used for both metals in -after ages under the name of the Euboic or Attic. It may of course be -argued that though found on Greek soil, they are not really Greek in -origin. For instance there may be certain indications of Egyptian art and -influence in these pre-historic remains, such as the frieze discovered -in the Palace at Tiryns of alabaster inlaid with blue glass which -according to Lepsius and Helbig[290] is the mock _lapis lazuli_ which -the Egyptians were so fond of making in imitation of the rare and costly -real stone which had to be brought from Tartary. Granting then for the -sake of argument that the Homeric _Talent_ was a standard introduced into -Greece from Egypt at a very early period, it by no means follows that -this standard has had a scientific origin. The Greeks it will be noticed -found it necessary in taking over this standard to equate it to their -primitive barter system. If then the process of human development is such -that the Greeks, who above all people shewed the most extraordinary power -of acquiring civilization, found it necessary even when presented with a -ready made standard for metallic currency, to bring it into harmony with -their immemorial system of appraising values by means of the cow, there -is certainly a strong presumption that the people from whom they derived -that metallic standard had not themselves obtained it by any mathematical -process. - -We can hardly doubt that mankind first obtained empirically the art of -weighing, and that it was only at a later period that mathematics were -called in to fix scientifically the standards obtained by the older and -cruder method. Such is the function of mathematics still. Thus Professor -Cayley observed (in his address at Stockport), “I said I would speak to -you not of the utility of mathematics in any of the questions of common -life or of physical science, but rather of the obligations of mathematics -to these different subjects. The consideration which thus presents itself -is in a great measure that of the history of the development of the -different branches of mathematical science in connection with the older -physical sciences, Astronomy and Mechanics. The mathematical theory is -in the first instance suggested by some question of common life or of -physical science, is pursued and studied quite independently thereof, and -perhaps after a long interval comes in contact with it or with quite a -different question[291].” - -If such then is the part played by mathematics in an age when even the -mathematician has come to the aid of the hangman, and the wretch meets -a well-deserved doom in strict accordance with a mathematical formula, -_a fortiori_ must empirical discovery have preceded mathematical theory -in the second millennium before the Christian era. Just as countless -malefactors were successfully executed by empirical Jack Ketches before -ever the mathematician turned executioner, so we may be certain that -untold sums of gold had been weighed by means of natural seeds and -according to a standard empirically obtained before ever the sages of -Thebes or Chaldaea had dreamed of applying to metrology the results of -their first gropings in Geometry or Astronomy. - - - - -PART II. - - - - -CHAPTER X. - -THE SYSTEMS OF EGYPT, BABYLON, AND PALESTINE. - - -We are now in a position to approach the last stage in our task, that -which deals with the growth and development of various weight-standards, -all of which start from a common unit. Of necessity Egypt, Babylon, -Greece and Italy will claim a chief share of our attention. The question -now is, Shall we deal with these regions according to the priority of -their civilization, that is, in the order in which I have just named -them, or shall we rather adhere to the principle which has hitherto -guided us, of working back from that which is better known to that which -is less known? - -On the whole the former is perhaps the better for our present purpose. -As we believe that we have discovered by the inductive method the common -unit which lies at the base of all these systems, there is no longer the -same necessity for always starting with that which is the less ancient. -Besides, if we were nominally to pursue this course, it by no means -follows that we would be starting from that which is the best known. -_Prima facie_ we ought to start with the Roman system, the tradition of -which has remained unbroken down to our own days. We could work back -through the system of the Middle Ages to the time of Constantine the -Great, from Constantine to the early Empire, and from the Empire to the -Republic. Moreover no weight-unit is more accurately known than the -Roman pound. But the early history of Rome is so obscure that we have -absolutely no records of a time, when Greece had already a literature of -a venerable antiquity. Rome has no literary remains and even not more -than a very few meagre inscriptions dating from before the first Punic -War (263-241 B.C.), the very time when Hellas was already far advanced -in the autumn of her life. Then Italy had borrowed so much from Hellas -that the enquirer must be cautious as to how far he may be dealing -with material of true Italian or merely adventitious origin. As we are -concerned rather with the _origin_ than with the later developments -of weight-systems, it is plain that for dealing with our principal -objects the Italian systems present us with no special aid. The late -period (268 B.C.) at which the Romans struck silver coins places us at a -still further disadvantage if we start with their system. Greece on the -other hand presents us not only with abundant literary records of great -antiquity, some of them descending from an age which knew not the uses of -coined money, but also with thousands of inscriptions cut in marble or -bronze, many of which contain data of great value for dealing with the -history of currency and weight, and finally presents us with vast series -of coins from which we can learn empirically the coin standards employed -in various times and places. But it is the very wealth of material that -is in some degree here our difficulty. The special feature of Greek -national life was its numerous autonomous states. There was no central -authority with a mint which issued coins for a whole empire as was -virtually the case in the great Persian kingdom, and at a later period in -the Macedonian empire of Alexander the Great. In the palmy days of Hellas -each petty state issued its own coinage, following in its silver and -copper mintages whatever standard or module it pleased. - -To commence our constructive part with a country where we are confronted -with such an array of separate coinages and of diverse standards would be -unwise if it were possible to start from some region where there was a -single central authority, and consequently less diversity of standards. -We are thus led to choose either Egypt or Babylonia as our starting -point. The former presents to us a system less developed and more simple -than the latter. In fact we are tolerably well justified, in view of -recent discussion, in regarding all that is more complex in the system -of Egypt as borrowed from Babylonia. Yet it must not be supposed that -we escape all difficulties in thus starting with Egypt. If in Hellas we -found ourselves embarrassed by the wealth of coinages, in Egypt on the -other hand we have no native coinage to guide us, for it was only after -the conquest of Egypt by Alexander that under the Greek dynasty founded -by Ptolemy Lagos the essentially Greek art of coining was introduced -into Egypt. We depend therefore for our knowledge of Egyptian standards -upon the actual weighings of weight-pieces and such information as can -be gleaned from the ancient Egyptian documents. The same holds good -likewise on the whole for the Assyrian system, where however the actual -weight-pieces and statements derived from cuneiform inscriptions can in -some degree be supported by collateral evidence. At the same time we must -be careful not to assign as much importance to the literary evidence -supplied to us by Egyptian hieroglyphic or Assyrian cuneiform as we do -to the records of Greece or Rome. The keys to the former have only been -obtained within the present century, and many of the translations of such -documents given us by that brilliant band of savants who have opened to -us the portals of a Past far exceeding in antiquity the most remote epoch -of which the literatures of Greece and Rome contain even any tradition, -must at the best in many cases be considered only as tentative. - -Furthermore although the knowledge gained from actually existing -weights, which have been gleaned from the ruins of Nineveh, Khorsabad, -or Naucratis, may be regarded as positive and more or less exact, we -are met by the difficulty that in the case of Egypt and Assyria, where -there was no coined money, we have no means of deciding what class of -weight was used for certain kinds of commodities. In Greece and in the -countries which formed the Persian empire we can be sure at all events of -the standards which were employed in the weighing of gold and silver: the -absence of this test is a serious hindrance in the study of Egyptian and -Assyrian metrology. It is easy to illustrate by a supposed example the -element of uncertainty introduced. Let us suppose that in ages to come -the ruins of some English ironmonger’s shop were excavated, and a series -of weights was found therein, a set of Avoirdupois weights ranging from -a one-hundredweight to half an ounce; a set of Troy weights ranging from -one pound to half a grain, and one of Apothecaries’ weights consisting -of ounces, drachms, scruples, and grains. Suppose likewise that some -ardent metrologist of that age, in addition to this splendid find, should -be able to add to his material from elsewhere one or two sovereign and -half-sovereign weights, a guinea, half-guinea, quarter-guinea, and -seven-shilling-piece weight, perhaps even a noble, or a half-noble -weight, and then without consulting literary sources, or previously -studying the standards on which the English coinage had been struck at -different periods, proceeded to reconstruct the metrological system of -England. It is needless to say that his conclusions would be indeed -widely aberrant from the truth. - -Having thus sketched however roughly some of the difficulties which beset -our path, and after warning the reader that in metrology if anywhere the -maxim of the old Sicilian poet is to be observed, - - Sober keep, to doubt inclined be; - Hinges these are of the mind[292], - -I shall now proceed to set forth the method in which I conceive the -various systems gradually rose and expanded. Let us bear in mind the fact -already proved that gold was the first of all commodities to be weighed, -and that consequently the standards employed for weighing that metal are -the most archaic. - - -EGYPT. - -As has been previously remarked, we are not concerned with the long -battle still raging between Assyriologists and Egyptologists as regards -the respective claims of Egypt and Babylonia to the invention of measure -and weight-standards. Boeckh himself seems instinctively to have felt -this difficulty. For whilst he took Babylonia as the birthplace and home -of all the ancient systems, nevertheless he held that contemporaneously -there must have existed a connection between Egypt and Babylonia in -remote antiquity, from which alone certain agreements and relations -between the measures and weights of Egypt and Babylonia were capable -of explanation[293]. The primitive measures of length are undoubtedly -by the consensus of mankind based upon the parts of the body, such as -the finger, the thumb, the foot, the arm, or both arms fully extended, -standards common to Egyptians and Chaldaeans alike. Whilst at a later -stage in the history of all civilized peoples efforts have been made -to obtain more accuracy in these standards, which of necessity have -produced certain local and national divergencies, yet inasmuch as all -alike started from these standards which have been supplied by nature, -it is obvious that many striking similarities and relations will always -be found when any comparative study of different systems is attempted. -The same principle of course holds good for weight-standards. According -to our argument there was a common animal unit existing in Assyria and -Egypt, which was represented by a metal unit, prevailing alike in both -regions possibly with certain modifications. Egypt and Assyria starting -with this common unit, each in their own fashion constructed their -distinctive national systems, and we need not be surprised if at a later -period under certain political conditions certain parts of the system of -one of these regions are found exercising some influence upon that of the -other. - -We shall now briefly state the Egyptian weight-system. In the oldest -Egyptian documents two weights continually occur, the Kat (_Ket_ or -_Kite_) and the Uten (_Ten_ or _Outen_). Already in the third millennium -before Christ the precious metals were in full use in Egypt, and copper -likewise was employed in the purchase of articles of small value. -Although very large amounts are recorded, yet they had devised no larger -unit than those mentioned. - -[Illustration: FIG. 22. Egyptian Five-Kat weight (Harris Collection).] - -To M. Chabas belongs the honour of being the first to clear up the -relations between the uten and kat. The history of this discovery is -an interesting proof of the fruitlessness of the purely empirical form -of metrology which confines itself to the measuring of buildings, and -weighing of ancient weight-pieces and coins, unless its path is made -clear by means of the light derived from ancient records. The names uten -and kat had been long known, as both of them recur frequently on the -walls of the temple of Karnak (_Temp._ Thothmes III. 1700-1600 B.C.), and -Egyptian weights were in the museums of Europe, but nevertheless “the -exact relation of the one to the other remained unknown until it was -fortunately disclosed by a passage in the Harris papyrus, which contains -the annals of Rameses III. (circ. 1300 B.C.). From this it appears that -the Uten contained ten Kats[294].” The uten therefore is the tenfold of -the kat: Nissen[295] thinks that the latter was perhaps originally a -gold weight (_vielleicht ursprünglich ein Goldgewicht_). These two units -served for the weighing of gold, silver and copper, and there seems to -be no difference noted in the documents between the units used for each -purpose. In the lists of booty we read of such sums as 3144 utens of -gold and 36692 utens of electrum. In lists of prices of commodities kats -and utens of silver and copper are frequently mentioned. The weight of -the kat has been fixed by Lepsius at 9·096 grammes (142·1 grains) and -that of the uten at 90·959 grammes (1421·2 grains). But as it often -happens in the case of coins that one well-preserved specimen is a better -index of the normal standard than any that can be attained by taking -the average of 100 bad specimens, so in the case of weights, one good -specimen, made of some hard and imperishable substance, will give us a -truer representation of the standard unit than the average of a large -number of weights made of some less durable material, and carelessly -executed, and meant merely for traffic in goods of little value. If such -a weight as we have supposed is inscribed with its name, and we can also -get some indication that it has all the authority that belongs to a -weight used for official purposes, its value becomes still greater. Such -a piece fortunately exists in the Harris Collection. It is a beautifully -preserved serpentine weight, and weighs 698 grs. Troy. Allowing for its -extremely slight loss we may suppose its original weight to have been -about 700 grs. It bears the inscription, _Five Kats of the Treasury of -On_. This gives 140 grains Troy as the weight of the kat[296]. This -inscription also proves that the kat was the unit. For if as is commonly -stated the uten is the unit, of which the kat is simply the one-tenth, we -must naturally expect to find this weight described as ½ uten rather than -as 5 kats. This is confirmed by a statement of the grammarian Horapollo -(or Horus, who although writing about 400 A.D. nevertheless preserves -much valuable information) that “with the Egyptians the didrachm is the -monad. But the monad is the source of production of all numeration.” As -two drachms were 135 grs., it is evident that it is the kat of 140 grs., -and not the uten of 1400 grs. which the Egyptians themselves regarded as -the basis of their system[297]. Mr Flinders Petrie from the weights of -158 specimens found in the ruins of Naucratis, which range from 136.8 -grains to 153 grains, concludes that there were two distinct kat units, -one weighing 142 grs., the other 152 grs. But until some literary -evidence is forthcoming for the existence of this second and heavier -kat[298], we must suspend our judgment. It is perfectly possible that -such existed, being used for some purpose different from that of the kat -of 140 grains. For instance it might have been used specially for copper -owing to a desire to make certain adjustments between silver and copper, -but this is of course mere conjecture. - -It is worth while here to see the method by which those who believe in a -scientific system of Egyptian origin obtain their unit. - -Signor Bortolotti (_Del primitivo cubito Egizio_) thinks that the uten -of 1400 grains is exactly the ⅟₁₀₀₀ part of the weight of a cubic cubit -of Nile water, the cubit in question being not the ordinary royal cubit -of 20·66 inches, but a measure which he calls the primitive Egyptian -cubit of 19·71 inches in length. Signor Bortolotti also suggests that -the standard uten of Mr Petrie’s heavy system was 1486 grains, being -the ⅟₁₅₀₀ part of the weight of a cubic _royal_ cubit (20·66 inches) in -Nile water. But as I have just pointed out the evidence is in favour of -the kat being the original unit rather than the uten. Besides if the -Egyptians obtained their system for the first time by the scientific -process, we ought naturally to find some of those larger units such as -the talent and mina, which are found in Egypt at a later epoch. But as we -have seen in the case of Greeks, Hebrews, Chinese and Hindus, everywhere -weight systems begin with a weight for gold, and this is naturally a -small unit. - -There is still one element in this matter which we must not overlook. -A certain number of gold rings have been found in Egypt. Their unit is -fixed by Lenormant at 8·1 grammes (128 grains). Brandis regarded them -as Syrian in origin, and thus got rid of all difficulty. Others regard -the rings as evidently of Egyptian manufacture, and from finding as they -think a corresponding mina appearing in Egypt in Ptolemaic times regard -this unit as a genuine ancient Egyptian standard in use long anterior -to the Persian conquest. It may thus be very probable that the standard -employed in early days in Egypt for gold (and also electrum and silver) -was this unit of 128 grains, which is of course almost identical with an -ox-unit. Silver, according to Erman[299], was in the time of the oldest -Egyptian records more valuable than gold, for in enumeration it is always -named before gold, whereas under the later dynasties it is named as -with us always after gold, shewing that a great change had taken place -in the relations between these metals. It is then clearly conceivable -that at the outset one and the same unit of about 128-30 grains, under -the name of kat, served as the unit for both gold and silver (which -explains perfectly the fact that an ox is valued at a kat of silver), -but that in after days when the change in the relative values of the -metals came, there was found a need for a new silver unit, just as the -Greeks in certain places found it necessary to form the Aeginetan and -other standards, and the Babylonians found themselves compelled to form -that standard which alone can with truth be termed _the Babylonian_, the -silver unit of 172 grains. - -We have now before us the data for the early Egyptian weight system[300]. -It is simple; the unit is the kat probably based on the ox as we have -seen already. The fact that weights formed in the shape of cows and cows’ -heads are represented in Egyptian paintings as employed in the weighing -of rings, indicates that in the mind of the first manufacturer of such -weights there was a distinct connection between the shape given to the -weight and the object whose value in gold (or silver) it expressed. -Specimens of such weights are known, and are always of small size, a -sure indication that the commodity for which they were employed was -very precious. The fact that we find weights in the shape of lions can -be readily accounted for by the supposition that in the course of time -when the connection between the ox and the original weight-unit became -forgotten, and different standards had been evolved, some distinctive -animal form was adopted to distinguish the weights of a particular -standard. The original unit being thus obtained, the higher unit, the -uten, was formed by the method most familiar to all races of men. The -fingers of one hand suggested to mankind a simple means of counting; -and the combined fingers of both hands gave them the decimal system. -The Egyptians accordingly simply took the tenfold of the ox-unit as -their highest unit. As weighing in the earliest stage was confined -to the precious metals, this unit was sufficient for all practical -needs[301]. It will be noticed that the process employed in forming this -weight-system is exactly that which we have found in the Chinese and its -related systems. The Chinese _liang_ (_tael_ or ounce) corresponds to the -Egyptian kat (or shekel). Under its name of _tical_ or _bat_ we found -it as the unit of gold in South-Eastern Asia, and for the weighing of -precious metals we found that the highest unit employed was the _nên_, -the tenfold of the original unit, (the _tael_) itself still the only unit -in use in China for the precious metals. In process of time when ordinary -commodities of life began to be reckoned by weight, the Chinese made use -of the _pical_ (which originally simply meant a man’s load) as their -highest commercial unit. Much the same process seems to have taken place -in Egypt, for in later times we find _talents_ of various kinds in use. -Thus the Alexandrine talent which was employed for wood contained 360 -utens. Was this talent originally nothing more than a man’s load, which -in a later and more scientific age was adjusted to the weight standard -time out of mind employed for metals? In this talent of 360 utens we can -see the influence of the _sexagesimal_ systems of Asia Minor, which, as -we shall presently see, was really a commercial standard of comparatively -late development and never at any time was employed for the precious -metals. The Alexandrine talent of 360 utens contained 3600 kats, just as -the _royal_ Babylonian talent contained 3600 shekels. - - -THE ASSYRIO-BABYLONIAN SYSTEM. - -[Illustration: FIG. 23. Lion weight.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 24. Assyrian half-shekel weight of the so-called Duck -type[302]. - -_A._ Side view showing cuneiform symbol = ½. - -_B._ View from above.] - -Much has been written in the last thirty years concerning what is known -as the _Assyrio-Babylonian_ system: in fact so much has been written that -it is difficult to find out the data amidst the masses of theory. What -then are the facts which we have to go upon? Whence do we get the name -_Babylonian_? Herodotus[303] tells us that when Darius imposed on his -subjects a fixed quota of tribute instead of the occasional gifts and -contributions which were brought to the king’s treasury under the reigns -of his predecessors Cyrus and Cambyses, those “who brought silver got -orders to bring a talent of Babylonian weight whilst those who brought -gold one of Euboic weight. But the Babylonian talent amounts to seventy -Euboic minas.” Properly speaking then according to the ancients, the only -specific Babylonian talent was one employed for silver and which was -one-sixth heavier than the Euboic talent. It is to be noted carefully -that the standard employed for the weighing of gold is not regarded by -Herodotus as peculiar to Babylon or Persia, but is treated as identical -with the common Euboic standard which was used for silver in many parts -of Greece, and the stater of which was the only standard employed for -gold in Greece, even in those states where the Aeginetic system was in -use for their silver currency. Thus in the system employed for gold in -the empire of the Great King the mina contained 50 staters, and the -talent 60 minas. But the discovery of the weights known as the Lion and -the Duck weights by Sir A. H. Layard at Nineveh whilst from one point of -view most fortunate, from another may be regarded as the reverse. The -large size of many of the weights caused scholars to fix their attention -entirely on the larger units, and ever since then all the various efforts -to reconstruct the Assyrio-Babylonian weight system have had if nothing -else in common at least this that they have all commenced to build the -pyramid from the top downwards. They all took the highest units, the -talent or mina, as their starting-point, and proceeded to evolve from -thence the small unit or _shekel_. Yet all the evidence of antiquity -pointed in the opposite direction. In the Greek system, which those -scholars held to be borrowed from the East, it was the small unit which -was called the _stater_ or “weigher,” indicating clearly that it was -regarded as the real basis of the standard. - -Again the Phoenicians and Hebrews who from the earliest times were in -constant contact with Mesopotamia ought certainly to exhibit traces in -their earliest extant records of the _mina_ and _talent_, if it was from -these units that the weight-system started. Yet that is not the evidence -afforded by the Old Testament. There is no mention of a _mina_ except -in Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, and Ezekiel, all books of late date. In the -Book of Genesis where sums of money are mentioned, they are reckoned by -shekels and nothing else. So when Abraham bought the cave of Machpelah -for 600 pieces of silver, what could have been more convenient than to -describe the purchase money as consisting of 12 _manahs_ (_minas_)[304]? -Thus, as we shall see later on, the conclusion to be drawn from the -ancient Hebrew writings is the same as that which we draw from the -Homeric Poems, that it is the shekel (or stater), the small unit, which -was the first to be employed, and that it was only in the course of -time that the higher units, the _mina_ and the _talent_, make their -appearance. If according to the common theory the weight standards were -the actual creations of either Chaldaeans or Egyptians and only borrowed -from them by other peoples, why do we not find the higher units appearing -from the first amongst those supposed borrowers, if the other part of the -theory is true, that they started from a high unit? - -Now for the evidence of the monuments themselves. - -The weights found by Sir A. H. Layard fall into two classes, (_a_) those -in the shape of Lions, which are made of bronze, and (_b_) those in the -shape of Ducks, which are of stone[305]. “The bronze Lions are for the -most part furnished with a handle on the back of the animal, and are -generally inscribed with a double legend, one in cuneiform characters, -the other in Aramaic.” The Ducks which are inscribed have a legend in -cuneiform characters only. These inscriptions contain not only the -name of the king of Babylon or Assyria in whose reign they were made, -but likewise a statement of the number of the minas or fractions of a -mina which each weight originally represented. As these weights were -found in the ancient palace some have thought that they were possibly -official standards of weight deposited from time to time in the royal -palaces[306]. This seems at least to be implied by the inscriptions on -some of them, such as those of the largest and most ancient of the Duck -weights, which run as follows: - - (1) ‘The palace of Irta-Merodach, King of Babylon [circ. B.C. - 1050], 30 Manahs[307].’ - - Wt., 15060·5 grammes, yielding a Mina of 502 gram. - - (2) ‘Thirty Manahs of Nabu-suma-libur, King of Assyria,’ [date - unknown]. - - Wt., 14589 gram. - - A small portion of this weight is broken off; if this is allowed - for it will yield a Mina of about the same weight as No. 1. - - (3) ‘Ten Manahs’ (somewhat injured), bears the name of ‘Dungi,’ - according to George Smith, King of Babylon circ. B.C. 2000. - - Wt., 4986 gram., yielding a Mina of 498·6 gram. - -On three of the Lions we read as follows: - - (1) ‘The Palace of Shalmaneser [circ. B.C. 850] King of the - Country, two manahs of the King,’ in cuneiform characters, and - ‘Two Manahs’ weight of the country’ in Aramaic characters. - - Wt., 1992 gram., yielding a Mina of 996 gram. - - (2) ‘The Palace of Tiglath-Pileser [circ. B.C. 747], King of the - Country, two Manehs’ in cuneiform characters. - - Wt., 946 gram., yielding a Mina of 473 gram. - - (3) ‘Five Manahs of the King’ in cuneiform characters, and ‘Five - Manahs’ weight of the country’ in Aramaic characters. - - Wt., 5042 gram., yielding a Mina of 1008 gram. - -The results which we obtain from these weights are that there were -evidently two standards used side by side in the Assyrio-Babylonian -empire, the Mina of one being about 1010 gram., that of the other about -505 gram. In other words one standard was simply the double of the -other; also the weights on which Aramaic legends appear are those which -belong to the double standard. Again, there is no evidence that the -Talent was as yet conceived, as all the weights are Minae or fractions -(or multiples) of Minae. Might we not equally well expect fractions of -the Talent, as for instance to find the weight of 30 Manahs described as -half a Talent, if the Talent already at this period formed part of the -system[308]? - -But there is one most important point to be noticed. The single mina -of 505 gram, is plainly different from the mina of gold, (the Euboic -mina of Herodotus) which contained 50 shekels, staters (Darics) of 130 -grains (8·4 gram.) each. For it would require 50 shekels of 10·5 gram. -(164 grains) each to make a mina of 505 gram. On the other hand it will -be found that if we take 60 shekels of the Daric or ox-unit weight they -will exactly make up the mina of 505 gram. Neither can this mina be the -Babylonian silver mina of 50 shekels of 172 grains (11·2 gram.) each. For -the Babylonian silver mina consists of 50 shekels of 11·2 gram., whereas -the mina of 505 gram, would give 50 shekels of only 10·1 gram. each. The -obvious conclusion is that this mina of 505 gram. is neither the gold nor -the silver standard. It is a mina composed of 60 shekels of the weight -of the gold unit (Daric or ox-unit). And its talent was composed when -the system was completed, of 60 minae, as was the case with all other -talents. From the weights just described it may reasonably be assumed -that both the heavy and light systems were employed contemporaneously -in the Assyrio-Babylonian empire. Some have suggested that whilst the -light system was employed in Babylon, its double, or the heavy one, was -employed in the northern part of the empire. But the fact that it is -on the weights of the latter standard that we find the double legends, -the second being in Aramaic characters, seems to point irresistibly to -the conclusion that the heavy standard (no matter what it may have been -employed for) was especially used in Syria. - -It is of great significance that it is in this very quarter we find in -use as the gold unit not our usual Daric or ox-unit, but its double, -which is commonly known as the heavy gold shekel of 260 grains. I have -suggested elsewhere that the explanation of this may be due to the fact -that among certain peoples, especially those who dwelt after the fashion -of the Sidonians, quiet and full of riches, and who had passed from the -life pastoral into the settled agricultural stage, the yoke or pair of -oxen would readily be regarded as the unit instead of the single ox of -primitive days. The fact that a _zeugos_ or yoke of oxen was taken as the -unit of assessment by Solon for the third of the Athenian classes lends -some support to this view[309]. We have likewise seen how the ancient -Irish, after borrowing the Roman ounce, and equating an ounce of silver -to the cow, made for their silver a higher unit by taking three ounces, -which represented three cows, the ordinary price of a female slave -(_cumhal_). - -The Phoenicians employed the double shekel as their unit, but there is -evidence to show that the light shekel was the original unit. We have -seen that in Egypt, Palestine and Greece, from the remotest time, gold -circulated in the form of rings made of a fixed amount of gold, and also -that the unit on which they were made was our ox unit, or light shekel -(130-5 grains). From the practice of using gold rings in currency as well -as for ornament, we may safely conclude that the standard of 130 grains -upon which these were probably made was far anterior to the use of the -double shekel in Syria and Phoenicia. - -The standards which we have learned from the weights found at Nineveh -and Khorsabad are now generally known as the light royal talent, and -the heavy royal talent, because on specimens of both standards the -inscriptions describe them as weights “of the king.” - -It is evident that as gold and silver had each a separate standard, the -“royal” standards were not employed for the precious metals. It is then -most probable that they were employed for the weighing of the inferior -metals such as copper, which of course played a most important part in -the daily life of both Babylonians and Assyrians. We may rest assured -that corn was not weighed but continued to be bought and sold by dry -measure, as it was with the Hebrews in the days of the Prophets, when the -_Homer_ and the _Ephah_ were employed to measure it. - -I shall now give a tabular view of the three standards used by the -peoples of Mesopotamia and their neighbours, treating the _heavy royal -talent_ as merely the double of the light one. - - GOLD. - - 1 Stater = 130 grs. Troy (8·4 gram.). - 50 Staters = 1 Mina = 6500 grs. (420·0 gram.). - 60 Minae = 1 Talent = 390000 grs. - - SILVER. - - 1 Shekel = 172 grs. - 50 Shekels = 1 Manah = 8600 grs. - 60 Manahs = 1 Talent = 516000 grs. - - ROYAL STANDARD. - - 1 Shekel = 130 grs. (8·4 gram.). - 60 Shekels = 1 Manah = 7800 grs. - 60 Manahs = 1 Talent = 468000 grs. - -Let us now examine for a moment the current explanation of the origin and -inter-relations of these standards and we shall find that they all start -at the wrong end, assuming as earliest that which can be proved to be -later, and deducing what are really the earliest stages from those which -were in fact the historical outcome of the others. - -“The proficiency of the Chaldaeans in the cognate sciences of Arithmetic -and Astronomy is well known[310],[311]. The broad and monotonous plains -of lower Mesopotamia had nothing to attract the eye, and impelled their -inhabitants to fix their attention upon the overarching skies studded -with stars that shone with exceptional clearness and lustre in the dry -pellucid atmosphere of that region. There were no dark mountains looming -in the distance to hinder the eye from watching down to the very horizon -the heavenly bodies in their periodic movements. Thus as Geometry may -be regarded as the special offspring of the Egyptian mind, so Astronomy -and Astrology were the children of Babylonia. The results of their -astronomical observations were duly recorded on clay tablets in the -cuneiform characters, and these tablets were then baked hard, and stored -up in the great libraries in their chief cities. It is recorded that when -Alexander the Great captured Babylon, he obtained and forwarded to his -tutor Aristotle a series of astronomical records extending back as far as -the year B.C. 2234, according to our reckoning.” - -Certain investigations into these tablets, primarily suggested by a -fragment of Berosus which described the method of dividing time employed -by the Babylonians, have led scholars to conclude that upon these -observations “rests the entire structure of the metric system of the -Babylonians[312].” - -Thus was obtained the famous Babylonian Sexagesimal system. Although the -French metric system of modern days has returned to the decimal system, -which was the first employed by primitive men, being probably suggested -to them by those natural counters, the fingers, the sexagesimal had -a considerable superiority over the older decimal system (which the -Egyptians had clung to) for certain practical purposes, as the number on -which it was based could be resolved into fractions far more conveniently -than the number 10. Dr Hultsch (_Metrologie_², p. 393) arrives at the -Babylonian weight-unit thus: the Babylonian _maris_ is equal to one-fifth -of the cube of the Royal Babylonian Ell, which is itself obtained from -the sun’s apparent diameter. The weight in water corresponding to this -measure of capacity gave the _light_ Royal Babylonian Talent; this Talent -was divided into 60 Minae, and each Mina into sixty parts or _Shekels_. -Their _gold_ Talent was derived from the _sixtieth_ of this Royal Mina, -with the modification that now _fifty_ sixtieths of the Royal Mina made a -_Mina of gold_ and sixty Minae made a Talent[313]. - -It seems strange that the framers of this theory did not consider that -just as undoubtedly the Chaldaeans must have reckoned their time by -the primitive methods of sunrise, noon and sunset, “full market,” or -ox-loosing time for centuries before they arrived at their scientific -division of time, and just as the Chaldaean artificer employed his -fingers or palm, or span or foot, as a measure of length ages before -the Royal Cubit was equated to the sun’s apparent diameter, so in all -probability they employed as measures of capacity, gourds or eggshells -(as did the Hebrews) and for weights the seeds of plants. - -But since, after what we have already seen, it is perfectly clear that -the first of articles to be weighed is gold, and that the unit of weight -is consequently small, we at once join issue with several points in the -theory of Brandis and his school. First they start with the Talent as -the unit, and only arrive at the shekel (the _weight_ par excellence) -by a twofold process of subdivision; secondly, it is assumed that the -Royal Talent which we have had reason to believe was a purely commercial -Talent, seeing that it was employed neither for gold or silver, was the -first to be invented, and that it was only at a later stage that the mina -and talent specially employed for gold were developed, not out of the -primal unit obtained originally from the one-fifth of the cube of the -_maris_, but from the sixtieth of the mina of that Royal Talent; thirdly -one asks in wonder why did the Chaldaeans, who only achieved their -famous Sexagesimal system after gazing at the stars through unnumbered -generations, abandon this precious discovery the very moment they set -about the construction of a weight-unit for gold, for instead of taking -one-sixth of the cube of the _maris_, they are represented as following -their old decimal system with invincible obstinacy by taking one-_fifth_ -of the _maris_ as their point of departure; lastly, it is astonishing -that the Chaldaeans did not employ their new discovery in the weighing -of the precious metals, the thing which above all others ought to have -called for the most scientific accuracy. - -The fact is, that just as children find some difficulty in realising that -their parents were ever children, so when we stand in the presence of -the remains of the great cities of Egypt and Babylonia, those ancients -of the earth, we are too prone to forget that Thebes, Babylon or Nineveh -had ever their day of small things. The familiar tale of Romulus and -Remus with their band of outlaws dwelling in their hovels beside the -Tiber has kept people in mind that “Rome was not built in a day.” If we -can but just approach the question of the first beginnings of Egyptian -or Chaldaean civilization with the same idea, it will be far easier to -project ourselves into the past of those great races, and thus to realize -far better the conditions under which they grew and lived. - -There can be little doubt that the unit of the Babylonian system was the -light shekel (Daric or ox-unit) of 130-5 grs. Troy. But I have shown -that the Chaldaeans were aware of and made use of the method of fixing -weight-units by means of grains of corn such as we have found to be the -universal practice from Ireland to China, and we have at once removed all -need for supposing that it was only when they had discovered a scientific -method of metrology that the Chaldaeans constructed their weight-unit. - -After what we have shown upon p. 115 concerning the methods employed in -the buying and selling of corn, where it has been made clear that of all -commodities corn is one of the very last to be weighed because of its -bulkiness in proportion to its cheapness, I think no one will readily -accept M. Aurè’s ingenious hypothesis[314]. - -Are we not now justified in supposing that, just as the peoples of -Mesopotamia had marked their seasons and time by primitive methods, -and used their fingers and hands and feet as measures long before they -dreamed of scientific methods, so that likewise they had employed for -weighing their gold the natural weight-unit which lay ready to their -hands in the wheat-ears that crowned their plains. - -Let us now start with the light shekel as our unit. According to our -argument it was nothing more than the amount of gold which represented -the value of the cow, the unit of barter throughout all Europe, Asia -and Africa, as it still is over considerable areas of both the latter -continents. There is no reason for not believing that as among other -people, all articles of property, utensils, weapons, clothes, ornaments -and the various kinds of animals stand to one another in well-known -relations of value, so the same principle was in full force among the -Semites of Mesopotamia. We found that the wild tribes of Laos had a -regular scale commencing with a hoe as their lowest unit, leading up -through kettles and porcelain jars to the buffalo, their main unit; we -also found that the weight of a grain of corn in gold was equated to -a hoe, and that thus by a simple process of multiplication it was easy -to ascertain the value of a buffalo in gold. The unit thus attained was -kept from fluctuating, as it was known to every one how many grains of -corn gave the true weight of the unit. The practical accuracy of this -method of fixing monetary units has been demonstrated from the case of -the Early English and Mediaeval English silver penny (p. 180). There is -complete evidence to show that the light shekel system was older than the -heavy system. Firstly the so-called Duck weights with their cuneiform -inscriptions point to the fact that Babylonia was the special home of -this system, whilst the Lion weights with their Aramaic inscriptions -point to a later period, when the Assyrian Empire was in immediate touch -with the merchants of Phoenicia. But, in the next place, a far more -powerful argument can be drawn from the Hebrew system. In later times -the heavy shekel system prevailed in Palestine, in accordance with which -the maneh contained 50 heavy or double shekels of 200 grs. each. But -that this maneh was simply imposed on the older light shekel system is -demonstrated from the fact that when in two parallel passages articles of -a certain weight of gold are mentioned, in the one the weight is given at -three manehs, in the other at 300 shekels, the maneh thus being counted -at 100 shekels. These 100 shekels are equal to the 50 heavy shekels of -the heavy Assyrian or Aramaic maneh. Now it is evident that if the heavy -system had been the original one employed by the Hebrews, the maneh would -simply have been reckoned at 50 (heavy) shekels. As the matter stands -it is evident that on the contrary, the heavy mina was introduced into -a system where the unit was simply the light shekel, and the Hebrews -therefore clinging to their old unit, described the maneh as consisting -of 100 shekels instead of 50. Further evidence to the same effect will -be adduced later on. Finding thus the light shekel in Babylonia, in -Palestine and in Egypt, and current even under the Assyrian Empire side -by side with the heavy system even amongst people who used the Aramaic -system of writing, we may without any hesitation regard it as the older. - -The process by which the gold Talent was arrived at was somewhat thus: - -The ox-unit of 130-135 grs. is the basis. - -Next the fivefold of this was taken, whether from five being the simplest -multiple, since it was suggested from the primitive method of counting by -the fingers of one hand, or far less likely from a slave being estimated -at 5 oxen, somewhat as we find among the Homeric Greeks an ordinary -slave-woman estimated at four cows, and in ancient Ireland at three cows. -This weight is known as the Assyrian five-shekel standard, and from it Mr -Petrie derives the 80-grain standard which he detects as the unit of a -certain number of weights found at Naucratis (_Naukratis_, p. 86). Whilst -the Egyptians contented themselves with the 5 ket and 10 ket, or uten, -as their highest unit, the Chaldaeans advanced to the fifty-fold (5 × -10), and thus obtained that which probably for a long time formed their -highest unit. - -What was this _Maneh_? Is it a Semitic word or is it rather an Aryan, -as the present writer has argued elsewhere[315]? At all events it is -interesting to find the appearance of a similar word in the Rig Veda -and that too in connection with gold: this has been regarded by some -as a loan word from Babylon[316]. But it is equally possible, that it -is a “loan word” from India to Babylon. The maneh evidently belongs to -a period anterior to the development of the sexagesimal system, for if -it had come into use along with or subsequent to that system, we should -certainly find 60 instead of 50 shekels in the mina of gold and the mina -of silver: hence it cannot in any wise be regarded as a distinctive -feature of the Babylonian scientific system, as it plainly existed at -the time when the decimal system was still dominant. As the latter was -the system which prevailed among the Indians of the Vedic period there -was no reason why they should borrow the Chaldaean term. On the contrary -there is rather a reason why the Chaldaeans would have borrowed the -term from India. Gold did not pass into India from Babylonia, for as we -have already seen there are no auriferous strata in Mesopotamia, but -it passed from the rich surface deposit of the valley of the Oxus and -Central Asia into Chaldaea. Now if the same term intimately associated -with the same commodity is found among two different peoples, and it is -known as a matter of certainty that one of these countries supplies the -other with this particular article, there is a considerable probability -that the peculiar term connected with the commodity has passed along with -it from the source of its production into the country which imports it. - -We saw above that there was no native gold in Chaldaea and therefore it -must have been imported by those Chaldaean merchantmen from India by way -of the Persian Gulf. But was there no gold in Chaldaea until the shipmen -of Ur were able to construct vessels capable of a voyage, even albeit -only a coasting voyage, to the mouths of the Indus? Working in metals -must have been far advanced when such ships were built. That gold came -from India we can have little doubt. But it probably came overland for -ages before anything in the form of a ship larger than a ‘dug-out’ had -ever floated on the Indian Seas. - -The first voyage undertaken to the ancient El Dorado may have been to -search for the region from whence came the gold, somewhat in the fashion -that in after-times Pytheas of Massalia sallied forth to investigate -the sources of the tin and amber which reached Marseilles overland from -Britain and the Baltic. After weighing these considerations we shall -be careful to avoid any dogmatic declarations as to the origin of the -word _mana_. One thing however is clear, and that is that the ancient -Hindus were employing certain lumps of gold probably of uniform size in -Vedic times, as we saw[317]. The Indians of the Vedic times had thus a -gold unit of their own (and as we have shown above probably based on -the value of a cow) before they as yet knew the use of silver or had -as yet reached the sea in their downward advance into the peninsula of -Hindustan. Even granting that they borrowed the _Manā_ from Babylonia, -it is plain that they had already their own gold unit, for otherwise -instead of employing _hiranya pinda_, a most primitive term meaning only -_gold-lump_, they would certainly have borrowed the term _shekel_ along -with the _maneh_. But the fact of most importance for us at present is -that, whether _maneh_ be Semitic or Aryan, in either case it seems to -mean not a _weight_ but a _measure_. It will be remembered that we found -the _catty_ or pound of Further Asia was in origin a natural unit of -capacity, as was shown by its Cambodian name _neal_, which simply means a -cocoa-nut, and that we found in China the joints of the bamboo of certain -sizes serving as their measures of capacity, and both cocoa-nuts and -bamboo joints among the Malays of the Indian Isles. This will naturally -suggest the question, Is it possible that the _maneh_ had a somewhat -similar origin? Was some natural object, such as the gourd, which is at -the present moment the ordinary unit of capacity at Zanzibar, taken to -serve as a measure of liquids or of corn? It is probable that the Greek -_cyathus_ (κύαθος) like its Latin congener _cucurbita_ meant originally -some kind of gourd. But there is a certain amount of probability that the -Semitic peoples used gourds in primitive times for vessels, not simply -from _à priori_ considerations, but from the fact that the most archaic -pottery obtained by Mr Petrie from his excavations on the site of the -ancient city of Lachish in 1890 show unmistakable signs of being modelled -after the shape of a gourd. Although the Chinese never have employed -their _ching_ (catty) for the precious metals, yet the Cambodians have -advanced to counting silver not only by the _catty_ but also by the -_picul_. Did then the Babylonians make 50 shekels of gold or silver -roundly equal to their _maneh_ or measure of capacity? This is of course -pure speculation, but it is at least supported by the comparison of what -has actually taken place elsewhere; and even from the empire of the Great -King himself can we get an insight into the method by which the _maneh_ -(and likewise the Talent) may have been brought into the weight system. -Herodotus[318] tells us that when the tribute of gold (largely in gold -dust) and silver was brought to the King he stored it thus: “he melts it -and pours it into earthenware jars, and when he has filled the vessels -he strips off the earthenware, and whenever he wants money, he cuts off -as much as he needs on each occasion.” We saw above that the Cambodian -_catty_ of silver is twice the weight of the catty of rice, the Cambodian -_catty_ being simply the cocoanut, the ordinary unit of capacity, which -after being filled with rice or silver and then weighed has given two -different _catties_. The Great King no doubt poured his gold into jars -of known capacity, and the weight of such a jar when filled with gold -was well known. It seems then not unlikely that in this way from either -a jar, or from the gourd which preceded the jar, the mina was derived. -However the _maneh_ may have been determined, it is fairly certain that -the Babylonians fixed upon 50 as a convenient multiple of the gold unit -when silver first came into use; as we have seen above it was probably -equal if not superior in value to gold and it was naturally weighed by -the same unit. But in the course of time as it became more plentiful, and -at the same time if likewise the art of weighing began to be employed by -merchants in the traffic in the costly spices and balsams of the east, a -necessity would be specially felt among traders for a somewhat heavier -unit than the original shekel. Possibly then the Aramaean merchants -adopted the double shekel (based on the double ox-unit) for the purpose -of weighing silver (when that metal had now become much more plentiful -than gold), and for trade in precious gums and spices. Such a procedure -can be well paralleled by the old English pound of silk, which is simply -two pounds Troy weight. Silk was of course of great value, and was -accordingly weighed after the same system as the precious metals; but -when it became less costly and more abundant the weight unit was simply -doubled. We may therefore regard the doubling of the original shekel as -an early step towards the development of a commercial standard. It is not -difficult to understand how in the course of time a nation of traders -like the Phoenicians preferred this double standard even for their gold, -and made it perhaps, as we shall shortly see, the basis of their silver -standard. - -We saw above that there is every reason to believe that when silver first -became known to mankind, they esteemed it as highly as gold, if not more -so. It would naturally, therefore, be weighed on the same standard as -gold. This would continue until, in the course of years, a time came -when the relation between gold and silver had become fairly fixed over -all Asia Minor. We know that in the beginning of the 5th cent. B.C. gold -was to silver as 13:1 (or rather 13·3:1). Herodotus, in the celebrated -passage in which he describes the organisation of the Persian empire into -satrapies, and details the amount of tribute appointed by Darius for -each, tells us that the gold was reckoned at thirteen times the value -of silver. Now for ordinary purposes of exchange this relation would be -extremely inconvenient, and the more accurate relation of 13·3:1 would -be still more so. It became thus desirable to fix some separate standard -for silver by which a convenient number, such as 10, of silver ingots -would be equal to the gold ingot of the ox-unit standard. Metrologists -are wont to speak of the desirability of being able to exchange a round -number of talents of silver for a talent of gold. But not even in the -palmiest days of the wealthy Orient lands was the ordinary individual so -rich that he felt any inconvenience in the way of exchanging _talents_ -of gold and silver. The Great King might deal out talents as he pleased, -but his subjects were chiefly concerned with the exchange of silver and -gold shekels. I have made this remark because it appears to me that many -of the misconceptions connected with this whole subject have arisen from -scholars concentrating all their attention on the talent, and taking it -as their point of departure. - -The Babylonians arrived at their silver standard as follows: - -1 gold shekel of 130 grs. was worth 1730 grs. of silver (130 × 13·3), -since gold was to silver as 13·3:1. - -130 grs. gold = 1730 grs. silver. - -They divided this amount of silver by 10, and thus: - -1 gold shekel of 130 grs. = 10 silver shekels of 173 grs. - -As we stated already, Herodotus says that the Babylonian talent was equal -to 70 Euboic minas, that is, one-sixth more than the Euboic talent. The -latter contained 390,000 grs. Troy, therefore the Babylonian ought to -give 455,000 grs. If we multiply our silver shekel by 50 and then by 60, -we shall obtain a total amount for the talent of silver of 519,000 grs. -Unfortunately several inaccuracies have crept into the text of Herodotus, -numerals always being especially liable to corruption in MSS. He seems, -however, to have regarded the relation of the Euboic to the Babylonian -talent as about that of 5:6, and also to have estimated the current -weight of the Persian silver piece at about 162 grs. Troy. But there can -be little doubt that the full standard weight of the Babylonian silver -shekel was 169 grs. (or, according to Mr Head, 172·9 grs.). - -From this it is easy to construct the Babylonian _silver_ system, which -was employed in Lydia and in the Persian empire. - - 1 shekel = 169 grs. - 50 shekels = 1 mina = 7450, - 60 minae = 1 talent 447000. - -From the double gold shekel was formed another silver standard known as -the _Phoenician_. - -Gold being to silver as 13:1, - - 1 double shekel of 260 grs. = 3380 grs. silver, - 3380 grs. silver = 15 shekels of 225·3 grs. - -As this silver standard is found in the same area as the double gold -shekel, I have thought it best to follow the usual derivation, but at the -same time it is worth pointing out that it may have been gained directly -from the light shekel. - -The light shekel (which in the form of coined money appears either as the -gold of Croesus, or the Daric), in the case of the Babylonian system was -made equal to ten silver didrachms, or 20 drachms known under the name of -Sigli; it likewise is equal in value to 15 Phoenician didrachms of 112·6 -grs. Thus, whilst in one region they obtained a silver unit, ten of which -would be an equivalent to the gold unit, in another they formed a silver -unit, 15 of which would be equivalent to the same gold unit of 130 grs. -In each case a number convenient for purposes of exchange was substituted -for the extremely unmanageable number 13 (or still more intractable 13·3) -of the older system, according to which silver was made into ingots of -the same size as those of gold. - -These now are the systems on which depended all traffic and currency of -the precious metals throughout Western Asia for many centuries. I have -been compelled in the statement of the two silver systems to anticipate -one step in the growth of the fully developed weight system by speaking -of the _Talent_. We have seen that the mina of silver, like that of gold, -contains only 50 shekels, thus evidently having likewise been developed -before the full elaboration of the Chaldaean system of numeration, or at -least before the application of that system to their metric standards. -But when we come to deal with the talent we find that in every case -alike, whether it be the gold, silver, or royal talent of commerce, -the talent invariably consists of _sixty_ minae. From this we may with -safety infer that it was at a period posterior to the invention of the -sexagesimal method that the _Talent_ was added to the gold and silver -systems. When we turn to the royal system (both light and heavy), we find -that the mina consists of _sixty_ shekels, just as the talent consists -of 60 minae, and consequently we are constrained to believe that this -royal system was fixed at a date long after the growth of the gold and -silver _minae_, and when the sexagesimal system had now complete sway. -We have already seen good reason for considering the _royal_ talent to -be essentially a mercantile unit. It certainly was not used for gold or -silver. Corn was not sold by weight, and so in all probability it was -meant for copper, iron, lead, and merchandise of value. We have learned -from our studies in the metal trade of primitive peoples that copper -and iron are not weighed but are sold by measurement, being wrought -into bars or plates of a well defined size. It is only when communities -are well advanced in culture that they begin to employ the scales for -the buying and selling of the common metals. We argued above that the -double shekel system arose from a desire amongst a nation of traders -like the Phoenicians for a heavier standard, more serviceable for such -goods as were less valuable than gold. It was probably the same desire -which found its complete realization in the royal system. Whilst gold -and silver had only the mina as their highest unit, there was a new -system developed scientifically from the ancient shekel or ox-unit. The -sixty-fold of this unit was taken to form a mina considerably heavier -than the old gold mina, and now a new higher unit, the sixty-fold of the -mina, was introduced. This we know under its Greek name of _talent_, but -it was called _kikkar_ in the Semitic languages. Now are we to suppose -that this _kikkar_ or talent was purely and simply nothing more than a -higher unit formed by taking a convenient multiple of the lower unit, -just as in the French metric system the kilogram is 1000 times the -gramme; or was it rather some ancient natural unit, originally formed -empirically, and at a later epoch, when science had advanced, fitted into -the system of commercial weight by being made exactly the sixty-fold of -the _mina_? Comparison with other systems in various lands will incline -us to the latter alternative. If we enquire for a moment in what manner -the highest unit of weight for merchandise is fixed among barbarous and -semi-civilized nationalities, we shall find that the _load_, that is, -the amount that a man of average size and strength can carry, is the -universal unit. Readers of the various recent books of African travel -frequently meet in their dreary and monotonous pages allusions to so many -_loads_ for which porters have to be supplied. The amount of the _load_ -seems to vary in different parts. Thus amongst the Madi or Moru tribe of -Central Africa, a pure negro race, according to that admirable observer -Mr Felkin, the _load_ is about 50 lbs. in weight, whilst according to -Major Barttelot, the _load_ carried by the Zanzibaris on the Emin Pacha -Relief expedition was 65 lbs. (besides the man’s own rations for several -days). We have already had occasion to refer to the _picul_ of Eastern -Asia, which we found was simply the Malay word for a _load_; and we also -found that the load varied in different places. Finally, we found that -the Chinese had introduced the _picul_ into their system of commercial -weight, fixing it at 100 _chings_ (catties), but at the same time -excluded it from their silver and gold system, where the _tael_ (ounce) -has remained always the highest unit. Yet in Cambodia we find that the -further step has been made, and that the commercial system of the catty -and _picul_ has been called into service for the weighing of silver. In -Java, whilst gold and silver are weighed by units of small size, copper -is sold by the _picul_. - -It seems to me not unreasonable to suppose that the origin of the talent -has been analogous to that of the _picul_. There is certainly nothing -in either the Hebrew _kikkar_ or the Greek _talanton_ to imply in the -slightest degree that they represented a numerical multiple of the mina. -The Greek word means simply a _weight_, whilst the Hebrew seems to mean -nothing more than a _round mass_ or _cake_ of anything, whether applied -to a tract of country, as the region round the Jordan (as in Nehemiah -vii. 28), or a loaf of bread (Exodus xxix. 23; 1 Samuel ii. 36). For as -the talent was only introduced into the Hebrew system at a late period -the term was probably applied to a _cake_ or _pig_ of copper or iron -the weight of the ordinary _load_. That there was a direct connection -between the kikkar and a man’s _load_ seems implied by the fact that -Naaman “bound _two_ talents of silver in _two_ bags, with two changes -of garments, and laid _them_ upon _two_ of his servants; and they bare -_them_ before him” (2 Kings v. 23). As we find Naaman asking Elisha for -“two mules’ burden of earth” (v. 17) it is at least certain that the -Semites regularly estimated bulky weights by some kind of _load_. We -saw above that in Assyrian the same ideogram stands for _tribute_ and -_talent_. If a _load_ of corn was the regular unit for tribute, the use -of a single ideogram may be explained. In the case of _talanton_ we have -no difficulty in directly regarding it as a _load_, whilst with _kikkar_ -it is not difficult to see how easy it was for the meaning of a _load_ of -a certain weight to spring from the earlier meaning of the word. Its use -as a loaf is interesting in connection with the fact noted on p. 159 that -in Annam the largest unit in use for gold and silver is called a _loaf_. - -When under a strong central government a metric system more or less -scientific was introduced at Babylon, it was natural that an accurate -adjustment of the old empirical unit of merchandise, the _load_, to the -mina and shekel should be carefully carried out, just as in China the -Mathematical Board have fixed the _picul_ of commerce as the hundred -fold of the _ching_ (_catty_), giving it a value equal to 133⅓ lbs. -avoirdupois. Such scientific adjustments take place in all countries -with the advance of civilization and commerce, and above all under the -influence of a strong central government. Let us reflect how long it -has taken for the English Statute Acre to conquer the local ancient -acres in use in various parts of the United Kingdom, such as the Irish, -the Scotch or the Winchester acre. In like fashion, although the -standards of weight and capacity were regulated by Act of Parliament -in 1824, local usage still held on, and units of weight unknown to the -Statute still survive in the usage of provincial places. Now it is not -unreasonable to suppose that the name _royal_ or _king’s weight_ was -given to the Babylonian commercial system, which was constructed on -purely sexagesimal lines, because it was enforced by royal proclamation -and power throughout the whole of the empire, and that in like manner -the _royal cubit_ mentioned by Herodotus (I. 178) owes its origin to the -establishment of one uniform standard for the dominions of the Great -King. In fact no better illustration of what took place can be found than -that afforded by our own terms such as _imperial pint_, or _imperial_ -gallon, or in a less degree by the _statute_ acre, as contrasted with -the older customary pints, or gallons, or acres. The mistake made by -metrologists, in regarding the scientifically constructed Babylonian -system as the first beginning of the art of weighing, is just as great -as if a person writing a manual of English Metrology were to start with -the metric legislation of 1824 as the first beginning of our metrology, -and were to try and explain all traces of an earlier system or systems by -forcing the facts into some sort of conformity with our modern standards. -Undoubtedly in such an effort great facility would be found inasmuch -as the present scientific standards are simply the ancient units of -the realm accurately defined. But the reader will best understand the -relations which probably existed between the Babylonian _royal_ standard -(both single and double) by having a short account of the adjustment of -our standards laid before him. Great inconvenience having been felt in -the United Kingdom for a long time from the want of uniformity in the -system of weights and measures, which were in use in different parts -of it, an Act of Parliament was passed in 1824 and came into force on -January the 1st 1826, by which certain measures and weights therein -specified were declared to be the only lawful ones in this realm under -the name of _imperial weights and measures_. It was settled by this Act -(1) that a certain yard-measure, made by an order of Parliament in 1760 -by a comparison of the yards then in common use, should henceforward -be the _imperial yard_ and the standard of _length_ for the kingdom: -and that, in case this standard should be lost or injured, it might be -recovered from a knowledge of the fact that the length of a pendulum, -oscillating in a second _in vacuo_ in the latitude of London and at the -level of the sea (which can always be accurately obtained by certain -scientific processes), was 39·13929 inches of this yard: (2) that the -half of a double pound Troy, made at the same time (1760), should be -the _Imperial Pound Troy_ and the standard of _weight_; and that of the -5760 grains which this pound contains, the pound _Avoirdupois_ should -contain 7000; and that, in case this standard should be lost or injured, -it might be recovered from the knowledge of the fact that a _cubic inch_ -of distilled water at the temperature of 62° Fahrenheit, and when the -barometer is at 30 in., weighs 252·458 grains: (3) that the _imperial -gallon_ and standard of _capacity_ should contain 277·274 _cubic inches_ -(the _inch_ being above defined), which size was selected from its being -nearly that of the gallons already, in use, and from the fact that 10 -lbs. Avoirdupois of distilled water weighed in air at a temperature -of 62° Fahrenheit, and when the barometer stands at 30 in., will just -fill this space. On p. 180 we saw that the standard gallon in the Tudor -period ultimately depended on the pennyweight, which was, as we found, -fixed by being the weight of 32 grains of wheat, dry and taken from the -midst of the ear of wheat after the ancient laws of the realm. It was -from the descendants of this gallon that the _imperial gallon_ of 1824 -was fixed, with a slight modification so as to make it contain 10 lbs. -of distilled water weighed in air at a temperature of 62° and when the -barometer stands at 30 in. The double pound Troy made in 1760 depended -in like fashion for its ultimate origin on the wheat-grains, and it also -affords us an interesting illustration of the doubling of the original -single unit, such as we find in the heavy _royal_ Babylonian system. -We may find further analogies between our own system and that of the -Babylonians. Whilst at the Mint gold and silver are weighed for coinage -by Troy weight, the copper coinage on the other hand is regulated by the -lb. Avoirdupois, the ordinary commercial standard. As already remarked, -it is almost certain from the method of elimination that copper was the -principal article for which the _royal_ Babylonian system was employed, -as gold and silver had separate standards of their own, and corn was sold -by measure and not by weight. - -To sum up then the results of our enquiry into the Assyrio-Babylonian -system, we started with the so-called light shekel or ox-unit as the -basis of the system; and found that gold and silver were weighed by it -and by its fifty-fold, the _maneh_, which may have been itself a natural -measure of capacity, such as the catty used in Eastern Asia, where we -know for certain that this weight was originally a measure of capacity -obtained from the joints of bamboos or the cocoanut; that in a certain -part of the empire a need was felt for a slightly heavier unit for the -weighing of silver and precious commodities such as gums and spices, and -that accordingly the great trading Aramaic peoples used the two-fold -of the ox-unit (260 grains Troy); that at the earliest period copper -would not be sold by weight but would be sold by bars or plates of fixed -dimensions, as is still the practice with iron and copper among the -barbarous peoples of Further Asia and Africa; that with the advance of -culture the art of weighing was extended to copper and other articles -of small value in proportion to their bulk, and that, as the maneh, or -contents of a gourd, and the _load_ or amount that a man could carry -on his back, had been most probably in general use as units for common -merchandise, the time came when under the all-mastering authority of -the Great King a standard based on the ancient ox-unit, but framed on -the new scientific sexagesimal system, was established for copper and -certain other kinds of merchandise; that in this system 60 shekels made -the maneh, and the _load_ (the _kikkar_ or talent) was adjusted to the -new system as the sixty-fold of the maneh; and that in the course of time -this higher unit of the _kikkar_ or talent was added to the gold and -silver systems, sixty manehs in each case making the _kikkar_ as in the -case of the royal or commercial system; that in the case of silver, which -on its first discovery and employment was as valuable as gold, and was -therefore weighed on the same standard, when in course of time it became -about thirteen times less valuable than gold, and there was a difficulty -experienced in exchanging the units of gold and silver; a separate -standard was created by dividing into ten new parts or shekels the -amount of silver which was the equivalent of the gold shekel (ox-unit); -that this was probably developed before the royal commercial mina of -60 shekels had been formed, as in that case the silver mina would have -contained 60 shekels likewise; we were able to give an explanation of the -name _royal_ as applied to the commercial standard by regarding it as of -late origin, created by a supreme central authority for the regulation of -the commerce of a great empire made up of a heterogeneous mass of races, -just as in the present century our own _imperial_ standards have been -fixed for the whole kingdom, being based, as was the Babylonian, on an -ancient unit empirically obtained; and just as the royal arms are stamped -on our imperial standards, so the weights of the Assyrian _royal_ system -were shaped in the form of a lion, the symbol of royalty throughout -the East. Finally we found that at the base of the Assyrio-Babylonian -system lay, as the determinant of the ox-unit or shekel, the grain -of wheat, which we have already traced all across Europe into Asia. -We can therefore now come to a very reasonable conclusion that the -Assyrio-Babylonian weight system was in its origin empirical, and that it -was only at a comparatively late date in its history, just as in the case -of our own standards, that a certain uniformity between the standards of -measures and weights was brought about by the (not complete) application -of the sexagesimal system of numeration, the invention of which is their -eternal glory. - -Having now dealt with Egypt, and the systems which prevailed in the -Assyrio-Babylonian empire, it will be best to treat of the region which -lay between them. In both the former countries we found the light -shekel or ox-unit in use from the earliest times; and it will also -be remembered that at an earlier stage we found that Abraham was able -to traverse all the wide country that lay between Mesopotamia and the -ancient kingdom of the Nile with his flocks and herds, and that he dwelt -in the land of Canaan in close neighbourhood and on friendly terms with -the sons of Heth, or Hittites, who were then the possessors of that land; -and that furthermore monetary transactions were then carried on by means -of certain small ingots of silver, as we see from the purchase of the -Cave of Machpelah. These ingots, translated _shekels_ in the English -version and called _didrachms_ in the Septuagint, are termed in Hebrew -_Keseph_ (כֶּסֶף), simply _pieces of silver_, or _silverlings_. In the -old Hebrew literature values in silver and gold are expressed either in -_shekels_ or by a simple numeral with the words “of silver,” “of gold” -added (where the latter method is followed the English version supplies -_pieces_ or substitutes “a thousand silverlings” for “a thousand of -silver” (Isa. vii. 23). The Septuagint renders the shekel by the Greek -_didrachm_). There are several inferences to be drawn from this. It is -evident that pieces of silver (and no doubt of gold also) of a certain -quality and weight were employed as currency in Palestine, and we may -likewise suppose with some probability that these pieces of silver were -according to the standard in common use in Egypt and Chaldaea. Again, -since we have already shown that gold in the form of rings and other -articles for personal adornment was exchanged according to the ox-unit -of 130-5 grs., as evidenced by the story of the ring given to Rebekah, -it follows that there was but one and the same standard for gold from -the Euphrates to the Nile. This is confirmed by the story of the sale -of Joseph by his brethren to the company of Ishmaelites “who came from -Gilead with their camels bearing spices and balm and myrrh going to carry -it down to Egypt”; to these Ishmaelites or Midianites Joseph was sold -for twenty pieces of silver[319]. Here we have evidence that the same -silver unit was current from Gilead to Egypt. There are various other -large sums of silver mentioned both in Genesis and also in the Book of -Judges and in Joshua. Thus Abimelech, King of Gerar, is said to have -given Abraham a thousand [pieces] of silver[320], whilst the lords of -the Philistines persuaded Delilah to beguile Samson into telling her -wherein lay his great strength by the promise of eleven hundred [pieces] -of silver, which money she afterwards received[321]. Abimelech the son -of Jerubbaal (Gideon) was enabled to form his conspiracy by hiring ‘vain -and light persons’[322] with the three-score and ten [pieces] of silver -taken by his mother’s brother from the house of Baal-berith. Finally, we -have a sum of eleven hundred [pieces] of silver which were stolen by that -“man of Mount Ephraim whose name was Micah” from his mother, of which his -mother took (when he had restored the money) two hundred [shekels] and -gave them to the founder, who “made thereof a graven image and a molten -image[323].” Now although all these are considerable sums, all exceeding -a _mina_, yet there is no mention whatever made of the latter unit of -account in any of these passages. The story of another theft shows that -gold as well as silver was reckoned originally only by the shekel and not -by the mina. Thus Achan “saw among the spoils a goodly Babylonish garment -and two hundred shekels of silver and a wedge of gold of fifty shekels -weight[324].” As fifty shekels were a mina, here if anywhere we ought to -have found the latter term. From this we infer without hesitation that -the shekel was the original unit. - -But there is another word besides _keseph_ which is translated _piece -of money_ or piece of silver. This is the term _qesitah_ (קְשׂׅיטָה) -which occurs in three passages of the Old Testament. Thus Jacob bought -the parcel of ground where he had spread his tent at the hand of the -children of Hamor, Shechem’s father, “for an hundred pieces of money” -(Gen. xxxiii. 19); and the same word is used in the parallel passage in -Joshua (xxiv. 32) where the children of Israel buried Joseph’s bones -in Shechem in the parcel of ground which Jacob bought for an hundred -pieces of money. Lastly, Job’s kinsfolk and acquaintances gave him every -man a _piece of money_, and every one a ring of gold (xlii. 11). It has -been always a matter of doubt what this piece of money really was. The -Septuagint translates _qesitah_ in these three passages by ἑκατὸν ἀμνῶν, -ἑκατὸν ἀμνάδων, and ἀμνάδα μίαν, thus in every case regarding it as a -_lamb_. The most ancient interpreters all agree in this, whilst some of -the later Rabbis regarded it as signifying a coin stamped with the form -of a lamb: one of them says that he found such a coin in Africa[325]. - -[Illustration: FIG. 25. Weights in the form of Sheep[326].] - -Long ago Prof. R. S. Poole, speaking of this word, said: “The sanction -of the LXX, and the use of weights bearing the forms of lions, bulls, -and geese by the Egyptians, Assyrians, and probably Persians, must make -us hesitate before we abandon a rendering [lamb] so singularly confirmed -by the relation of the Latin _pecunia_ and _pecus_[327].” The connection -between weights and units of currency is especially close at a time -when coined money is as yet unknown, and hence when we find weights in -the form of sheep coming from Syria, and also recollect that sheep were -employed as a regular unit in Palestine for the paying of tribute, and -with the light obtained from primitive systems of currency, we may well -conclude that the _qesitah_ was an old unit of barter, like the Homeric -ox, and as the latter was transformed into a gold unit, so the former -was superseded by an equivalent of silver. We read (2 Kings iii. 4) that -Mesha, king of Moab (now so famous from the inscription which bears his -name), was a sheep-master, and he rendered unto the king of Israel one -hundred thousand lambs, and one hundred thousand rams with the wool. -When payment in metal came more and more into use silver served as the -sub-multiple of gold, just as sheep formed that of the ox, and it is not -surprising that in later times when coins were struck by the Phoenicians, -as at Salamis in Cyprus and many other places, bearing a sheep or a -sheep’s head, there arose some doubt as to whether the _qesitah_ was a -_sheep_, a piece of uncoined silver, or a coin stamped with a sheep. The -very fact of the Phoenicians having such a predilection for this type is -in itself an indication that the silver coin in its origin represented -the value of a sheep. At a later stage, when we come to deal with the -early Greek coin types, we shall develop this principle more completely. -The mere fact that the sheep on the Phoenician coins is sometimes found -accompanying a divinity does not militate against our doctrine, as I -shall explain when I deal with the coins of Messana and Thasos. - -[Illustration: FIG. 26. Coin of Salamis in Cyprus.] - -But then comes the question, which was the shekel employed by the -Hebrews? It must have been either (1) the ox-unit of 130 grs., used alike -for gold and silver in early days both in Egypt and Mesopotamia and -Greece, or (2) the double of this, or heavy shekel of 260 grs., used for -gold only in parts of Asia Minor, or (3) the Phoenician shekel of 225 -grs., used only for silver and electrum along the coast of Asia Minor, -and never employed for gold, or (4) the Babylonian or Persic standard -of 172 grs., used only for _silver_. In later times the silver shekel -in use amongst the Jews was most undoubtedly the Phoenician shekel, -obtained, as we saw above, by dividing the amount of silver equivalent to -the double gold shekel into 15 parts. But it may be reasonably doubted -whether the silver piece or shekel (called always a _didrachmon_ in the -Septuagint) mentioned in Genesis and Judges is the Phoenician shekel. It -is used without any distinctive epithet, as if it were the weight _par -excellence_, and is employed for _gold_ as well as silver. But when we -turn to certain other passages we find mention made of a shekel called -the _Shekel of the Sanctuary_[328]. This shekel is frequently mentioned, -generally in connection with silver, and in reference to such things as -the contribution of the half-shekel to the Tabernacle, the redemption of -the firstborn, the sacrifice of animals, and the payment of the seer. Yet -we find this shekel likewise employed in the estimation of _gold_, a fact -which at once shews that it is neither the Phoenician shekel of 220 grs. -nor the Persic of 172 grs., both of which were confined to _silver_. It -must then have been either the ox-unit of 130 grs. or the heavy shekel of -260 grs. As the latter was confined in use to _gold_ it follows that the -ox-unit of 130 grs. alone fits the conditions required. If then we can -discover what in the case of either silver or gold was the weight of this -shekel, we shall have determined it for both metals, for it will hardly -be maintained that there was one shekel of the Sanctuary for gold and one -of different weight for silver. - -Now we read in Exodus (xxxviii. 24 _seqq._) that “all the gold that was -occupied for the work in all the work of the holy [place], even the gold -of the offering, was twenty and nine talents and seven hundred and thirty -shekels, after the shekel of the Sanctuary. And the silver of them that -were numbered of the congregation was an hundred talents and a thousand -seven hundred and three-score and fifteen shekels, after the shekel of -the Sanctuary; a bekah for every man, that is, half a shekel after the -shekel of the Sanctuary, for every one that went to be numbered from -twenty years old and upward, for six hundred thousand and three thousand -and five hundred and fifty men. And the brass of the offering was -seventy talents and two thousand and four hundred shekels.” From this -passage we learn that, whilst the gold and silver were estimated on the -shekel of the Sanctuary (or Holy Shekel), the brass was probably reckoned -by some other standard. - -It is also of importance to note that it is the shekel which is regarded -as the _unit_ of the system, for we never hear of a talent or mina of the -Sanctuary. From this passage likewise we readily discover that the talent -of silver contained 3000 shekels (603,550 ÷ 2 = 301,775 shekels - 1775 = -300,000 ÷ 100 = 3000 shekels). - -Now when king Solomon made three hundred shields of beaten gold, three -minas (translated _pounds_ in the Authorized Version) went to one shield -(1 Kings x. 17). But in the parallel passage (1 Chron. ix. 1) we read -that “three hundred shields made he of beaten gold, three hundred shekels -went to one shield,” from which it is evident that a maneh of gold -contained 100 shekels[329]. A very important conclusion follows from -these facts, for it is plain that when the Hebrews adopted the heavy -or double maneh from the Phoenicians they did not adopt for _gold_ and -silver at the same time the double shekel, of which that maneh was the -fifty-fold, but on the contrary they retained their own old unit of the -light shekel, and made one hundred of them equivalent to the Phoenician -or heavy Assyrian mina. Since this light shekel was employed in the -estimation of the gold and silver dedicated by King Solomon for the -adornment of the Temple, this shekel can hardly be any other than the -Holy Shekel of the Sanctuary. - -We are thus led to conclude that the shekel was the same both for gold -and silver, and was simply the time-honoured immemorial unit of 130-5 grs. - -It is natural on other grounds that this should be the unit employed by -the Israelites for the precious metals, since it was the unit employed -both for silver and gold in Egypt, the land of their bondage. - -The question next suggests itself, Why was the shekel called by a -distinctive name? It is only when there are two or more examples or -individuals of the same kind that any need arises for a distinctive -appellation: again, as we have already observed, in such cases the older -institution continues to prevail in all matters religious or legal. It -is important to note that in Exodus xxi. 32, a passage which the best -critics consider of great antiquity, the penalties are expressed in -shekels simply without any distinctive appellation. At that period there -was probably only one shekel (the ox-unit of 130-5 grs.) as yet in use, -and so there was no need to distinguish the shekel in which fines were -paid. This shekel was then described in the later part of Exodus, where -there was a second standard in use, as the holy shekel. As a matter -of fact we have another weight mentioned in 2 Samuel (xiv. 26), where -it is related of Absalom that “when he polled his head (for it was at -every year’s end that he polled it: because the hair was heavy on him, -therefore he polled it) he weighed the hair of his head at two hundred -shekels after the king’s weight[330].” - -Now it will be observed that in the passage from Exodus quoted above, -whilst the shekel of the Sanctuary is carefully mentioned when amounts -of gold and silver are enumerated, no such addition is made in reference -to the “seventy talents and two thousand and four hundred shekels of -brass.” If then the heavy or double shekel and its corresponding mina -and talent, known to us hitherto as the royal Assyrio-Babylonian heavy -standard, had already been introduced among the Hebrews (and we have just -seen that according to the First Book of Kings it was in use, at least -a mina of 50 double shekels (100 light) was employed for gold), nothing -is more likely than that this standard would bear a title similar to -that which it enjoyed in Babylonia and Syria, and be known as the king’s -weight or _stone_. As I have observed in the case of the royal Assyrian -standards that they were employed for copper, lead, and commodities -sufficiently costly to be sold by weight, so we may with considerable -probability conjecture that this king’s weight was employed regularly -among the Semites for the weighing of the less precious metals, and other -merchandise. Hence it is that there was no need to add any explanation of -the nature of the standard by which the 70 talents of brass were weighed, -and it was only because in the case of Absalom’s hair we have an article -not commonly weighed, that it was thought necessary by the writer to make -clear to us by which of the two standards usually employed the estimate -of the weight of the year’s growth of hair was made. We may therefore -conclude with probability that “the king’s shekel” was no other than the -double shekel (260 grains). It will have been noted that in Genesis and -Judges, admittedly two of the oldest books, there is mention made of only -one kind of shekel, and that it is only in Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus, -all of late date, that we find the shekel distinguished as that of the -Sanctuary, and that it is only in Samuel that we find reference made to -the _royal shekel_. It is also worthy of notice that neither in Genesis -nor Judges is there any mention made of a maneh or talent, although there -was full opportunity for the appearance of the former if it had been then -in use, as we find such sums as 400 shekels (4 manehs), 1100 shekels -(11 manehs) and 1700 shekels (17 manehs), whilst in the other series of -books named we find both the maneh and the talent. It is not unreasonable -therefore to suppose, that with the advent of the _maneh_ and _kikkar_ or -talent from their powerful kinsfolk and neighbours came also the practice -of employing the double shekel, the fiftieth part of the mina of gold and -mina of silver, which was employed in that part of the Assyrio-Babylonian -empire, where the use of the heavy Assyrian shekel was in vogue. Besides -gold and silver, spices were likewise weighed according to the shekel -of the Sanctuary. “Take thee also unto thee principal spices, of pure -myrrh five hundred [shekels], and of sweet cinnamon half as much [even] -two hundred and fifty [shekels], and of sweet calamus two hundred and -fifty [shekels], and of cassia five hundred [shekels], after the shekel -of the Sanctuary[331].” If we had any doubt as to whether it was not -possible that there were two separate shekels of the Sanctuary, one for -gold, and one of different standard for silver, our misgivings are at -once dispelled by finding spices weighed after the holy shekel. It is -certainly incredible that there could have been a separate standard of -the Sanctuary for the weighing of spices. There seems then no reasonable -doubt that there was only one shekel of the Sanctuary, and that the -unit of 130 grains. In support of this we may adduce Josephus[332], -who made the Jewish gold shekel a Daric (which as we have already seen -is our unit of 130 grains). This in turn derives support from the fact -that the Septuagint, which regularly renders the Hebrew _sheqel_ (which -like the Greek _Talanton_ means simply _weight_) by both _siklos_ and -_didrachmon_, not unfrequently renders _shekel of gold_ by chrysûs[333], -which means of course nothing more than gold _stater_, that is a didrachm -of gold, such as those struck by the Athenians, by Philip of Macedon, -Alexander and the successors of the latter, including the Ptolemies of -Egypt, under whom was made the Septuagint Version. We have thus found -the earliest Hebrew weight unit to be that standard which we have found -universally diffused, and which we have called the ox-unit. - -Next let us see how from this unit grew their system. In several passages -the shekel of the Sanctuary is said to consist of 20 _gerahs_[334], a -word rendered simply by _obolos_ in the Septuagint. As before observed, -the Hebrew metric system was essentially decimal, like that of Egypt; -in fact had Tacitus been a metrologist he might have quoted this as -an additional proof that the Jews were Egyptian outcasts, expelled by -their countrymen because they were afflicted with a plague, perhaps -the _scabies_[335], which so frequently affects swine. The measures of -capacity, both dry and liquid, are decimal, and so accordingly we find -a decimal division applied to the shekel. The latter is divided into -two _bekahs_ (בֶּקַע, “a division,” “a half”), and each _bekah_ is -divided into 10 _gerahs_ (גֵּרָה). The latter signifies “a grain” -or “bean.” The Hebrew literature does not state what kind of seed or -grain it was, although it is defined by Rabbinical writers as equal to -16 barleycorns. But the fact is that, as we see from the Septuagint -rendering, the name in the course of time came to be considered simply as -that of one-twentieth of the shekel, whether that shekel was the shekel -of the Sanctuary, the Phoenician silver shekel of 220 grains, or the -kings shekel of 260 grains used for copper and lead. The _gerah_ of the -gold shekel or shekel of the Sanctuary was probably the most ancient and -came closest to the natural seed from which it derived its name; this -_gerah_ would be about 6½ grains (130 ÷ 20 = 6·5). On an earlier page -(p. 194) we gave the weights of a number of grains and seeds of plants, -and amongst them that of the lupin, called by the Greeks _thermos_. -According to the ancient tables the _thermos_ is equal to two _keratia_, -or _siliquae_ (the seeds of the carob tree); but since each _siliqua_ = 4 -wheat grains, the _thermos_ = 8 wheat grains, or 6 barleycorns, or 6 Troy -grains. If the wheat grain in Palestine was as heavy as that of Egypt or -Africa (·051 gram, instead of ·047 gram.), the 8 wheat grains, would = -6·4 grains troy. Again, the Roman metrologists estimated the _lupin_ as -the third part of the _scripulum_, which weighed 24 grains of wheat[336]; -thus the Roman _lupin_ also = 8 wheat grains. We may therefore have -little doubt that the _gerah_ was simply the _lupin_[337]. But what -about the Rabbinical _gerah_ of 16 barleycorns? In the first place let -us recall the confusion which exists in the Arab metrologists respecting -the _habba_, some making three habbas, some four equal to the _karat_. -This arose, as we saw, from confounding the wheat and barley grain. If -the 16 grains assigned to the _gerah_ by the Rabbis are really wheat -grains, all is at once clear. The _gerah_ to which they refer is that of -the royal or double shekel (260 grs.), or in other words it is a double -_gerah_. We have just found the _gerah_ of the Sanctuary shekel to be the -lupin, and equal to 8 wheat grains, accordingly its double will contain -16 wheat grains. Nothing is more common than a change in the value of a -natural weight unit, when in the course of time its real origin has been -forgotten, and it has been adjusted to meet the requirements of newer -systems. Thus the value of the Greek _thermos_ and its Roman equivalent -the _lupin_ both suffered in later days, and were regarded as only equal -to 6 wheat grains instead of the original 8 owing to a like confusion -between wheat grains and barleycorns. Finally there is a further reason -why the authors of the Septuagint Version would translate _gerah_ by -_obolos_. Writing at Alexandria under Ptolemaic rule, at a time when the -Ptolemaic silver stater of 220 grains contained exactly 20 obols of the -Attic or ordinary Greek standard of 11 grains, they would all the more -readily adopt a rendering, which harmonized so well with the monetary -system of their own day; at the same time the Greek habit of dividing -all staters into 12 _obols_, no matter on what standard the stater was -struck, naturally would incline them all the more to regard the _gerah_ -not as an actual weight, but simply as the twentieth of the shekel, be -the shekel what it might. - -The Hebrew gold standard accordingly consisted of a shekel of 130 grains, -subdivided into 2 _bekahs_ or _halves_; each of which in turn contained -10 _gerahs_ or lupins: 100 such shekels made a maneh, and according to -Josephus[338] 100 manehs made a _kikkar_ or talent. It would thus appear -that, just as in the time of Solomon the heavy mina had been introduced -which was equal to 100 shekels of the Sanctuary, so the Hebrews carried -out consistently this principle by making 100 minae go to the talent. -It is however most probable that before that time they had employed a -maneh of their own of 50 light shekels, for we have seen above that the -talent of silver mentioned in Exodus consisted of only 3000 shekels, just -as in all the other gold and silver systems of Asia Minor and Greece: -and since we have proved that the silver shekel of the Sanctuary was -the ordinary light shekel of 130 grains, it is evident that the silver -talent is not made up of 3000 double shekels, but is really nothing more -than the sixty-fold of a mina which contained 50 shekels of the ox-unit -standard. If gold was weighed at all by any higher standard than the -shekel, it is almost certain that it must have been weighed by this mina -and talent[339]. However, by the time of the monarchy it is most probable -that the double or heavy mina had been introduced for silver as well -as for gold. In fact the probabilities are that it was applied for the -weighing of silver before that of gold. Thus when Naaman the leper set -out to go to the Hebrew prophet, “he took with him ten talents of silver, -and six thousand [pieces] of gold, and ten changes of raiment[340].” -Here the 6000 gold pieces are perhaps the 6000 light shekels which -would make a talent of the heavy Assyrian standard after the ordinary -Phoenician system of 50 shekels = 1 mina, and 60 minae = 1 talent: and -doubtless Naaman counted these 6000 gold pieces as a talent of gold; but -inasmuch as the Hebrews had a peculiar system of their own, by which -100 minae, and 10,000 light shekels went to the _kikkar_, these 6000 -are not described as a talent by the Hebrew writer. We may thus regard -the silver talent as consisting of 3000 light shekels, at the earliest -period, and later on as of 3000 heavy shekels: finally, when coinage was -introduced and money was struck under the Maccabees on the Phoenician -silver standard, it consisted of 3000 shekels of 220 grs. each. But there -is one period about which we find great difficulty in coming to any -conclusion. After the return from the Babylonian captivity what standards -were employed for gold and silver? As Judaea formed part of the dominions -of the Great King, we would naturally expect to find in Nehemiah and -Ezra traces of the standard then employed throughout the Persian Empire -for the precious metals. As we have found that the light shekel formed -the unit for gold from first to last, and as it was also the gold unit -of the Babylonians and Assyrians, we may unhesitatingly assume that -it formed the basis of the Jewish system in the days of Nehemiah (446 -B.C.). As regards the silver standard we have fortunately one piece of -evidence, which may give us the right solution. We found that in Exodus -each male Israelite contributed a _bekah_, or half a shekel (of the -Sanctuary) to defray the cost of the tabernacle: this half-shekel was a -drachm of about 65 grs. Troy. Now after the Return from Captivity, we -find Nehemiah (x. 32) writing: “We made ordinances for us, to charge -ourselves yearly with the third part of a shekel[341] for the service of -the house of our God.” Why the third of a shekel instead of the half of -earlier days? When we read of the generous and self-sacrificing efforts -made by the Jews to restore the ancient glories of the Temple worship, -we can hardly believe that it was through any desire to reduce the -annual contribution. The solution is not far to seek when we recollect -that the Babylonian silver stater of that age weighed about 172·8 grs. -This formed the standard of the empire, and doubtless the Jews of the -Captivity employed it like the rest of the subjects of the Great King. -The third part of this stater or shekel weighed about 58 grains; so that -practically the third part of the Babylonian silver shekel was the same -as the half of the ancient light shekel, or shekel of the Sanctuary. -From this we may not unreasonably infer that after the Return the Jews -employed the Babylonian silver shekel as their silver unit, and this -probably continued in use until Alexander by the victories of Issus and -Arbela overthrew the Persian Empire, and erected his own on its ruins. -But although the Babylonian shekel was the official standard of the -empire there can be no doubt that the old local standards lingered on, -or rather held their ground stubbornly in not a few cases. We saw above -that the Aramaean peoples had especially preferred the double shekel, -and from it they developed the so-called Phoenician or Graeco-Asiatic -silver standard. Gold being to silver as 13·3:1, one double shekel of 260 -grains of gold was equal to fifteen reduced double shekels of silver of -225 grains each. Now it is important to note that the Phoenician shekel -or stater was always considered not as a didrachm but as a tetradrachm; a -fact which is explained by its development from the old double shekel, -which of course was regarded as containing four drachms, and which at the -same time explains why it is that in the New Testament the Temple-tax of -the half shekel is called a _didrachm_, the term applied to the shekel -itself in the Septuagint. When the Jews coined money under the Maccabees, -they struck their silver coins on this Phoenician standard, and their -shekel was always regarded as a tetradrachm. For the ancient half shekel -of the Sanctuary they soon substituted the half of their shekel coins, -that is about 110 instead of 65 grains of silver. This change probably -took place under the Maccabees; silver had then probably become much more -plentiful in Judaea as shown by the fact that they were able to issue a -silver coinage. When those who collected the Temple-tax asked Christ for -his didrachm, he bade Simon Peter go to the sea and catch a fish, in the -mouth of which he would find a _stater_, “that give him, said he, for -both me and thee.” As the stater evidently sufficed to pay a didrachm for -each, there can be no doubt that the shekel or stater was considered by -the Jews to be a tetradrachm. - -It is very uncertain whether the Hebrews at any time employed a _maneh_ -of 60 shekels. They most certainly did not do so for gold and silver, -and probably not even for copper and other cheap commodities. Very -unfortunately the famous passage in Ezekiel (xlv. 12), which deals with -weights and measures, is so confused in the description of the maneh that -we cannot employ it as evidence. The one element of certainty is that -the gold shekel never varied from first to last. It is likewise probable -that, whilst the heavy maneh was introduced for gold silver and copper -alike, the shekel always remained the same, 100 shekels being counted to -the mina of gold and silver in the royal system, whilst 50 shekels always -continued to be regarded as composing the maneh of the Sanctuary, such -as we found it in the Book of Exodus. To confirm this view of the shekel -we can cite the Bull’s-head weight (fig. 27), which came from Jerusalem, -and weighs 36·800 grammes, which represents the amount of 5 light shekels -(making allowance for a small fracture), the light shekel being 8·4 -grams. (130 grs.). It is plain that this is a multiple of the light and -not of the heavy shekel, for it is not likely that such a multiple as 2½ -would be employed. On the other hand, we found the five-fold multiple of -the light shekel appearing in the Assyrian system, and also the Egyptian. - -[Illustration: FIG. 27. Bull’s-head Five-shekel Weight.] - -The Hebrew systems, as we have tentatively set them forth, may be seen in -the following tables. - -I. Earliest period. Shekel of 130-5 grs. alone employed for gold and -probably silver. - -II. Mosaic period. _Gold and Silver._ (The old light shekel or ox-unit is -now called shekel of the Sanctuary to distinguish it from its double.) - - 50 light Shekels = 1 Maneh - 3000 light Shekels = 60 Manehs = 1 Kikkar (_talent_). - -III. Regal period. _Gold._ - - 100 light (= 50 double) shekels = 1 heavy Maneh - 5000 heavy (= 10,000 light) ” = 100 heavy Manehs = 1 talent. - -The same system was probably employed for _silver and copper_, but -instead of counting 100 light shekels to the Maneh as in the case of -gold, they reckoned silver and copper by the double shekel, probably -called the king’s shekel in contradistinction to that of the Sanctuary. - -IV. After the Return. The light shekel still retained for _gold_, and the -Babylonian, or Phoenician silver standard, employed for _silver_. - -V. Maccabean Period. _Gold_ on the old standard, and _silver_ (now first -coined) struck on the Phoenician silver standard of 220 grains. - -_Copper_ was estimated most probably on the old double shekel system; and -most likely the royal Assyrian heavy system of 60 shekels to the maneh -and 60 manehs to the talent was adopted in its entirety for copper and -other articles of no great value in proportion to their bulk[342]. - - -PHOENICIAN STANDARD. - -The total loss of the literature and records of the Phoenicians, and -the fact that neither in their own country nor in the greatest of their -colonies, Carthage, did they employ coined money until a comparatively -late period, make the task of restoring their weight system very -difficult if not hopeless. The _silver_ standard called Phoenician or -Graeco-Asiatic is the sole evidence to show that they employed as their -unit for gold the heavy Babylonian shekel of 260 grs. On the other hand -we have just seen that their close neighbours, the Hebrews, from first to -last, and the ancient people of the Nile with whom the Phoenicians were -in the closest trade relations (having large trading communities settled -in the Delta, and from whom they had borrowed the hieroglyphic syllabic -symbols, which with them became the Alphabet), had employed the light -shekel, the only _gold_ unit that likewise from first to last prevailed -throughout the vast regions of Central Asia Minor, and as we have seen, -was the unit of Greece even in the early days when the great cities of -Mycenae and Tiryns were in direct contact with, and deriving their arts -and civilization from Asia or from Egypt. - -The derivation of the Phoenician _silver_ standard of about 225 grs. -(14·58 gram.) according to the hitherto received doctrine is as follows. -As the Babylonians formed their silver standard by making into _ten_ -pieces the amount of silver equivalent to the “light gold shekel,” so -the Phoenicians and Syrians are supposed to have divided the amount of -silver equivalent to “the heavy shekel” into _fifteen_ pieces, gold being -to silver in each case as 13·3:1. But we ask why did the Phoenicians -adopt so awkward a scale as the quindecimal when it was possible for them -to employ the decimal or duodecimal? In the next place by the supposed -system 7½ silver shekels were equal to one light shekel, that is the -gold unit which was universally employed amongst all the peoples with -whom they traded: and what number could be more awkward for purposes of -exchange than 7½? If therefore we can show that it is probable that at -one period silver was exceedingly abundant in Phoenicia compared with -gold, and that consequently gold was worth considerably more than 13 -times its weight in silver, the sole support for the heavy shekel being -the Phoenician unit is removed, and the theory of the _fifteen stater_ -system falls to the ground. It is well known that the Phoenicians had -much of the trade of Cilicia and the other coast regions of Asia Minor in -their hands. It was Cilicia that produced the chief supplies of silver -for Western Asia[343]. From this land therefore the Phoenicians obtained -vast quantities of silver, and it was from them almost certainly the -Egyptians, who had no native silver, obtained a supply of that metal. But -this was not all. About 1000 B.C. the Phoenicians, in their quest after -new and unexhausted regions, made their way westward and reached Spain. -I have already related the ancient stories which embody the account of -the marvellous amount of silver which the first bold explorers brought -back. We need not wonder then if in the days of king Solomon, “silver -was nothing accounted of” in Syria and Palestine. We also saw that the -relative value of gold and silver was just as liable to fluctuate in -ancient, as in modern times, according to the supply of either metal, and -when we come to deal with the Greek system we shall find many instances -of this. If we then suppose that gold was to silver as 17:1 in Phoenicia, -the gold shekel of 130 grs. would be worth ten silver pieces of 220 grs. -each. (130 × 17 = 2210; 2210 ÷ 10 = 221). This is in reality far closer -to the actual weight of the coins than the result obtained by the old -hypothesis: 260 × 13·3 = 3466 ÷ 15 = 231 grs. Troy, which is about 10 -grs. higher than the actual coin weights. - -The approximation gained by our conjectural relation of 17:1, is far -closer than that obtained by that of 13·3:1. The conclusion is probable -that silver was far cheaper in Phoenicia and the contiguous coasts than -elsewhere in Asia Minor, and that it was natural that the weight of the -silver unit was increased in order to preserve the relation in value -between one gold unit, and ten silver units. Lastly we may point out -that at no place on the coast of Phoenicia or Asia Minor, the region -especially in contact with the Phoenicians, do we find _gold_ pieces -struck on the heavy shekel. _Electrum_ certainly was coined on this foot; -but of this we shall be able to give a satisfactory explanation. We have -(with the exception of some Lydian pieces) to go as far north as Thasos -or Thrace before we find a gold coin of such a nature, which is of course -nothing more than a double stater. - -The Phoenician gold mina was probably like the Hebrew, which was most -likely borrowed from it, the fifty-fold of the heavy shekel, 100 -gold shekels and 100 silver shekels constituting a maneh, as amongst -the Hebrews in the time of Solomon. But we can conjecture with some -probability that at an earlier stage they weighed their gold and silver -according to the old common ox-unit, which we found in use among the -Hebrews under the name of the Holy Shekel or shekel of the Sanctuary. No -doubt the mina for gold always contained 100 light or 50 heavy shekels, -and when their own peculiar shekel of 220 grs. came into vogue for -silver, 50 such shekels made a mina. Finally, there can be little doubt -that 60 minas invariably went to the talent. - -In the case of commercial weights, it is most probable that 60 heavy -shekels made a mina: this is rendered almost perfectly certain by the -Lion weights with Phoenician as well as cuneiform inscriptions found at -Nineveh, 60 heavy minas forming a heavy talent. - - -THE PHOENICIAN COLONIES. - -It is worth while before going further to enquire whether we can gain any -light from the systems of weight employed by the famous daughter-cities -of Phoenicia, such as Gades and Carthage. A weight bearing in Punic -characters the name of the Agoranomos and the numeral 100 has been -found at Jol (Julia Caesarea) in North Africa, but unfortunately it has -suffered so much by corrosion from water and the loss of its handle that -it is impossible to make any tolerable approximation to its original -weight. Hultsch[344] conjectures with some probability that, making -allowance for its loss, it represents 100 _drachms_, and deduces from -this that the Carthaginians treated the drachm as their _shekel_, but -for this latter hypothesis there seems no sufficient evidence. If this -supposition were true, the weight would represent a half-mina of the -Phoenician _silver_ standard. But there is one thing which this weight -does prove, and that is that, whether it be a mina or half-mina, it is -the drachm or shekel, which was evidently regarded as the unit of the -system, not the mina. Thus once more we get a confirmation of our general -thesis that the mina and talent are the multiples, and that it is the -shekel or stater which is the basis. Nor does the coinage of Carthage -furnish us with all the information that could be desired, for it was -only after 410 B.C. that that great “mart of merchants” began to strike -coins, and even then it was only in her Sicilian possessions that she -did so, no doubt induced to adopt the practice by constant contact with -her Greek enemies: for not only the type (of Persephone) was borrowed -from Syracusan coins, but the very dies were engraved by the hands of -Greek artists. The gold coins are struck on a standard of about 120 grs. -Troy, whilst the silver issue consists of tetradrachms of the so-called -Attic (or more simply light shekel or ox-unit) standard of 130-135 grs. -Since during the same period (405-347 B.C.) Syracuse[345] was issuing -gold pieces on the Attic standard, it is most probable that it is only -through the want of heavier specimens that we are compelled to set the -Siculo-Punic coins issued at Panormus (Palermo) and other places in Italy -so low as 120 grs. It was not until about the time of Timoleon (340 -B.C.) that money was coined at Carthage itself. This coinage consists -wholly of gold, electrum and bronze, down to the time of the acquisition -of the rich silver mines of Spain, and the foundation of New Carthage -in that country by Hasdrubal, the son-in-law of Hamilkar Barca and -brother-in-law of Hannibal, in the interval between the First and Second -Punic wars (241-218 B.C.), when large silver coins both Carthaginian and -Hispano-Carthaginian seem to have been first struck[346]. - -The gold and electrum coins of the first period are of the following -weights: _gold_ 145 and 73 grs.; _electrum_ 118, 58 and 27 grains. The -gold unit is thus some 10 grains higher than the normal value of the -ox-unit. If these coins belonged to an earlier period we might with -some confidence affirm that the variation was due to the plentiful -supply of gold derived by the Carthaginians from the still unexhausted -gold deposits of Western Africa. This is perhaps the true explanation -even at the late period when the coins were issued, but there may have -been a desire to adjust the three metals, gold, electrum and silver, so -that they might be conveniently exchanged. It will be observed that the -electrum coins are struck on a unit of 118 grs., and it is not at all -improbable that silver was reckoned by the same unit, even though not yet -coined; for when the silver coins appear they are struck on a standard -of 118 or 236 grs. It will be at once noticed that this standard is -considerably higher than the Phoenician silver standard found along the -coasts of Asia Minor. It may thus have been found convenient to raise by -a few grains the weight of the gold unit so as to harmonize the relations -between the three metals. Further speculation is vain, as we do not know -the proportion of gold contained in the electrum coins[347]. From what we -shall shortly learn about the electrum of Cyzicus, it is not impossible -that the gold piece of 73 grs. was worth an electrum stater of 118 grs. - -Coming to the Phoenicians of Spain we find that Gades, which did not -begin her coinage until about 250 B.C., employed a standard for her -silver of 78 grains, and that the island of Ebusus (_Iviza_) struck -didrachms of 154 grs., a half-drachm of 39 grs. and a quarter-drachm. -This coincides closely with the 78 grain drachm of Gades. It is palpable -that there is no connection between this standard and the Phoenician -standard of 220 grs. As the same system is found in the cities of -Emporiae and Rhoda (_Ampurias_ and _Rosas_) in the north-east of Spain, -and in the earliest drachms of Massilia (_Marseilles_)[348], it is far -more reasonable to suppose that the relations between gold and silver -throughout Spain were such that, in order to make a certain fixed number -of silver pieces equivalent to the gold ox-unit, it was found necessary -to make the silver didrachm of about 156 grs. and the drachm of 78 grs. - -It would thus seem that the principle which we shall seek to establish -for the Greek silver standards held true of the Phoenician likewise,—that -whilst the gold unit, the basis of all weight, remains unchanged or was -but very slightly modified even at a late period (when the idea of the -original ox-unit must have become dimmed by time), in order to effect a -more complete harmonizing of a threefold system of gold, electrum and -silver, the silver units shew every kind of variety, which can only be -accounted for by supposing that owing to the different relations between -gold and silver in various regions and at various periods in the same -regions, it was found necessary from time to time to increase or diminish -the weight of the silver unit. Thus if gold was to silver as 12:1 in -the 3rd century B.C., we find a ready explanation for the standard of -Gades and Emporiae. The gold unit of 130 grs. would be worth ten silver -units of 156 grs. each (130 × 12 = 1560 ÷ 10 = 156). So too the 118 -gr. standard of Carthage may be explained by supposing that gold was -to silver as 11:1; for then 1 gold unit of 130 grs. = 12 silver of 118 -grs. each (130 × 11 = 1430 ÷ 12 = 119 grs.), duodecimal division perhaps -being preferred to the decimal owing to the relations between electrum -and silver, the former perhaps being as in Lydia[349] counted at 10 times -the value of the latter. If gold was to silver as 12:1, and electrum to -silver as 8:1, electrum being thus nearly two-thirds gold, one gold piece -of 75 grs. = 1 piece of electrum of 118 grains, and 8 pieces of silver -of 116 grs. each (75 × 12 = 900; 116 × 8 = 928), and 1 piece of electrum -of 118 was worth 8 pieces of silver of 116 grs. each. All this is, be -it remembered, purely conjectural, as we know nothing of the actual -relations existing between any pair of the metals. - -However, when we come to deal with the electrum of Cyzicus we shall be -able to produce some data, which will at least show that our suggested -explanation of the relations existing between gold, electrum and silver -at Carthage is not purely chimerical. - -Lastly comes the question of the commercial weight-system. We have -already spoken of the badly preserved weight from Jol, but we could -not say whether it was used for the precious metals, or more ordinary -merchandize. However, the great Phoenician inscription of Marseilles, -already referred to, makes it plain that even in the weighing of meat -they reckoned by the shekel and not by the mina; for we find in it -mention of 300 [shekels] and 150 [shekels] of flesh from the victims. -This completely accords with the 20 shekels of food mentioned by Ezekiel -(iv. 10), and clearly indicates that even in what we may well believe -to be the heavy commercial shekel, the ancient decimal system had not -been superseded by the sexagesimal; and, further, that the mina had -not succeeded in supplanting the more ancient fashion of counting by -shekels; for had such been the case, the weight of the meat would have -been expressed in 6 manehs, or 3 manehs. This piece of evidence confirms -the results which we arrived at in the case of the Hebrews—that it was -only at a later period that reckoning by manehs came into use. The -Phoenician colonies of the West, including Carthage herself, had probably -been planted before the influences of the Chaldaean system had obtained -a solid footing in Palestine. We may however not unreasonably believe -that the Carthaginians employed some such form of talent as we find in -the Book of Exodus, 3000 shekels (50 × 60 = 3000) going to the talent, -though as yet no record has revealed to us the actual existence of either -_talent_ or _mina_. - - - - -CHAPTER XI. - -THE LYDIAN AND PERSIAN SYSTEMS. - - -“The Lydians,” says Herodotus, “were the first of all nations we know -who struck gold and silver coin[350],” a tradition also attested -by Xenophanes of Colophon, according to Julius Pollux[351]. These -statements of the ancient writers are confirmed by an examination of the -earliest essays made in Asia in the art of coining; from which the best -numismatists have been led to ascribe it to the seventh century B.C. -and probably to the reign of Gyges, who from being a shepherd, by means -of the “virtuous ring” became the founder of the great dynasty of the -Mermnadae, and of the new Lydian empire as distinguished from the Lydia -of a more remote antiquity. The first issues of the Lydian mint were -rudely executed coins of electrum, being staters and smaller coins of the -standards usually known as the Babylonian and Phoenician, of which the -earliest staters weigh about 167 and 220 grs. respectively[352]. It is -most likely that the Babylonian standard was intended for commerce with -the interior of Asia Minor, and the Phoenician for transactions with the -cities of the western seaboard, to coincide with the silver standards -in use in these respective regions. The proportion of gold and silver -in electrum is exceedingly variable: according to Pliny[353] any gold -alloyed with one-fifth of silver (and by implication any containing any -higher proportion of silver) was called electrum. We shall soon find that -the electrum staters of Cyzicus contained about an equal amount of either -metal; but the analysis of Lydian electrum gives a proportion of 73 per -cent. of gold to 27 per cent. of silver, or practically 3 to 1. As gold -in the central parts of Asia Minor stood to silver as 13·3:1 in the reign -of Darius and probably long before, we may not unreasonably assume that -such also was the relation between them in the reign of Gyges, at least -in the interior. In this case electrum would stand to silver as 10:1, -a proportion exceedingly convenient for exchange, as a single standard -served for both metals, one electrum ingot of 168 grs. being equal to 10 -silver ingots of like weight. We have already seen that one gold unit -of 130 grs. was equivalent to 10 silver units of 168 grs., therefore -the gold ox-unit was exactly represented in value by the electrum ingot -of 168 grs., for, according to our statement of the composition of the -Lydian electrum, 168 grs. of that alloy would contain 126 grs. of pure -gold. If we were certain that on the coast of Asia Minor the relation -between gold and silver was 13·3:1, we should be compelled to follow -Brandis and the rest in making the double gold shekel of 260 grs. equal -to 15 silver shekels of 220 grs. each; again, if we accept as universal -the relation of gold to electrum as 4:3, and accordingly make one piece -of electrum of 220 grs. equal to 10 silver pieces of the same standard, -we shall find it impossible to obtain any convenient relation between the -gold stater of 130 grs. and the electrum stater of 220 grs. But from this -difficulty it is not hard to find an escape: 224 grs. of electrum = 168 -grs. of gold; that is exactly 1⅓ gold shekels (129 ÷ 3 = 43 × 4 = 172). -The division into thirds and sixths is of course a well-known feature in -the coinage of the Asiatic coast-towns. Thus there would be no practical -difficulty in the ordinary monetary transactions, for three Phoenician -drachms of electrum (= 168 grs.) would = 1 gold shekel; and 4 gold Thirds -(_Tritae_), or 8 gold Sixths (_Hectae_), would equal one electrum stater -of 224-220 grs. - -If on the other hand silver held a lower value in relation to gold on -the coasts of the Aegean, and the electrum employed in that quarter was -alloyed to a greater extent with silver, two disturbing elements are -introduced. The probabilities are in favour of silver being cheaper in -Cilicia and the contiguous region, and most certainly at Cyzicus the -electrum was half silver, whilst the Phocaic electrum had a bad name -in antiquity, since according to Hesychius Phocaic gold was synonymous -with bad gold. Is it then possible that 220 grains of electrum were -equivalent to 130 grs. of pure gold? This gives about 60 per cent. of -gold. If gold was to silver as 13·3:1, the gold unit of 130 grs. is equal -to 8 silver pieces of 220 grs. (130 × 13·3 = 1765 ÷ 8 = 220·6). In our -present state of knowledge it is impossible to decide in favour of either -view, but it is at least evident that some such relation and adjustment -must have existed between the three metals. In fact the problem which -the Lydians tried to solve was not merely that of _Bimetallism_, but of -_Trimetallism_. - -[Illustration: FIG. 28. Lydian electrum coin.] - -These early electrum coins are simply bullet-shaped lumps of metal, like -the so-called _bean_ money formerly employed by the Japanese, having -what is termed the obverse plain or rather striated, as a series of -lines in relief run across the coin, whilst the reverse has three incuse -depressions, that in the centre oblong, the others square. The coin here -figured (from the British Museum specimen) is on the Babylonian silver -standard (166·8 grs.), but it is on the staters of Phoenician standard -that we first find any attempt at types or symbols. The idea of engraving -some symbol on the punches used for stamping the incuse depressions was -in truth the grand step towards the creation of a real coin. Thus a -stater of 219 grs. which bears in the central incuse a running fox, in -the upper square a stag’s head, and the lower an X-like device, may be -regarded as the first complete coin as yet known. It would seem from -this, therefore, that it was on the coast-region, where the Lydians came -into contact with the artistic genius of the Greeks, that the real start -in the art of striking money took place. Electrum was employed because -it was found native in great quantities in the whole district which lay -around Sardis, in the valleys of Tmolus, and the sands of Pactolus. The -ancients found considerable difficulty in freeing the gold from the -associated silver (p. 97). - -Once known, Miletus and other important Ionian cities were not long in -improving on the Lydian invention. The advantages of a metallic currency -were so obvious that an intelligent and progressive race hastened to -avail themselves of it. “Only those,” says Captain Gill (speaking of the -borders of Thibet and China), “who have gone through the weary process of -cutting up and weighing out lumps of silver, disputing over the scale, -and asserting the quality of the metal, can appreciate our feelings of -satisfaction at being once more able to make payments in coin[354].” No -sooner had the Ionians commenced coining than they appear to have adorned -the face of the ingot with a symbol, probably both as a guarantee of -weight and purity, and perhaps as a preventive of fraudulent abrasion. -During this period it is not improbable that the arts of Ionia had made -their influence felt in Lydia, and hence “it is impossible to distinguish -with absolute certainty the Lydian issues from those of the Greek towns, -but there is one type which seems to be especially characteristic of -Lydia as it occurs in a modified form on the coinage attributed to the -Sardian mint and to the reign of Croesus; this is the Lion and the Bull. -These coins have on the obverse the forefronts of a lion and a bull -turned away from one another and joined by their necks[355],” whilst the -reverse shows three incuse depressions. This is Phoenician in weight -(215·4 grs.). There are other coins, often attributed to Miletus, which -may be assigned to Lydia; some with a recumbent lion on the obverse, and -a reverse exhibiting the fox, stag’s head, and X of the coin already -described. To these may be added a series of coins bearing a lion’s head -with open mouth, and with what is commonly regarded as a star above it, -but which is more probably part of the lion’s hair, and on the reverse -incuse sinkings, in some cases containing an ornamental star[356]. These -coins have now with great probability been assigned by the eminent -numismatist, Mr J. P. Six, to the Lydian king, Alyattes, the father of -Croesus. - -When Croesus ascended the throne in 568 B.C., one of his earliest acts -seems to have been an attempt to propitiate the Greeks both of Asia -and Hellas proper by sending offerings of equal value to the two most -famous shrines of Apollo, Delphi and Branchidae. In the course of some -fourteen years he reduced under the sway of Lydia all the regions that -lay between the river Halys and the sea. “It seems probable (says Mr -Head) that the introduction of a double currency of pure gold and silver, -in place of the primitive electrum, may have been due to the commercial -genius of Croesus.” If this be so, the monarch seems to have acted with -thrift in his offerings, for according to Herodotus his dedications at -Delphi were all of _white gold_, _i.e._ electrum. Perhaps then he got no -more than he deserved when, induced by the declaration of the Delphic -prophetess that he would destroy a mighty kingdom, he made war upon Cyrus -with disastrous issue. There however can be no doubt that Croesus made -some important monetary change, for in after years there still remained -a clear tradition of Croesus’ stater (Κροίσειος στατήρ), just as the -famous gold stater of Philip of Macedon was known as the _Philippean_ or -_Philippus_[357]. In his monetary reform Croesus seems to have had regard -to the weights of the two old electrum staters, each of which was now -represented by an equal value, though not of course by an equal weight, -of pure gold. - -[Illustration: FIG. 29. Coin of Croesus.] - -Thus the old Phoenician electrum stater of 220 grs. was replaced by a -pure gold coin of 168 grs., equivalent like its predecessor in electrum -to 10 silver staters of 220 grs. each, and the old Babylonian electrum -stater of 168 grs. was replaced by a new pure gold stater of 126 grs., -equal in value like it to 10 silver staters of 168 grs. each, “as now for -the first time coined.” These gold coins bear as obverse the foreparts of -a lion and a bull facing each other, and on the reverse an oblong incuse -divided into two parts (Fig. 29). Of the Babylonian standard we find: - - Stater 168 grs. - Trite 56 ” - Hecte 28 ” - Hemihecton 14 ” - -And of the light shekel: - - Stater 126 grs. - Trite 42 ” - Hecte 21 ” - Hemihecton 11 ” - -Of Babylonian standard _silver_: - - Stater 168 grs. - ½ stater 84 ” - ⅓ stater 56 ” - ⅟₁₂ stater 14 ” - -This double standard for gold is at first sight somewhat strange until -we observe that the two systems are in complete harmony. For the gold -piece of 168 grs. is nothing more than 1⅓ of the light shekel (168 ÷ ⁴⁄₃ -= 126 grs.). The third of the light shekel (42 grs.) is the fourth of the -Babylonian of 168 grs. There can be no doubt that the coins of 168 grs. -were simply an experiment suggested by the coincidence that the number of -grains (168) in the Babylonian silver shekel was exactly one-quarter more -than those in the _light_ gold shekel, in the hope doubtless of obtaining -a single standard for gold electrum and silver. The division of the -silver stater into thirds would facilitate the process of exchange, as 13 -silver staters and one-third would be equivalent to the gold piece of the -same Babylonian standard, whilst 10 silver staters would be equivalent to -one of the old electrum pieces of 168 grs. It is at all events certain -that the standard of 168 grs. was not a regular gold unit, for it simply -makes its appearance for a brief space, there being no trace of it at any -earlier period, nor does it afterwards appear save in its own legitimate -province of silver. A perfectly analogous case is that of the gold pieces -struck by the Ptolemaic kings, who, starting with the gold stater of -Philip and Alexander and the Phoenician standard for silver (after the -founder of the dynasty had for a short time used the so-called Rhodian -standard), presently struck gold pieces on the same standard as their -silver. But the experiment of Croesus, if such it was, did not succeed. -For the eastern mind was still too much impressed with the necessity of -cleaving fast to the original weight unit obtained from the ancient unit -of barter. For whether the attempt had failed before the reign of Croesus -was brought to a sudden end by the conquests of the great Cyrus, or -whether he continued up to the very hour of the Persian conquest to coin, -at least for one part of his dominions, the gold pieces of the Babylonian -silver standard, it matters little. As we have no evidence on the point, -we cannot say whether there were two gold minae and two gold talents in -use, one being of course the ordinary gold talent (called Euboic) of 3000 -light shekels of 130 grs., the other containing 3000 shekels of 168 grs. -each. The probability I think is that only the former existed. As 50 -of the latter shekels made 1⅓ minae, there was no practical difficulty -in making any calculations; on the other hand, if there had been two -separate minae, and two separate talents, it would have led to great -complications. The fact that we hear nothing about any such second gold -system existing in Asia, and that when Darius fixed the tribute from -each region he did not make it the basis of his payment, which he would -probably have done as he would thus have made a considerable gain, by -causing the payments in gold as well as those in silver to be made on the -Babylonian standard, seems to put beyond all doubt that the 168 grain -gold piece was not a real unit, but was simply regarded as 1⅓ shekels, -and was nothing more than a temporary effort to simplify the trimetallic -monetary system of Lydia. - -What system the Lydians employed for commercial purposes we have no means -of knowing, but we may conjecture plausibly that the light royal mina of -60 shekels was the standard employed. - - -THE PERSIAN STANDARD. - -We may adopt the generally received belief that the Persians, like the -Medes and Babylonians, did not coin money (although they were probably -acquainted with the Lydian stater) until after the conquest of Asia Minor -and Egypt by Cyrus and Cambyses, and the reorganization of the empire -by Darius the son of Hystaspes (522-485 B.C.). For although the learned -_savants_ MM. Oppert and Révillout[358] hold that Daric (Δαρεικός) is -unconnected with the name Darius (Δαρεῖος), an opinion supported by Dr -Hoffmann[359], and rather regard it as derived from the Assyrian _darag -mana_, “degree (i.e. ⅟₆₀) of a mina,” and although Mr G. Bertin has read -the word _dariku_ on a Babylonian contract, dated in the twelfth year -of Nabonidas, five years before the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus[360], -it does not at all follow that either _darag_ or _dariku_ refers to a -_coin_. That the unit was employed for gold ages before the Persians -ever descended from the mountains there can be little doubt. But whether -we adopt or reject the Greek tradition that the Daric (Δαρεικός) was -named from Darius, as the Philippean and Croesean staters were called -after the sovereigns who first struck them, it is perfectly certain -that Darius organized the whole numbering system of the great empire -to which he had succeeded, and that he coined gold pieces of the first -quality: for Herodotus tells us that Darius, having refined gold to -the greatest extent possible, had coin struck[361]. This would be very -analogous to the course pursued by Croesus and Philip; gold in some form -was current in the dominions of both these princes before their reigns, -but it was owing to certain reforms introduced and to the issue of a -gold coin of a certain pattern, that the names of both became associated -with particular kinds of gold coins. By the time of Xerxes the son of -Darius vast quantities of these Darics were circulating through Asia -Minor, for Herodotus relates that the Lydian Pythius had in his own -possession as many as 3,993,000 of them, a sum afterwards increased by -Xerxes to 4,000,000. They became the gold currency of all the Greek -towns not only of Asia Minor, but also of the islands, and made their -way in considerable quantities into the great cities of the mainland of -Hellas, and wrought as much harm in disuniting the various states of -Greece as did the gold staters of Philip at a period a little later. -Darics formed a regular part of the wealth of a well-to-do Athenian at -the time of the Peloponnesian war. Thus Lysias[362] relates that when his -house was entered and plundered by the minions of the Thirty, his money -chest contained 100 Darics, 400 Cyzicenes, and 3 talents of silver. It is -only necessary to enumerate some of the passages in the Greek authors, -where mention is made of their coins, to show how wide an influence they -exercised in the eastern Mediterranean. Besides Herodotus and Lysias -already mentioned, Thucydides, Aristophanes, Xenophon, Demosthenes, -Arrian, Diodorus and many others all make mention of these famous -coins[363]. No classification of them according to the reigns of the -monarchs by whom they were issued is possible, for this is precluded by -the absence of all inscriptions, and the great uniformity of style. They -bear on the obverse the king of Persia bearded crowned and clad in a long -robe; he kneels towards the right on one knee; on his back is a quiver, -in his right hand is a long spear, and in his outstretched left a bow -(from which came the familiar Greek name of Archers for these pieces). -The reverse is simply marked by an oblong incuse. - -Their weight may be set at 130 grs., which of course is the light shekel -or ox-unit. We have no difficulty in fixing the gold mina or talent. In -fact we have already seen on p. 260 that the Persian talent of gold was -the same as the Euboic-Attic talent. Hence - - 1 Daric = 130 grs. - 50 Darics = 1 mina = 6,500 grs. - 3000 Darics = 60 minas = 1 talent = 390,000 grs. - -For silver currency the Persians employed half of the Babylonian silver -stater of 168 grs., its usual weight being about 84 grs. This coin was -in every way similar to the Daric and in fact is sometimes called by the -same name by writers of a later age[364], but the more usual appellation -in the classical writers was the _Median_ siglos (Μηδικός σίγλος) or -simply _siglos_. Twenty of these sigli were equivalent to one gold -Daric, for Xenophon appears to count 3000 Darics as equal to 10 talents -of silver, or in other words to 60,000 sigli (6000 × 10 = 60,000). The -siglos may therefore be regarded as the Persian drachm or half-stater. As -130 grains of gold are thus made equal to 1680 grs. of silver (84 × 20), -gold held to silver the old ratio of 13:1. - -The Persian silver standard was formed thus: - - 1 siglos = 84 grs. - 100 sigli = 50 staters = 1 mina = 8400 grs. - 6000 sigli = 3000 staters = 60 minae = 1 talent = 504,000 grs. - -As regards commercial weight we may fairly assume that the old light and -heavy _royal_ systems continued in use in the respective regions where -they had been employed in early days. - - - - -CHAPTER XII. - -THE GREEK SYSTEM. - - -We are now come to the most important portion of our task, the -development of the Greek and Italic systems. In the Homeric Poems we -found the Talanton (or value of a cow in gold) the sole unit of weight, -and that only employed for gold. This Talanton has been shown to be the -same in weight as the light gold shekel of Asia Minor, which, under the -form of coin, we have just been discussing as the Croesean stater and -Persian Daric. It was therefore nothing else than the Euboic or Attic -stater of historical times, which at all periods and at all places that -fall within our knowledge formed the sole unit for the weighing of gold. - -Besides the Talanton based on the ox, there was in all probability -another higher unit in occasional use in Greece Proper. This was the -threefold of the ox-unit. We have already had occasion to notice the -small gold talent, called by some writers the Macedonian, which was equal -to three Attic staters. The same weight under the name of the Sicilian -talent was employed likewise for gold only in the Greek colonies of -Sicily and Southern Italy. The conservatism of colonists is too well -known to need illustration, and we may with high probability infer that -the Greek settlers in Magna Graecia brought the small talent from their -original homes. What was the origin of this weight? We have seen that -everywhere all over our area the slave is the occasional higher unit. -Thus the Irish slave (_cumhal_) was a unit of account equal to three -cows. The slave in the Welsh Laws is equal to 4 cows, whilst in Homer we -found a slave woman valued at 4 cows also. From the way in which this -notice of her price occurs, it is probable that Achilles did not give a -woman of the most ordinary kind as a prize, for had she been the ordinary -slave-woman of account, there would have been no need to mention the -price, as any one would have known how many cows exactly she was worth. -It is then not improbable that three cows were commonly reckoned as the -value of a slave, and accordingly the small gold talent, which is the -multiple of the ox-unit, is simply the metallic representative of the -slave, just as the Homeric Talanton itself is that of the cow. - -What the exact weight of this unit was on Greek soil we are now enabled -to ascertain by the aid of the treatise on the Constitution of the -Athenians known to the ancients as the work of Aristotle, and the -brilliant discovery and identification of which by the officials of the -British Museum reflects much credit on British scholarship. - -We had previously known from Plutarch (who ascribed the first coinage -of Athens to Theseus[365]) that amongst his other reforms Solon caused -drachms to be coined of lighter weight than those previously in currency, -so that 100 of the new ones would be equal in value to 73 old ones. Some -scholars have inferred that this was an expedient for relieving debtors, -who would be allowed to pay in the new coin debts contracted in the older -currency. The newly discovered Constitution dispels this assumption, and -also affords us some most valuable additional matter[366]: “In his Laws -then he appears to have made these enactments in favour of the people, -but before his legislation he appears to have wrought the cancelling of -debts, and afterwards the augmentation of the measures and weights, and -the augmentation of the currency. For in his day the measures likewise -were made larger than those of Pheidon, and the mina, which previously -had almost seventy drachms, was filled up by a hundred drachms[367]. -But the ancient type was the didrachm[368], and he also made as a -standard[369] for his coinage 63 minas weighing the talent, and the minae -were apportioned out by the stater, and the other weights.” - -[Illustration: FIG. 30. Coin of Eretria.] - -The first point to engage our attention is the formation of a new -standard for the _silver_ coin (for no gold was coined for nearly two -centuries): sixty-three old minas were taken to form a new talent, which -of course was divided henceforward into 60 new minas. As the weight of -the Attic talent in post-Solonian times is most accurately known, we can -at once discover the weight of the ancient mina by dividing the ordinary -weight of the talent (405,000 grs.) by 63: 405,000 ÷ 63 = 6428 grs., that -is 322 grs. less than the post-Solonian mina of 6750 grs. As there are 50 -staters in the mina, the ancient stater weighed 128·56 grs., or just a -grain lighter than the Daric (129·6 grs.). The old mina of 6428 grs. had -been equal to 70 drachms; each of these then must have weighed 92 grs. -nearly, that is, the ordinary weight of an Aeginetic drachm. There can be -no doubt that the coins of Aegina were used as currency at Athens before -Solon’s time, where they circulated side by side in all probability -with the coins of Euboea which bore the bull’s head, whence arose the -tradition of the earliest coinage of Athens consisting of didrachms -stamped with an ox. The old mina (63 of which went to the new _silver_ -talent) was of course the ancient standard used for weighing _gold_ and -_silver_ before coined money was employed. It was that known as the -Euboic, based on the ox-unit. The Aeginetic standard was only used for -_silver_, _gold_ at all times being weighed by the Euboic standard even -where the Aeginetic was in use for silver. This standard was of course -in full use for gold and evidently likewise for silver in prae-Solonian -times, even though the Aeginetic drachms passed as currency at Athens. -For if they had adopted the Aeginetic _standard_, 100 Aeginetic drachms -would have been reckoned to the mina, but as only 70 drachms went to -the mina it is evident that the old ox-unit (so-called Euboic) standard -of unit 130 grs. with its corresponding mina was always the national -Athenian standard. - -We showed at an earlier stage that in the age when the art of coining was -first introduced into Greece by Pheidon of Argos, it was probable that -gold stood to silver in the proportion of 15:1. For convenience, then, -in Peloponnesus and in Central Greece a system was adopted by which 10 -pieces of silver were equivalent to one piece or ingot of gold. This -system, known as the Aeginetic, was thus obtained. - -Gold being to silver as 15:1, - - 1 gold ingot (Talanton) of 130 grs. × 15 = 1950 grs. of silver, - 1950 grs. ÷ 10 = 195 grs. - - Therefore 1 gold Talanton of 130 grs. = 10 pieces of silver of - 195 grs. each. - -It is possible that this method of making 10 silver pieces equal to one -gold unit was developed at the time of the introduction of coined money, -but it is more likely that it may have been in use even before that time. - -Now it is worth observing that all through the classical period of Greek -history the term stater is generally confined in use to gold pieces. Thus -silver coins, unless they weighed 135 grs., are not described as silver -_staters_, but are regularly termed didrachms. So general evidently was -this practice that the adjective _chrysous_ (χρυσοῦς) was regularly -employed to express the gold unit, the masculine gender showing that -the noun understood is _stater_ (στατήρ). Thus Pollux says: “Some were -termed staters of Darius, some Philippeans, other Alexandrians, all -being of gold, and if you say _gold piece_, _stater_ is understood: but if -you should say _stater_, _gold_ is not absolutely to be understood[370].” -From the fact that Pollux draws attention to the exceptional use of -_stater_ to express a silver coin, on the principle that _exceptio -probat regulam_, it is evident that stater regularly represents a gold -piece of two Attic drachms. The familiar practice in Attic Greek, when -speaking of a considerable sum of silver without employing either the -term mina or talent, is to say 1000 drachms, 2000 drachms and the -like, but not 1000 staters or 2000 staters, etc., whilst on the other -hand, under like conditions, the practice is to enumerate gold not by -drachms, but by _staters_. Thus in a fragment from the _Demi_ of Eupolis -quoted by Pollux[371] a man is described as possessing 3000 _staters_ -of gold. We certainly hear of an Aeginean stater and a Corinthian[372] -stater (both of silver), but both are found in writers of comparatively -late date, when usage was getting less exact, and besides, as the -Aeginetic system had a separate individuality of its own, its unit being -perfectly different from the Euboic Attic, might with justice be termed -a stater. We are thus justified in considering the gold stater the -legitimate descendant of the Homeric Talanton, the stater or _weigher_ -representing the Talanton or _weight_ of the older time. As long as no -other unit than the ox-unit or Talanton was employed, the Talanton or -weight _par excellence_ was sufficient to describe it, but when under -Asiatic influences the higher unit of the _mina_ (μνᾶ) and _talent_ were -introduced, a term was substituted which indicates clearly that the gold -unit of 130 grs. was _the weigher_ or basis of the whole system. Starting -then with our ox-unit, we find already in Homer definite traces of a -decimal, but nothing to indicate the existence of a sexagesimal system. -_Ten_ talents of gold are mentioned in several passages. - -Starting then with the ox-unit of 130 grs. we can thus arrive at the -fully elaborated Greek systems. The term mina (μνᾶ) is beyond doubt -a borrowing from the East. How far it was ever much employed in the -reckoning of gold it is hard to say, but it is at least remarkable that, -when we hear so frequently of _minae_ of silver in the Attic writers, -no instance of a mina of gold is quoted in our books of reference. From -this one is led to infer that it was for the purpose of measuring the -less precious metal, silver, that the term _mina_ was brought into use -in Greece. In fact, as stater is essentially a term which clings to -gold, so _mina_ is especially a term used of silver. With the mina the -Greeks borrowed likewise the highest Asiatic unit (the _kikkar_ of the -Hebrews), which became the Talanton or talent of historical Greece. -But it is remarkable that the Greeks did not borrow its Asiatic name -along with the unit itself. They simply gave it their own name _weight_ -(literally, ‘_that which can be lifted_,’ cp. τλάω, _tollo_, etc.). This -fact can be explained readily if we suppose that the Greeks, like all -those other primitive peoples whom we have mentioned, had a rough and -ready unit for estimating bulky wares, the standard of _the load_, or -as much as a man could conveniently carry on his back. Having already -such a unit they would have no difficulty in adopting the _load_ or -talent, which had been fixed according to the Sexagesimal system, and -which had permeated all Western Asia. In fact their position towards -the Asiatic _load_, which had been accurately fixed by the mathematical -skill of the Babylonians, would be exactly analagous to that of the -Malays of Java and Sumatra towards the accurately adjusted Chinese -_picul_. Because the Malays themselves were accustomed to use _loads_ of -various weights as their rough highest unit of bulk, they have with all -the more readiness received the form of the same unit, which the clever -Chinese have incorporated into their commercial weight system by making -it equal to 100 _chings_ (catties, or pounds). But it is doubtful if at -any time in Greece Proper the talent of gold was ever considered as a -monetary unit. We have found Eupolis speaking of “3000 staters of gold” -instead of simply saying a talent of gold, and when we do find mention -made of talents of gold, as in a famous passage of Thucydides, where -he describes the amount of gold employed by Pheidias in the making of -the world-renowned chryselephantine statue of Athena for the Parthenon, -whilst the computations in silver are expressed simply by talents, the -gold is enumerated as talents _in weight_. We may assume that gold was -weighed throughout Greece in historical times on the following system: - - 1 stater = 130 grs. - 50 staters = 1 mina = 6500 grs. - 3000 ” = 60 minae = 1 talent = 390,000 grs. - -When silver came into use it was probably weighed all through Hellas, as -in Asia and Egypt, on the same standard as gold. This continued always -to be the practice amongst the great trading communities of Euboea, -Chalcis and Eretria, and their colonies, and also with Corinth and her -daughter states. Hence the system was commonly known as the Euboic, -sometimes as the Corinthian, and in later times, for a reason to be -presently given, the _Attic_. But in this silver system it is no longer -the stater which represents the smaller unit, but rather the _drachm_ -(δραχμή). Furthermore we find in most constant use a subdivision of the -_drachm_ called the _obol_ (ὀβολός _nail_ or _spike_), six of which made -a drachm. There can be no doubt that this silver obolos represented the -value in silver of the ancient copper unit from which it took its name, -which itself was not estimated by weight but probably, as we saw above, -was simply appraised by measure, as is done by all primitive peoples in -the estimation of copper and iron, nay even in the very earliest stage of -gold itself (p. 43). As six of these _nails_ or _obols_ made a handful -(δραχμή) in the ancient copper system, so when each of them was equated -to a certain amount of silver, the equivalence in silver was called an -_obol_, and the six silver _obols_ obtained the old name of _handful_ -or _drachm_. In the ordinary Greek system of reckoning silver it is 100 -drachms, not 50 staters, of silver which form the mina. But of course at -the earlier stages of the use of silver we may with some boldness assume -that silver was simply weighed by the stater (or Homeric Talanton). - -It is important then to note that among the smaller weight denominations -silver has virtually no term peculiarly its own: for we have seen that -_stater_ belongs essentially to gold, whilst _drachm_ and _obol_ have -originated in the use of copper. This is in complete harmony with what we -know of the history of the metals themselves, gold and copper being known -and employed long before men had learned to utilize silver; and so too, -we find the late-introduced term _mina_ in especially close connection -with the latest employed of the three metals. This Euboic-Attic _silver_ -system may be stated as follows: - - 6 obols = 1 drachm - 100 drachms = 1 mina - 60 minae = 1 talent. - -The Corinthians, whilst making the _obol_ of the same weight as the -Euboic, made a different division of the silver stater; for as Corinth -occupied the very portals of Peloponnesus where the Aeginetic system was -universal, she found it convenient for purposes of exchange to divide -her silver stater of 135 grs. into _three_ drachms of 45 grs. each, one -of which was for practical purposes identical with the Aeginetan _half -drachm_. Thus two Corinthian drachms of 45 grs. each were equal to one -Aeginetan drachm of 90 grs. - - -_The Aeginetan Standard._ - -The desire to obtain 10 silver pieces equivalent in value to the gold -ox-unit induced the Aeginetans, who were famous merchantmen, to make a -silver system distinct from that of gold. Gold being to silver as 15:1, - - 130 × 15 = 1950 grs. of silver. - 1950 ÷ 10 = 195 grs. - -With the Aeginetans as with the Euboeans in their silver system, the -ancient copper units of the _nail_ and _handful_ played an important -part. The story of Pheidon[373] having hung up in the temple of Hera at -Argos the ancient currency of nails of copper and iron as soon as he -struck his first issue of silver coins, if not absolutely true in all -details, at least contains a most probable statement of what did actually -take place when a real silver currency was first introduced. We have seen -how the Chinese, starting with a barter currency of real hoes and knives, -the objects of most general demand, gradually replaced those larger and -more cumbrous articles by hoes and knives of a more diminutive size, -until finally they became a real currency when they had been so reduced -in size as to be utterly unfit for practical use. We saw likewise how -that at the present moment the real hoe is the lowest unit of barter -among the wild tribes of Annam, and that small bars of iron of given -size are used in Laos, and that plates of metal ready to be made into -hoes, and hoes themselves, are employed by the negroes of Central Africa, -whilst on the west coast axes of a size too diminutive for actual use are -employed as a real currency. As the day came when the Chinese finally -replaced the archaic knife by the full developed copper coin called the -cash, so the Aeginetans and Argives of the days of Pheidon superseded by -a real coin ancient monetary-units consisting either of real implements -of iron and copper, or bars of those metals of certain definite -dimensions, or possibly mere Lilliputian representatives of such, which -had previously served them as a true currency. On the whole however -it is safest to assume from the names _nail_ (_Obol_) and _Handful_ -(drachme) that the form in which copper or iron served as currency in -Peloponnesus and the mainland of Hellas in general was that of rods of -a certain length and thickness. We have cited already many analogous -forms from modern Asia and Africa, and from the ancient Kelts, to which -we shall presently add the ancient Italians. But just as we found that -in the Soudan, whilst the slave and ox were universally the higher units -of value, each particular district had its own distinctive lower unit -according to the nature of its products and requirements, so it is most -likely that there were many different units of value (but all alike -sub-multiples of the cow) in use among the various Greek communities. It -is also probable that they must have exercised a certain effect in the -formation of the units of silver currency. Nor is evidence wanting for -this. I have already maintained (p. 5) that the fact of the occurrence -of the type of the cow, or cow’s head, on early Greek coins is evidence -that the original monetary unit was the ox. Thus we find the forepart of -an ox on the early electrum staters of Samos of the Phoenician standard -(217 grs.), which was probably equivalent to a pure gold ox-unit of -130 grs. The bull’s head also appears on the electrum coins of Eretria -and of other places in Euboea. But it is with the silver currency that -we are now especially concerned. Whilst it was extremely likely that -silver coins might in process of time bear the impress of an ox, the -general unit of currency, it was still more natural that, as pieces of -silver supplanted as units not the ox but its sub-multiples, that is -the particular series of articles of barter in use in any particular -district, so these silver coins should bear some traces in their types -of the ancient units thus supplanted. That eminent scholar Colonel -Leake many years ago remarked that the types of Greek coins generally -related “to the local mythology and fortunes of the place, with _symbols -referring to the principal productions_ or to the protecting numina.” - -[Illustration: FIG. 31. Coin of Cyrene with Silphium plant.] - -Modern scholars have more and more lost sight of the doctrine contained -in the words which I have italicized, and directed all their efforts to -giving a religious signification to everything[374]. The forepart of the -Lion and the Bull on the coins of Lydia become symbols of the Sun and -Moon, the Tortoise on the didrachm of Aegina is regarded as a symbol of -Aphrodite, the Ashtaroth of the Phoenicians, in her capacity of patron -divinity of traders; even the silphium plant of Cyrene, which yielded a -salubrious but somewhat unpleasant medicine, is regarded not as holding -its place on the coins of Cyrene and its sister towns because it formed -the chief staple of trade, but because forsooth it may have been the -symbol of Aristaeus, “the protector of the corn-field and the vine and -all growing crops, and bees and flocks and shepherds, and the averter -of the scorching blasts of the Sahara.” There is probably just as much -evidence for this as there is for believing that the beaver on some -Canadian coins and stamps is symbolical of St Lawrence, after whom the -great Canadian river is named, the warm skin of the beaver indicating -that the saint of the red-hot gridiron is the averter of the cruel and -biting blasts that sweep down from the icy North. I do not for a moment -mean that mythological and religious subjects do not play their proper -part in Greek coin types. But it is just as wrong to reduce all coin -types to this category as it would be to regard them all as merely -symbolic of the natural and manufactured products of the various states. -If however we can show that certain coins, even in historical times, -were regarded as the representations of the objects of barter of more -primitive times, we shall have established a firm basis from which to -make further advances. - -In those now famous Cretan inscriptions found at Gortyn[375] certain -sums are counted by kettles (_lebetes_, λέβητες) and pots (_tripods_, -τρίποδες). Some have thought that these are the same objects which are -called staters in later forms of the same documents. But recently M. -Svoronos[376] has advanced a very plausible hypothesis that the _lebetes_ -and _tripods_ of the inscriptions really refer not to an actual currency -in the kettles and pots of the old Homeric times, but to certain Cretan -coins which are countermarked with a stamp, which he recognizes in many -examples as a _lebes_, and in at least one case as a _tripod_. Whether -the first hypothesis, that actual kettles and pots were indicated in -the earlier inscriptions and that they had been replaced afterwards by -coins, or the hypothesis of M. Svoronos, be true, is immaterial for us. -In either case there is evidence of a direct and unbroken succession -which connects the silver currency of Crete with an earlier currency of -manufactured articles. The very fact that a lebes or a tripod stamped -upon a coin gave it currency, not merely in the town of issue but among -neighbouring states, indicates that in a previous age the common unit of -currency corresponding in value to the coin so marked was an actual lebes -or tripod. Such is the evidence preserved for us in this remote corner of -Hellas where life moved slowly, and where the archaic style of writing -known as _boustrophedon_ (the lines going from right to left and left -to right alternately, as the plough turns up and down the field) still -lingered on long after it had disappeared from every spot on the mainland -of Greece. If then amongst the symbols which appear on the earliest -coins of Greek communities, which began very early to strike money, we -can find some which have not been identified as religious, and which we -can show represent objects which actually did or may well have formed a -monetary unit in such places, we shall have advanced a step further; and -if we succeed in making good this fresh position, we may in turn find a -nonreligious explanation for certain types, which at present are regarded -as mythological symbols. - -The types with which we shall deal must be those found on the most -archaic coins, and which therefore date from a time when barter was just -being replaced by a monetary currency. Thus in the case of cities like -Athens and Corinth, which began to coin at a comparatively late period -and which had been long accustomed to use the issues of other states -before they struck money of their own, we should hardly expect to find -any trace of the old local barter-unit in their coin types, as such a -unit had long since been replaced by the foreign coins. - -[Illustration: FIG. 32. Coin of Cyzicus with tunny fish.] - -Let us first turn to the well-known type of the tunny fish (πηλαμύς, -θύννος), vast shoals of which were continually passing through the sea -of Marmora (Propontis) from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean[377]. -This type appears invariably upon the electrum coins of Cyzicus, and -a tunny’s head is found upon some very archaic silver coins from the -Santorin ‘find’ which Mr Head places at the top of the whole Cyzicene -series, but no one has, as far as I am aware, yet hitherto attempted to -mythologize it[378], although the fecundity of this fish would make it -just as suitable an emblem for Aphrodite as the “lascivious turtle,” and -the traders of Cyzicus might quite as well wear the badge of the goddess -of the sea as the merchants of Aegina, for there is just as much or just -as little evidence for Phoenician influences at Cyzicus as there is at -Aegina. From what we have learned in an earlier chapter we know that the -articles which form the staple commodities of a community in the age of -barter virtually form its money. In a city like Cyzicus whose citizens -depended for their wealth on their fisheries and trade, rather than on -flocks or herds and agriculture, the tunny fish singly or in certain -defined numbers, as by the score or hundred and the like, would naturally -form a chief monetary unit, just as we found the stock fish employed in -mediaeval Iceland. Are we not then justified in considering the tunny -fish, which forms the invariable adjunct of the coins of Cyzicus, as an -indication that these coins superseded a primitive system in which the -tunny formed a monetary unit, just as the Kettle and Pot counter-marks -on the coins of Crete point back to the days when real kettles formed -the chief medium of exchange? But far stronger evidence is at hand to -show that the tunny fish was used as a monetary unit in some parts of -Hellas. We have had occasion to refer to the city of Olbia which lay on -the north shore of the Black Sea. It was a Milesian colony, and was the -chief Greek emporium in this region. There are bronze coins of this city -made in the shape of fishes, and inscribed ΘΥ, which has been identified -as the abbreviation θύννος, _tunny_. Others are inscribed ΑΡΙΧΟ, which -Koehler read as τάριχος, salt fish, but which the distinguished German -numismatist Von Sallet[379] regards as meaning a basket (ἄρριχος). He -holds those marked ΘΥ as the legal price of a tunny fish, those marked -ΑΡΙΧΟ as that of a basket of fish[380]. When we recall the Chinese -bronze cowries, the Burmese silver shells, the silver fish-hooks of the -Indian Ocean, the little hoes and knives of China, and the miniature -axes from Africa, we are constrained to believe that in those coins of -Olbia, shaped like a fish, we have a distinct proof of the influence on -the Greek mind of the same principle which has impelled other peoples -to imitate in metal the older object of barter which a metal currency -is replacing. The inhabitants of Olbia were largely intermixed with the -surrounding barbarians, and may therefore have felt some difficulty in -replacing their barter unit by a round piece of metal bearing merely -the imprint of a fish, while the pure-blooded Greek of Cyzicus had no -hesitation in mentally bridging the gulf between a real fish and a piece -of metal merely stamped with a fish, and did not require the intermediate -step of first shaping his metal unit into the form of a tunny. We shall -find that this tendency to shape metal into the form of the object which -it supplants may perhaps be traced in the coins of Aegina and Boeotia. - -[Illustration: FIG. 33. Coins of Olbia in the form of tunny fish.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 34. Coin of Tenedos with double-headed axe.] - -In the same quarter of Hellas we find another instance of a coin type -which may be regarded as evidence that the silver coin which bears it -was the representative of an older barter unit. The island of Tenedos, -lying off the Troad, struck at a very early date silver coins bearing for -device a double-headed axe (the Latin _bipennis_). This “Axe of Tenedos” -(Τενέδιος πέλεκυς) was explained by Aristotle[381] as a reference to a -decree of a king of Tenedos which enacted that all who were convicted -of adultery should be put to death. This explanation is probably a -bit of mere aetiology to explain the existence of an emblem, the true -origin of which had been forgotten. However, it yields one important -result, for it shows that the emblem was not religious. Had that been -its nature, priestly conservatism would have kept an unbroken tradition -of its origin. But from another source some light may be obtained: -Pausanias[382] in the 2nd century A.D. saw at Delphi axes dedicated -according to tradition by Periclytus of Tenedos, and then proceeds to -relate the following tale: Tennes, an old King of Tenedos about the time -of the Trojan War, cut with an axe the ropes with which his father Cycnus -had moored his ship to the shore, when he came to ask pardon of Tennes -for having cast him and his sister in a chest into the sea, in a fit -of anger caused by the false accusation of a stepmother. We may gather -that according to this form of the legend the Janiform head, male and -female, on the obverse of the coins of Tenedos alludes to the brother and -sister. But Pausanias makes no attempt to connect Periclytus in any way -with Tennes except as being a native of Tenedos. This is hardly enough -to account for the dedication of the axes at Delphi. Two explanations -suggest themselves. It was the custom of kings or communities to send -offerings to Delphi of the best products of their land. Thus Croesus sent -vast quantities of his Lydian electrum, and, still more to the point, -the people of Metapontum in South Italy, whose land was famous for its -wheat, after an especially favourable harvest sent to Delphi a wheat-ear -(υέρος) of gold. Were the double axes in like fashion an especial product -of Tenedos? Or was this dedication analogous to that of Pheidon when he -hung up in the temple of the Argive Here the ancient nails and bars? The -first explanation is the more probable, for there was no reason why the -Tenedians should not have dedicated their cast off currency of axes in -some temple at home. I have already mentioned the hoe currency of ancient -China, and the axes used as such in Africa. I shall now show that such -double-axes as those stamped on the coins of Tenedos formed part of the -earliest Greek system of currency. I have already enumerated the various -articles used in barter in the Homeric poems. The prizes offered in the -Funeral games of Patroclus are of course merely the usual objects of -barter and currency, slavewomen, oxen, lebetes, tripods, talents of gold -and the like. “But he (Achilles) set for the archers dark iron, and he -set down ten axes (πελέκεας), and ten half-axes (ἡμιπέλεκκα)[383].” The -axe is undoubtedly of the same kind as that on the coins of Tenedos, -the name (_pelekys_) being the same in each case, and the Homeric one -beyond doubt is double-headed like the Tenedian, since the half-axe -(_hemi-pelekkon_) must obviously mean a single-headed axe[384]. The -double-axes formed the first prize, the ten half-axes the second, for -“Meriones took up all the ten axes, and Teucer bore the ten half-axes -to the hollow ships[385].” These axes and half-axes then seem to go in -groups of ten as units of value, the half-axes representing half the -value of the double-headed. If then the kettle and tripod of Homeric -times are found as symbols on the coins of Crete, why may not the axe on -those of Tenedos represent the local unit of an earlier epoch? and that -such axes were evidently an important article in Tenedos is proved by the -dedication at Delphi. - -[Illustration: FIG. 35. Coin of Phanes (earliest known inscribed coin).] - -[Illustration: FIG. 36. Archaic coin of Samos.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 37. Coin of Cnidus.] - -But could we only find a contemporary description of the type on one of -the earliest coins of Asia Minor, the cradle of the art of coining, we -might get our ideas on the nature of the coin types greatly cleared. -Fortunately such an opportunity is afforded to us by an unique coin in -the British Museum, the oldest as yet known which bears an inscription. -It is an oblong electrum coin (Fig. 35), the reverse having the usual -incuse, but on its obverse it bears a stag feeding, and over it runs -(retrograde) in archaic letters I AM THE MARK OF PHANES (Φανος εμι σεμα -= Φάνους εἰμὶ σῆμα). There can be no doubt that the _mark_ of Phanes -is the stag. If there was no inscription it would have been at once -asserted that the stag was the symbol of the goddess Artemis, and who -could deny it? But as it stands it is plain that the stag is nothing -more than the particular badge adopted by the potentate Phanes, when and -where he may have reigned, as a guarantee of the weight of the coin and -perhaps the purity of the metal. The Daric itself needs no inscription -to tell us that its type is not religious. The figure of the Great -King with his spear and bow and quiver can hardly be allegorized even -by an Origen[386]. Emboldened by these instances we may even hold up -our hands against the host of Heaven, and raise doubts as to whether -the foreparts of the lion and bull upon the coins of Lydia represent -the Sun-god and the Moon-goddess. May not the lion simply be the royal -emblem? I have already suggested this explanation for the lion weights of -Assyria. Undoubtedly from the earliest times the king of beasts (as in -_Aesop’s Fables_) was regarded in the East as the true badge of royalty. -“The Lion of the tribe of Judah” is familiar to us all, and it is more -rational to regard the lions which guarded the steps of Solomon’s throne -as emblems of kingship rather than as symbols of the Sun. Is then the -Lion on the coins of Lydia nothing more than the kings badge, just as -the stag is the badge of Phanes? But what about the bull or cow? Shall -I go too far if I regard it as indicating that the coin is the ox-unit? -When the Greeks borrowed the art of coining from Lydia it is easy to -understand that they would likewise borrow the type either in a complete -or modified form, and hence it is that we find the lion or lion’s head -on the coins of Miletus[387], the lion’s scalp on those of Samos (on -which the cow’s head also is found), the lion’s head on the coins of -Cnidus, of Gortyn in Crete, at Rhodes, at Miletus, and at the Phocaean -towns of Velia in Lucania, and Massalia in Gaul, and put by the Samian -exiles on their coins at Zancle. If the Greeks had been barbarians they -would have slavishly copied the lion coins of Lydia, just as the Gauls -copied the lion of Massalia, and at a later time the stater of Philip, -and as the Himyarites of South Arabia, the “owls” of Athens[388], and -as in mediaeval times the Danes of Dublin copied the coins of the Saxon -kings[389]. But the artistic genius of the Greeks could submit to no such -trammels, and the lion type was varied and diversified according to the -fancy of each community. The same holds good of the type of the cow and -cow’s head. The Greek genius gave us these beautiful types such as the -cow suckling her calf (Dyrrachium), the cow with the bird on her back -(Eretria), the cow scratching herself (Eretria), the two calves’ heads -seen on the coins of Mytilene, and the magnificent charging bull on the -coins of Thurii. The cow or bull’s head on the early gold and electrum -coins was the indication of the value. In later times when the connection -between ox and coin was only traditional, the ox was put on coins simply -as symbolical of money. - -[Illustration: FIG. 38. Coin of Thurii.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 39. Coin of Rhoda in Spain.] - -Again Phocaea, one of the very earliest Greek towns to issue coins, -employed a symbol which cannot be termed religious. Her coins bear a -seal (_phoca_) a _type parlant_ referring to the name of the town. Many -examples of the same kind can be quoted, the rose (ῥόδον) on the coins of -Rhodes (Ῥόδος) and also on those of Rhoda in Spain, the bee (_melitta_) -on those of Melitaea, perhaps even the owl (χαλκίς) on coins ascribed to -Chalcis in Euboea. These considerations will serve to show that we may -expect many things on coins besides religious symbols. Thasos was famous -for its wine, and accordingly the wine-cup is a regular adjunct of its -coins, either standing alone, or held in the hands of old Silenus, who -quaffs therefrom a “draught of vintage that hath been cooled a long age -in the deep-delved earth.” All who have read Horace remember the fame of -the wines of Chios, and accordingly the wine-jar is a regular adjunct of -the mintage of that island. Now there is proof that the trade in wine -was of extreme antiquity, if not in the islands just mentioned, at least -in Lemnos, and that that trade was carried on by barter, for we read in -Homer how “many ships stood in from Lemnos bringing wine, which Euneos -the son of Jason had sent forward, whom Hypsipyle had borne to Jason -shepherd of the folk, but separately for the sons of Atreus, Agamemnon -and Menelaus, the son of Jason gave wine to be fetched, a thousand -measures. From thence used the flowing-haired Achaeans to buy their wine, -some with copper, some with glittering iron, some with hides, others with -the kine themselves, others again with slaves[390].” From what we have -seen in an earlier chapter it is clear that a measure of wine would have -a known value in relation to the various articles here enumerated. Thus -in North America where the beaver skin was the unit, a gallon of brandy = -6 skins, a brass kettle = 1 skin, an ounce of vermilion = 1 skin and so -on[391]. In other words, the ordinary currency with which the Lemnians -would purchase wares from other people who had no wine of their own would -be wine, the unit of which was the _measure_ (which elsewhere I have -tried to show was the cup δέπας, Smith’s _Dict. Antiq._ _s.v._ Mensura). -This measure would be the size of the vessel ordinarily employed for -wine, probably much the same as the two-handled vase out of which Silenus -is seen drinking on coins of Thasos. - -With the introduction of silver currency nothing is more likely than that -an effort would be made to equate the new silver unit to that which -had formed the principal unit of barter. That the earliest types should -indicate the object (or its value) which the coin replaced is in complete -accord with the statement of Aristotle (quoted on an earlier page) that -“the stamp was put on the coin as an indication of value[392].” As no -numerals appear on the early Greek coins, it is evident that Aristotle -regarded the symbol, whether ox-head, or tunny, or shield, as the index -of the value. If it be said that the putting of a cow, or axe, or tunny -on a coin was simply a picturesque way of indicating a single unit, -we may reply that it is far easier to understand why a certain people -chose a particular symbol, if in their minds the object symbolized was -identified with the value of the silver or gold coin. It is at all -events certain that Aristotle did not regard the type as religious in -origin. But we are not without actual evidence that such an equating of -the silver unit to the barter-unit really took place in Greece. It is -held by the best numismatists that Solon was the first to coin money at -Athens. It is also well known that the highest class in his constitution, -called Pentacosiomedimni (_Five-hundred-measure-men_), were rated at 500 -drachms. Thus the Olympic victor received 500 drachms to qualify him to -be a Five-hundred-measure-man[393]. Furthermore Plutarch distinctly tells -us that Solon reckoned a drachm as equivalent to a measure[394] or a -sheep. It is hardly possible to doubt that the first Attic coined silver -drachm was equated to the old barter unit of a measure (either of corn or -oil). The same may be said in reference to the olive sprig which from the -earliest issue is found on the coins of Athens. The sacred olive-trees -(μορίαι) which belonged to the state, and for the care of which special -officials were appointed, and even the very stumps of which, and the -spot on which they had grown, were under a taboo[395], were a source -of considerable revenue to the state in the 6th century B.C. The fact -that they were all supposed to be scions of the sacred olive-tree on the -Acropolis, which was itself supposed to be the gift of Athena, and the -religious care bestowed on them, puts it beyond doubt that the olive -at an early date formed one of the most important products of Attica. -The instances given already of the employment of various kinds of food -as money are sufficient to show that there is nothing far-fetched in -supposing that olives and olive-oil may have been so employed at Athens. - -[Illustration: FIG. 40. Tetradrachm of Athens.] - -We have already spoken of the silphium or laserpitium plant on the -coins of Cyrene, Barca, Euesperides and Teuchira, and mentioned the -interpretation which makes it the symbol of the hero Aristaeus. It seems -however far more reasonable to treat it on the same principle as the -others just discussed. The silphium formed the most important article -produced in that region, and it is perfectly in accordance with all -analogy that certain quantities of this plant and of the juice extracted -from it should be employed as money. We saw above that at the present -moment tea is so employed on the borders of Tibet and China, and raw -cotton in Darfur. But there is also some positive evidence in favour of -this assumption, for Strabo[396] tells us that a traffic was carried -on at the port of Charax between the Carthaginians and Cyrenaeans, the -former bringing wine wherewith to purchase the silphium of the latter. -There must have been a wine-unit, and also an unit for the silphium, -or otherwise the barter could not have been carried on; and just as in -Gaul[397] a jar of wine purchased a boy fit to serve as a cupbearer, -a certain measure of wine being equated to a slave-boy, so we may -conclude that some such wine-unit was equated to a packet or bale of -silphium, the latter in turn having a certain amount of silver equated -to it, which when coinage was introduced was stamped with the silphium -device. That the silphium was packed in bales of a fixed weight is -proved by a now famous vase-painting which represents the weighing (on -ship board?) of the bales of silphium in the presence of Arcesilas the -king of Cyrene[398]. The figure who points to the scales is marked -_silphiomachos_ (σλιφιομαχος) which is taken to mean _silphium-weigher_ -(σλιφιο- being either a mis-spelling of the artist, or the local form of -the word, whilst the latter part is connected with the Egyptian _mach_ = -to _weigh_). Close to the silphium packets is the word ΜΑΕΝ, which has -not been explained, but which may be simply a form of the word _mina_ -(_manah_, _meneh_) and denotes that each packet weighed that amount. - -[Illustration: FIG. 41. Vase from Cyrene, shewing the weighing of the -Silphium.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 42. Coin of Metapontum.] - -The ear of corn (wheat) on the coins of Metapontum[399], an old Achaean -colony in Magna Graecia, is explained by modern writers as a symbol of -Demeter: but the story told by Strabo of how the early settlers dedicated -a golden ear at Delphi because they had amassed such great wealth from -agriculture, indicates a far simpler solution, that the chief product and -chief article of barter of Metapontum was naturally placed on her coins. -As the tunny adorns the coins of Cyzicus, so we find the cuttle-fish -on the coins of Croton and Eretria. As this creature was devoured with -great gusto by the ancients, as it is at the present day at Naples and in -Palestine, there is no necessity to regard it as a symbol of Poseidon, -or of treating it in any way different from the tunny. - -[Illustration: FIG. 43. Coin of Croton with cuttle fish.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 44. ‘Tortoise’ of Aegina.] - -I now come to two most important types, the Tortoise of Aegina, and the -Shield of Boeotia. I have already mentioned the symbolic interpretation -given by E. Curtius to the former. That various natural productions, -such as gourds, cocoa-nuts, joints of bamboo, served and still serve -as vessels and measures of capacity in various countries we have seen -already, and we likewise found that in the ancient Chinese monetary -system of shells the shell of the tortoise stood at the top as the unit -of highest value, and that down to a comparatively late epoch it was -still highly prized in Cochin China for making bowls of great beauty. -In both Greek and Latin there is abundant evidence to show that the -functions which in a later time were performed by pottery were discharged -by natural shells at an earlier period. Thus, if we do not find any -actual vessel called a _chelône_ (tortoise) in use amongst the Greeks, -we at least find one called a Sea-urchin (Echinus, ἐχῖνος): for not only -was the shell of this creature used as a vessel for containing medicines -and the like, but vessels of artificial construction of the same shape -and name were actually employed; thus the casket in which were deposited -and sealed up the documents produced at the preliminary hearing of an -Athenian lawsuit was called an _Echinus_. There was likewise a small -vessel called _conché_ (κόγχη), after the shell-fish of that name, the -Latin _concha_, whilst a cognate name, _conchylion_, was applied to the -case placed over the seals of wills. - -Nay, _ostrakon_, the common word for a potsherd, familiar to us from its -famous derivative Ostracism, or _Voting by Potsherds_, so called because -the people inscribed their votes on pieces of pottery, meant originally -nothing more than an oyster shell. In Latin _testa_, the ordinary -name for an earthenware vessel, means nothing more than the covering -of a shell-fish, and from this word _testudo_, the Latin name for the -tortoise, is simply a derivative. Such instances could be multiplied if -it were necessary, but those mentioned are sufficient to show the high -probability of so valuable a shell as that of the tortoise having been -employed. Owing to its beauty it would probably hold its place in Greece -as the choicest kind of vessel for centuries after the art of pottery -was known, just as it did in Cochin China. It would be only when the art -of glazing and embellishing pottery had made some progress that vessels -of baked clay could compete with the lustrous, many-hued shell. Nor are -we without some direct evidence for the use of tortoise shell among the -Greeks. The famous story of the invention of the lyre by the god Hermes -is not without significance. According to the Hymn to Hermes, “the -precocious divinity on the very day of his birth sallied forth and found -a tortoise feeding on the luxuriant grass in front of the palace, as it -moved with straddling gait.” His eye was caught by the dappled shell -(αἰόλον ὄστρακον), and carrying home his spoil, he made of it a lyre. -The legend which thus explains why the sounding-board of the lyre is so -called points back to a time when the best form of bowl or hollow vessel -for making a sounding board for a musical instrument was that afforded by -the shell which was probably one of the common articles of everyday life. - -But, in addition to all this indirect evidence, we are able to point to -actual Greek vessels made of earthenware, fashioned in the shape of a -tortoise. In the second Vase Room of the British Museum (case 48 and 49) -there are two terra cotta vases from the island of Melos, wrought in the -shape of this creature, and with these before us it is hardly possible -to regard as other than wooden bowls carved in the shape of the same -animal _the wooden tortoises_ with which the Thessalian women pounded to -death Lais the famous courtezan, in the temple of Aphrodite, after she -had taken up her residence in their country[400]. We can parallel this -development of artificial vessels of wood and earthenware from the use -of the actual shell in modern times. Lady Brassey saw in the Museum at -Honolulu, amongst the ancient native weapons and swords, “tortoise-shell -cups and spoons, calabashes and bowls[401].” Now in the Cambridge -Ethnological Museum there is a very fine wooden bowl from the South -Seas, carved in the shape of a tortoise, and also earthenware vessels in -the shape of tortoises from Fiji, which shows that the islanders of the -Pacific not only used the real shells for vessels, but likewise imitated -them in wood[402]. - -On an earlier page I quoted the statement of Ephorus that the Aeginetans -took to commerce on account of the barrenness of their island. But they -must have had something to give in exchange to other people before they -could have developed a carrying trade, and as the island had been the -resort of merchants from very early days, it must have had something to -attract strangers as well as its position. Let us take the case of an -island with barren soil in modern days, and see what it has to export. -Thus Dhalac Island in the Red Sea is frequented by the Banyan merchants -for the sake of its pearls, and at Massowah tortoise-shell forms an -important article of commerce. Just as the Banyans come to Dhalac[403], -so the Phoenicians probably came to Aegina, searching for the murex -(purple fish) and tortoise. No doubt tortoise-shell must have been the -chief article of export from Tortoise Island, described by Strabo (773), -as situated in the Arabian Gulf (Red Sea). - -The foregoing considerations make it not at all improbable that the -tortoise on the coins of Aegina simply indicates that the old monetary -unit of that island was the shell of the sea-tortoise (ἡ θαλαττία -χελώνη), which was considerably larger, and therefore more valuable for -making bowls, than that of the land or “mountain” tortoise (ἡ ὀρεινὴ -χελώνη). There was a well-known headland on the Coast of Peloponnesus -called “Tortoise Head” (Chelonates), and this creature must have been -a peculiar feature of the shores of Aegina, or it would not have been -chosen as the type for her coins, whether it be a religious symbol or -not. At all events we know from the story of Sciron the robber, slain -by Theseus, that the sea-tortoise was a familiar feature on the shores -of the Saronic Gulf, as the hapless travellers who were kicked over -the rocks by the caitiff were devoured by a large sea-tortoise which -frequented the strand below. This creature’s picture is handed down on -a well-known vase-painting which commemorates the exploits of Theseus. -Finally, it may well be supposed that had not its connection with the -invention of the lyre attracted to that instrument the name of “Tortoise” -both in Greek and Latin, we should have found the name employed for some -sort of vessel, as is the case with the Echinus. - -[Illustration: FIG. 45. Coin of Boeotia with shield.] - -Coming now to Central Greece, we find on the coins of all the Boeotian -towns (with the exception of Orchomenus in her earliest issues) the -well-known device of the Boeotian shield. This has been confidently -pronounced to be a sacred emblem, symbolic of a common worship, -conjectured to be that of Athena Itonia, whose temple near Coronea was -the meeting-place of the Boeotians[404], whilst at Coronea golden -shields were preserved in the Acropolis[405]. This may be so, but it is -equally possible that the shield represented a common monetary unit in -ancient times. The shield of early Hellas was a simple ox-hide buckler, -described in Homeric language simply as an _ox-hide_[406]. Amongst -barbarous peoples, as we saw above, weapons form one of the regular -commodities commonly employed as currency; the Achaeans bought wine with -hides as well as with oxen from the ships that came from Lemnos, and -as there can be no doubt that the hide was a regular sub-multiple of -the cow, it is very probable that the ox-hide shield stood in a similar -relation to the cow, the chief or most universal unit; and as we find -axes and half-axes among the prizes offered by Achilles as well as -kettles and caldrons, so we learn from a famous passage[407] that shields -were amongst the most usual articles offered as prizes and therefore -were regular units of currency: “For they strove neither for an ox to be -sacrificed nor yet for an ox-hide shield which are wont to be the prizes -for the feet of men, but they strove for the life of the horse-taming -Hector.” - -[Illustration: FIG. 46. Coin of Lycia.] - -When silver money was struck, it was natural that the barter-unit which -came nearest in value to the silver didrachm would be equated to it, and -the piece of silver would accordingly be termed _Shield_ or _Tortoise_, -just as the silver equivalent for the old copper rod was called the Obol, -and in due course the corresponding device would be impressed on the -silver coinage. The same explanation may probably be applied in other -cases, such as that of the boar on the coins of Lycia. On the coins of -the Gaulish tribe Sequani who made the best bacon and hams which came -into the Roman market, the swine is found[408]. Doubtless this animal was -their chief source of wealth, and formed a unit of barter, but we have -not space for any more examples. - -It is worth noting that it is quite possible that the men who issued -the earliest coins of Boeotia and Aegina were influenced in the shape -they gave these coins by the actual objects which they were replacing. -The coins of Aegina with their high round upper side and flat under -side suggest the general outline of a tortoise. As the people of -Olbia, like the Chinese, Burmese and Ceylonese, had to make coins in -the shape of a fish, so the Aeginetans acting under a like instinct -may have wished to give a conventional representation of the tortoise. -The earliest coins have the incuse on the reverse divided into _eight_ -triangular compartments. Are these the _eight_ plates which form -invariably the _plastron_ or under surface of all the tortoise family? -Later on the Aeginetan incuse is always in five compartments, but in -the two well-known triangular depressions we perhaps find an echo of -the tortoise-_plastron_[409]. The earliest coins seem to represent a -sea-tortoise, for the feet are real _flippers_ quite distinct in shape -from the legs shown on the later coins. As the plates of the _carapace_ -(upper surface) are not fully represented in the archaic coins, this -omission may not be merely due to rudeness of work, but rather because in -the case of the sea-tortoise the _thirteen_ plates of the _carapace_ are -not so prominent as in the land-tortoise. On the later coins where the -feet are those of the land-tortoise the coins accurately represent the -_thirteen_ plates. - -It has to be borne in mind that the shape of the incuse depressions on -the reverse of coins is very constant. Thus on the Aeginetan coins we -never find what is known as the mill-sail incuse which is the peculiar -feature of the reverse of the early Boeotian coins, nor on the other -hand do we even find the eight-fold incuse on the coins of Boeotia. Some -influences must have determined the choice of form, such as I have just -suggested in the case of Aegina. Did the first Boeotian Mintmaster shape -his coins with the real buckler in his mind’s eye? On the reverse of -these coins we find the incuse forming a rude X, which is bounded by a -circle of dots, whilst in the centre of the incuse is the initial letter -of the name of the issuing town, such as 𐌈 for Thebes, 𐌇 for Haliartus. -Does the X-shaped incuse represent conventionally the cross-bars of the -frame of the shield seen at the back, the circle dots indicating the -outline? The letters on these coins are the earliest inscriptions on the -coins of Greece Proper. We can easily see how they came to be placed on -the coins, as soon as we remember that there was a Λ on the Lacedaemonian -shields, a Σ on the Sicyonian, a Μ on the Messenian[410]. Why do not -we find the initial in the coins placed on the front of the shield, -where it must have stood on the real buckler? If as is held by the best -authorities the coins of Boeotia formed a federal currency, we see a -reason for the practice. As the silver shield replaced the real buckler, -the old unit which had been universally employed through Boeotia, no -town would have been permitted to put its initial on the shield engraved -on the obverse. No doubt the old actual shield of currency was plain, -and each purchaser painted the initial of his own country upon it. The -Mintmasters accordingly of each town regarding the whole coin as a shield -placed the letter of these several states on the reverse. Baumeister -(_Denkmäler_, _s.v._ Wappen) gives pictures of the back of two shields. -The frame of the shield consists of a circular rod, with two cross bars. -The idea of making the incuse represent the other side of the object -given in relief on the obverse seems to be just the stage between a -complete representation of the object as in the tunny of Olbia, and that -evinced by the early coins of Magna Graecia, on which the reverse gives -in the incuse exactly the same form as that in relief on the obverse. - -At first sight the result of this great variety of local units apparently -places impassable barriers to trade, but a knowledge of the actual facts -of barbarous communities and their monetary systems as they exist in our -time easily dispels this impression. I quoted above (p. 46) the words of -Mohammed Ibn-Omar, wherein he points out that every separate district -in the Soudan has its own lower unit or units, whilst everywhere alike -the ox and the slave are the higher units; these local units are equated -one to the other, so that there is no difficulty in trading. The same -holds true of ancient Greece; the tortoise-shell of Aegina may have been -reckoned equal to a certain amount of Attic olive oil or to a jar of -wine of certain size, which formed the unit of commerce at Thasos and -Chios, whilst in its turn a jar of wine was reckoned as equivalent to -a package of silphion from Cyrene, a kettle from Crete, or an axe, or -certain number of axes, or half-axes from Tenedos, or an ox-hide shield -from Boeotia. All were sub-multiples of the ox, and had a fixed value -in gold, and later in silver, as weighed against grains of corn. This -supposition is in complete accord with the system revealed to us in the -Homeric Poems, and is confirmed by the evidence drawn from barbarous -races in modern times. It is likewise to be borne in mind that the -tendency to place religious and mythological types on Greek coins was -one especially developed in the later but not in the earliest period of -coinage. No doubt aesthetic considerations played a large part in the -adoption of such types, which came especially into prominence when Greek -art was at its height. On the early coins one simple type is the rule, -whilst at a later stage, besides the old national type, many adjuncts and -symbols are added. Contrast the early coins of Athens with the later. -The archaic issues have an olive spray and an owl, the later have not -merely the owl, but an amphora, and a symbol in the field alluding to the -legend of Triptolemus. Again, at Argos the early coins have simply the -wolf or half-wolf or wolf’s head, with a large A on the reverse, but in -the later times the A is accompanied by symbols, such as a crescent and -letters. The hare appears on the coins of Rhegium and Messana, having -been chosen as a type, according to Aristotle, by the tyrant Anaxilas in -commemoration of the introduction of that animal by him into Sicily; but -it also appears on a rare coin of Messana, not as a main type, but as -caressed by Pan. This does not prove that the hare was a symbol of Pan, -but that for artistic purposes the rustic god in the act of caressing -the hare is chosen instead of the more commonplace type of the hare all -alone. So at Thasos the coins with old Silenus quaffing from a wine-cup -do not signify that Silenus was a principal object of worship, but he -is simply added for picturesque effect. We can at all events draw one -conclusion from the historical origin assigned to both this type and -that of the axe of Tenedos, that in the middle of the 4th cent. B.C. the -Greeks did not see any religious significance in them, any more than -they did in the representation of the mule-car which had won at Olympia, -placed on his coins by Anaxilas. If, as has been so emphatically laid -down by the leading modern Greek numismatists, the types on Greek coins -are so essentially religious in origin, it is extremely difficult to -explain the extraordinary rapidity with which all such notions as regards -their origin must have vanished from the minds of the most learned of -the Greeks, at so early a date as the 4th cent. B.C. (hardly more than -two centuries after the introduction of the art of coining). The Greeks -regarded those types from much the same point of view as we regard St -George and the Dragon on sovereigns and crowns, or the Lady Godiva -riding _in puris naturalibus_ on the Coventry tokens. The effort to -turn agonistic into religious types by contending that, as the Olympic -festival was of religious origin, so the successful chariot which had -won at Olympia was a sacred symbol, can only be regarded as an ingenious -effort to attach by even the most slender thread a simple commemorative -type to a religious origin. - -[Illustration: FIG. 47. Coin of Messana.] - -There is not the slightest reason for treating with incredulity the -statement that Anaxilas introduced the hare into Sicily. Pollux[411] -tells us that there were no hares in Ithaca, and from the same source -we learn that the islanders of Carpathus, wishing to add the animal to -the products of their isle, introduced a single pair, the descendants of -which became in a short time so numerous that they ruined the crops, a -story which finds a singular parallel in the history of the introduction -of the rabbit into Australia in our own days. The hare was to the old -Greek sportsman (as we know from the Tracts on Hunting of Xenophon and -Arrian) what the stag was to the mediaeval baron, and the fox to the -modern English squire. If William the Conqueror, as says the chronicler, -“loved the tall deer as though he were their father,” the tyrant -Anaxilas may well have prided himself upon the introduction of the hare -into Sicily in much the same manner as modern sportsmen have brought -the French partridge into England. When once the type was started, the -dislike of any change in coin types is so strong that we need not be -surprised at the hare appearing for a long period on the coins of Messana -and Rhegium. Besides, the hare was considered by the Greek gourmet as the -choicest of viands: all readers of Aristophanes are familiar with “jugged -hare” as a proverbial expression for “the best of cheer.” - - -_Variation of Silver Standards._ - -The connection between the types on early silver coins of Greece and the -earlier local units of value being probably such as I have indicated, -we next approach the question of changes in the weight of the silver -coins at various places and at various times. Besides the ordinary -Euboic and Aeginetic standards we find others such as the Rhodian, and -the Ptolemaic, the former so named because the island of Rhodes from the -beginning of the 4th century B.C. ceased to strike tetradrachms of the -full Attic weight of 270 grs. and coined instead pieces which range in -weight from 240 to 230 grs., the latter getting its name from the dynasty -of the Lagidae, who quickly dropped the full weight of the tetradrachm -(270 grs.) as struck by Alexander, and reverted to the Phoenician silver -of 220 grs., which they used not only for silver, but also for gold; it -is to this last fact that the name Ptolemaic as given to the standard -is really due, for as a standard for gold it was certainly new. But -not merely shall we find coins standing so far apart from the usual -standards that we are obliged to give them distinctive appellations, -but we likewise find various modifications of the Aeginetic in various -places, whilst in some parts of northern Greece and Thrace we shall find -the so-called Phoenician and Babylonian standards in occupation. It is -hardly possible that mere degradation of weight will account for all the -phenomena; accordingly the object of this section will be to show that -from first to last _the Greek communities were engaged in an endless -quest after bimetallism_: we shall find, as we have already indicated, -that whilst the gold unit never varies in any part of Hellas until a -late epoch, the silver coins exhibit differences not merely between one -district and another, but even between one period and another in the -self-same city or state. There is incontrovertible evidence to prove -that the same trouble was caused by the fluctuation in the relative -value of gold and silver as arises in modern times. Xenophon[412] in his -treatise _De Vectigalibus_ (speaking of the benefit likely to accrue -to the state if the silver mines of Laurium were better worked) makes -the most interesting remark that “if any one were to allege that gold -too is not less useful than silver, that I do not deny, yet this I know -that gold, whenever it turns up in quantity, becomes on the one hand -cheaper itself, and on the other makes silver dearer.” This passage -alone is sufficient to show how sensitive was the old Greek money market -in the beginning of the 4th century B.C., and this statement is amply -substantiated on Italian soil by a passage quoted by Strabo[413] from -Polybius, from which we learn that after the discovery of a rich gold -mine in the land of the Taurisci of Noricum, within the space of two -months “gold went down one third in value throughout all Italy.” Such -being the effect of a discovery of gold, it is evident that either the -silver currency must undergo certain modifications in order that a -definite round number of silver units may be equal to the gold unit, or -on the other hand the gold unit must undergo modification. But as we have -shown that the gold unit remained unaltered throughout all Hellas, Asia -and Egypt down to the time of the Ptolemies, it follows that whatever -changes were necessary must have taken place in the _silver_ standards. -Of this we have proof in the case of Rhodes itself. Down to 408 B.C. -the three ancient cities of Ialysus, Camirus and Lindus issued each a -separate series of coins, Camirus on the Aeginetic standard, the other -two on the Phoenician. In 408 B.C. all these united in founding the new -city of Rhodes, and henceforward there is a single coinage. At first -the Attic standard seems to have been employed for silver, as rare -tetradrachms of 260 grs. are found, but it must have very soon given -place to the so-called Rhodian, the tetradrachm of which ranges from 240 -to 230 grs. About the same time (400 B.C.) the Rhodians began to issue -gold staters of the so-called Euboic standard, and for a century this -double issue of gold and silver continued unbroken. It is plain, from the -case of this famous island, that it is only the silver standards which -changed. There can be no doubt that the unit by which gold in bullion -was reckoned before that metal was coined was the so-called Euboic -or ox-unit, but during the archaic period we find both the so-called -Phoenician (220 grs.) and Aeginetic (drachms of 92 grs.) being employed -for silver in the island, whilst after 408 B.C. gold is issued on the -ox-unit, but silver, although at first on this standard, immediately -changes to the Rhodian of 240 grs. Evidently then the fixed element is -the gold, the fluctuating the silver. The coinage of Rhodes likewise -exemplifies the doctrine already indicated, that the employment of -religious and mythological symbols seems to mark not the earlier but -rather the later stages of Greek coining. Thus Camirus employed the -fig-leaf, Ialysus half a winged boar, and Lindus the lions head with -open jaws, but after 408 Helios the Sun-god, from whom all Rhodians -alike claimed descent, and to whom the island was sacred[414], becomes -the regular type, with the _type parlant_ of the Rose (_Rhodon_) on the -reverse. - -Next let us take the money of Macedonia, where there was an abundant -coinage of both gold and silver. The Pelasgian tribe of Bisaltae, and -the Thracian Edonians and Odomanti, had during the half century which -preceded the Persian wars all struck silver on the so-called Phoenician -standard. It is commonly supposed that they obtained this standard from -the important town of Abdera, which at the same period employed a like -standard, and it is suggested that Abdera had borrowed it from her mother -Teos, who had borrowed it from Miletus and the other great towns of the -Ionian seaboard, among which it was especially employed for electrum. -But unfortunately, whilst the types of Teos and Abdera are the same -(a seated Griffin), the staters of Teos weigh only 186 grs., which is -the Aeginetic, not the Phoenician (220 grs.) standard. Shortly after -the overthrow of the Persian host Alexander I. of Macedon acquired the -land of the Bisaltae along with the rich silver mines, which were said -to produce for him a talent daily, and he adopted both the types and -standard of the Bisaltian silver coinage, only substituting his own -name for that of the Bisaltae. During the century which elapsed between -Alexander I. and the accession of the famous Philip II. the coinage of -Macedon and that of Abdera followed the same course in each case; the -Phoenician standard of 230 grs. gave way to the so-called Babylonian -or Persian of about 170 grs. Again, it has been suggested that Abdera -influenced the neighbouring communities in this change. But when Philip -came to the throne he returned to the Phoenician standard for silver, -and when for the first time in Macedon he issued a bountiful coinage of -gold staters, they were struck on the ancient gold unit, the so-called -Euboic standard of 130 grs. But hardly had Philip slept with his fathers, -and Alexander reigned in his stead, when a need was felt for a change in -the silver standard. Accordingly the latter in the early years of his -reign began, and continued to his death, to strike his silver on the -same standard as his gold. Let us now study the lessons to be learned -from this history of currency. There can be no reasonable doubt that -the ox-unit or _stater_ was the unit by which gold was estimated from -first to last in that region. Unless it already existed Philip would -not have employed it for his gold coinage at a time when he was making -changes in his silver, but would have assimilated his gold to his silver -standard. But, as before remarked, just because gold was not coined -anywhere in Greece until the closing years of the 5th century, and in -all transactions it passed as bullion, so much the stronger was the -reason for keeping its weight-unit unchanged. But was the standard of -220 grs. really an imported Phoenician, or was it not rather one arrived -at in that region by the natives themselves owing to the relations then -existing between silver and gold? It is evident from the account given -of the Bisaltian silver mines that in the time preceding and immediately -posterior to the Persian invasion silver was exceedingly abundant in -all that region. It is then by no means unlikely that it required ten -silver pieces of 220 grs. each to make the equivalent of one gold unit -of 130 grs. With the exhaustion of the silver mines, and perhaps a -greater output of gold, silver became dearer, and consequently 10 silver -pieces of 170 grs. each were now equal to a gold stater. Abdera on the -coast would come perfectly within the sphere of such changed conditions, -and her standard would consequently likewise undergo modification. -With Philip’s accession, fresh conquests and a general development of -resources may have temporarily thrown more silver on the market, thus -inducing him to revert to the 220 grs. standard, but the exploiting of -the famous mines of Crenides increased the supply of gold to such an -extent that by the time Alexander mounted his fathers throne gold stood -to silver in the relation of 10:1, and it was found extremely convenient -to coin this on the same footing as gold, 10 silver pieces of 135 grs. -being exactly equal to the gold stater of like weight. A like explanation -applies to the coinage of Thrace. Amongst the Thracian tribes who dwelt -near Mount Pangaeum and worked the gold and silver mines of that region -the art of coining had been known from the 6th century B.C. and they -issued silver coins of about 160 grs. This is regarded by some as debased -Babylonian or Persic standard. But it is far more rational to suppose -that in that region gold was more plentiful in proportion to silver than -it was at that time further west in Macedonia, and accordingly a certain -number of silver didrachms of 160 grs. were found to represent the gold -stater or ox-unit. It seems most unlikely that a people long acquainted -with both gold and silver could not devise for themselves a simple -method of making some convenient number of silver pieces be equivalent -to one gold, and that, on the contrary, having once obtained a certain -standard fixed for silver in Asia Minor, at a time when gold was to -silver as 13:1, they would blindly cleave to this standard, no matter -how great a change took place in the relation of the metals. In face -of the statements of Xenophon and Polybius already quoted and the fact -that Solon deliberately constructed a new silver standard, it is simply -impossible to believe such a doctrine. - -On the opposite shore from Thrace lay the flourishing city of Cyzicus. -This wealthy community commenced to issue electrum staters and _hectae_ -in the 5th century B.C., if not earlier, the former being about 252 -grs., the latter 41 grs. These electrum staters have been shown by -Professor Gardner to have contained gold and silver in about equal -proportions[415]. This most important fact, taken in connection with -the literary evidence derived from Xenophon and Demosthenes, makes it -probable that the Cyzicene stater of 252 grs. was counted equal to a -Daric of 130 grs. of pure gold[416]. “These coins of Cyzicus,” says Mr -Head, “together with the Persian Darics formed the staple of the gold -currency of the whole ancient world, until such time as they were both -superseded by the gold staters of Philip and Alexander the Great[417].” - -Not only did they circulate side by side with the Darics, but it is -worthy of notice that when the Cyzicenes struck coins of pure gold -(_circa_ 413 B.C.) they were of Daric type and standard. The earliest -silver coins (430-412 B.C.) were small pieces of 32 and 18 grs., whilst -the larger coins which come later are on the Phoenician silver standard -of 212 grs. (412 B.C.), whilst from 400 B.C. to 330 B.C. the Rhodian -standard of 235 grs. prevailed. From the story of her coinage we learn -clearly that at Cyzicus the inferior metals bowed to the sway of gold. -The electrum stater of 252 grs. is made equal to the pure gold unit, -and whilst the silver standard changes from 212 grs. to 235 grs. the -gold and pale gold pieces in currency remain inviolate. Once more, it -is almost certain that some displacement in the relative values of the -metals had caused the raising of the standard from 212 grs. to 235 grs. -One thing certainly is beyond doubt, and that is the utter improbability -of the introduction of the 235 grs. standard being in any way due to the -influence of Rhodes. This remark likewise applies to Chios, where from a -very early period (600-490 B.C.) side by side with electrum staters of -217 grs. we find didrachms of silver of 123-120 grs., “a weight peculiar -to Chios,” says Mr Head, “which was probably the Phoenician somewhat -raised.” But why was it raised? The real solution is that the relations -between gold, electrum and silver at Chios necessitated the striking of -silver on a standard a few grains lighter than the gold unit in use -(the Persian Daric), and the electrum stater of 217 grs. Space forbids -our going through all the cities of the Ionian coast in detail, but the -principle which we have laid down and illustrated from the currency -systems of several leading states is sufficient to indicate the method by -which we would explain the fluctuations in the silver standards employed -at different times in various states. The Daric is the universal gold -unit of all this region; by its side is the electrum stater usually of -217 grs. and most probably the equivalent in value of the pure gold coin -of 130 grs.: along with them we find singular fluctuations in the silver -currency; towns that are close neighbours employing different systems -contemporaneously. - -There is, however, one state which cannot be passed over without more -particular reference. At an earlier page I spoke of the gold mines -of Thasos, which had attracted the attention of the Phoenicians at a -very early time. But, in addition to the mineral wealth of their own -island, the Thasians drew a huge annual revenue from their mines on the -mainland. Although the first influence in the island was Phoenician, -and the Thasians themselves were Ionians from Paros, instead of finding -the Phoenician standard employed for its silver coins, we see them -striking their archaic coins on the so-called Babylonian system. Under -the supremacy of Athens this standard fell so much that it eventually -coincided with the Attic (138 grs.) or even was lower. The Thasians, -after revolting from Athens in 411 B.C., struck gold coins for the -first time; these were on the Euboic or ox-unit standard (consisting of -half-staters and thirds). But about the same period they began to coin -silver on the so-called Phoenician of 220 grs. It is indeed strange that -in the early age, when the Phoenician tradition was still strong, they -did not employ the 220 grs. standard, but only resorted to it after -employing for a long period the Babylonian and Attic standards. It is -evident that in Thasos, as elsewhere, there had existed the same gold -unit for untold generations, else at the very time when they revolted -from Athens and adopted a new standard for their silver, they would -not have struck gold on what is commonly called the Attic or Euboic -standard. It is evident that the changes in the silver standards were due -to changes in the relation of silver to gold, the fall in standard from -168 grs. to 135 grs. indicating perhaps that silver, which at first was -to gold as 1:13, had gradually grown dearer. - - -_Commercial Weight System._ - -We must now turn to the commercial weight system. As elsewhere, one of -the chief commodities to come under such a system was copper, and the -history of the weighing of this metal, as far as it can be learned, will -be of great importance to us. Now we should naturally expect that at -Athens, which had in later days but one standard for gold and silver, -copper likewise would have been estimated on this unit. But, as a matter -of fact, there were two distinct standards in use at Athens, as is proved -by two weights preserved in the British Museum, the inscription on one of -which is _Mina of the Market_ (ΜΝΑ ΑΓΟΡ), that on the other is _Mina of -the State_ (ΜΝΑ ΔΗΜΟ). This mina of the market is the same as that called -the _Commercial Mina_ on an Attic inscription[418], where its weight is -given as that of 138 silver drachms, that is, the weight of an Aeginetic -mina of silver. Athens had not coined any money of her own up to Solon’s -time, but seems to have employed the coins of Aegina. But this standard, -although no longer employed for silver, did not fall into desuetude. -As already pointed out, all peoples have felt the need of a heavier -standard for cheap articles than that which serves for gold. Probably -the Aeginetic mina had been used at Athens for copper: accordingly, -when Solon made his new silver standard for the weighing of silver, the -Aeginetic standard was found convenient for less costly and more bulky -wares, and was therefore retained in use as the mercantile or market -standard, the name STATE being given to the silver standard. - -We have learned already that in the early stages of society copper and -iron are not sold or appraised by weight, but rather by measurement. -We have also seen that there is every reason to believe that the Greek -obol originally was a spike or rod of copper of a definite length and -thickness. If we can believe the statement of Ephorus given by Strabo -that Phidon of Argos established a weight as well as a measure system for -the Peloponnesians (although Herodotus is silent as regards weights), -it is not at all improbable that, taking this story in conjunction with -the dedication of the old bar money by Phidon in the temple of Hera, we -have here a genuine tradition of the superseding of the bars of metal, -the value of which simply depended on their dimensions, by a system based -essentially on weight. It is plain that, as copper was weighed both at -Aegina and Athens by the Aeginetic silver standard, copper most probably -was never estimated by weight until after the forming of the separate -silver standard in the way already described. - -We have previously noticed the fact that the two principal terms applied -to silver coins, _drachm_ and _obol_, give clear indications that they -have been borrowed from an ancient system of copper (just as we shall -presently find that the _denarius_, the special term employed for their -silver currency by the Romans, owes its origin to the ancient copper -_as_). If further proof were required, it is afforded by the name -employed for the subdivisions of the obol. The latter at Athens was -divided into 8 _chalci_ or _coppers_ (χαλκοῖ). The smallest silver coin -at Athens was the half-obol, but in some places names, _Trichalcum_, -_Tetrachalcum_, etc. were given to copper coins. Now, as the Aeginetan -obol weighed about 16½ grs. and the Attic 11¼, the former is one-third -greater than the latter. But we shall see shortly that as the Attic -obol has 8 _chalci_, the Aeginetan must have had 12, from which it -follows that the ancient copper obol or bar used in Aegina, throughout -Peloponnesus, and at Athens, and probably throughout Boeotia, was -everywhere the same. - - -_The Sicilian System._ - -In dealing with the Sicilian and Italian systems we must reverse the -order of treatment of the metals, and as it is in the copper that we -shall find the closest link between the Greek and those other systems, we -shall therefore commence with that metal. - -On the Italian Peninsula and in Sicily we find a series of weight and -monetary terms totally distinct from any found in Greece Proper. From -this alone we may infer that, even before the settlement of any Greek -Colonies in Magna Graecia and Sicily, there existed a well defined -system, if not of weight, at least for the exchange of copper by fixed -standards of measurement. In various Sicilian cities we find small -silver coins called _litrae_; these beyond all question are simply the -representatives in silver of an ancient copper unit employed by the -Sicels, and which they had brought with them into the island. These -Sicels were a tribe of the great Italian stock (itself a branch of the -Aryan family) closely related to the Umbrians, Latins, and Oscans, had -probably formed the van of the Aryan advance into the Peninsula, and had -finally crossed the straits and overcome the Sicanians, an Iberic race, -who were the earliest inhabitants of the island of whom any historical -record exists. The word _litra_ is merely a dialectic form of the same -original _lidhra_[419], from which the Latin _libra_ itself is sprung. -But whilst we shall have little difficulty in finding out the weight at -which the Latin _libra_ was fixed, we have just as great difficulty in -discovering that of the Sicilian _litra_, as we have lately found in the -case of the ancient Greek copper obol. As copper was only coined at a -late period, and the copper coins are merely tokens, or money of account, -we are unable to arrive at any conclusion as to the original full weight -of the litra from any data afforded by the copper coins of the various -Sicilian states, although, from the circumstance that many of these coins -bear marks of value, at first sight it might seem far otherwise. Thus -at Agrigentum in the period preceding 415 B.C. the copper litra weighed -about 750 grs., between 415 B.C. and 406 B.C. 613 grs., and from 340 B.C. -to 287 B.C. it was about 536 grs. only. At Himera between 472 B.C. and -415 B.C. it was about 990 grs., but within the same period it fell to -200 grs., whilst at Camarina between 415 B.C. and 405 B.C. it was about -221 grs. Not only therefore is it futile to attempt any statement of the -reduction of the litra in Sicily in general, but also to arrive at any -sound approximation to its full original weight, as far as the weight of -the copper coins is concerned. On the other hand, any calculation based -on the relative values of copper and silver has been up to the present -unsatisfactory, owing to the great uncertainty which still prevails, -Mommsen making the relation in the earlier period stand as 288:1, whilst -Mr Soutzo thinks it never can have been higher than 120:1. - -The latter view I have already proved to be untenable when we apply the -test of the value of cattle, and it was made probable that in the 5th -century B.C. silver was to copper as 300:1. From this it will be possible -to show that the full weight of the copper litra was originally about -4900 grs. - -Any effort to determine the original weight of the copper litra by a -new method calls for a merciful consideration, even though it too may -fail. Whilst the original weight of the litra is still a matter of -doubt, we are fortunately completely acquainted with the method of its -subdivisions. The litra was divided into 12 parts called Ungiae, Unciae -or Onciae, a name which is no other than the Latin _Uncia_. This at once -brings us face to face with the Roman copper system, where the _as_ was -the higher unit, and was divided into 12 unciae (ounces). But there are -other striking coincidences of nomenclature. Thus ⅙ of the _as_ was -called _sextans_; one-sixth of the litra is called _Hexâs_ (ἑξᾶς), and -the _Triens_ and _Quadrans_ are paralleled by the _trias_ (τριᾶς) and -_tetras_ (τετρᾶς) although there is a difference in the application -of these terms. Then the five-twelfths of the _as_ is _Quincunx_; the -same fraction of the litra is _Pentonkion_ (πετόγκιον). We have plainly -therefore a common Italo-Sicilian copper system, the terms of which were -adopted and Graecised by the settlers in Italy and Sicily. - -Now we have already adverted to the fact that the earliest Sicilian -towns which coined money, Naxos, Zancle and Himera, although Chalcidian -colonies, yet employed the Aeginetic standard, whereas we might naturally -expect them to follow the Euboic. This would give the maximum of 16½ -grs. for the silver obol. Now according to Pollux, Aristotle in his lost -treatise on the constitution of Agrigentum says that the litra is worth -an Aeginetan obol, and Pollux goes on to say that “one would find in him -(Aristotle) in his Constitution of the Himeraeans likewise other names of -Sicilian coins, such as _ungia_, which is equivalent to one _chalcus_, -and _hexas_, which is equivalent to two _chalci_, and _trias_, which -is equivalent to three _chalci_, and _hemilitron_ (half litra), which -is equivalent to six, and litra which is equivalent to an obol[420].” -It is plain from this that Aristotle knew that the Aeginetic obol was -divided into _twelve chalci_. Thus the proposition laid down above, that -the ancient Greek copper obol was a rod or spike divided into 12 parts, -is thoroughly proved. The reason why the Attic obol had only 8 _chalci_ -is now plain; it was, as we saw, only two-thirds of the Aeginetan and -consequently only contained two-thirds of the whole number of pieces -of copper into which the ancient copper unit was divided. Now, as we -find the Chalcidian settlers of Himera and other places not using their -native Euboic standard for coining, but employing the Aeginetic, and as -the Aeginetic obol was equal to the Sicilian litra, we are justified in -the conclusion, that when the Greek settlers reached Italy and Sicily -they found their Italic kinsfolk using a copper unit exactly the same as -that employed in Greece; and that finally, when they began to coin, they -found it more convenient to strike silver on a standard which was both -convenient in reference to exchange with gold, as I have shown above, -and had the further advantage of corresponding accurately in value to -the ancient copper unit in use among the Sicels. If, as I indicated, -silver was to copper as 300:1, the Aeginetic silver obol of 16⅔ grs. -would be worth 5000 grs. of copper (practically the same as the early -Roman _libra_). It follows then that if we could only discover the weight -of the Sicilian litra we should know that of the old Greek _copper_ -obol. Is this possible? We have no reason to doubt that the obol was a -rod of copper of a certain size, which in the course of time after the -introduction of coined money shrank up until the original rod was only -represented by what had been its equivalent in silver, or a small copper -coin, whose name still survives in the _ob_ used in old account books -as the symbol for _half-penny_[421]. The Greek coinage has preserved -for us but faint traces of the various steps in the degradation of the -copper obol, but, as we have already seen, we find the Sicilian copper -litra in various stages of its decadence from 990 grs. down to 200 grs. -Again, whilst no trace has as yet been found of obols at all in the -archaic shape of rods, or anything approaching it, we find in Sicily at -Agrigentum _litrae_ which are in form distinct survivals of an earlier -stage when the litra, like the obol, was a rod or bar of copper. These -are very strange looking lumps of bronze made in the shape of a tooth -with a flat base, having on one side an eagle or eagle’s head and on the -other a crab, while on the base are marks of value ⸬, ⸪, : (_tetras_, -_trias_, _hexas_). The _uncia_ is almond-shaped with an eagle’s head on -one side, and a crab’s claw on the other[422]. As we found the Chinese -knife shrinking up into a shorter and thicker mass until at last it only -survives in the round _cash_, so in all probability we here find the -Sicilian litra in its mid course from its original full size and shape -to that of the ordinary round copper coin of a later age. That the shape -of the original copper unit of the Italians was that of a rod or bar we -shall now proceed to demonstrate in the case of the Roman _as_. - - -_The Italian System. Bronze._ - -As the cow formed the highest unit in the monetary system of ancient -Italy, so the lowest unit employed was a certain amount of copper called -an _as_. We have already found the cow serving the same purpose in Sicily -(as late as the time of Dionysius forming the rateable unit at Syracuse). -The systems of Further Asia, where the buffalo stands at the head of -the scale and the hoe or a piece of raw metal of a certain size stands -at the bottom, form a perfect analogy in modern times. As far as its -value and divisional system go, we have identified the Sicilian litra -with the ancient Hellenic obol or rod, and we have in turn discovered -a very close resemblance between the divisions of the litra and that -of the _as_. I now propose to examine into the original nature of this -denomination, and the form of the object to which it was applied. This -will have been effectually accomplished, if I can succeed in establishing -the proposition _that the as was primarily a rod or bar of copper, -one foot in length, divided into 12 parts, called inches (unciae), -thus coinciding with the Greek obol in form, as also in its duodecimal -division_. - -We must, as a preliminary, note carefully several most essential facts -connected with the _as_: (1) The term _as_ (as used in respect of metals) -is never employed for either gold or silver, but is appropriated to -_bronze_ exclusively; (2) it is not the Roman unit of weight, for that is -expressed by the general term _libra_, a word exactly corresponding to -the Greek _Talanton_, since it means both the _weight_ and the _scales_; -(3) the _as_ is not confined to weight, but is also employed as the unit -of linear measure equal to the foot, and also as the unit of land measure -equal to the _jugerum_ or acre. - -The following table exhibits the subdivisions of the _as_: - - As (Pes, Jugerum) - Deunx = ¹¹⁄₁₂ - Dextans ¹⁰⁄₁₂ - Dodrans ¾ - Bes ⅔ - Septunx ⁷⁄₁₂ - Semis ½ - Quincunx ⁵⁄₁₂ - Triens ⅓ - Quadrans ¼ - Sextans ⅙ - Uncia ⅟₁₂ - Semuncia ⅟₂₄ - Sicilicus ⅟₄₈ - Sextula ⅟₇₂ - Scriptulum ⅟₂₈₈ - -Now it has been hitherto assumed by all writers that the system of -division employed in the _as_ as a unit of _weight_ has been transferred -to _measure_. This however is contrary to all experience, for, as we have -had occasion constantly before to notice, weight units are derived from -measures, e.g. the bushel from the measure of that name, and so on. In -the next place as the _as_ is not the unit of Roman weight, if even the -measure unit was borrowed from the weight, we ought to expect the foot -to be called a _libra_ rather than an _as_. It is far more likely that -a unit originally employed for measure would in time give its name to a -weight-unit corresponding in mass to the original measure-unit. There -are besides certain pieces of evidence afforded by the nomenclature of -the submultiples which point directly to the original as being a measure -rather than a weight-unit. The 24th part of the uncia is called the -_scriptulum_, _little scratch_, or _line_ (_scribo_), which is exactly -translated by the Greeks as _gramme_ (γραμμή, scratch or line)[423]. Now -whilst 24 strokes make an excellent method of dividing the uncia in its -capacity of _inch_, they of course have no significance as submultiples -of uncia, meaning _ounce_. Moreover, the forms of several of the best -known divisions of the _as_, such as triens, quadrans, sextans, which are -not easy to explain on the hypothesis that the terminology was primarily -applied to weight, on the other hand admit of a ready solution when we -take the _as_ as originally a unit of measure. For sextans means not a -sixth, but that which makes a sixth, triens not a third, but that which -divides in three parts, and quadrans not a fourth, but that which makes -fourfold, i.e. divides into four, for _quadra_ means not a fourth part, -but that which has four parts (hence usually a square). If we regard -these words as referring to certain lines drawn across a bar of metal, -their meaning is obvious. Whilst _sextans uncia_, the ounce which makes a -sixth, is nonsense, _sextans linea_, the line which makes a sixth, gives -excellent sense, so likewise _triens linea_ fits in admirably with the -required meaning, whilst _quadrans linea_ seems to mean _the line which -divides the whole into four parts_. - -The etymology of the word _as_ has long been a puzzle. Scholars starting -with the assumption that _as_ was the Roman abstract term for unity have -accordingly searched for an appropriate derivation. Some have identified -it with the Greek _heis_ one (εἶς through a Tarentine ἇς), whilst the -most recent attempt connects it with the first syllable of _el_ementum. -The same principle has been carried out with regard to _uncia_, which -has been treated simply as meaning _unit_ and connected with _unus_ and -_unicus_. - -Now it is notorious that the Roman mind was essentially concrete, and -found great difficulty in arriving at abstract ideas, and consequently at -abstract terms. This alone would make us hesitate to believe that _as_ -had originally begun as an abstract term meaning unit, and rather incline -us to believe that it started in life as a name for some common concrete -object. But we have seen above that the numerals in all languages seem -originally to have meant certain actual physical objects which served -as counters, such as the fingers and toes (_decem_ δέκα, _digitus_ -δάκτυλος), seeds or pebbles. If such has been the origin of the various -names for _unit_, we can hardly believe that any term for _unity_ can -have originated independently of some concrete object. To add to the -mists which hang round the origin of the _as_, its division into 12 parts -is taken to indicate a Babylonian source. Now the Roman foot was divided, -not merely into 16 fingers like the Greek, but also into 12 unciae or -inches like our own. The latter is most probably the true Italian system, -as it is that found among their cousins and neighbours the Kelts, as well -as amongst the Teutonic peoples. With ourselves still the rustic measures -inches by his thumb, just as he measures feet by means of his own natural -foot. The ancient Irish foot was divided into 12 thumbs or inches -(_ordlach_, Lat. _pollex_, the initial _p_ being lost in Irish)[424]. -The Romans too (as did likewise the Teutonic peoples, _e.g._ Icelandic -_tomme_, an inch) used the thumb (_pollex_) as the ordinary measure in -practical life[425]. The division then into 12 unciae is simply the -result of the fact that a certain natural relation exists between the -breadth of the thumb and the length of the foot, and as the relation held -true just as much for the Kelt as the Chaldaean, there was no need for -the ancient Italians to borrow their duodecimal system from the East. Now -what are we to say as to the origin of the word _uncia_? Does it mean -anything more or less than the breadth of the (thumb) _nail_? The use -of _unguis_, a nail, as a measure was common in Latin, as we know from -the phrases _transversum unguem_ (the thickness of a nail) and _latum -unguem_ (a nail’s breadth) side by side with _transversum digitum_ (a -fingers thickness) in Plautus. _Uncia_ may be simply a derivative from -_unguis_; there is no phonetic impossibility, and even if there were any -linguistic irregularity, false analogy with _unicus_ would amply account -for it. The use of a word meaning _nail_ to express the divisions of the -foot is completely paralleled by the ancient Hindu system, where the -_finger-breadth_ is termed _angala_, _i.e._ nail (cognate of _unguis_ and -ὄνυξ). - -Next we come to the word _as_ itself, which appears in old Latin as -_assis_. It is masculine in gender, which of itself is sufficient to -throw doubts on its being a really abstract word. Can it be that we have -a close relative of it in _asser_ a rod, bar, pole, which is likewise -masculine in gender? Whilst one form of the name was specially confined -to a small rod or bar of copper, the other was employed in a wide and -general way. These two forms _assis_ and _asser_,-_is_ are completely -analogous to _vomis_ and _vomer_,-_is_, a ploughshare. The meaning _rod_ -is in complete harmony with what we have said about the Greek obol. All -that is now wanting to make our proof complete is some evidence that the -primitive Italian _as_ was really in the form of a rod or bar. The most -archaic specimens of ancient Italian bronze money as yet described are -those found at the Ponte di Badia near Vulci in 1828. These consisted (1) -of quadrilaterals broken in pieces, weighing from 2 to 3 pounds each, -stamped with an ox and trident, (2) cube-shaped pieces of copper without -any mark, weighing from an ounce to a pound, and (3) some ellipse-shaped -pieces for the most part weighing two ounces[426]. But in the British -Museum are preserved a number of pieces of bronze which are roughly -quadrilateral. A cursory examination showed me that, whilst two parallel -sides exhibit the marks of a mould, the two remaining sides displayed -unmistakable signs of fracture. Several of them are end pieces, showing -the voluting of the mould on two sides and at one end, whilst the other -end shows marks of having been broken (Fig. 48). Several of them bear -stamps, or letters. There can be no doubt that these are pieces of short -bars of bronze, which were afterwards cut up, as occasion demanded. -The imprints on them prove them to be of comparatively recent date. If -therefore the _asses_ still retained their bar shape after the art of -stamping metal to serve as currency had come into use, _à fortiori_ the -primitive _as_ of Italy must certainly have been nothing more than a -plain rod or bar of copper, which passed from hand to hand as the obols -in Greece, and the bars of iron and copper pass at the present among -savages of Africa and Asia[427]. This was what was called by the ancient -writers _the raw copper_ (_aes rude_), as distinguished from _the stamped -copper_ (_aes signatum_) of a later date. The fact that early specimens -of _aes signatum_, such as the _decussis_, bearing a cow on both obverse -and reverse (Fig. 49), were still made in the shape of a bar, is a -further proof that such was the original form. - -[Illustration: FIG. 48. Aes Rude.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 49. Bronze Decussis.] - -It will be observed that I can give no positive evidence for the length -or breadth of the _as_. The pieces in the Museum are all fragments, -and, even if there were any of them whole, they would not by any means -decide the original _length_, although they would of course represent the -_weight_. For as they are late, they would probably have been made at a -time when the original rod was shrinking up into a more compact form, -just as the Chinese bronze knives get shorter and thicker. But the fact -remains that the _as_ was identified completely with the Roman _foot_ -measure, the divisions being the same in each. We therefore may with -great probability infer that the _as_ was originally a piece of copper a -foot in length, and of a known thickness. We have seen that copper and -iron are not weighed in the early stages of society, but are appraised -by measurement. Why should not the same hold true for Rome? It may be -asked, how came it that the _as_ was taken as the typical unit for weight -and superficial measure, and to express even an inheritance? The answer -is not far to seek. To express fractional parts has ever been a great -difficulty with primitive people. As the Malays cannot conceive abstract -numerals, but must append the concrete _padi_ to each of their numbers, -so the old Italian found it necessary to employ some concrete object, -the subdivisions of which were familiar, to express the fractional parts -whether it be of an estate or anything else. The most common unit in -use was the rod of copper divided into 12 thumbs. Accordingly, if a -Roman wished to say that Balbus was heir to one-twelfth of an estate he -expressed this by the homely formula that Balbus had come in for _one -inch_, the denominator 12 being mentally supplied, as everyone knew that -there were 12 inches in the copper bar. The same principle of taking some -familiar object, the ordinary method of dividing which was known to all -men, is seen in the method of expressing one-tenth. The Roman _denarius_ -was divided into 10 _libellae_; accordingly, when Cicero wishes to say -that a certain person had come in for a tenth part of an estate he says -that he has come in for a _libella_ (_heres ex libella_). From this the -reader will at once see that we might just as well declare that the word -_denarius_ is an abstract word meaning _unity_ as make the same assertion -about the _as_. Again, when the Roman land surveyors elaborated their -system of mensuration, they found that the simplest method of expressing -the fractional parts of the _jugerum_ was to employ the old duodecimal -method of the _as_. Nor is this without a parallel elsewhere. As the yard -was the common English unit of linear measure, it was applied to the -most common unit of land, the quarter of the hide, which was accordingly -termed a yard of land, or a virgate (_virga terrae_). The English analogy -is even still more complete, for as the _as_ or foot-rod became the unit -of weight, so in Cambridge the yard of butter is identical with the pound -of butter[428]. - -Our next step will be to trace the process by which the _as_ or rod -became the general weight-unit, the pound (_libra_). The term _libra_ is -not the oldest Latin name for _weight_, for _pondus_ or its cognate verb -_pendeo_, which literally means to _hang_, is the true claimant for that -position. _Libra_ seems properly to mean the _balance_, as is seen from -the legal formula (employed in Mancipatio) _per aes et libram_, by means -of copper and the balance. From the fact that its chief use was to weigh -_asses_ of copper, the mass of an _as_ came to be termed the _weight -par excellence_, just as the most usual amount weighed in the Greek -_talanta_ (scales) became the _talanton par excellence_. This process -can be illustrated by modern examples. Thus in the south of Ireland -potatoes are sold by the unit of 21 lbs., which consequently is termed a -_weight_, and instead of speaking of so many stones or hundredweights, -everyone speaks of a weight of potatoes. But, as already remarked, it was -only at a comparatively late epoch that the bars of copper were weighed. -It would be only with the growth of greater exactitude in commercial -dealings that the art of weighing, which was employed for all dealings -in gold and silver, would be applied to copper. Just as the Malays and -Tibetans have been gradually taught by the careful Chinese to employ -weights commercially, so the Italian tribes may have been led to do so -under the influence of the astute Greek traders from Magna Graecia and -Sicily. The system in vogue for gold was that of our old friend the -ox-unit. This is proved from the fact that not only is the oldest gold -coinage of the Etruscans, the close neighbours of Latium, based upon this -standard, but that also in Sicily and Southern Italy there was the small -gold talent, the three-fold of the ox-unit. This three-fold of the stater -was also used at Neapolis. Although the earliest Greek colonies in Sicily -employed at first the Aeginetic standard for silver, we soon find them -reverting to the gold or Euboic standard for that metal, whilst the early -silver coinage of the Etruscans (before 350 B.C.) is also of the Euboic -standard. We may with high probability assume that when the Sicilians -and Italians first essayed to weigh their copper rods, they naturally -employed the standard already in use for gold and silver. The highest -unit of this was the small talent of 3 staters which weighed about 405 -grs. The bar was divided into 12 inches, and it was found that an inch of -copper rod closely approximated in weight to the small gold talent. The -weight of the bar, which was the ancient unit for copper before weight -had been employed, now became the standard weight-unit for that metal. It -is to be observed that this ounce of 405 grs., though some 27 grs. less -than the full Roman _uncia_ of later times, is only 15 grs. lighter than -the Roman ounce prior to 268 B.C., for it is an ascertained fact that the -old Roman _uncia_ did not exceed 420 grs.[429] It must be remembered that -the weight of the ounce would depend on the standard foot by which the -bar was measured. Now, whilst the Roman foot measures 296 millim., there -was likewise in use in Campania, and probably in many parts of Southern -Italy, a foot of 276 millim. The relation of bars of these lengths and of -a given thickness to the Roman libra is not without interest. If we take -an ordinary engineer’s table of materials we shall find that a copper -rod a Roman foot long, and half a Roman inch in diameter, weighs 5040 -grs. Now, as the Roman pound weighs 5184 grs. this approximation seems -almost too close to be a mere coincidence. If on the other hand we take -a rod of a foot of 276 millim. and with a diameter of the corresponding -half-inch, we shall get a pound of 4680 grs. and an ounce of 390 grs, -which is certainly not far from the weight of the small gold talent. -It follows from this that we may expect pounds of different weights in -Italy, according as the foot-unit varies in different districts. - -In later times, besides the pound of 12 unciae, there were several -commercial pounds on Italian soil, the pound of 16 ounces (from which our -own avoirdupois is probably descended), that of 18 unciae, and that of -24. The last two are easy of explanation, since one is simply the double, -the other one and a half times the Roman pound. But perhaps a different -explanation must be sought for the 16 ounce pound. The foot was divided -by Greeks and also by Italians into 16 fingers as well as into 12 thumbs. -Was therefore the pound of 16 ounces simply derived from the division -of the foot bar into 16 fingers, the weight of the finger being however -equated to that of the Roman thumb or inch of copper? - -The _as_, having been once subjected to weight, its hundredfold, -the _centumpondium_ or “hundred weight,” became the highest Roman -weight-unit. Thus the _as_ and the _centumpondium_ of the Italians -correspond to the mina and talent of the Greeks. But it will be observed -that the Italians obtained their higher unit by the old decimal system, -whereas the Greeks had borrowed the mina and its sixtyfold from Asia. The -_centumpondium_ must be regarded as a true-born Italian unit, not one -borrowed from Greece or Asia, and of this there is further proof. We saw -by the ancient Roman law that the cow was estimated at 100 _asses_, the -sheep at 10 _asses_. No doubt from time out of mind 100 of the bars of -copper, which formed the chief lower unit of barter, made one cow, just -as in Annam 280 little hoes make one buffalo (p. 167). When copper came -to be weighed, the amount of copper which formed the equivalent of the -highest unit of barter, the cow, was taken as the highest weight-unit. -From what I have said above it is not improbable that the Roman libra -and the Sicilian litra of copper were almost equal in weight. The fact -that the Greek writers always employed the Sicilian word litra (λίτρα), -to translate the Latin _libra_, likewise indicates that in the Greek -mind there was a tradition of their identity. And if the doctrine here -put forward of the original nature of the _as_ be right, nothing can -be more likely than that the Italians who had crossed into Sicily and -their kinsfolk who had remained behind employed rods of similar size, -and that when they began to weigh the latter, the “weight” (libra or -litra), derived from the standard copper rod, should be the same in -each region, until certain modifications occasioned by new monetary -conditions according to the needs of different communities had caused -some divergency in _coin_ weights, although as a _commercial_ weight the -litra remained unchanged. As Aristotle identified the Aeginetic obol -and _chalcus_ with the Sicilian litra and _onkia_, we may with some -plausibility suggest that the ancient Greek copper obol or spike and the -Italian _as_ or rod were identical in dimensions and in origin. - -In Greece the copper obol rapidly fell in weight, for, when once silver -currency had been introduced, copper was thrust aside, and it was not -till the fourth century B.C. that copper coins came into use. When the -copper obol appears as a coin it is but a small piece, being in fact a -mere token. - -[Illustration: FIG. 50. As (_Aes grave_). (Before 2nd Punic War.)] - -The history of the degradation of copper was seen better in Sicily, where -we found the litra still weighing 990 grs., but it rapidly sank to only -200 grs., evidently in this case also being mere money of account. For as -the silver litra was about 13½ grs., unless the 200 grain copper litra -was a mere token, silver would have been to copper as 17:1, which is -obviously absurd. In the case of the Italian _as_ the process is still -clearer, for we have every stage of the _as_, from the bars which I have -described through the _libral as_ (_aes grave_), the _sextantal as_, the -uncial and half-uncial, down to the small coin of the empire commonly -called “a third brass.” - -[Illustration: FIG. 51. As (half uncial standard).] - -[Illustration: FIG. 52. As, 3rd Cent. A.D. (“Third Brass”).] - -[Illustration: FIG. 53. Didrachm of Corinth.] - - -_Gold and Silver._ - -Whilst in the infancy of coining the Sicilian silver litra was probably -the same as the Aeginetic obol, that is about 16⅔ grs., the Aeginetic -didrachm being probably treated as a _decalitron_ (ten-litra piece), -nevertheless after no long time the common Euboic standard of 135 grs. -was employed at Syracuse and elsewhere, and we have the authority of -Aristotle for the statement that the _Corinthian stater_ was called a -_decalitron_. Corinth, as we saw above, used the 135 grain unit for her -famous Pegasi, commonly known as “Colts” (πῶλοι), and therefore the litra -was by this time 13½ grs. Now, in Etruria we find about 400-350 B.C. a -silver currency struck on this same 135 grs. standard. These coins bear -marks of value, 𐌢 on coins of 131 grs., 𐌡 on those of 65 grs., 𐌠𐌠' on -those of 32 grs., and 𐌠 on those of 14 and 13 grs. It is plain therefore -that the stater of 135 grs. was considered to consist of 10 units of 13½ -grs. each. In other words, whatever the Etruscans may have called their -stater, it was exactly the same in weight and method of subdivision as -the _decalitron_ of Syracuse. At a later period (350-268 B.C.) we find -on coins of like weight the symbols 𐌢𐌢 instead of 𐌢, 𐌢 instead of 𐌡, 𐌡 -instead of 𐌠𐌠'. The unit now is exactly half of what it was at an earlier -stage, 6¾ grs. instead of 13½ grs. - -Not till 268 B.C., just on the eve of the First Punic War, did Rome -first coin silver. This coin, called _denarius_, as its name implies, -represented 10 _asses_. It was divided into four parts, each of which -was called a _sestertius_ or 2½, and was marked with the symbol 𐆘 -representing that number. - -[Illustration: FIG. 54. Sesterce of first Roman silver coinage.] - -It is very remarkable that the Etruscan coin of the second series, marked -2½, is only very slightly heavier than the Roman sesterce (_sestertius_) -which bears a similar mark. Hence it has been very reasonably inferred -that when the Romans set about the coinage of silver, they simply adopted -with slight modification the silver system employed by their neighbours -across the Tiber. This is all the more probable, as it is almost certain -that, though Rome did not strike silver she like Athens before the time -of Solon, and like Syracuse, used freely the coins of other communities -for a long time previously. The Etruscan coins would therefore serve as -silver currency at Rome. We may then assume that the monetary system must -have been much the same on both sides of the river. Accordingly, since -in 268 B.C. we find the Romans striking a coin in silver representing -10 copper _asses_, which is almost the same in weight as the Etruscan -coin marked 𐌢, we may reasonably infer that, if the Romans had commenced -coining silver a century earlier, their _denarius_ or 10-_as_ piece would -have been the same weight as the Etruscan. - -[Illustration: FIG. 55. Didrachm of Tarentum.] - -Now besides the _litra_, which we found to be both a copper-unit and -a silver coin in Sicily, there is another term of great interest, -especially as it plays an important part in the history of Roman money. -The general Latin name for a coin is _numus_, which in the later days of -the Republic usually meant a _denarius_ when used in the more restricted -sense, but in the earlier period it was the term specially applied to the -silver sesterce (_sestertius_). This is almost certainly a loan-word, -for Pollux is most explicit in warning us that, although the word seems -Roman, it is in reality Greek and belongs to the Dorians of Sicily and -Italy[430]. It is always a name of a coin of silver in Sicily, being so -used by Epicharmus. The coin meant by this poet cannot have been one of -great value, for he says: “Buy me a fine heifer calf for ten _nomi_.” -It was in all probability the Aeginetan obol, for Apollodorus in his -comments on Sophron set it down at three half (Attic) obols, that is, -almost 17 grs. This is confirmed by the fact that an Homeric scholiast -makes the small talent weigh 24 _nomi_, which gives nearly 17 grs. as -the weight of that unit. Crossing into Italy, we find that according -to Aristotle[431] there was a coin called a _noummos_ at Tarentum, on -which was the device of Taras riding on a dolphin. This is the familiar -type of the Tarentine didrachms which, from their first issue down to -the invasion of Pyrrhus (450-280 B.C.), weigh normally 123-120 grs., -although one specimen weighs 128 grs. This coin Mommsen recognized as -the _noummos_ of Aristotle. Professor Gardner afterwards suggested -that the diobol, on which occasionally the same type is found, was -rather the coin meant. Recently Mr A. J. Evans has almost proved this -hypothesis impossible by showing that all the diobols yet known are -probably later than the time of Aristotle[432]. As, however, this rests -on negative evidence, and is liable to be overthrown at any moment by -the discovery of an archaic diobol, it is advisable to cast about for -some more positive criterion. Heraclea of Lucania, the daughter-city and -close neighbor of Tarentum, as we know from the famous Heraclean Tables -(which scholars are agreed in regarding as written about the end of the -4th cent. B.C.), employed as a unit of account a silver _nomos_. It is -so probable that the _nomos_ employed at Heraclea (_circ._ 325 B.C.) -would be the same in value as that employed at Tarentum in the time of -Aristotle (_ob._ 322 B.C.), that if we can prove the _nomos_ of Heraclea -to be a _didrachm_ and not a _diobol_, we may henceforth hold with -certainty that the _nomos_ of Tarentum was the larger coin. - -On the Heraclean Tables it is enacted that those who held certain public -land should pay certain fines in case they had failed to plant their -holdings properly; four olive trees were to be planted on each _schoenus_ -of land, and for each olive tree not so planted a penalty of 10 _nomi_ -of silver was to be exacted, and for each _schoenus_ of land not planted -with vines the penalty was two _minae_ of silver[433]. The _schoenus_ is -identical with the Roman _actus_ (half a _jugerum_), being the square of -120 feet. Four olive trees were the allowance for each _schoenus_. Now if -we can determine the number of vines which were planted on a _schoenus_, -we shall be able to get a test of the value of a _nomos_. Two minae of -silver contained in round numbers 110 Tarentine didrachms of 123 grs. -each, or 675 diobols of about 20 grs. each. Olives were many times more -valuable than the vine, so that any result which will make the vine about -the same value as the obol will be absurd. - -Now Mr A. J. Evans, when in Southern Italy, at my request kindly -ascertained that vines, when trained on poles on vineyard slopes, are -usually about 3 yards apart, whilst when trained on pollard poplars (as -is much more usual in Campagna), they stand about 6 yards apart. In the -case of the former about 150 vines would go to a _schoenus_ (1600 sq. -yards), whilst in the latter case barely 50. We cannot doubt that the -distance between the vines must have been much the same in ancient as in -modern times. - -If now we take the _nomos_ to be a _diobol_, each vine is worth 4⅔ -_nomi_, or 14 _nomi_, according as there are 50 or 150 vines to the -_schoenus_. Now, as the valuable and slow growing olive is only worth 10 -_nomi_, and it is impossible to believe that the relative values of olive -and vine could have ever been such as those arrived at on the assumption -that the _nomos_ is a diobol, we must turn to the alternative course and -take the _nomos_ as a didrachm. The penalty for a _schoenus_ of vines is -two minae or 110 didrachms. If 150 vines go to a _schoenus_, each will -be worth about ⅔ didrachm, 15 vines being equal to one olive, or taking -50 vines to the _schoenus_, each vine will be worth about two didrachms, -5 vines being worth one olive. This result is so rational that we need -hesitate no longer to regard the well-known Tarentine didrachm as the -_nomos_ (_noummos_) of Aristotle. - -There is such a difference between the _nomos_ of Sicily, identical with -the Aeginetan obol, and that of Tarentum that we are forced to conclude -that the term _nomos_ is not specially applied to any particular coin -unit. In Sicily we found the native unit, the litra, identified in -certain cases, at least in earlier times, with the Aeginetan obol as well -as with the _nomos_. Why two names _nomos_ and _litra_ for the same unit? -Is one Sicilian and the other Greek? This at least gives a reasonable -explanation. The Dorians then in Sicily gave the name to their earliest -coins, _nomos_, with them indicating the unit of currency established by -law just as did _nomisma_ among other Greeks. As in Sicily the Aeginetic -obol was the _legal coin_ (_nomos_) _par excellence_, so at Tarentum, -where didrachms were the first coins to be struck, the term (_nomos_) was -applied to that unit. We may therefore expect to find the term _nomos_ -applied to various kinds of coins among the Italiotes and Italians, -according to the particular coin chosen by each state as its own unit of -account. - -Accordingly we find the term _nomos_ applied to certain bronze coins -struck on the sextantal (two ounce) and uncial standards, at Arpi -and other towns, which are inscribed N II (the double _nummus_), N I -(_nummus_), ..... (_quincunx_), .... (_triens_), ... (_quadrans_), .. -(_sextans_), . S (_sescuncia_), . (_uncia_), and Σ (_semuncia_). The -divisions being those of the _as_, it is clear that the _nomos_, or -current coin in those places, was the reduced _as_. Finally, when the -Romans first use the term _nummus_, it means the silver _sestertius_ (2½ -asses), the one-fourth of the _denarius_ or ten-_as_ piece, which weighed -a scruple (_i.e._ 18½ grs.) at the time of the first Roman coinage of -silver. Here we have all our positive evidence for the _nomos_. As -diobols of 18 to 17 grs. are found in the coinages of various towns in -Magna Graecia, such as Arpi, Caelia, Canusium, Rubi, and Teate, it has -been plausibly held that such a diobol was the _nomos par excellence_ -of these states, and that it was from contact with them that the Romans -learned both the use and the name of such a monetary unit. But Rome may -have been influenced by her Etruscan neighbours, for, as we have seen, -the smallest denomination in the second silver series of Etruscan coins -(of which the coins weigh 129 grs., 32 grs. and 17 grs. respectively) is -just the weight of the Roman sestertius, and bears the symbol 𐌡𐌠𐌠 (2½), -just as the latter bears 𐆘 (2½). Taking into consideration these facts, -it looks as if the Romans and Etruscans grafted on to a native system -the diobol, or current silver coin of Southern Italy, the Romans (and -for all we can tell the Etruscans likewise) adopting at the same time -the name _nummus_. Finally, we observe that this _nummus_ is identical -with the Sicilian _nomos_, which in turn was found to be none other than -the Aeginetic obol. The Roman _sestertius_ being a _scriptulum_ (17⁷⁄₁₂ -grs.) in weight, we thus find a direct connection between the latter -and the Aeginetic obol (16⅔ grs.). This need not surprise us, for it is -most natural that in the welding of a weight system (partly foreign, and -on the native side only employed for gold and silver) and of a system -of measurement employed for bronze, certain features derived from the -special silver units in use would be introduced into the new system, -which afterwards became universal for weighing all commodities. The term -_Sicilicus_[434] employed for the quarter-ounce is good evidence for -this hypothesis. Its name seems to mean simply _Sicilian_. In weight it -was about 108 grs. Now, didrachms struck on such a foot are found in the -Greek cities of south-western Italy, at Velia, Neapolis and at Tarentum, -after the time of Pyrrhus. Did the Romans, who must have carried on -by weight all dealings in silver up to 268 B.C., treat such coins as -quarter-ounces, and ultimately take the name of the coin (wrongly -connecting it with Sicily) to designate the quarter-ounce? In like -fashion it was probably discovered that the Aeginetic obol of the Greek -colonists was about equal in weight to the line (_scriptulum_) which is -one-twenty-fourth of the inch (_uncia_) of copper. Thus as there are 24 -_nomi_ in the Sicilian talent, so there are 24 _scriptula_ in the Roman -_uncia_. These considerations help to explain the relations which existed -between the _nomos_ (Aeginetic obol), _sestertius_, and _scruple_. - -Mr Soutzo[435] gives a very different account of the _nomos_. Starting -with the Egyptian hypothesis he makes all the Italian weight systems -of foreign origin. He thus makes the Roman libra the ⅟₁₀₀ of a Roman -_talent_, which he seems to identify with a light Asiatic talent[436]. -Starting with the talent he supposes that on Italian soil it was divided -into 100 _librae_ instead of 60 heavy or 120 light minae, as in the -East. Each of these _librae_ or _pounds_ was divided into 12 _ounces_, -and each _ounce_ into 24 fractions. He holds likewise that the Italians -adopted from the East the use of bronze “comme matière première de -leurs échanges,” at the same time as they obtained the first germs of -civilization and their first weight standards. The _centumpondium_ -or 100 weight therefore he takes as his prime unit. But besides the -talent and the mina and the _centumpondium_ and _libra_ or _as_, -according to Mr Soutzo, “all the Italian peoples availed themselves of -an intermediate weight unit: this was the _nomos_ or _decussis_[437]. -This unit was the _libral nomos_, the twelfth of the heavy talent, -being worth ten _minae_ or _librae_, and the _libral decussis_, the -_tenth_ of the _centumpondium_, weighing 10 _librae_.” The monetary -_nomos_ and _decussis_, he thinks, played an important part in the -history of Italian coinage. He admits however that no specimen of either -_nomos_ or _decussis_ of libral standard is known, the heaviest being -a _decussis_ of the Roman triental (one-third) standard, whilst the -pieces from Venusia and Teanum Apulum marked N I and N II (_nomos_ and -double _nomos_), representing 10 and 20 minas respectively, belong to -a still much more reduced standard. The simple multiples of the _as_ -(libra) and litra, such as the _tripondius_ and _dupondius_, were just -as rarely cast in the libral epoch. The _mina_ or the _as_ with their -fractions, on the contrary, were the kinds most employed: originally -the series was ordinarily composed of the _as_ (marked I or sometimes -............), the _semis_ (S), the _triens_ (....), the _quadrans_ -(...), the _sextans_ (..), the _uncia_ (.) and _semuncia_ (Σ). In some -series the _as_ is rare and the _semis_ is wanting, but in addition to -the other denominations here given the _quincunx_ (:·:) and the _dextans_ -(S...., 1 _semis_ + 4 _unciae_) are found. The presence or absence -of these pieces characterizes certain Italian and Sicilian monetary -systems[438]. All the evidence virtually which can be produced by Soutzo -for this hypothetical _nomos_ is that at Syracuse the Corinthian stater -of 135 grs. was called a _decalitron_, that the Tarentine didrachm of -128 grs. (max.) was similarly divided into 10 _litras_, that the Romans -employed the tenfold of the _as_ (_decussis_) and when they coined silver -called their silver unit a _denarius_ as representing 10 copper _asses_, -and the fact that certain copper coins such as those of Arpi, called -_nomi_, were evidently regarded as containing 10 units, the half being -the _quincunx_. But, as we have already seen, the real explanation of -these coins seems to be that they represent reduced _asses_. We must -remember that the heaviest Roman _as_ yet known is only 11 ounces, whilst -the great proportion of the earliest specimens are only 10 _unciae_ -or (_dextantals_). When the idea of a real copper currency for local -purposes gained ground, and it was found that it was not necessary to -have the _as_ of account of full weight, and at the same time to enable -the state to make a profit of this copper currency which was solely for -home use (just as our Mint makes a large profit of our silver coins), -the first stage in reduction was to take off an ounce, or much more -frequently two full ounces. I have already pointed out the vitality and -universality of the _uncia_ as an unit, and have given the reasons for -this. Hence arose _asses_ or _bars_ of 10 ounces. The number 10 had of -course great advantages, and presently, when further reductions in the -copper currency took place, certain communities clave fast to the decimal -system and, instead of taking off some more whole ounces, simply reduced -the ounce itself, and retained the denomination, continuing to place -the marks of value as before. In those Hellenized states of Apulia just -referred to this reduced copper _as_ or _litra_ was the _legal_ unit, and -therefore denominated a _nomos_, especially as it probably corresponded -in value (at least as money of account) to the silver unit or _nomos_ in -circulation in each district. But whilst Mr Soutzo seems wrong in his -view of the _nomos_, there can be no doubt that there was a consensus -among the Sicilians and Italians in favour of making an intermediate -unit between 1 and 100, the tenfold of the _litra_ and _as_, into a -higher unit. The Syracusan _decalitron_ and the Roman _decussis_ and -_denarius_ are incontrovertible facts. For the latter at least a most -interesting connection with a unit of barter can be proved. We saw that -by the Lex Tarpeia (451 B.C.) a cow was counted at one hundred _asses_ -(_centussis_, _centumpondium_) whilst a sheep was estimated at 10 _asses_ -(_decussis_). The reader will observe that, even if the theory were -true that the Roman _centumpondium_ is the starting-point of the Roman -weight system, and that it was borrowed from the East, the cow all the -same plays a most important part in the founding of the system. It would -be another instance to prove the impossibility of framing a weight -standard independent of the unit of barter, just as we have already seen -that the Irish, when borrowing a ready-made weight system from Rome, -found it absolutely necessary to equate the cow to the ounce of silver, -and as Charlemagne had to adjust the _solidus_ by the value of the same -animal. If again the _centumpondium_ and _as_ grew up independently as -_weight_ units on Italian soil, and copper was weighed there before -gold, the cow is evidently the basis of the system; whilst again, on -my hypothesis that _copper_ went by bulk in bars of given dimensions, -and was not weighed until long after the scales had been employed for -gold, the cow is directly connected with that unit of weight (the gold -ox-unit of 135 grs.) which ultimately forms the basis of the uncia (as -_weight_) and libra. On every hypothesis alike the cow must be retained -as the chief factor in the origin of the Roman weight system. It will be -observed that Mr Soutzo offers no explanation why the Romans, instead of -retaining the sexagesimal division of the talent which they are supposed -to have imported, subdivided it according to the decimal scale. It cannot -be alleged that they had any deep-rooted antipathy to the duodecimal -system, seeing that the _as_ was divided into 12 _unciae_, and the ounce -into 24 scruples. The fact that the Romans resisted in this respect the -Greek influences, which were so potent a factor in their civilization, -is strong evidence that the employment of the tenfold and hundredfold of -the _as_ was of immemorial native origin, and most intimately connected -with the animal units, which must certainly be held to be autochthonous. -As we found in Further Asia and Africa hoes or bars of metal as the -lowest unit of currency, so many hoes being worth a kettle, so many -kettles a buffalo, so in ancient Italy 10 bars (_asses_) of copper made -a sheep, and 10 sheep made a cow. It is exceedingly probable that the -same system prevailed among the Sicels and Sicilian Greeks, 10 litras -going to the sheep, 10 sheep to the cow. For we saw on an earlier page -that at Syracuse down to the time of Dionysius the cow remained the unit -of assessment, just as at the present moment the buffalo is the unit of -assessment among the villages of Annam; and, just as with the latter -the buffalo is the unit of value, so we may well infer that with the -Sicilians the cow played the same rôle. It may therefore be assumed with -considerable probability that the employment of the _decalitron_ and -_decussis_ as monetary units was originally due to their connection with -the value of the sheep. - -As Soutzo has observed, the degradation of the local copper series moved -on most unequal lines, and no doubt in some places the _decussis_ did -not represent perhaps one half the value of its archetype, the sheep, -whilst at the same moment the copper unit in another community stood -at almost its original weight and value. Where silver was coined the -degradation of copper went on all the quicker; there was a tendency more -and more to get rid of the old cumbrous copper coins, and to employ -those of a lighter and more portable size. Moreover the inter-relations -between copper and silver made the coinages in these metals act and react -upon each other. Thus the state after reducing the copper would reduce -likewise the silver, so as to make the two series correspond. This was -probably facilitated in some cases at least by the change in the relative -value of these metals. Italy was not a silver-producing region, whilst -it was rich in copper. Naturally with the increase of commerce and the -development of silver mines in neighbouring countries such as Spain, -silver became more abundant and the price of copper rose accordingly. We -have had occasion already to remark that the abundance or scarcity of -gold or silver is indicated by its being employed or not for coinage. -In the case of gold we know that it is only when the supply of that -metal is in excess of its demand for purposes of ornament that it is or -can be employed in the form of coined money. The history of the coinage -of Persia, Lydia, Macedonia, Rhodes and elsewhere in ancient times, as -well as the history of mediaeval gold coining, make this evident, whilst -modern Hindustan teaches us the same lesson. Of course in times of great -financial straits under the pressure of war a gold coinage was sometimes -issued, as perhaps at Athens[439] in 407 B.C. and as at Rome during the -second Punic war in 206 B.C. Backwardness in the coinage of silver among -certain peoples is probably to be accounted for in the same way. The -employment of iron money at Sparta (and Byzantium) was probably due to -the dearth of precious metals rather than to any ordinance of Lycurgus -against the employment of the latter. If accordingly we find that Rome -did not coin silver until 268 B.C. we are justified in concluding that it -was from want of silver she had been so long in following the example of -the Etruscans and the Greeks. - -It is certainly most significant that within four years after the capture -of Tarentum (272 B.C.) and the subjugation of all Southern Italy we find -her issuing a well-matured silver currency. Doubtless by her conquests -she obtained a vast supply of the precious metal, for we know from the -records of Livy and Pliny that great masses of foreign coins and bullion -flowed into the treasury after every fresh conquest. We may therefore -reasonably assume that previous to 272 B.C. silver had been much dearer -in relation to copper. - -But to return. We have seen that with the imprinting of some device on -the primitive bars of copper, the tendency to reduce their weight would -quickly evince itself. Accordingly it was possible that in certain places -when the coinage of silver began, and there was still a desire to make -the silver unit equal to the copper, the latter having been already -reduced, the silver would be proportioned thereto. Thus when silver -was first coined in some towns in Sicily, the silver Aeginetic obol of -16½ grs. was regarded as the equivalent of the copper litra, but when -Syracuse started a coinage of Corinthian staters, a piece of silver of -13½ grs. was accounted as the litra. - -But in other parts of Italy the process was somewhat different. For -we find the silver unit when once fixed remaining the same in weight, -but simply having its denomination altered to meet the requirements of -certain changes in the bronze series. Thus the Etruscan silver staters -of the period prior to 350 B.C., which weigh 130 grs., are marked 𐌢, -whilst the coins of the same weight at a later epoch are marked 𐌢𐌢, -showing that the copper unit had undergone a change. This Soutzo thinks -was simply a reduction from the triental to the sextantal foot, and in no -wise due to any change in the relative value of silver and copper. That -however both influences may have aided in the change will be made clear -from the history of the reduction of the Roman _denarius_ and _as_ in the -second Punic war. Finally when the Romans coined their first _denarii_ -in 268 B.C., the _libella_ or tenth of the _denarius_, which represented -in silver the copper _libra_, was only 7 grs., an indubitable proof that -the _as_ was but then a mere fraction of its former self. Yet all the -same it is clear that this silver _denarius_, which represented a reduced -_decussis_ of bronze, had its ultimate source in nothing else than the 10 -libral _asses_ which represented the value of a sheep. Are we not then -justified in suggesting that the Etruscan stater of 135 grs. marked 𐌢 -had a like origin, that the 10 litra piece or _noummos_ of Tarentum of -almost the same weight, and the Syracusan 10 litra piece of 135 grs., had -also a similar origin, whilst at an earlier period 10 Aeginetic obols -(the _nomi_ of the poems of Epicharmus and Sophron) were the equivalent -of the same animal? Ten _nomi_ were the price of a calf in the time of -Epicharmus, and as we have seen already the value of a sheep and a young -calf is always about the same, even down to the present day. - - -_Roman System._ - -Although it is not our concern to go into the history of Roman money, -it is nevertheless necessary to give the reader a short sketch of its -principal features in order to make the history of the Roman weight -standards intelligible. - -First came oxen and sheep, which according to their age and sex bore -definite relations to each other, and by which all other values were -measured. From an early period (at least 1000 B.C.) copper was in use, -not yet however weighed, but estimated by the bulk, as I have already -described. Side by side with it ingots of gold and silver passed from -hand to hand. Such ingots are mentioned by Varro under the name of -_bricks_ (_lateres_)[440]. Though this mention refers to a later period, -we can yet infer from it with certainty that the practice of trafficking -in small ingots of gold and silver prevailed in Italy as elsewhere. With -gold came the art of weighing, which was also applied to silver. We have -given reasons for believing that the weight-unit employed was the same as -that which I have termed the ox-unit. We found the Etruscans, the close -neighbours of the Romans, and who had access to the gold fields of Upper -Italy, employing this unit as their standard from the commencement of -their coinage in the 5th century for both gold and silver. Any of the -towns of Southern Italy which struck gold, such as Metapontum, coined -on the same standard, which was likewise employed for silver, sometimes -a little reduced, by many communities, such as Tarentum. The standard -ingot of gold would bear a known relation to that of silver, to the bar -of bronze, the cow, and the sheep. We have given absolute proof of the -relation between cattle and bronze in the 5th cent. B.C., and we may well -infer similar constant relations between cattle and bronze, and the other -metals. With greater exactness in commercial dealings the bronze rod was -next weighed by the standard already in use for gold, and it was found -that each of the 12 parts or unciae into which it was divided weighed -just three times the ox-unit, that is, the weight of the small talent -which we have found likewise in Macedon, Sicily, and Lower Italy, and -which may have itself represented originally the conventional value of a -slave, which was three cows among the Celts, the close kinsfolk of the -Italians, and probably about the same among the early Greeks. As soon as -the rods or _asses_ were exchanged by weighing, they would quickly lose -their original form, which was only required so long as it was necessary -that they should be of certain fixed dimensions. Under the new system it -mattered not whether an _as_ was ·8 inches long, and three inches thick, -provided only it was of full weight when placed in the scale. These are -the pieces which are known as _aes rude_; as yet they are mere lumps of -metal, without any stamp or device. Gaius well describes this stage: -“For this reason bronze and the balance are employed (in _mancipatio_) -because formerly they only employed bronze coins, and there were bars -(_asses_), double bars (_dupondii_), half-bars (_semisses_) and quarters -(_quadrantes_), nor was there any gold or silver coin in use, as we can -learn from a law of the Twelve Tables, and the force and power of these -coins depended not on their number but on weight. For as there were bars -(_asses_) of a pound weight, there were also two pound bars (_dupondii_), -whence even still the term _dupondius_ is used, as if two in weight[441]. -And the name is still retained in use.” The half-bars likewise and -quarters were no doubt proportionately adjusted to weight. It will be -observed that the omission of all mention of the _decussis_ as a standard -seems to throw additional doubt on Mr Soutzo’s hypothesis. The plain fact -is that a mass of bronze ten pounds in weight would have been extremely -cumbrous and unhandy for purposes of manufacture into the implements of -everyday life. - -[Illustration: FIG. 56. Romano-Campanian Coin.] - -[Illustration: FIG. 57. Victoriatus] - -When and by whom a stamp was first placed on the bars, it is of course -impossible to say. Tradition however seems unanimous in assigning -it to the Regal period. Pliny’s account of the Roman coinage is as -follows[442]: “King Servius first stamped bronze. Timaeus hands down -the tradition that aforetime they employed it in a rough state at -Rome. It was stamped with the impressions of animals (_nota pecudum_), -whence it was termed _pecunia_. The highest rating in the reign of that -king (Servius) was 120,000 asses, and accordingly this was the first -class. Silver was struck A.U.C. 485 (B.C. 268) in the Consulship of Q. -Ogulnius and C. Fabius, five years before the first Punic war, and it -was enacted that the _denarius_ should pass for ten pounds of bronze, -the _quinarius_ for five, and the _sestertius_ for two and a half. Now -the libral weight was reduced in the First Punic war, as the state -could not stand the expenditure, and it was appointed that _asses_ of -the weight of a _sextans_ (2 _unciae_) should be struck. Thus there -was a gain of five-sixths, and the debt was cleared off. The type of -that bronze coin was on the one side a double Janus, on the other a -ship’s beak, whilst on the _triens_ and _quadrans_ there was a ship. The -_quadrans_ was previously termed a _teruncius_ from _tres unciae_ (three -ounces). Afterwards under the pressure of the Hannibalic wars in the -dictatorship of Q. Fabius Maximus, _asses_ the weight of an ounce were -coined, and it was enacted that the _denarius_ should be exchanged for -sixteen _asses_, the _quinarius_ for eight, the _sestertius_ for four; -thus the state gained one half. Nevertheless in the soldiers’ pay the -_denarius_ was always given for ten _asses_. The types of the silver -were _bigae_ and _quadrigae_ (two-horse and four-horse chariots), hence -they were termed _bigati_ and _quadrigati_[443]. By and by in accordance -with the Papirian law half-ounce _asses_ were struck. Livius Drusus when -tribune of the Plebs alloyed the silver with an eighth part of bronze. -The _Victoriatus_ was struck in accordance with a law of Clodius, for -previously this coin brought from Illyria was treated as merchandize. It -was stamped with a Victory and hence its name. The gold piece was struck -sixty-two years after the silver on such a standard that a scruple was -worth twenty sesterces, and this on the scale of the then value of the -sesterce made 900 go to the pound. Afterwards it was enacted that 1040 -should be coined from gold pounds, and gradually the emperors reduced the -weight, most recently Nero reduced it to 45.” - -This statement of Pliny is supported in various details by several -disjointed passages of Varro and Festus. Thus the former says that “the -most ancient bronze which was cast was marked with an animal (_pecore -notatum_)[444], and elsewhere he says that the ancient money has as its -device either an ox, or a sheep, or a swine[445],” a statement repeated -by Plutarch and other later writers. Festus (_s.v._ _grave aes_) says -“_aes grave_ was so called from its weight because ten _asses_, each a -pound in weight, made a _denarius_, which was so named from the very -number (i.e. _deni_). But in the Punic war, the Roman people being -burdened with debt, made out of every _as_ which weighed a pound (_ex -singulis assibus librariis_) six _asses_, which were to have the same -value as the former.” We have also a statement in the fragment of Festus -(4, p. 347, Müller) that afterwards the _asses_ in the _sestertius_ were -increased (_i.e._ to 4 from 2½), and that with the ancients the _denarii_ -were of ten _asses_, and were worth a _decussis_, and that the amount -of bronze (in the _denarius_) was reckoned at XVI _asses_ by the Lex -Flaminia when the Roman people were put to straits by Hannibal[446]. -Again, Festus says: “_Asses_ of the weight of a _sextans_ (two ounces) -began to be in use from that time, when on account of the Second Punic -war which was waged with Hannibal, the Senate decreed that out of the -_asses_ which were then libral (a pound in weight) should be made -those of a _sextans_ in weight, by means of which when payments began -to be made, both the Roman people would be freed from debt, and private -persons, to whom a debt had to be paid by the state, would not suffer -much loss[447].” Varro likewise is worth hearing: “In the case of silver -the term _nummi_ is used: that is borrowed from the Sicilians. _Denarii_ -(were so named) because they were worth ten (coins) of bronze each, -_quinarii_ because they were worth five each, _sestertius_, because a -half was added to two (for the ancient _sestertius_ was a _dupondius_ and -a _semis_). The tenth part of a _denarius nummus_ is a _libella_, because -it was worth a _libra_ of bronze in weight, and being made of silver was -small. The _sembella_ is half the _libella_, just as the _semis_ is of -the _as_. _Teruncius_ is from _tres unciae_; as this is the fourth part -of the _libella_ so the _quadrans_ is the fourth part of the _as_.” - -[Illustration: FIG. 58. Sextans (Aes Grave). (The two globules mark the -value.)] - -As so much difficulty and controversy surround the various questions -connected with the beginnings of Roman currency, I have thought it -best to give at full length the scanty data afforded by the ancient -authorities. Let us now state the principal facts revealed by those -extracts. (1) The Romans in the Regal epoch employed _aes rude_, but -according to the testimony of Timaeus (an Italian Greek historian who -wrote about B.C. 300), they had already before the days of the Republic -stamped bronze with figures of cattle. (2) Silver was first coined five -years before the beginning of the First Punic war: (3) Some time during -that war the _as_ was reduced from a pound to two ounces; (4) In the -Second Punic war under like circumstances the _as_ was reduced from two -ounces to one ounce; (5) The _denarius_ when first struck represented -ten libral _asses_, or a _decussis_; (6) In the Second Punic war when -the _as_ was reduced, the _denarius_ was ordered to pass for 16 instead -of 10 _asses_; (7) In spite of this reduction, the _denarius_ continued -to be regarded as containing only 10 _asses_ when employed in paying the -soldiers. - -Considerable numbers of _asses_ and the parts of _asses_ have come -down to us, many of them bearing marks of value as before described. -There is undoubted evidence of a constant reduction of the _as_. The -question arises, did the reduction take place _per saltum_ or by a -gradual process? Mommsen thinks that the _as_ continued to be of libral -weight until shortly before 264 B.C. and that it was then without any -intermediate steps reduced to the triens (4 ounces). Mr Soutzo on -the other hand maintains with vigour that from 338 B.C., the date at -which he fixes the first coinage of _asses_ at Rome, to 264 B.C., the -degradation was a gradual process, and he arraigns Mommsen on a charge -of disregarding the ancient authorities, who state, as we have seen, -that the change was from libral to sextantal _asses_. Mr Soutzo is thus -compelled to state that all the _asses_ within that period (338-264 -B.C.) although they have a range from almost full libral weight to only -3 ounces were treated as libral _asses_. Now this of course is a very -reasonable hypothesis on the principle which I have adopted that bronze -money was in fact merely token currency, used only for local circulation -and not for extraneous trade. But Mr Soutzo is precluded from adopting -such a position unless he gives up the basis of his whole work. He has -laid down that the bronze money was not a mere conventional currency, -but always was actual value for the amount which it represented. On this -assumption he obtains his relation of 1:120 between copper and silver. -Assuming that the sextantal reduction was contemporaneous with the issue -of the first _denarius_ (which is in direct defiance of the historians), -he found that the _denarius_ of 70 grs. = 2 ounces (840 grs.) of bronze; -therefore silver was to bronze as 120:1. Again, when the financial crisis -took place during the Second Punic war and the _denarius_ was reduced -(as we learn from the actual coin weights) to 62 grs., and it was made -to pass for 16 _asses_ instead of 10 _asses_, he finds that since 62 -grs. of silver = 16 _asses_ of 432 grs. (_unciae_) silver was to bronze -as 112:1. But in the latter case he omits to explain why it was that -the _denarius_ in paying the troops only counted for _ten asses_. It is -evident that if the relation between copper and silver was really as -1:112, there could have been no need for making this difference. But as -the soldiers were serving outside Rome, and Roman local token currency -would not be taken in payment, it was necessary to pay them according -to the market value of bronze. At Rome the _denarius_ was made to pass -for 16 _asses_, or three-fifths more than its actual value. It appears -therefore that the data given us by Pliny are not sufficient to allow -us to come to any definite conclusion as regards the relative value of -silver and bronze at that time. Moreover there is no evidence to show -that the _denarius_ was reduced from 70 grs. to 62 grs. by the Lex -Flaminia. It is on the whole more likely that this reduction took place -when the first gold coinage was issued (62 years after the first silver) -in 206 B.C., since there was every inducement to make such a change in -the silver as would admit of a convenient relation between the gold -_scruple_ and 20 _sestertii_. This again raises just doubts as regards -the accuracy of Mr Soutzo’s calculation. With reference to the reduction -of the _as_ to the sextantal standard we have seen that the truth of his -deductions rests entirely on the assumption that the degradation took -place _before_ the First Punic war at the same time as the issue of the -first silver coinage. This of course is directly contradicted by the -historians. But even granting that it was correct, it is difficult to see -why we should assume that the Roman _as_, which according to Soutzo’s -own principles had been nothing more than a token, should suddenly -have been treated as though it really was of the actual value which it -represented. There was no reason why, even though the unit of account -was the sextantal _as_, the _as_ should have been anything else than a -token in its relation to the silver currency: certainly it is strange -that, if the Romans after treating the _as_ as a token down to 268 B.C. -then suddenly gave it its full monetary value, they did not continue to -carry out their new principle. For as a matter of fact there are very -great differences in the weight of the sextantal _asses_, and after the -reduction to the uncial standard, the same process of degradation went on -without ceasing, as Soutzo himself has shown[448]. All these facts point -to the conclusion that the bronze coinage at Rome was only a local token -currency, such as is our own silver and bronze series at the present day. - -Let us now see if we can give a consistent explanation of the statements -of the ancient writers which I have quoted above. _Aes rude_ or bronze -in an unstamped or unmanufactured state was originally in use at Rome, -according to Timaeus. This period corresponds to that time when, as I -have endeavoured to show, _asses_ or _bars_ of given dimensions intended -to be made into articles for use or ornament passed from hand to hand, -as do the brass rods mentioned above at the present moment in the Congo -region of Africa. Then came the stamping of the _asses_ towards the close -of the regal period (according to Timaeus), when figures of animals -were placed thereon. We have seen above (p. 354) that such figures are -actually found on certain rough quadrilateral pieces of bronze found in -some parts of central Italy. With the use of weight instead of measure -for appraising their value, the shape of the _asses_ would become -modified, getting shorter and thicker. Finally, they assume the round -shape of ordinary coins, and bear certain well-defined symbols on both -sides, such as the Janus head and Rostrum on the _as_, that of Mercury -on the _sextans_. But as few of these round _asses_ are found to weigh -more than 10 _unciae_, it would seem that the process of degradation had -already set in before their issue. Gold and silver at the same epoch -passed by weight either after the ancient fashion in ingots, or as the -coined money of the Greek cities of the South or of the Etruscans. The -unit of account continues to be the _as_ of _full weight_. Thus all -penalties due to the state would be paid not in reduced _asses_ of only -5 or 4 ounces, but in full libral _asses_ as weighed in the balance. On -the other hand although reduced _asses_ were used by the state in paying -debts to private individuals, they were only received as tokens, and no -doubt the state was bound if called upon to pay a full pound of bronze -for every stamped reduced _as_ presented to it, but in ordinary times -this made no practical difference, for the bronze currency was purely -local all over Italy and Sicily, as we have seen above. It was far too -cumbrous to be used as a medium of international trade. - -When the Romans after defeating Pyrrhus and taking Tarentum had reduced -all Southern Italy and hence obtained great quantities of silver, -they proceeded five years before the beginning of the First Punic war -to issue silver _denarii_ or ten _as_ pieces. Are these pieces real -representatives of the as of account, or do they rather simply represent -the value of the then normal _as_ of currency, which was probably not -more than a _triens_ or four ounces or perhaps not more than a _quadrans_ -or three ounces? The latter is the more likely hypothesis. They had been -long accustomed to a bronze token currency, and it was most likely that -the new silver currency would be adapted to it. It is then likely that -the _denarius_ equalled ten _asses_ of at least 3 ounces each, in which -case silver was to bronze as 180:1. In transactions inside the state the -balance would be commonly, and in dealing with strangers invariably, -employed in all monetary transactions, ancient states being very jealous -of alien mintages. This is exemplified by Pliny’s statement that the -Victoriates brought from Illyria were treated simply as merchandize. Then -came the First Punic war, which lasted for two-and-twenty weary years, -during which the resources of the Republic were almost drained dry. The -state became virtually a bankrupt and simply paid in modern phraseology -3_s._ 4_d._ in the pound. It was effected thus: up to the present the -_as_ of full weight was the unit of account, although the coined _asses_ -had by this time come to be simply tokens of about 2 ounces each. The -state accordingly enacted that the _as_ of currency should become the -unit of account, and paid the state debt by these coins, and at the same -time made it legal for private individuals, who were bound under the old -order of things to pay their debts in libral _asses_ to discharge their -obligations by sextantal _asses_. Thus Pliny is perfectly right in saying -that the state made a profit of five-sixths. The influx of silver after -the conquest of Southern Italy and the requirements of large quantities -of bronze for the building of fleet after fleet, and for military -equipment, may have very well tended to appreciate the value of bronze at -this period. As the reduction in the size of the _as_ continued, though -the unit of account was two ounces, under the pressure of the Second -Punic war they repeated the same process. The _as_ was now not more than -an ounce, so they decreed that the _as_ of currency should again be the -_as_ of account, and the state thus gained a half, this time paying ten -shillings in the pound. - -The _ounce_ and _libra_ had been long well defined at Rome before the -silver coinage first appeared, and whilst we saw that the _sextula_ or -one-sixth of the _uncia_ was the lowest weight employed for bronze, the -fourth part of this weight, the _scriptulum_, had been regularly employed -in weighing silver and gold; as we have seen it owed its origin to the -fact that the Aeginetan silver obol was found to be about the weight -of the 24th part of an _uncia_ or inch of bronze. The first _denarii_ -were the weight of a _sextula_ or 4 _scriptula_ (70 grs.) of the older -weight. The _scriptulum_ and _sestertius_ were thus identical, and hence -in later days the unit of account was the _sestertius_ and not the _as_. -Accordingly when the gold coinage of 206 B.C. was issued, it was based on -the _scruple_, and consisted of pieces of 1, 2, and 3 scruples. - -[Illustration: FIG. 59. Gold Solidus of Julian II. (the Apostate).] - -We have now traced the origin of Roman currency sufficiently for the -purposes of this work. After various fluctuations in the weight of the -gold pieces under Sulla, Pompey, Julius Caesar and others, Constantine -the Great finally fixed the weight of the _aureus_ or _solidus_ at 4 -scruples in 312 A.D., and so it remained until the final downfall of the -Empire of the East in 1453. From this famous coin the various mintages -of mediaeval and consequently of modern Europe may be said to trace -their pedigrees. The _solidus_ was divided into _thirds_ or _tremisses_, -for the scrupular system had been abandoned, the _solidus_ being regarded -simply as a _sextula_ or one-sixth of the _uncia_, and not as a multiple -of the _scruple_. The _tremissis_ therefore weighed 24 grs. Troy, or -32 wheat grains. When the barbarian conquerors of the Roman Empire -began to coin silver they took as their model the gold _tremissis_. In -the earliest stage of the Anglo-Saxon mintage we find so-called gold -pennies of 24 grs. occasionally appearing. These are nothing else than -_tremisses_. But silver henceforward was to form for centuries the staple -currency of Western Europe, and the silver penny of 24 grs. (whence comes -our own penny-weight) became virtually the unit of account. As its weight -shows, the penny was based on the gold _tremissis_. - -[Illustration: FIG. 60. Gold Tremissis of Leo I.] - -The first regular coinage of gold in Western Europe began with the famous -gold pieces of Florence in the beginning of the 14th century. These -weighed 48 grs. or 2 _tremisses_. From their place of mintage the name -_florin_ (fiorino) became a generic term for gold coins. Accordingly -when Edward III. issued his first gold coins of 108 grs. each, although -differing so completely in weight from their prototype, they too were -called _florins_. In reality however Edward’s coin was 1½ solidus (72 + -36). The first attempt did not prove satisfactory, and with the issue of -the famous noble, first of 136½ grs., and afterwards of 129 grs., the -series of English gold coins may be said to begin, of which the latest -stage is the sovereign of 120¼ grs. Troy. - -I have already explained at an earlier stage the origin of the Troy -grain; before we end let me add a word on the origin of the Troy ounce. -The Troy pound like the Roman has 12 ounces, but whereas the Roman ounce -had 432 grs. Troy or 576 grs. wheat, the Troy ounce has 480 grs. Troy or -640 grs. wheat. How came this augmentation of the ounce? - -It is in Apothecaries’ weight that we find the key. This standard runs -thus - - 20 grs. = 1 scruple, - 3 scruples = 1 drachm, - 8 drachms = 1 ounce, - 12 ounces = 1 pound. - -Now note that there are 24 scruples in the ounce, and 288 scruples in the -pound, exactly as in the Roman system. But there is an element foreign -to the old Roman system as seen in the drachm of 60 grs. Now Galen and -the medical writers of the Empire used the post-Neronian _denarius_ of -60 grs. as a medicine weight. What more convenient weight unit could be -employed than the most common coin in circulation? The _drachma_ and -_denarius_ had long since been used synonymously in common parlance. But -as there were 18 grs. (Troy, 24 wheat grs.) in the old scruple, and there -were 60 grs. in the drachm or _denarius_, they were not commensurable, -and accordingly to obviate this difficulty the physicians for practical -purposes raised the scruple to 20 grs., in order that it might be -one-third of the drachm. The number of scruples in the ounce remaining 24 -as before, the ounce became augmented by 48 grs. (24 × 2) and accordingly -rose to 480 grs. We saw above that the Troy grain is the barley-corn. Why -is the latter so closely connected with ‘Troy weight’? When the scruple -was raised from 18 grs. Troy, 24 grs. of wheat, to 20 grs. Troy, it no -longer contained an even number of wheat grains, for the new _scruple_ -contained 26⅔ grs. wheat. As this was inconvenient, and on the other hand -the new scruple weighed exactly 20 barley-corns, the latter henceforth -became the lowest unit of this system. - - -_Conclusion._ - -It now simply remains to sum up the results of our enquiry. Starting -with the Homeric Poems we found that although certain pieces of gold -called _talents_ were in circulation among the early Greeks, yet all -values were still expressed in terms of cows. We then found that the -gold _talent_ was nothing else than the equivalent of the cow, the older -unit of barter, and we found that the _talent_ was the same unit as that -known in historical times under the names of Euboic stater or Attic -stater, and commonly described by metrologists as the light Babylonian -shekel. Our next stage was to enquire into the systems of currency used -by primitive peoples in both ancient and modern times, and everywhere -alike we found systems closely analogous to that depicted in the Homeric -Poems, and we found that in the regions of Asia, Europe and Africa, where -the system of weight standards which has given birth to all the systems -of modern Europe had its origin, the cow was universally the chief unit -of barter. Furthermore gold was distributed with great impartiality over -the same area, and known and employed for purposes of decoration from an -early period by the various races which inhabited it. We then found that -practically all over that area there was but one unit for gold, and that -unit was the same weight as the Homeric Talanton. Next we proved that -gold was the first object for which mankind employed the art of weighing, -and we then found that over the area in question there was strong -evidence to show that everywhere from India to the shores of the Atlantic -the cow originally had the same value as the universally distributed gold -unit. - -From this we drew the conclusion that the gold unit, which was certainly -later in date than the employment of the cow as a unit of value, was -based on the latter; and finally we showed that man everywhere made his -earliest essays in weighing by means of the seeds of plants, which nature -had placed ready to his hand as counters and as weights. Then we surveyed -the theories which derive all weight standards from the scientific -investigations of the Chaldeans or Egyptians, and having found that they -were directly in contradiction to the facts of both ancient history and -modern researches into the systems of primitive peoples, we concluded -that the theories of Boeckh and his school must be abandoned. - -Next we proceeded to explain the development of the various systems -of antiquity from our ox-unit, taking in turn the Egyptian, -Assyrio-Babylonian, Hebrew, Lydian, Greek and Italian. New explanations -of the origin of the Talent and Mina and also of the earlier types on -Greek coins and of the varieties of standard employed for silver by -the Greeks were offered, and finally in dealing with the systems of -Sicily and Italy arguments were advanced to show that the Roman _as_ -was originally nothing more than a rod or bar of copper of definite -measurements, and was in weight and method of division the same as the -Sicilian Litra and the Greek Obol. - -In how far the propositions here put forward have been proved, it must -remain for others to decide. - -Laus Deo, Pax Vibis, Requies Mortuis. - - - - -APPENDIX A - -THE HOMERIC TRIAL SCENE. - - Κεῖτο δ’ ἄρ’ ἐν μέσσοισι δύω χρυσοῖο τάλαντα, - Τῷ δόμεν, ὃς μετὰ τοῖσι δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴποι. - - _Il._ XVIII. 507-8. - - -I would not return to so well-worn a theme, were it not that editors like -Dr Leaf (_ad loc._) still state that there is nothing in the _language_ -of the last line to hinder us from taking it either of the litigant or of -the judge. - -Scholars have fixed their attention so closely on the words δίκην εἴποι -that they have completely overlooked the qualifying ἰθύντατα. In modern -courts of law we do not expect to hear the _straightest_ statement of a -case from advocates, but rather from the judge. The ancient Greek would -never dream of expecting a litigant to give a _straight_ statement of -his case. The following passages will show that ἰθύς, ἰθύνειν, εὐθύνειν, -ὀρθός are always applied to a judge (the converse σκολιός being used -of unjust judges). The metaphor is from the carpenter’s rule (cf. ἐπὶ -στάθμην ἰθύνειν _Od._ V. 245). - -Pind. _Pyth._ IV. 152 καὶ θρόνος, ᾦ ποτε ἐγκαθίζων Κρηθεΐδας ἱππόταις -_εὔθυνε_ λαοῖς δίκας. - -Solon 3. 36 _εὐθύνων_ σκολιὰς δίκας. - -_Il._ XVI. 387 οἳ βίῃ εἰν ἀγορῇ _σκολιὰς_ κρίνωσι θέμιστας. - -Hesiod _Opp._ 221 σκολιῇς δε δίκῃς κρίνωσι θέμιστας. - -Hes. _Opp._ 222 - - (Δίκη) κακὸν ἀνθρώποισι φέρουσα - οἵ τέ μιν ἐξελάσωσι καὶ οὐκ _ἰθεῖαν_ ἔνειμαν. - -Arist. _Rhet._ I. 1 οὐ γὰρ δεῖ τὸν δικαστὴν διαστρέφειν εἰς ὀργὴν -προάγοντας ἢ φθόνον ἢ ἔλεον· ὅμοιον γάρ κἂν εἴ τις, ᾧ μέλλει χρῆσθαι -_κανόνι_, τοῦτον ποιήσειε _στρεβλόν_. - -Pind. _Pyth._ XI. 15 ὀρθοδίκαν γᾶς ὀμφαλόν. - -Aesch. _Persae_ 764 _εὐθυντήριον_ σκῆπτρον. - -No one can then doubt that the words δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴποι can only refer -to the judge. - -The following account of a trial on the Gold Coast so well illustrates -the principle of payment having to be made to the judges that I think it -worth quoting. (_Eighteen years on the Gold Coast of Africa_, by Brodie -Crookshank, Vol. I. p. 279, London, 1853.) - -“When the day arrived for the hearing of Quansah’s charge, a large space -was cleanly swept in the market-place for the accommodation of the -assembly; for this a charge of ten shillings was made and paid. When the -Pynins (elders) had taken their seats, surrounded by their followers, -who squatted upon the ground, a consultation took place as to the amount -which they ought to charge for the occupation of their valuable time, and -after duly considering the plaintiff’s means, with the view of extracting -from him as much as they could, they valued their intended services at -£6. 15_s._, which he was in like manner called upon to pay. Another -charge of £2. 5_s._ was made in the name of tribute to the chief, and as -an acknowledgment of gratitude for his presence upon the occasion. £1. -10_s._ was then ordered to be paid to purchase rum for the judges, £1 for -the gratification of the followers, ten shillings to the men who took the -trouble to weigh out the different sums, and five shillings for the court -criers. Thus Quansah had to pay £12. 15_s._ to bring his case before this -august court, the members of which during the trial carried on a pleasant -course of rum and palm wine.” - - - - -APPENDIX B. - -WHAT WAS THE UNIT OF ASSESSMENT IN THE CONSTITUTION OF SERVIUS TULLIUS? - - -Th. Mommsen in his Roman History (I. 95-96 English Trans.) has laid down -that land was the basis of assessment, on the analogy of the Teutonic -_hide_. He makes the members of the First Class those who held a whole -hide; and the remaining four classes were made up of those who held -proportionally smaller freeholds. When Mommsen has once spoken, it -is presumptuous to raise doubts. If however it can be shown that the -Italians rather based their assessments on cattle, and that furthermore -the statements of the later historians point to an original rating which -harmonizes well with such an original condition, it may have been worth -while to start enquiry once again in a case where the data are so scanty -and obscure. - -Pliny _H. N._ XXXIII. 3. 13. Maximus census CXX. assium fuit illo rege, -ideo haec prima classis. This is confirmed by Festus (_s.v._ _infra -censum_, p. 113 Müller) infra classem significantur qui minore summa quam -centum et viginti millia aeris censi sunt. - -Livy I. 42 says the rating of the _prima classis_ was Centum millia -aeris, of the _secunda classis_ was infra centum assium ad quinque -et septuaginta millia. _Tertia classis_ quinquaginta millia, _Quarta -classis_, quinque et viginti millia. _Quinta classis_, undecim millia. - -Dionysius of Halicarnassus (IV. 16-17) puts the rating of the 1st class -at 100 minae (of silver) or 10,000 drachms; of the 2nd at 75 minae, of -the 3rd at 50 minae, of the 4th at 25 minae, and that of the 5th at 12 -minae. - -All are agreed that it is absolutely incredible that the original rating -of the first class was 120,000 _libral_ asses of bronze. The cow was -worth 100 _libral_ asses at Rome in 451 B.C. Therefore the rating of -120,000 asses would have been equivalent to 1200 cows. It is impossible -to believe that there could have been a numerous body of men in early -Rome possessed of such vast capital. Boeckh’s explanation is that with -the reduction of the _as_ from its original weight of a _libra_ to two -ounces, and one ounce, there was a corresponding raising of the amount of -the rating of the several classes. - -Mommsen on the other hand thinks that the rating was originally on -_land_, and that the change in the method of rating from land to bronze -took place at a time when land had greatly risen in value, and that -accordingly 120,000 _asses_ of the First Class are libral _asses_. Such -a change as Mommsen supposes must have taken place before 260-241 B.C., -for the _as_ was reduced to two ounces during the first Punic War. Yet -we cannot easily suggest any period before that date when there was -likely to have been so great a rise in the value of land, as is necessary -to account for the large rating of 120,000 _asses_, which according to -Mommsen’s reckoning would be worth about 400 lbs. of silver (or according -to Soutzo 1000 lbs. of silver). - -Boeckh’s hypothesis seems to fit better the conditions of the problem. -Much of the importance of the rating of the various classes passed away -when Marius (104 B.C.) changed the whole military system and chose the -troops from the _Capite censi_, as well as from the five property classes. - -The _as_ had been reduced to a single _uncia_ in the 2nd Punic War (cf. -p. 377). Thus 12 _asses_ of the _uncial_ standard were required to make -up the weight of the old _libral as_. Accordingly 120,000 _asses_ of -the 2nd century B.C. would be equal to 10,000 _libral asses_ of the -earlier days. But as by the Lex Tarpeia 100 _asses_ is the value of a -cow, 10,000 _libral asses_ = 100 cows. This would be by no means an -unlikely number of cows, to form the minimum of the wealthiest class of -a pastoral community. There is another curious piece of evidence which -seems to confirm my hypothesis. One of the provisions of the Licinian -Rogations (367 B.C.) was that no one should hold more than 500 _jugera_ -of the Public Land, or should be allowed to feed more than _one hundred_ -large cattle or 500 small cattle on public pastures. μηδένα ἔχειν τῆσδε -τῆς γῆς πλέθρα πεντακοσίων πλείονα, μηδὲ προβατεύειν ἑκατὸν πλείω τὰ -μείζονα καὶ πεντακοσίων τὰ ἐλάσσονα. Appian, _Bell. Civ._ I. 8. If 100 -large cattle were the number which qualified a Roman for the first class, -there was every reason why Licinius and Sextus should have taken 100 as -the _maximum_ number of cows which a citizen could keep on the public -pastures. - -Next I shall show that the method of rating by cattle and not by land -was that actually practised in Sicily. That island stood in such close -relations to the Italian Peninsula both geographically and ethnologically -that we may reasonably infer that the method of rating in use there was -also in use in Italy. - -Now we learn from Aristotle’s _Oeconomica_ (II. 21) that when the tyrant -Dionysius oppressed the Syracusans with excessive exactions, they ceased -to keep cattle: - -Τὼν δὲ πολιτῶν διὰ τὰς εἰσφορὰς οὐ τρεφόντων βοσκήματα, εἶπεν ὅτι ἱκανὰ -ἦν αὐτῷ πρὸς τοσοῦτον· τοὺς οὖν νῦν κτησαμένους ἀτελεῖς ἔσεσθαι, πολλῶν -δὲ ταχὺ κτησαμένων πολλὰ βοσκήματα, ὡς ἀτελῆ ἑξόντων, ἐπεὶ ᾤετο καιρὸν -εἶναι, τιμήσασθαι κελεύσας ἐπέβαλε τέλος, κ.τ.λ. - -If the citizens of Syracuse, a great Greek trading city, were still -rated in cattle in the time of Dionysius (405-367 B.C.), _à fortiori_ we -may expect the same primitive method of assessment to prevail among the -pastoral peoples of Central Italy in the 6th and 5th centuries B.C. - -Among the Kelts, the close kinsfolk of the Italians, the same system -probably prevailed. Thus in the ancient Irish laws, where the various -classes of freemen are described, there are a number of them called -_Bo-aires_[449], cow-freemen. - -As modern research has shown that everywhere among the Aryans land was -originally held in common, and that separate property in land sprung up -only at a comparatively late period, we may with some confidence infer -that in Italy likewise in early days a man’s wealth was reckoned in his -cattle, and not in lands, such as I have shown to have been the practice -among the Greeks of the ‘Homeric times’ (‘The Homeric Land System,’ -_Journal of Hellenic Studies_, 1885). - - - - -APPENDIX C. - -KELTIC AND SCANDINAVIAN WEIGHT SYSTEMS. - - -It is always dangerous to deal with things Keltic. So much difficulty is -there in getting at any facts amidst masses of wild assertions and loose -conclusions, that a prudent man may well shrink back. However, as it is -worth while to give some _facts_ respecting the actual weights of gold -rings and other ornaments, I have thought it best to print the following -pages. - -Attempts have long ago been made to find the standard of the so-called -ring money. Sir William Betham, followed by John Lindsay[450], after -weighing many examples, arrived at the conclusion that they are based -on the ounce Troy. Now as the ounce Troy is entirely unknown to the -Brehon Laws, and was only brought into Ireland by the English settlers, -it is needless to argue further against that doctrine. Dr Petrie’s[451] -discussions about Irish coins are similarly vitiated by his treating as -Troy grains the grains of wheat mentioned by the authorities. - -1. _Irish._ Let us work back from the known to the unknown. - -The system in the Brehon Laws is as follows: - - 1 Cumhal (ancilla) = 3 Cows. - 1 Cow = 1 Unga (uncia of silver). - 1 Unga = 24 Screapalls. - 1 Screapall = 3 Pinginns. - 1 Pinginn = 8 grs. of wheat. - -Unga = 576 grs. of wheat. - -The ounce seems to be the highest unit of weight, and just as in the -Brehon Laws an _unga_ of silver is equated to a cow, so in early times -an _unga_ of gold seems to have been the regular value of a slave, the -most valuable of living chattels. At least we may so infer from a curious -story of St Finnian of Clonard: - - LIFE OF ST FINNIAN (OF CLONARD, CO. MEATH). - - (BOOK OF LISMORE, fol. 24 b, c.) - - Tainic iar sin Finnen cu Cilldara co Brighit, cu m-bui ic - tiachtuin leiginn ocus proicepta fri re. Ceilebrais iar sin do - Brigit ocus dobreth Brighit fainne oir dho. Nir ’bho santach som - imon saegul: ni roghabh in fainne. “Ce no optha,” ar Brigit, - “roricfea a leas.” Tainic Finnen iar sin cu Fotharta Airbrech. - Dorala uisce do. Roinnail a lamha asin usci[452]: tuc lais for a - bhais asan uisci in fáinne targaidh Brighit dó. - - Táinic iar sin Caisin, mac Naemain, co faelti moir fri Finden. - Ocus coneadhbair fein dó ocus roacain fris ró Fotharta ic - cuinghidh oir fair ar a shaeire. “Cia mét,” ar Finnen, - “conaidheas?” “Noghebhudh uingi n-oir,” ar Caisin. Rothomthuis sé - iar sin in fainne [ocus frith uingi oir[453]] ann. Dorat Caisin - hi ar a shaeriri. - - TRANSLATION. - - “After that came Finnian to Kildare to Brigit and he was engaged - in teaching and preaching for a time. He takes leave afterwards - of Brigit and Brigit gave a ring of gold to him. He was not - covetous regarding the world: he accepted not the ring. “Though - thou refusest,” said Brigit, “thou wilt require it.” Finnian came - after that to Fotharta Airbrech[454]. [On his way] he met water. - He washed his hands with the water [and] brought on his palm from - out the water the ring that Brigit offered to him. - - “After that came Caisin, son of Naeman, with great joy to [visit] - Finnian. And he offered himself to him and complained to him - that the king of Fotharta was demanding gold from him for his - liberation. “How much,” said Finnian, “asketh he?” “He would - accept an ounce of gold,” said Caisin. He [Finnian] weighed after - that the ring (and there was found an ounce of gold[455]) in it. - Caisin gave it for his liberation.” - -I am indebted for this valuable reference, which also enables us to form -an idea of the relative value of gold and silver in early Ireland, to the -Rev. B. Mac Carthy, D.D., of Youghal. - -But there is another weight called crosoch (crosóg or crosach), found -in the most ancient poems. For instance in Cuchulaind the brooch of -Queen Medbh, “My spear brooch of gold which weighs thirty ungas, and -thirty half ungas, and thirty crossachs and thirty quarter [crossachs].” -(O’Curry, _Manners and Customs_, Vol. III. p. 102.) The weight of -a crosoch we learn from a gloss quoted by O’Donovan (Supplement to -O’Reilly’s Dictionary) from _MS. R. I. A._, No. 35, 5. 49. - - da pinginn agas cetrime pinginne isin lacht caerach i, - crosóg[456]. - -“Two pinginns and a fourth of a pinginn are a milk of a sheep, i.e. a -crosóg.” Since 1 pinginn = 8 grs. wheat therefore a crosóg = 18 grs. -wheat or 13·5 grs. Troy. - -There are accordingly 32 crosochs in the unga of the Brehon Laws. - -Inspection at once shows that the crosoch must have belonged to a -different system, on which either the system of ungas and screapalls was -grafted or _vice versa_. The expulsion of the crosoch from the later -Irish shows that the first alternative is the true one. - -Again, it is certain that the unga and screapall were borrowed from the -Roman system, probably before the time of Constantine, as after his time -the solidus became universal throughout the Empire, and has left its -impress everywhere. - -The crosoch therefore must be non-Roman, _i.e._ belong to the native -population. - -Above we saw that it was used along with ungas and half ungas in -describing Medbh’s Fibula. Here is historical evidence of its use in the -weighing of gold ornaments. - -There were certainly 32 crosochs in the ounce of the Brehon Laws, but if -we can show in another system of north-western Europe a weight exactly -the same as the crosoch, with an ounce which is its thirty-fold, we may -hesitate to lay down that the full Roman ounce with its 432 grs. Troy -(576 grs. wheat) was the earliest form of Irish _unga_. - -There is no mention of screapalls in the weight of Medbh’s brooch. It -is quite possible that under ecclesiastical influences the full Roman -ounce and its division into screapalls may have been introduced at a -comparatively late period. The contact between Kelts and Scandinavians in -early times has of late excited much interest. - -2. Let us now turn to the old Norse system. It is as follows: - - 1 pening = 13·5 grs. Troy - 10 penings = 1 örtug = 136·7 grs. - 3 örtugs = 1 öre = 410 grs. - 8 öres = 1 mark = 3280 grs. - -Let us deal first with the mark. As its name signifies, it in all -probability was originally not a _weight_, but a _measure_. The use of -_mark_ as a land measure is well known in the Teutonic languages. It is -also used as a measure of length. Thus a mark of cloth consists of 448 -_alen_ or _ells_. After what we have learned about the history of the -Roman _as_ (p. 354) we need not be surprised if a term originally used -as a measure of some article which was not as yet sold by weight, came -in similar fashion to be incorporated at a later period into the weight -system as a higher unit. If the mark was originally a given measure -of bronze or iron, we can readily see how it came later on to be used -as a weight, and ultimately to be the chief unit of account among our -Anglo-Saxon forefathers, until it was at last driven out by the _pound_. - -That silver was cast into bars which weighed a mark is rendered highly -probable by the fact that three of the silver bars found at Cuerdale -weigh respectively 3960, 3954, and 3950 grs. Troy; that is, just the -weight of 160 pennies of the reign of Alfred. 160 pennies are two-thirds -of a pound of 240 pennies, or in other words a _mark_. - -The practice of running silver into ingots of such a weight may well have -arisen from an earlier practice of employing bronze or iron bars of such -a weight. It is at all events certain that the mark is native Teutonic -and is not borrowed from Rome. That the Kelts at least used bars of iron -as money is made not unlikely by a famous passage of Caesar which I shall -quote later on. A various reading states that the Britons used iron -rods as money (_ferreis taleis_). Even without this we may reasonably -infer from what we have learned of the practice of primitive peoples in -dealing with iron or copper, that the Teutons and Kelts must have used -these by measure. It is well known that the Swedes used ingots of copper -as currency down to comparatively recent times. It is then most likely -that the _öre_ or ounce of 410 grs. was the highest original weight unit, -just as the _unga_ is in the ancient Irish system. The weight of this -_öre_ is of great interest. If we found the Roman pound of 12 ounces in -Scandinavia, we should at once say that the _öre_ of 410 grs. was the -reduced Roman ounce (432 grs.). But as the native mark evidently got -its position before the influence of Rome was felt in the North, we may -well consider the _öre_ to be pre-Roman. The reader will remember that -I identified the ancient Roman _uncia_ with the small talent of Sicily -and Macedonia. The latter weighed 3 ox-units or about 405 grs. I also -suggested that it originally represented the value of a _slave_, and -was thus the original highest unit used for gold or silver. I showed -on an earlier page (141) that the Norse _örtug_, the one-third of the -_öre_, was the price of a cow. If three cows were the price of a slave in -Scandinavia as they were in Ireland, and probably in Homeric Greece, an -_öre_ of gold was the price of a slave. The passage from the life of St -Finnian given at once shows that an ounce of gold was the regular price -of a slave in early Ireland, and probably a good Scandinavian scholar -could soon find similar evidence for the value of the old Norse slave. - -The meaning and derivation of the term _örtug_ have been much discussed. -It occurs in the forms _örtog_, _örtug_, _ertog_, _œrtug_. Cleasby’s -Lexicon makes nothing out of the first part of the word, but takes the -second part (-tog -tug = tugr = 20), because _örtug_ had the value of 20 -_penningar_, though _tugr_ means 10. But as a matter of fact there were, -as we saw above, 240 _penningar_ in the mark, and therefore there were 10 -_penningar_ in the _örtug_. Holmboe[457] goes more deeply into the origin -of _örtug_. He says, “As _á_, pl. _œr_, signifies a _ewe_, and _tug-r_ as -a derivative of _ten_ both by itself and in compounds signifies _ten_, -_ertug_ seems originally to have signified 10 _ewes_, just as the weight -_ertug_ betokens the weight of 10 _peningar_, and _peningr_ itself also -means a _sheep_. It may be regarded as questionable to assume the plural -_œr_ to form the first part of the compound, yet _œr_ must at an early -period have been used in the formation of compounds, since both the -folkspeech of Norway has the form _œr-saud-ewe_, sheep, technically a -_ewe-with-lamb_, and the folkspeech of Denmark has _œr lam_ in the sense -of _ewe-lamb_[458].” Another suggestion is that _örtug_ comes from _arta_ -= a pea-_formed knob_, so that örtug = örtu-vog, the weight of a pea. - -The objection to this would be that the pea would weigh 13·5 grs. Troy, -which seems far too much. - -In spite of the philological difficulty in making _örtug_ = 10 ewes, -it is very remarkable that this value corresponds so accurately with -the value of a cow, which I independently found for it. I have already -pointed out that 10 sheep were the usual value of a cow. So it was at -Rome in 451 B.C. and so it is with the Modern Ossetes. The ox fit for -the yoke was probably worth 20 lambs or 5 sheep in Lusitania[459], and -as we saw that in the Welsh Laws the ox when fit for the yoke was worth -half a full-grown cow, the Lusitanian cow was worth 10 sheep. So also -at Athens, when Plutarch[460] says an ox was worth 5 sheep, he probably -means an ox fit for the yoke, the cow being worth 10 sheep. In the -Brehon Laws 8 sheep go to the cow, but as I have already pointed out the -insulated position of Ireland would tend to cause a variation in prices -from those on the mainland of Europe. Thus we see from the story of St -Finnian that gold must have been worth only three times its weight in -silver in Ireland in the early centuries of our era. For the price of a -slave was an ounce of gold, whilst in the Brehon Laws it is 3 ounces of -silver. It might be said that we cannot prove that this was the value of -a slave in gold and silver at any one time, and that silver may have been -much cheaper at an earlier date. When we recollect that silver has never -existed in any quantity in Ireland, and that where it does exist it can -only be obtained by systematic mining, a thing impossible in the eternal -turmoil of Ireland, and also bear in mind that when Japan was opened to -Europeans in this century gold was exchanged for three times its weight -in silver, we need not think such a relation at all unlikely in ancient -Ireland. The paucity of silver ornaments in the Royal Irish Academy -Museum confirms this opinion. But the evidence from the Penitentials -shows that silver was scarce at a comparatively still early date in -Ireland[461]. Thus XII altilia vel XIII sicli praetium unius cuiusque -ancillae. - -I have already shown the universality of making gold ornaments after -a fixed weight. The passages given above show that a similar practice -existed among the ancient Irish. - -Let us turn to the numerous gold rings, commonly called Ring Money, of -which there are some 50 in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy of -various weights and sizes. I give these weights. Let us examine them, -and see if we can find any indications gained inductively of a weight -standard. - -As by inspection we see that the smallest rings weigh 13 and 14 grs. -Troy, and the next three 29, 31, 32 respectively, which look like -the double of the smaller, I shall group the rings according as they -approximate to the multiples of 15. - - ---------+---------------------+----------+---------+-------+-------- - Multiples| Actual Ring Weights | Multiples| Actual | Rings | Weights - of 15 | (Royal Irish Acad.) | of 15 | | | - ---------+---------------------+----------+---------+-------+-------- - 15 | 13, 14 | 180 | 179 | 345 | - 30 | 29, 31, 32, 36 | 195 | 199, 203| 360 | - 45 | 40, 46 | 210 | 206, 209| 375 | 372 - 60 | 54, 56, 58, 59, | 225 | 220 | 370 | - | 61, 65, 65 | | | | - 75 | 69, 73 | 240 | 247 | | - 90 | 84, 84, 88, 96 | 255 | 259 | | - 105 | 98, 104, 111 | 270 | | | - 120 | 121, 124 | 285 | 283, 283| | - 135 | | 300 | | | - 150 | 144, 144, 147, | 315 | 322 | | - | 147, 150, 151 | | | | - 165 | 171, 172 | 330 | 332 | | - -A glance at the foregoing table shows that the most numerous group of -rings occurs at the fourfold (60), no less than seven specimens ranging -themselves at that point, next we find six specimens at the tenfold -(150), whilst next in order comes the sixfold with four examples. There -are three cases of the double (30). On the other hand it is worth -noticing the absence of the ninefold, whilst there are three instances -of the sevenfold, and the absence of the eighteenfold (2 × 9) likewise, -whilst we have the elevenfold, twelvefold, thirteenfold, fourteenfold. -However from the absence of the twentyfold (2 × 10) we cannot lay great -stress on this. The heaviest specimen (372) closely approximates to the -twenty-five fold (375). - -I add the weights of the ancient Irish gold rings preserved in the -British Museum. - - _Irish small plain ring money. Some are without localities but - may be assumed to be Irish. Marked thus *._ - - *103, 563, *389, *121, *29½, 218, 224, 323, 295 injured, 218, - 122, 90, 28, 56, 215 copper plated with gold (injured), 299, 148, - 98, 366, 89 piece cut from a larger bracelet?, 48½ hollow and - open? plating of bronze ring? (banded), 422, 410 (ounces), 288 - (injured). - - _Irish fluted ring money. * No precise locality, but presumably - Irish._ - - *106, *123 (worn), 30, 59, 90, 66, 59½. - - With disks, 249, 806 (2 oz.), 595, 283, 169, 665, 139, 119. - - Dots, no lines, 32. - -The weights of these rings show many points of agreement with those in -the Irish Museum. Thus we get 28, 29½, 30, and 32 grs. corresponding to -29, 31, and 32 grs. of the second group in the Irish Table. Again, 56 and -59½ where we get 54, 56, 58, 59, 61 in the Irish, and 66 corresponding -to 65, 65; 98 to 96 and 98; and 89 corresponding to 88 and 90; 119, -121, 122 and 123 to 121 and 124; 139 to 144, and 144 and 148 to 147 and -147; then 169 to 171 and 172. Then comes a break, and we get 215, 218, -218, 224 corresponding to 220, and 249 to 247, and 283 to 283 and 283; -and 323 to 322, and 360 to 366. But the British Museum gives us in the -higher weights three very important specimens: for 410 grs. is the ounce -corresponding exactly to the old Norse _öre_ of 410 grs., and the ring -of 422 grs. looks like the later ounce rising towards the full weight of -432. The ring of 806 grs. is plainly 2 ounces of the standard of 410 (806 -÷ 2 = 403). - -The occurrence of several specimens so constantly all of the same -weight, as for instance those about 220 grs., points beyond doubt to the -conclusion that when the rings were being made a given quantity of gold -was weighed out for the purpose. The story of St Finnian proves that for -any transaction in which rings were employed as money, the scales were -employed. - -There is a set of leaden weights in the Royal Irish Academy Collection, -found at Island Bridge, Dublin, in 1869, when Ancient Irish and -Scandinavian remains were found together. As they are more or less -corroded, it is not advisable to lay much stress on their present weights. - - grs. - 1. Semicircular weight 1852 - 2. Animal’s head 1550 - 3. Circular 1221 - 4. 958 - 5. 634 - 6. Oblong 539 - 7. 459 - 8. Quadrangular 414 (oz.) - 9. 395 (oz.) - 10. 220 - -There are certainly some interesting points of agreement between the -weights and the gold ornaments, _e.g._ the weights of 220, 390, 414, 630, -have corresponding weights in gold. The largest weight may be 4½ oz. of -410 grs. - - * * * * * - -Let us now return to the Irish monetary system, and see if we can -determine more accurately its relation to that of Rome. - - 8 grains of wheat = 1 pinginn. - 24 ” ” = 3 pinginns = 1 screapall. - 576 ” ” = 72 ” = 24 screapalls = 1 unga. - -As regards _unga_ and _screapall_ we have spoken already. Of their origin -there is no doubt. The pinginn on the other hand is not so easy. The -name is certainly Teutonic, said to be ultimately a loan word formed -from _pecunia_. It seems to have been employed as a general term for the -smallest form of currency. Hence we find the Saxon form (_pendinga_) -applied to the 240th part of the lb., and of about 32 grs. wheat, and the -Norse _peningr_ used for the 240th part of the _mark_, whilst in Ireland -the cognate form is applied to the 72nd part of the ounce, and is of the -weight of 8 grains _wheat_. - -The Irish employed the system of Uncia and Scripula. Shall we say then -that this system was in vogue in Britain likewise before the time of -Constantine and yielded slowly before the later one? - -Since then it was common to the Kelts on both sides of the Irish Sea, -and we find that in Ireland it was grafted upon an earlier system, of -which the _crosoch_ is a survival, we may reasonably infer that the Kelts -of Britain had likewise a native system analogous to the _crosoch_. But -further, of this we have strong evidence of two kinds. Caesar _B. G._ v. -12, when describing the British Kelts and their manners, says; pecorum -magnus numerus. Utuntur aut aere aut nummo aureo aut annulis ferreis ad -certum pondus examinatis pro nummo[462]. The passage has been mutilated -by Editors, but this is the reading of the best MSS. Caesar thus tells us -that they had a system of weights of their own. Secondly the evidence of -the actual British Coins (cf. Evans, _Coins of Ancient Britons_) which -are of a standard not Roman. - -Now we have seen above that the Irish gold rings were weighed on a -standard of almost 13·5 grs. Troy. Let us now see if the larger gold -ornaments preserved in our Museums confirm or disprove the evidence of -the rings. I shall first give the weights of those in the Royal Irish -Academy[463]: - - _Crescent shaped ornaments_: 1539, 434 (ounce of Brehon Laws?), - 733, 1008, 255, 2013, 489, 552, 660, 1081, 98, 432 (ounce of - Brehon Laws), 339, 400 (early ounce = Norse _öre_?), 187, 390 - (old ounce?), 797 (2 ounces, 2 × 398½). - - The following are not in Wilde’s Catalogue: 472, 505, 542, 540, - 630, 647, 667, 687, 720, 722, 737, 1092, 4331. - - _Torques_: 476, 1013, 1527, 3126, 3168, 4722, 5941, 6007, 10268. - - Not in Wilde: 154, 342, 1946, 2715, 4172, 5207, 5275, 6012, 6881. - - _Armlets_: 144, 158, 182, 329, 401 (small pre-Roman ounce), 421 - (ounce), 487, 510, 684, 757, 894, 989, 1037, 1369, 1630 (4 ounces - of 407 grs.?), 1716 (4 ounces of 426 grs.?), 2089 (5 oz. of 418 - grs.?), 5635 (14 oz. of 402 grs.?), 6265 (15 oz. of 417 grs.). - - Not in Wilde: 130, 145 (⅓ of oz. of 432 grs.?), 178, 184, 187, - 199, 208, 215 (half oz. of 432 grs.?), 241, 289, 301, 303 (¾ oz. - of 405 grs.?), 345, 396 (oz.?), 487, 509 (1¼ oz.?), 547 (1⅓ of - oz.), 606 (1½ oz. of 405 grs.?), 630 (1⅓ oz. of 420 grs.?), 740, - 753 (1¾ oz.), 1093 (2½ oz.?), 1190, 1210 (3 oz. of 405 grs.), - 1267 (3 oz. of 422 grs.?), 1322, 1641 (4 oz. of 410 grs.), 1730 - (4 oz. of 432 grs.?), 1836, 1836 (4½ oz. of 410 grs.?), 1940 (5 - oz. of 388 grs.? or 4¾ oz. of 410 grs.?), 1980 (5 oz. of 396 grs. - or 4¾ oz. of 410 grs.?), 2201, 6144 (15 oz. of 410 grs.?), 13557 - (33 oz. of 410 grs.?). - - _Fibulae_: 56 (4 crosachs), 179, 180 (⅖ oz. of 400 grs.?), 415 - (oz.), 600 (1½ oz. of 400 grs.?), 1231 (3 oz. of 410 grs.), 1345 - (3½ oz. of 432 grs.), 1596 (4 oz. of 399 grs.?), 2301 (5¼ oz. of - 400 grs.), 2536 (6 oz. of 422 grs.), 17200 (43 oz. of 400 grs.?), - 8092 (20 oz. of 404 grs.), 19440 (48 oz. of 405 grs.). - - Not in Wilde: 61, 106 (¼ oz.), 170, 170 (⅖ oz. of 425 gr.), 191, - 196 (½ oz.?), 207, 209 (½ oz.), 248, 275 (⅔ oz. of 411 grs.), 315 - (¾ oz.?), 379 (oz.), 542 (1⅓ oz.?), 557 (1⅓ oz.?), 586 (1½ oz.?), - 649 (1½ oz. of 432 grs.?), 1187 (3 oz. of 396 grs.?). - - _Gorgets_: 1160 (3 oz. of 387 grs.?), 2020 (5 oz. of 404 grs.?), - 3091 (8 oz. of 386 grs.?), 3444 (8 oz. of 430 grs.?). - -The result of an examination of the foregoing weights is to show that -in all probability the vast majority of them were made on a standard -much lighter than the Roman ounce of 432 grs., which was in full use in -mediaeval Ireland. We saw that the Roman ounce had been only 420 grs. -down to the Second Punic war, and I suggested that originally it was of -the same weight as the Sicilian talent 390-405 grs. Can we observe a -similar increase in the Irish ounce? The ounce of 400-410 seems to point -to a time when Kelt and Scandinavian had a common higher unit of similar -weight corresponding to the value of a slave[464], just as the Sicilian -and Macedonian talent of three ox units represented the same slave unit. - -I shall now give the weights of the various ornaments of gold found in -England, Wales and Scotland which are preserved in the British Museum. -For these I am indebted to the great kindness of Mr F. L. Griffith of the -Anthropological department. - - _Torques with rings._ - - Boxton, Suffolk, torque band twisted. 1·038 (2½ oz. of 415 grs.) - with double ring. Weight 24·8 grs. - - (A ring of 8 parallel sections, bronze plated with gold, - injured, weighs 111 grs.; the locality is not known, but it - seems connected with this class. Probably Irish, one in Wilde’s - catalogue of 7 sections.) - - Another double ring, Devonshire, weighs 563 grs. (1⅓ oz. of 420 - grs.). - - Lincolnshire torques; 1454 grs. (3½ oz. of 415 grs.), coiled band - 119½. Quadruple ring, 93½ (¼ oz.?), another similar 93. - - Cambridgeshire torques (not in B. M.) 1944 (5 oz. of 387? or 4¾ - oz. of 410), rest in B. M. viz.:—bracelet 613 (1½ oz. of 412 - grs.), two treble rings linked together, combined weight 358, - double ring, weight 132 (⅓ oz.), another 131½, two others similar - but smaller are each 68 (⅙ oz.). - - Wales. Two plain bracelets, near Beaumaris, Anglesea, 1028 - (2½ oz. of 410 grs.); 420 (1 oz.), crescent-shaped gorget, - Caernarvon, 2861 (7 oz. of 410 grs.). - - Scotland. Noard, near Elgin, torques formed of a plain twisted - band, 207 (½ oz.): 215 (½ oz.): 192 (½ oz.): 119 grains. - -The evidence points to an ounce of 420 grs. It is worth noting that this -is just 5 times the weight of the latest British coins, 84-82 grs. - -Whence then did the Britons obtain this pre-Roman standard? Was it of -native development or borrowed from some other people? By Britons we must -be careful to express not all the natives of Britain. They fall most -certainly into at least two groups. I. The Kelts in the East and South -East. II. The barbarous inhabitants of the interior, who subsisted by -hunting and fishing, and who were probably of that Iberic race, which -spread over all Western Europe before the advance of the Aryans. It is -only with the first group that we are immediately concerned. They almost -exclusively possessed the art of coining, as is shown by the area over -which British coins are found. Furthermore Caesar tells us of the close -relationship of the first group to the Gauls, as is shown by their tribal -names, language and customs. In addition their coinage is similar. Now -there can be no doubt as regards the source from whence the Gauls derived -their coinage. As they got the art of writing from the Phocaeans of -Massilia (founded circ. 600 B.C.), so likewise did they gain the art -of money-stamping from the same famous town, as has been completely -demonstrated long since. People are inclined at once to assume that the -Gauls and Britons got their weight standards also from Marseilles. There -is certainly some evidence to support this belief. Thus the gold torque -lately found in Jersey weighs 11500 grs., which is exactly the mina of -the Phocaic system at a time when 57½ grs. went to the drachm. Again -we have seen that there were a considerable number of gold ornaments -in Ireland and Britain which weigh 224-216 grs. This is the Phocaic -(or Phoenician) stater. But the question is not so simple as it might -appear at first sight in relation to the weight system, as will appear -most readily by a short survey of the history of the monetary system of -Massilia. - -I. The earliest coinage consists of silver, small divisions of the -Phocaic drachm (58-54 grains Troy). These have various symbols on the -obverse, but have uniformly the incuse square on the reverse. These may -be placed after 500 B.C. “Notwithstanding their archaic appearance, it -does not seem that these little coins are much earlier than the middle of -the 5th century.” - -II. Next comes a series, chiefly obols for the most part with head -of Apollo on obverse, and a wheel on reverse, the latter probably a -development of the earlier incuse square. They are mostly obols of 13-8 -grains. - -III. About the middle of the 4th century the drachm first appears with -the head of Artemis on obverse and a lion on the reverse, weighing 58-55 -grains. - -Now over all Gaul, and far into Northern Italy, and the valleys of the -Alps, as far as the Tyrol, the coinage of Massilia made its way and was -abundantly imitated. In fact these imitations formed the entire medium -of those regions until the Roman conquest. The imitations of the little -coins with Apollo and the wheel as reverse are found right into the north -of France, and in England. - -Did the Kelts borrow their 13½ grain unit from the 13 grain obol of -Massilia, or is it of far earlier growth? The Etruscans used a unit of -13½ grs. in the 4th century B.C., and we find the Massaliotes having -almost the same. Is the true answer this? All over Western Europe the -ox unit of 135 grs. of gold was subdivided into 10 parts each of 13½ -grs. These 10 parts corresponded to 10 sheep, the regular value of -a cow. There was also a higher unit from Greece to Gaul and Britain -corresponding to the slave. There were fluctuations in their worth in -various times and places, but on the whole there was a tendency to raise -the weight of the higher unit (ounce). But it is natural that the Kelts -may have taken over into their system certain units from the Phocaic -system which they used as multiples of their own smaller units, just as -the Teutonic peoples took the Roman pound into their own system, and the -natives of West Africa made the Spanish dollar the multiple of their own -native weights, based on seeds. Some idea of the relative ages of Keltic -gold ornaments may perhaps be got from applying the criterion of weight -standard to them. - - - - -FOOTNOTES - - -[1] _Metrologische Untersuchungen über Gewichte, Münzfüsse und Masse des -Alterthums in ihrem Zusammenhange._ Berlin, 1838. - -[2] χρύσεα χαλκείων, ἑκατόμβοι’ ἐννεαβοίων. - -[3] _Iliad_, XXIII. 750. - -[4] Victor A. L. Morier, _Murray’s Magazine_, August, 1889, p. 181. - -[5] _Trans-Caucasia_, p. 410 (Engl. trans. 1854). - -[6] Pollux, IX. 73, τὸ παλαιὸν δὲ τοῦτ’ ἦν Ἀθηναίοις νόμισμα καὶ ἐκαλεῖτο -βοῦς, ὅτι βοῦν εἶχεν ἐντετυπωμένον. εἰδέναι δ’ αὐτὸ καὶ Ὅμηρον νομίζουσιν -εἰπόντα ἑκατόμβοι’ ὲννεαβοίων. - -[7] Cf. Aesch. _Agam._ 36; Theognis 815. Cp. τὰν ἀρετὰν καὶ τὰν σοφίαν -νικᾶντι χελῶναι, a proverb (given by Pollux IX. 74) alluding to the -_Tortoise_ coins of Aegina; and Menander (_Al._ 1), παχὺς γὰρ ὗς ἔκειτ’ -ἐπὶ στόμα. - -[8] ἡ γλαῦξ ἐπὶ χαράγματος ἢ τετραδράχμου, ὡς Φιλόχορος· ἐκλήθη δὲ τὸ -νόμισμα τὸ τετράδραχμον τότε [ἡ] γλαῦξ· ἦν γὰρ ἡ γλαῦξ ἐπίσημον καὶ -πρόσωπον Ἀθηνᾶς, τῶν προτέρων διδράχμων ὄντων, ἐπίσημον δὲ βοῦν ἐχόντων. - -[9] Plutarch, _Solon_, c. 15. - -[10] Hultsch, _Reliquiae Scriptorum Metrologicorum_, I. 301, τὸ δὲ γαρ’ -Ὁμήρῳ τάλαντον ἴσον ἐδύνατο τῷ μετὰ ταῦτα Δαρεικῷ. ἄγει δ’ οὖν τὸ χρυσοῦν -τάλαντον Ἀττικὰς δραχμὰς β’, γράμματα ζ’, τετάρτας δηλαδὴ τεσσάρας. - -[11] _Iliad_, XVIII. 507, 8, - - κεῖτο δ’ ἄρ’ ἐν μέσσοισι δύω χρυσοῖο τάλαντα, - τῷ δόμεν, ὃς μετὰ τοῖσι δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴπῃ. - -See Appendix A for a linguistic proof that the two talents were for the -Judge. - -[12] _Ancient Law_, p. 375. - -[13] - - ἀνδρὶ δὲ νικηθέντι γυναῖκ’ ἐς μέσσον ἔθηκεν, - πολλὰ δ’ ἐπίστατο ἔργα, τίον δέ ἑ τεσσαράβοιον. - -[14] _Od._ I. 430. - -[15] _Iliad_, IX. 12 _seqq._ - -[16] _Il._ XXIII. 262 _seqq._ - -[17] Of course amongst the lowest races of savages such as the aborigines -of Australia, even barter is almost unknown. Each man makes his own stone -implements from the greenstone which is everywhere in abundance, his own -clubs and boomerangs, whilst Nature supplies all his other wants. - -[18] Whymper’s _Alaska_, p. 225. - -[19] Morier, _Murray’s Magazine_, August, 1889, p. 181. - -[20] Jevons, _Money_, p. 24. - -[21] _Tribes of California_, p. 21. - -[22] _Op. cit._, p. 335. - -[23] Clavigero, _Hist. of Mexico_, Vol. I. 386. - -They counted the Cacao nuts by 8000 and to save the trouble of counting -them they reckoned them by sacks, every sack being reckoned to contain -24,000. Cf. Prescott, _Conquest of Mexico_, Vol. I. p. 44. - -[24] G. M. Dawson, ‘Report on the Queen Charlotte Islands, 1878,’ p. 135 -B (_Geological Survey of Canada_), Montreal, 1880. - -[25] F. Magnússon, _Nordiske Tidskrift for Oldkyndighed_, II. 112. - -[26] _Wanderings in a Wild Country, or Three Years among the Cannibals of -New Britain_ (London, 1883), p. 55. - -[27] For shell money in the Caroline Islands cf. Kubary’s -_Ethnographische Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Karolinen Archipels_ (Leipzig, -1889); in the Pelew Islands cf. Karl Semper, _Die Pelau Inseln_ -(Leipzig, 1873), p. 60; and for shell money in general cf. R. Stearn’s -_Ethno-conchology_ (Washington, 1889). - -[28] Jevons, _Money_, 25. - -[29] Terrien de la Couperie, _Coins and Medals_, p. 193. - -[30] Terrien de la Couperie, _Coins and Medals_, p. 199. - -[31] Yule’s Translation, Vol. II. p. 70. - -[32] Gill, _River of Golden Sand_, II. p. 77. - -[33] Yule’s Translation, Vol. II. p. 45. - -[34] So the Irish _sed_, the most general name for _chattel_, originally -meant simply an _ox_. - -[35] _Cochin-Chine Française. Excursions et Reconnaissances_, XIII. -(1877), p. 296-8. - -[36] _Excursions et Reconnaissances_, XIII. No. 30 (1887), p. 296-304. - -[37] M. Aymonier, _Cochin-Chine. Excursions et Reconnaissances_, Vol. X. -No. 24 (1885), pp. 233 _seqq._ - -[38] _Ibid._ p. 317. - -[39] _Rig-Veda_, _Mandala_, VII. 90. 6, VIII. 67. 1-2, VI. 47, 23-4. - -[40] _Vendidâd_, _Fasgard_, VII. 41 (Darmesteter’s translation in Sacred -Books of the East). - -[41] _Vendidâd_, _Fasgard_, IX. 37. - -[42] _Ibid._ IV. 2. - -[43] Hakluyt Society, 1857, p. 35. - -[44] For _larins_ cf. Prof. Rhys Davids, “On the Ancient Coins and -Measures of Ceylon” (_Numismata Orientalia_, Vol. I. 68-73). Mr Rhys -Davids makes no mention of the bronze fish-hooks, but there are a number -of them in the British Museum. - -[45] I am indebted to the kindness of Mr A. Galetly of the Edinburgh -Museum of Science and Art for the drawing from which the figure here -shown is reproduced, as also for the drawing of the Calabar wire money -and West African axe money figured lower down. My friend Mr J. G. Frazer -(one out of countless kindnesses) called my attention to all three -objects. - -[46] Haxthausen, _Transkaukasia_ II. p. 30 (Engl. Trans. p. 409). - -[47] _Il._ XXIII. 485. - -[48] _Oecon._ II. 21. - -[49] II. 18. - -[50] _Annals of the Four Masters_, Anno 106 A.D. (O’Donovan’s ed.). - -[51] _Ancient Laws of Wales_, p. 795. - -[52] O’Donovan’s Supplement to O’Reilly, s.v. _Lacht_: _Senchus Mor_, I. -287. - -[53] Thorpe, _Laws of the Anglo-Saxons_, I. 357. Cunningham, _History of -English Commerce_, I. 117. - -[54] Illud notandum est quales debent solidi esse Saxonum: id est, bovem -annoticum utriusque sexus, autumnali tempore, sicut in stabulum mittitur, -pro uno solido: similiter et vernum tempus, quando de stabulo exiit; et -deinceps, quantum aetatem auxerit, tantum in pretio crescat. De annona -vero bortrinis pro solido uno scapilos quadraginta donant et de sigule -viginti. Septemtrionales autem pro solidum scapilos triginta de avena -et sigule quindecim. Mel vero pro solido bortrensi, sigla una et medio -donant. Septemtrionales autem duos siclos de melle pro uno solido donent. -Item ordeum mundum sicut et sigule pro uno solido donent. In argento -duodecim denarios solidum faciant. Et in aliis speciebus ad istum pretium -omnem aestimationem compositionis sunt. _Capitulare Saxonicum_, II. -Migne, XCVII. 202. - -[55] Schive and Holmboe, _Norges Mynter_ (Christiania, 1865), pp. I.-III. - -[56] G. Hoffmann, _Zeitschrift für Assyriologie_, Vol. II. (1887) p. 48. - -[57] Schliemann, _Mycenae_, and _Tiryns_, p. 354. - -[58] _Il._ XVIII. 401 πόρπας τε, γναμπτάς θ’ ἕλικας, κάλυκάς τε, καὶ -ὅρμους. - -[59] _Homer. Epos_, 279-281 (2nd ed.). - -[60] Hesychius s.v. ἕλικες explains them as _earrings_ (ἐνώτια), or -_armlets_, _anklets_ (ψέλλια), or _rings_ (δακτύλιοι). Eustathius on -_Iliad_ XVIII. 400 explains them as ἐνώτια ἢ ψέλλια παρὰ τὸ εἰς κύκλον -ἑλίσσεσθαι, “earrings or armlets (anklets), so called from being rolled -up” (_helissesthai_). Cp. Ebeling, _Lexicon Homericum_, s.v. ἕλιξ. - -[61] Keary, _Catalogue of Anglo-Saxon Coins_, I. p. vii. From _beag_ Mr -Max Müller derives _buy_ in spite of a phonetic difficulty. - -[62] Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 are in the collection of my friend Mr R. Day, -F.S.A., of Cork. The others are in my own possession. - -[63] _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, Vol. X. Here is the description and -weight of the rings (which I have been enabled to figure by the kindness -of Mr John Murray): - - +--------+-------------+-----------------------+ - | | | WEIGHT | - | METAL | DESCRIPTION +---------+-------------+ - | | GRAMMES | GRAINS TROY | - +--------+-------------+---------+-------------+ - | Silver | Plain ring | 8·8 | 137 | - | Gold | Spiral | 8·5 | 132 | - | ” | ” | 9·9 | 153 | - | ” | ” | 10·8 | 167 | - | ” | Plain ring | 15·9 | 248 | - | ” | ” | 16·5 | 257 | - | ” | ” | 19·0 | 297 | - | ” | ” | 19·4 | 303 | - | ” | Spiral | 20·5 | 320 | - | ” | ” | 21·5 | 335 | - | ” | Plain ring | 22·0 | 340 | - | ” | Spiral | 29·3 | 452 | - | ” | ” | 39·0 | 612 | - | ” | ” | 39·5 | 617 | - | ” | ” | 41·5 | 643 | - | ” | ” | 42·2 | 654 | - | ” | ” | 42·3 | 655 | - | ” | ” | 42·8 | 662 | - +--------+-------------+---------+-------------+ - -[64] Cf. Keary’s _Catalogue of English Coins in the British Museum_, p. 6. - -[65] Strabo iii. p. 155. ἀντὶ δὲ νομίσματος οἱ λίαν ἐν βάθει φορτίων -ἀμοιβῇ χρώνται ἢ τοῦ ἀργύρου ἐλάγματος ἀποτέμνοντες διδόασιν. - -[66] Gordon Lang, _Travels in Western Africa_ (1825), Prefatory Note. - -[67] The specimen figured was brought home about 30 years ago and is now -in the Edinburgh Museum of Science and Art. - -[68] The specimens here figured are in the splendid collection of my -friend Mr R. Day, of Cork. - -[69] This information I owe to Lieut. Troup. - -[70] I am indebted to Messrs James Booth and Co. for this information. - -[71] Dapper _Description de l’Afrique_ (Amsterdam, 1686) p. 367. “Le bois -rouge de Majumba et la _pao_ de Hiengo de Benguela tiennent aussi le lieu -de monnaie: on en coupe des morceaux d’un pied de long; on leur met une -certaine taxe selon laquelle le prix des vivres se règle.” - -[72] Peter Kolben, _Present state of the Cape of Good Hope_, p. 262. - -[73] R. W. Felkin, “Notes on the Madi or Moru Tribe of Central Africa,” -_Transactions of Royal Society of Edinburgh_, Vol. XII. p. 303 _seqq._ - -[74] _Voyage au Darfour_, Mohammed Ibn Omar el Tounsy (translated by -Perron), Paris, 1845, pp. 218, 315. - -[75] _Voyage au Darfour_, p. 316. - -[76] _Ibid._ p. 319. - -[77] _Voyage au Darfour_, p. 321. - -[78] _Voyage au Ouadai_, Mohammed Ibn Omar el Tounsy (French translation -by Perron), p. 559. - -[79] Elliot’s _Alaska_, p. 8. This is an interesting parallel to the -ancient tradition that the Carthaginians employed leather money. (_Vide_ -Smith’s _Dict. of Geogr._ I. 545.) - -[80] _Il._ XXIII. 826. - -[81] _Il._ XXIV. 230-2. - -[82] Timaeus 12. - -[83] _B. G._ v. 12. - -[84] 199. - -[85] Schrader. _Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples_, p. 260. - -[86] _Odyssey_, XXIII. 198. - -[87] Cunningham, _Hist. of English Commerce_, I. p. 117. - -[88] _Il._ XXI. 41. - -[89] _Od._ XV. 460. - -[90] Prescott, _Mexico_, p. 234. - -[91] Schrader, p. 255. - -[92] Schrader, _op. cit._ p. 255. - -[93] Polybius II. 19. - -[94] W. Deecke, _Etrusk. Forschungen_, p. 5. - -[95] Herod. IV. 49. - -[96] _Ausland_, 1873, No. 39. - -[97] Arist. Θαυμ. 833 b. 14, φασὶ δὲ ἐν τοῖς Βάκτροις τὸν Ὦξον ποταμὸν -καταφέρειν βωλία χρυσίου πλήθει πολλά. - -[98] Herod. IV. 18. - -[99] Herod. III. 116, λέγεται δὲ ὑπὲκ τῶν γρυπῶν ἁρπάζειν Ἀριμάστους -ἄνδρας μουνοφθάλμους. - -For the gold-fields of India, cf. Dr Valentine Ball’s excellent chapter -(IV.) in his _Geology of India_. - -[100] Herod. IV. 25. - -[101] Herod. IV. 71, ἀργύρῳ δὲ οὐδὲν οὐδὲ χαλκῷ χρέωνται. - -[102] Strabo, XI. p. 499, παρὰ τούτοις δὲ λέγεται καὶ χρυσὸν καταφέρειν -τοὺς χειμάρρους, ὑποδέχεσθαι δ’ αὐτὸν τοὺς βαρβάρους φάνταις -κατατετρημέναις καὶ μαλλωταῖς δοραῖς· ἀφ’ οὖ δὴ μεμυθεῦσθαι καὶ τὸ -χρυσόμαλλον δέρος. - -[103] Strabo, XIV. p. 680. - -[104] Herod. I. 93, πάρεξ τοῦ ἐκ τοῦ Τμώλου καταφερομένου ψήγματος. - -[105] XIII. 625 _sq._ - -[106] Herod. VI. 46 _sq._ - -[107] Strabo, 331. - -[108] Herod. IX. 75. - -[109] Strabo, 618. 29. Didot. - -[110] Cf. Isaiah xlv. 14. - -[111] The Debae of Agatharchides and Artemidorus are held by almost all -scholars to be the people of Ptolemy’s Θῆβαι πόλις, i.e. Dhahabân, from -_Dhahab_, gold, with term.-ân. - -[112] Strabo, 661. 45. Didot. - -[113] Diodorus Sic. II. 50. 1 _sq._ - -[114] This story about their connection with Boeotia doubtless arose from -the confusion between Δέβαι and Θῆβαι. - -[115] Diod. Sic. III. 45. 4. - -[116] His description of the size of the largest nuggets of gold varies -slightly; in his second reference he compares them to “royal nuts” (κάρυα -βασιλικά), which are generally admitted to be walnuts, though walnuts are -sometimes also called “Persian nuts” (κάρυα Περσικά), the latter name -reminding us of the derivation of _walnut_ itself; in the first passage -he likens them in size to chestnuts (κάρυα κασταναικά) or κασταναῖα, the -name being said to be derived from Castanaea, a city of Pontus. It would -seem from this then that Diodorus got his accounts from two slightly -different sources. Strabo has been so cautious as not to give us any -specific epithet for the large nut, which we may accordingly regard as we -please either as a chestnut or a walnut. There can be no doubt about the -fruit to which Strabo compares the medium-sized nuggets. The _mespilon_, -Latin _merpilum_ (from which comes the French _nèfle_), is undoubtedly -the medlar, whilst perhaps the most likely meaning for the smallest of -the three fruits is _olive-stone_. - -[117] Diodorus, III. 12-14. - -[118] Mansfield Parkyns, _Life in Abyssinia_, Vol. I. p. 405 (London, -1853). - -[119] For similar ways of trading in Africa in modern times see -Rawlinson’s note _ad locum_. - -[120] Herod. IV. 49. - -[121] Strabo, 173. 34-49, Didot. - -[122] Ibid. 178 Didot. - -[123] Th. Mommsen (_Nordetruskische Alfabete_, p. 250, _seqq._) gives an -admirable summary of the metallurgical history of this region. - -[124] Strabo, 218. - -[125] Pliny, XXXIII. 4. § 78, extat lex censoria Victumularum -aurifodinae, qua in Vercellenai agro cavebatur, ne plus quinque M hominum -in opere publicani haberent. - -[126] Strabo, 205. - -[127] Th. Mommsen, _Die nordetruskischen Alfabete_, p. 223; Pauli, -_Altitalische Forschungen_, p. 6. - -[128] Strabo, 191. - -[129] Hucher, _L’Art Gaulois_, 19. - -[130] We must then in all probability place the first striking of the -Gaulish imitations of the Philippas about 150 B.C., rather than as is -usually stated about 250 B.C. - -[131] Strabo, 187. - -[132] Strabo, 146. - -[133] Diodorus, v. 27. - -[134] Strabo, 190. - -[135] Both are from coins in my own possession; A found near Mildenhall -(Suffolk) in 1884, cf. Dr Evans, _Ancient British Coins_, Pl. XXIII. 4; B -at Potton in Bedfordshire, 1888; cf. _op. cit._ Pl. B. 8. - -[136] Strabo, 191. - -[137] Caesar, _B. G._ V. 12, pecorum magnus numerus. Utuntur aut aere aut -nummis aureis aut taleis ferreis ad certum pondus examinatis pro nummo. -Nascitur ibi plumbum album in mediterraneis regionibus, maritimis ferrum, -sed eius exigua est copia, aere utuntur importato. - -[138] Caesar, _B. G._ II. 4. - -[139] W. Ridgeway, “The Greek Trade Routes to Britain” (_Folklore_, March -1880, p. 23). - -[140] Strabo, 199, leaves out tin here although he mentions it when -quoting from Posidonius. The reason is that after the tin-mines -of Northern Spain had been developed by Publius Crassus, Caesar’s -lieutenant, the British tin trade ceased. - -[141] Strabo, page 201. - -[142] IV. 151. - -[143] Herodotus, I. 163-4. - -[144] Strabo, 147. - -[145] Strabo, 146. - -[146] Strabo, 146 _sq._ - -[147] Diodorus, v. 35. - -[148] Marsden’s _History of Sumatra_, p. 172. - -[149] Pliny, _H. N._ XXXIII. 4, 21 aurum arrugia quaesitum non coquitur -sed statim suum est; inueniuntur ita massae; necnon in puteis denas -excedentes libras; palacras Hispani, alii palacranas, iidem quod minutum -est balucem uocant. - -May the French _paille_ (in the phrase _pailles d’or_), Ital. _paluola_, -Span. _palazuola_, all used technically of gold, be derived from _pala_, -the old technical term, rather than from _palea_, chaff? - -[150] Herod. IV. 11. - -[151] How trade was carried on in early days may be well illustrated from -Torres Straits of to-day. (Haddon, “The Western Tribe of Torres Straits,” -_Journal of Anthrop. Inst._ XIX. p. 347.) - -Dance masks made of turtle shell (340) occasionally used as money. - -If a Muralug man wanted a canoe he would communicate with a friend at -Moa, who would speak to a friend of his at Badu; possibly the Muralug -man might himself go to Badu, or treat with a friend there. The Badu man -would cross to Mabuiag to make arrangements, and a Mabuiag man would -proceed to Saibai. - -If there was no canoe available at the latter place word would be sent -on, along the coast, that a canoe was to be cut out and sent down. - -The canoe would then retrace the course of the verbal order and -ultimately find its way to Muralug. The annual payment for a canoe was -say three _dibi dibi_ or goods of about equal value. There were three -annual instalments. - -There is no money in the Straits; but certain articles have acquired a -generally recognized exchange value, a value which is intrinsic, and -not irrespective of the rarity of the material or the workmanship put -into it. These objects cannot be regarded as money; they are the round -shell ornaments (_dibi dibi_, shell armlet, _wai wai_, dugong, harpoon, -_wap_, and canoe). A good _wai wai_ is the most valuable possession; the -exchange of a _wai wai_ was a canoe, or harpoon. Ten or twelve _dibi -dibi_ was considered of equal value to any of the above. A wife was the -highest unit of exchange, being valued at a canoe, or a _wap_ or _wai -wai_. “The intermediaries (in the purchase of a canoe) are paid for their -services ‘by charging on,’ the amount depending on individual cupidity, -or they may be recompensed for their trouble by presents from the -purchaser” (p. 841). - -[152] [Aristotle,] _De Miris Auscult._ 104-5 (839ᵃ 34 _seqq._). - -[153] Pind. _Isth._ V. 22 _sq._ μυρίαι δ’ ἔργων καλῶν τέτμηνθ’ -ἑκατόμπεδοι ἐν σχερῷ κέλευθοι | καὶ πέραν Νείλοιο παγᾶν καὶ δι’ -Ὑπερβορέους. - -[154] _Ol._ III. 31 _sq._ - -[155] _Ol._ III. 13 _sqq._ - -[156] Pind. _Pyth._ X. 29 _sqq._ - -[157] Herod. IV. 32. - -[158] Herod. IV. 13. - -[159] Herod. IV. 33. - -[160] Boeckh, _Corp. Inscr. Graec._ Vol. I. p. 807. - -[161] Cf. Sallust, _Jug._ 18. - -[162] They derived it from λύγξ and οὖρον. The difference in colour -between the Baltic and Ligurian amber found an easy explanation, the -latter was regarded as the solidified urine of the female lynx, the -former of the male animal. Pliny, _H. N._ XXXVII. 2, § 34. - -[163] Cf. Boyd Dawkins, _Early Man in Britain_, 466. Von Sadowski, _Die -Handelstrassen der Griechen und Römer_, p. 15. - -[164] _Il._ V. 720 _seqq._ - -[165] _Il._ XXIII. 826 _seqq._ - -[166] _Il._ XII. 433-7, - - ἀλλ’ ἔχον, ὤς τε τάλαντα γυνὴ χερνῆτις ἀληθής, - ἤ τε σταθμὸν ἔχουσα καὶ εἴριον ἀμφὶς ἀνέλκει - ἰσάζουσ’ ἴνα παισὶν ἀεικέα μισθὸν ἄρηται. - ὦς μὲν τῶν ἐπὶ ἶσα μάχη τέταται πτόλεμός τε κ.τ.λ. - -Dr Leaf, in his introduction to Book XII., when calling attention to -various marks of lateness in this book, says: “It has further been -remarked with some truth that the numerous similes, though beautiful -in themselves, are often disproportionately elaborated and lead up to -points which are almost in the nature of an anti-climax.” But the use of -the word ἀληθής in an entirely un-Homeric sense seems to make it almost -certain that these lines are of late date. - -[167] Cf. Plautus, _Merc._ II. 3. 63. Virg. _Georg._ I. 390, carpentes -pensa puellae. - -[168] Mr J. G. Frazer gives me the following interesting note: - -As to the cutting off a child’s hair and weighing it against gold or -silver, the facts are these. - -(1) Among the Harari in Eastern Africa when a child is a few months old, -its hair is cut off and weighed against silver or gold money; the money -is then divided among the female relations of the mother. - - Paulitschke, _Beiträge zur Ethnographie und Anthropologie der - Somâl, Galla und Hararî_ (Leipzig, 1886), p. 70. - -(2) Mohammed’s daughter Fâtima gave in alms the weight of her child’s -hair in silver. - - W. Robertson Smith, _Kinship and Marriage in early Arabia_, p. - 153. - -(3) Among the Mohammedans of the Punjaub a boy’s hair is shaved off on -the 7th or 3rd day after birth, or sometimes immediately after birth. -Rich people give alms of silver coins equal in weight to the hair. - - _Punjab Notes and Queries_, I., No. 66. - -(4) When the Hindus of Bombay dedicate a child to any god or purpose, -they shave its head and weigh the hair against gold or silver. - - _Id._ II. No. 11. - -(5) In the inland districts of Padang (Sumatra) three days after birth -the child’s hair is cut off and weighed. Double the weight of hair in -money is given to the priest. - - Pistorios. _Studien over de inlandsche Huisponding in de - Padangsche Bovenlanden_, p. 56; Van Hasselt, _Volksbeschrijving - van Midden-Sumatra_, p. 268. - -(6) There is the Egyptian custom, for which we have the evidence of -Herodotus, II. 65, and Diodorus, I. 8. - -[169] F. L. Griffith, “Metrology of the Medical Papyrus Ebers,” _Proceed. -of Soc. Bibl. Arch._ June 1891. - -[170] Hultsch, _Metrol. Scrip._ 299, τὸ Μακεδονικὸν τάλαντον τρεῖς ἦσαν -χρύσινοι. - -[171] _Catalogue of Greek Kings of Bactria_, p. lxix. - -[172] _Catalogue of Greek Kings of Bactria_, p. lxvii. - -[173] Lepsius, _Denkmäler_, 331. - -[174] Brugsch, _Op. cit._ I. 386. - -[175] _Münz- Mass- und Gewichtswesen in Vorderasien_, p. 80 seqq. - -[176] Lenormant, _La Monnaie dans l’Antiquité_, I. 103 seqq. - -[177] _Metrol._², p. 375. - -[178] Horapollo, I. 11, Πάρ’ Αἰγυπτίοις μονάς ἐστιν αἱ δύο δραχμαί. - -[179] Deecke, _Etrusk. Forsch._ II. p. 1. Head, _Op. cit._ p. 12. - -[180] Head, _Op. cit._ p. 747. - -[181] Τὸ μέντοι Σικελικὸν τάλαντον ἐλάχιστον ἴσχυεν, τὸ μὲν ἀρχαῖον, -ὡς Ἀριστοτέλης λέγει τέτταρας καὶ εἴσκοσι τοὺς νούμμους τὸ δὲ ὕστερον -δυοκαίδεκα, δύνασθαι δὲ τὸν νοῦμμον τρία ἡμιωβόλια. (Hultsch, _Reliq. -Metrol. Scrip._ 300.) - -[182] Cf. Hucher, _L’Art Gaulois_, p. 19 and Pl. I. - -[183] _Histoire de la Monnaie Romaine_, I. 236. - -[184] _Étude des Monnaies de l’Italie antique._ - -[185] _De Rep._ II. 35, 60. - -[186] X. 50. - -[187] Aulus Gellius, XI. 1. 2. 3; Plutarch, _Poplic._ 11, says a cow = -100 ὀβολοί, a sheep 10 ὀβολοί. - -[188] Pollux, IX. 80, εὐθὺς πρίω μοι δέκα νόμων μόσχον καλάν. - -[189] Theocr. IX. 3, μόσχως βουσὶν ὑφέντες. - -[190] Mr Head (_Coinage of Syracuse_), _Numismat. Chronicle_, New Series, -Vol. XIV., thinks that under Dionysius the Elder (406-367 B.C.) and his -successors gold was to silver as 15:1 at Syracuse, whilst in the time -of Agathocles (317-289 B.C.) it was as 12:1. We can however hardly take -the evidence of the coin weights as sufficient, when we consider the -extraordinary devices to which Dionysius resorted to raise money, causing -coins of tin to pass as silver, making the silver coins bear a double -value etc. as is related by Aristotle, _Oeconomica_, II. 21. - -[191] _Op. cit._ 26. - -[192] Livy XXXIV. 1. Valer. Max. 9. 1. 3. - -[193] Head, _Op. cit._ 160. - -[194] Mommsen (Blacas), _Histoire de la Monnaie romaine_, III. 275. - -[195] Pertz, _Monumenta Historica Germaniae_, Vol. III. Lex Alamannorum, -_lib. sec._ LXXX. _summus bovis 5 tremisses valet cett_. - -[196] Pertz, _Op. cit._ _Leges Burgundiorum_, p. 534: pro bove solidos 2 -cett. - -[197] Schive and Holmboe, _Norges Mynter_ (Christiania, 1865), pp. i-iv. - -[198] Herod. VI. 57. See evidence of this collected by Stengel, Die -griechische Sakralaltertümer, pp. 29 _sq._ 81 _sq._ (Iwan Müller’s -Handbach, Vol. V. pt. iii.) - -[199] _Hist. Animal._ X. 50, τά γε μὴν ἱερεῖα ἑκάστης ἀγέλης αὐτόματα -φοιτᾷ καὶ τῷ βωμῷ παρέστηκεν, ἄγει δὲ ἄρα αὐτὰ πρώτη μὲν ἡ θεός, εἶτα ἡ -δύναμίς τε καὶ ἡ τοῦ θύοντος βούλησις. εἰ γοῦν ἐθέλοις θῦσαι οἶν, ἰδού -σοι τῷ βωμῷ παρέστηκεν οἶς, καὶ δεῖ χέρνιβα κατάρξασθαι· εἰ δὲ εἴης τῶν -ἁδροτέρων καὶ ἐθέλοις θῦσαι βοῦν θήλειαν ἢ καὶ ἔτι πλείους, εἶτα ὑπὲρ τῆς -τιμῆς οὔτε σὲ ὁ νομεὺς ἐπιτιμῶν ζημιώσει οὔτε σὺ λυπήσεις ἐκεῖνον· τὸ -γὰρ δίκαιον τῆς πράσεως ἡ θεὸς ἐφορᾷ. καὶ εὖ καταθεὶς ἵλεων ἕξεις αὐτήν· -εἰ δὲ ἐθέλοις τοῦ δέοντος πρίασθαι εὐτελέστερον, σὺ μὲν κατέθηκας τὸ -ἀργύριον ἄλλως, τὸ δὲ ζῷον ἀπέρχεται, καὶ θῦσαι οὐκ ἔχεις. - -[200] _Egypt under the Pharaohs_ (2nd edit. Engl, transl.), Vol. II. p. -199. - -[201] Sir Rutherford Alcock, _The Capital of the Tycoon_, I. 281. - -[202] Marco Polo, Yule’s Transl. II. pp. 62 and 70. - -[203] _Aegypten und ägyptisches Leben in Alterthum_, p. 611. - -[204] 1 Kings x. 21. - -[205] 2 Chron. i. 15. - -[206] 2 Chron. i. 17. - -[207] _Sacred Books of the East_, Vols. V., XVIII., and XXIV. - -[208] _Report of the Royal Commission appointed to enquire into the -recent changes in the relative values of the precious metals._ 1st -Report, p. 60 (1866). - -[209] This is almost exactly the weight of the _örtug_, into 3 of which -the _ora_ (ounce) of 410 grs. was divided. The _örtug_ of gold being -136·7 grs., and the value of a cow being 128 grs. of gold, it is hard not -to believe that there was a connection between them. (See App. C.) - -[210] See above, p. 24. - -[211] J. Silvestre, “Notes pour servir à la recherche et au classement -des monnaies et des médailles de Annam et de la Cochin-Chine Française.” -_Excursions et Reconnaissances_, No. 15 (1883), p. 395. - -[212] H. C. Millies, _Recherches sur les monnaies des Indigènes de -l’Archipel Indien et de la péninsule Malaie_ (La Haye, 1871). - -[213] Sir Thomas Wade’s _Colloquial Chinese Course_, I. p. 213 (2nd ed.). - -[214] J. Silvestre, _Op. cit._ p. 308 seqq. - -[215] J. Mours, _Le Royaume du Cambodge_, I. p. 323 (Paris, 1883). - -[216] This coin bears on one side the sacred bird Hangsa, on the other a -picture of an ancient palace of the kings. - -[217] E. Aymonier, _Notes sur le Laos_. Saigon, 1885. - -[218] For an account of the various kinds of Siamese coins of the bullet -shape cf. Msg. Pallegoix, _Description du royaume Thai ou Siam_, I. 256 -(Paris, 1854). - -[219] E. Aymonier, _Cochin-Chine Française. Excursions et -Reconnaissances_, Vol. X. No. 24 (1885), p. 317. - -[220] Aymonier, _ibid._ - -[221] This mode of estimating the age of the buffalo by the length of its -horns may throw some light on the young ox _suis cornibus intructus_ of -the Marseilles inscription (p. 143). - -[222] XXIII. 850 _sq._ - -[223] OD. XXI. 76. - -[224] E. Aymonier, _Notes sur le Laos_, p. 33. - -[225] _History of the Indian Archipelago_ by John Crawfurd, F.R.S. Vol. -I., p. 271. - -[226] P. 275. - -[227] _History of Sumatra_ by William Marsden, F.R.S. (London, 1811), p. -171. - -[228] R. W. Felkin, ‘Notes on the Madi or Moon tribe of Central Africa.’ -_Proceedings of Royal Society of Edinburgh_, Vol. XII. pp. 303, _seqq._ - -[229] H. T. Colebrooke, _On Indian Weights and Measures_ (Miscellaneous -Essays edited by Prof. E. B. Cowell, 1873), Vol. I. 528-543. - -[230] _Numismatic Chronicle_, IV. 131 (N. S.). - -[231] Thomas, _Initial Coinage of Bengal_, II. p. 6 (_Royal Asiatic -Journal_, Vol. VI.). - -[232] Algebra with Arithmetic and Mensuration translated from the -Sanskrit of Brahmegupta and Bhascara by H. T. Colebrooke (London, 1817). - -[233] Down almost to the present day a system of currency, similar -to that shown in the _Līlāvati_ prevailed in Assam. “Gold continues -to pass current in small uncoined round balls, usually weighing one -_Tola_,” there was a silver coinage also, and cowries passed as money. W. -Robinson, _Descriptive Account of Assam_, pp. 249 and 267 (London, 1841). - -[234] Martini, _Metrologia_, p. 770. Formerly the _nashod_ = 3 _habbi_ of -·063 gram which is just the weight of the barley grain, whereas ·047 the -weight assigned to the _gendum_ is that of a grain of wheat. - -[235] Queipo, _Essai sur les Systèmes Métriques et Monétaires des anciens -peuples_ I. 360 (Paris, 1859). - -[236] _Ancient Laws of Ireland_, Vol. IV. 335, (Book of Aicill), -O’Donovan’s Supplement, s.v. _pingiun_. - -[237] Ruding, _Annals of the Coinage of Great Britain_, II. 58. - -[238] Ruding, _op. cit._ I. 369. - -[239] Marquardt, _Röm. Staatsverwaltung_, II. p. 30. - -[240] _Fragm._ ap. Hultsch, _Metrol. Script._ I. 248, ἡ δὲ δραχμὴ κέρατα -ιη͵. ἄλλοι δὲ λέγουσιν· ἔχει γραμμὰς τρεῖς ... τὸ γράμμα ὀβολοὺς β͵. ὁ δὲ -ὀβολὸς κέρατα γ͵. τὸ δὲ κερὰτιον ἔχει σιτάρια δ͵. - -[241] Hultsch, _Op. cit._ II. 128. - -[242] _Recueil de travaux relatifs à la Philologie et l’Archéologie -Egyptienne et Assyrienne_, Vol. X. fasc. 4, p. 157. - -[243] Bosman, _Guinea, Letter VI._ (_Pinkerton’s Voyages_, Vol. XVI. p. -374). - -[244] Although I have made many enquiries and Dr Thiselton Dyer of Kew -has taken much trouble in the matter, I am unable to give the reader the -botanical names of the Taku and Damba. Dr Dyer thinks the Damba is our -old friend the _Abrus precatorius_, the Indian _ratti_, confirming the -opinion I had previously formed from its weight. These seeds are commonly -known as crabs’ eyes. - -[245] _Op. cit._ 373. “The fetiches they cast in moulds made of a black -and heavy earth into what form they please.” (p. 367.) - -[246] Ellis, _History of Madagascar_, I. p. 335. - -[247] _Op. cit._ I. p. 6. - -[248] Prescott, _Conquest of Mexico_, p. 44. - -[249] Prescott, _Peru_, p. 56. - -[250] Nissen, “Griechische und römische Metrologie” (Iwan Müller’s -_Handbuch der classischen Alterthumswissenschaft_ I. 663 _seq._ or -separately, Nordlingen, 1886). - -[251] “_Das älteste Gewicht_,” 1889, pp. 1-9, 34-43. - -[252] The whole series of these ancient weights was some years ago -subject to a careful process of weighing in a balance of precision by an -officer of the Standard Department and the result was published by Mr W. -H. Chisholme in the _Ninth Annual Report of the Warden of the Standards_ -1874-5, where a complete list of all of them may be found. - -All the more important pieces had however been weighed many years before, -and it need only be stated that the results of the process of re-weighing -under more favourable conditions are in the main identical with those -formerly arrived at by Queipo and the late Dr Brandis. - -[253] _Metrologie_², p. 393. - -[254] _Étalons pondéraux primitifs et lingots monétaires_ (Bucharest, -1884), p. 49. - -[255] Soph. _Antig._ 1038 _seqq._ - - κερδαίνετ’, ἐμπολᾶτε τόν πρὸς Σάρδεων - ἤλεκτρον, εἰ βούλεσθε, καὶ τὸν Ἰνδικὸν - χρυσόν. - -[256] I. 94. - -[257] Pollux, IX. 83. - -[258] _Histoire de la Monnaie Romaine_, I. 15. - -[259] Herod. I. 14. - -[260] Hultsch, _Metrol._² 579. - -[261] Head, _op. cit._ XXXVI. - -[262] Head, _op. cit._ XXXVI. - -[263] Thuc. II. 13. - -[264] _Ol._ I. 75: _Nem._ IV. 46. - -[265] VIII. 375, ὠνομάζετο δ’ Οἰνώνη πάλαι, ἐπῴκησαν δὲ αὐτὴν Ἀργεῖοι καὶ -Κρῆτες καὶ Ἐπιδαύριοι καὶ Δωριεῖς. - -[266] VI. 22. 2, Ὀλυμπιάδι μὲν τῇ ὀγδοῃ τὸν Ἀργεῖον ἐπήγαγον Φείδωνα -τυράννων τῶν ἐν Ἔλλησι μάλιστα ὑβρίσαντα κ.τ.λ. - -[267] Φείδωνος δὲ τοῦ τὰ μέτρα ποιήσαντος τοῖς Πελοποννησίοισι καὶ -ὑβρίσαντος κ.τ.λ. - -[268] Ἔφορος δ’ ἐν Αἰγίνῃ ἄργυρον πρῶτον κοπῆναί φησι ὑπὸ Φείδωνος, -ἐμπόριον γὰρ γενέσθαι, διὰ τὴν λυπρότητα τῆς χώρας τῶν ἀνθρώπων -θαλαττουργούντων ἐμπορικῶς, ἀφ’ οὖ τὸν ῥῶπον Αἰγιναίαν ἐμπολὴν λέγεσθαι. - -[269] Strabo VIII. 358, Φείδωνα δὲ τὸν Ἀργεῖον, δέκατον μὲν ὄντα ἀπὸ -Τημένου, δυνάμει δὲ ὑπερβεβλημένον τοὺς κατ’ αὐτόν, ἀφ’ ἧς τήν τε λῆξιν -ὅλην ἀνέλαβε τὴν Τημένου διεσπασμένην εἰς πλείω μέρη, καὶ μέτρα ἐξεῦρε τὰ -Φειδώνια καλούμενα καὶ σταθμοὺς κὰι νόμισμα κεχαραγμένον τό τε ἄλλο καὶ -τὸ ἀργυρον. - -[270] Pollux _Onom._ X. 179, εἴη δ’ ἂν καὶ Φείδων τι ἀγγεῖον ἐλαιηρόν, -ἀπὸ τῶν Φειδωνίων μέτρων ὠνομασμέον, ὑπὲρ ὧν ἐν Ἀργείων πολιτείᾳ -Ἀριστοτέλης λέγει. - -[271] This enables us to understand why it was that in the truce at Pylus -it was stipulated (probably by the Spartans) that they should be allowed -to send in 2 _Attic_ (not Peloponnesian) _choenikes_ of barley meal for -each of their men daily. By this arrangement the beleaguered men got a -larger ration. - -[272] πάντων δὲ πρῶτος Φείδων Ἀργεῖος νόμισμα ἕκοψεν ἐν Αἰγίνῃ· καὶ δοὺς -τὸ νόμισμα καὶ ἀναλαβὼν τοὺς ὀβελίσκους, ἀνέθηκε τῇ ἐν Ἄργει Ἥρα, ἐπειδὴ -δὲ τότε οἰ ὀβελίσκοι τὴν χεῖρα ἐπλήρουν, τουτέστι, τὴν δράκα, ἡμεῖς, -καίπερ μὴ πληροῦντες τὴν δράκα τοῖς ἓξ ὀβόλους δραχμὴν αὐτὴν λέγομεν παρὰ -τὸ δράξασθαι. - -[273] Φείδων ὁ Ἀργεῖος ἐδήμευσε τὰ μέτρα ... καὶ ἀνεσκεύασε καὶ νόμισμα -ἀργυροῦν ἐν Αἰγίνῃ ἐποίησεν (l. 30). - -[274] Head _op. cit._ XXXVIII. - -[275] _Op. cit._ 153. - -[276] _Op. cit._ XXXVIII. - -[277] Of course it is quite possible that the Persians issued coins in -Egypt after their conquest, but these coins cannot be regarded as really -Egyptian. - -[278] Herod. I. 62. - -[279] Head, _op. cit._ p. XL. Professor Percy Gardner (_Types of Greek -Coins_, p. 2), regards the Euboic standard as 130, which he thinks was -raised to 135 grs. by Solon when the latter introduced (as he supposes) -the Euboic system at Athens. - -[280] Head, _Coinage of Syracuse_, p. 71. - -[281] Arist. _Oeconomica_, II. 21. - -[282] Head, _op. cit._ p. 26. - -[283] Chautard, _Imitations des monnaies au type esterling_ (Nancy, 1871). - -[284] Mr D. B. Monro, _Historical Review_, January, 1886. - -[285] _Il._ II. 867. - -[286] _Od._ XV. 460. - -[287] _Od._ XV. 470. - -[288] It is more probable however that _Chalkos_ copper got its name from -the place (Chalcis) where it was first found in Greece. The name Chalcis -may itself be connected with χαλκίς, an _owl_. - -[289] Tylor, _Primitive Culture_, Vol. I. p. 219. - -[290] Schliemann, _Tiryns_, pl. II. Helbig, _Das homerisches Epos_², p. -79. - -[291] _Report of the British Association_, 1883, p. 21. - -[292] Νάφε καὶ μέμνασ’ ἀπιστεῖν, ἄρθρα ταῦτα τῶν φρενῶν, Epicharmus. - -[293] Boeckh, _Metrol. Untersuch._ p. 32. - -[294] Head, _op. cit._ XXVIII. - -[295] “Griech. und röm. Metrologie” (in Iwan Müller’s _Handbuch der -klass. Altertumswissenschaft_, Vol. I. p. 684). - -[296] Head, _op. cit._ XXIX. Madden’s _Jewish Coinage_, p. 277. - -[297] Horapollo I. 11, παρ’ Αἰγυπτίοις μονάς ἐστιν αἱ δύο δραχμαί. μονὰς -δὲ παντὸς ἀριθμοῦ γένεσις. εὐλογῶς οὖν τὰς δύο δραχμὰς βουλόμενοι δηλῶσαι -γύπα γράφουσι, ἐπεὶ μήτηρ δοκεῖ καὶ γένεσις εἶναι, καθάπερ καὶ ἡ μονὰς. - -[298] W. M. Flinders Petrie, _Naukratis_, p. 75. It is with extreme -reluctance that I must refuse to follow Mr Petrie, who for careful -accuracy and scientific method stands at the head not only of -metrologists but of archaeologists in general. But it seems to me that -in his method of arriving at his weight-units from the weighing of -weight-pieces he has overlooked one very important factor. False weights -and balances have prevailed in all ages and countries, and we can hardly -wrong the ancient Egyptians if we suppose that a certain number of their -nation were not as honest as they might have been in their dealings. -The variations in the weights of his specimens given by Mr Petrie may -very well be due to false weights. And it must be carefully noted that -frauds were not only perpetrated by means of light but also by means of -too heavy weights. Whether the Jews learned to cheat when they sojourned -in the land of Goshen or not, we cannot say, but that they used too -heavy as well as too light weights is plain from the denunciations of -the prophets: thus Amos (viii. 5), “When will the new moon be gone that -we may sell corn? and the sabbath that we may set forth wheat, making -the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by -deceit?” See also Ezekiel xlv. 10. But the practice of cheating with too -heavy as well as with too light weights is best seen in Deuteronomy xxv. -13; “Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights, a great and a small; -thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a small. -Thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure -shalt thou have.” It seems hardly likely that of the 516 weights found by -Mr Petrie at Naukratis all were “perfect and just” weights. It is thus -quite possible that the variations from what there is evidence to suppose -is the normal standard, whether they be those of excess or deficiency, -may be accounted for, at least in part, by this consideration. Mr -Petrie’s method, if applied to natural products such as certain kinds -of seeds, will of course give the truest possible result, but when the -factor of human knavery enters, his method is at once open to serious -drawbacks. - -[299] Erman, _Aegypten und Aegypt. Leben_, p. 611. - -[300] We also find mention of a weight called the _pek_, which weighed -·71 grammes (11 grains), and was the ⅟₁₂₈ part of the uten. Hultsch, -_Metrol._² p. 37, regards it as a provincial Ethiopian weight. Its -awkward relation to the kat and uten seem to show that it did not form -part of the genuine Egyptian system. - -[301] The large copper coins of the Ptolemies of 1450-1350 grs. Troy (the -_flans_ of which were turned in a lathe) were almost certainly struck on -the native uten. - -[302] This weight (in my own possession) said to have come from India, -and almost perfect, weighed 4·29 grammes. - -[303] III. 89, τοῖσι μὲν αὐτῶν ἀργύριον ἀπαγινέουσι εἴρητο Βαβυλώνιον -σταθμὸν τάλαντον ἀπαγινέειν, τοῖσι δὲ χρυσίον ἀπαγινέουσι Εὐβοϊκόν· τὸ δὲ -Βαβυλώνιον τάλαντον δύναται Εὐβοΐδας ἑβδομήκοντα μνέας. - -[304] If, as is held by some of the best critics, this is a late passage, -there is an _a fortiori_ argument against the early use of the _mina_. - -[305] Is it possible that the so-called _Ducks_ are only degraded -forms of bull-head weights? The ears and horns were dropped as being -inconvenient (see bull-head weight, p. 283), and at a later time when the -tradition of their origin had been lost, the shapeless lump was adorned -with a bird’s head to serve as a handle. All the large weights from -Nineveh are without any head; and it is but very rarely even on the small -haematite weights that the duck’s head is found fully formed. - -[306] As no better selection of these weights could be made than that of -Mr Head, I have followed his description. Cf. R. S. Poole, in Madden’s -_Jewish Coinage_, p. 261 seqq., and the Report of the Warden of the -Standards, 1874-5, for a full account of these weights. - -[307] The _Manah_ is of course the _Meneh_ so familiar from Belshazzar’s -vision, _mene, mene tekel upharsin_ (Daniel v. 25), which the best -scholars follow M. Clermont-Ganneau (_Journal Asiatique_, 1886) in -interpreting as _a mina, a mina, a shekel, and the parts of a shekel_. - -[308] Prof. Sayce (_Academy_, Dec. 19th, 1891) publishes a weight -from Babylonia inscribed “One maneh standard weight, the property of -Merodach-sar-ilani, a duplicate of the weight which Nebuchadrezzar, king -of Babylon, the son of Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, made in exact -accordance with the weight [prescribed] by the deified Dungi, a former -king.” This confirms my contention that the _mina_ is prior in _date_ to -the talent. - -[309] Cf. Plautus, _Persa_. - -[310] Brandis, 20-38. - -[311] Head, XXIX. - -[312] Berosus. Synkellos 30, 6 (Eusebii chronic, ed. Alfr. Schoene -vol. I. col. 8): ἀλλ’ ὁ μὲν Βηρωσσὸς διὰ σάρων καὶ νήρων καὶ σώσσων -ἀνεγράψατο· ὦν ὁ μὲν σάρος τρισχιλίων καὶ ἑξακοσίων ἐτῶν χρόνον σημαίνει, -ὁ δὲ νῆρος ἐτῶν ἑξακοσίων, ὁ δὲ σῶσσος ἑξήκοντα. _Fragm. Script. Hist. -Graec._ - -[313] Hultsch, _op. cit._ p. 407. - -[314] _Recueil des travaux relatifs à la Philologie et l’Archéologie -Egyptiennes et Assyriennes_, Vol. x. fasc. 4, p. 157. - -[315] Kaeji in Fleckeisen’s _Jahrbücher_, 1880, first calls attention to -this word. - -[316] Hultsch, _Metrol._², p. 131. - -[317] Rig Veda, _Mandala_, VI. 47, 23-4. - -[318] Herod. III. 96. - -[319] For 20 pieces of _gold_ (εἴκοσι χρυσῶν) LXX. - -[320] Gen. xx. 16. - -[321] Judges xvi. 5. - -[322] Judges ix. 4. - -[323] Judges xvii. 2-4. - -[324] Joshua vii. 21. - -[325] Cf. Buxtorf and Gesenius _sub voce_. - -[326] _A_ is from Beirut, in the Greville Chester Collection in the -Ashmolean Museum, of white and yellow crystalline stone; wt. 32·160 gram. -(a very slight chip from the base); on the base is engraved a rude ibex -and another figure. _B_ is from Persia, slightly chipped on side of head, -yellowish white stone, veined with red, like jasper; wt. 22·450 gram.; on -the base are two ibexes. I am indebted for this information to Mr A. J. -Evans, Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, by whose kindness I am likewise -enabled to give representations of the weights. - -[327] Madden’s _Jewish Coinage_, p. 7. - -[328] Exod. xxx. 13. Levit. v. 15, etc. - -[329] The question of the date at which certain documents were written -or took their final shape is of course important. But it does not at -all follow that a document written at a later period cannot contain -traditions of real historical value. Thus here we find Chronicles, placed -quite late by the critics, gives the weight in _shekels_, whilst Kings, -supposed to be far earlier, gives it in _minas_. - -[330] The mere question as to whether the 200 shekels is far more than -the average crop of hair can weigh, does not concern us. If the writer -wished to exaggerate the amount of Absalom’s hair he would naturally -make the shekel as heavy as possible, and say that the weight was in the -_heavy_ or _royal_ shekels, employed for merchandize. - -[331] Exod. XXX. 23-4. - -[332] _Antiq._ III. 8, 10. - -[333] Pollux, IX. 59, observes that when χρυσοῦς stands alone, στατήρ is -always to be understood. - -[334] Exod. XXX. 13. - -[335] _Hist._ V. 3. - -[336] Hultsch, _Metr. Scrip._ _s.v._ Lupinus. - -[337] In Gesenius’ _Lexicon_, II. 88; II. 144, it is suggested that the -_gerah_ is the lupin. - -[338] _Antiq._ III. 6, § 7, λυχνία ἐκ χρυσοῦ ... σταθμὸν ἔχουσα -μνᾶς ἑκατὸν, ἂς Ἑβραῖοι μὲν καλοῦσι κίγχαρες, εἰς δὲ τὴν Ἑλληνικὴν -μεταβαλλόμενον γλῶσσαν σημναίνει τάλαντον. - -[339] Even granting that the parts of Exodus (the priestly Code) took -their present form in post-Exile times it is perfectly possible that the -metrological data contained therein are based on a genuine old tradition, -just as Homer, although in its present shape differing much in linguistic -forms from what must have been its original, gives us an archaic talent -quite different from those in use when it took its final shape. - -[340] 2 Kings v. 5. - -[341] LXX. τρίτον τοῦ διδράχμου. - -[342] We are unfortunately unable to gain any definite knowledge from -Ezekiel xlv., as _v._ 12, which gives the weight system, is confused, -and there is a great discrepancy between the Hebrew and Greek texts. -Though it is a prophetic passage, there is no reason for supposing that -the prophet did not clearly understand the standard weight system of -his time (600 B.C.), for his account of the metric system is singularly -clear. It is best to give the whole passage as it appears in the Revised -Version: “Thus saith the Lord God: Let it suffice you, O princes of -Israel: remove violence and spoil, and execute judgment and justice; take -away your exactions from my people, saith the Lord God. Ye shall have -just balances, and a just ephah, and a just bath. The ephah and the bath -shall be of one measure, that the bath may contain the tenth part of an -homer, and the ephah the tenth part of an homer: the measure thereof -shall be after the homer. And the shekel shall be twenty gerahs; twenty -shekels, five and twenty shekels, fifteen shekels shall be your maneh.” -(vv. 9-12.) One thing is clear at least, and that is that the passage is -a protest against over-exaction, and we may infer that the weight system -here mentioned is for precious metals, seeing that there is no mention -made of the talent. The shekel is to be 20 gerahs, that is, the shekel -of the Sanctuary. If the princes had sought to exact payment in _royal_ -shekels instead of the old shekel, and also to make the maneh of silver -contain 60 shekels instead of 50, we can see every reason for the cry of -the oppressed being loud. - -The confusion in the Hebrew text may be due to the fact that there were -two manehs in use, that of 50 shekels for gold and silver, and that of -60 shekels for other commodities. The Septuagint version is perfectly -capable of explanation on the principles which I have indicated. The LXX. -runs thus: καὶ τὰ στάθμια εἴκοσι ὀβολοί, πέντε σίκλοι, πέντε καὶ σίκλοι, -δέκα καὶ πεντήκοντα σίκλοι ἡ μνᾶ ἔσται ὑμῖν. So Tischendorf. - -There is a MS. (Cod. Al.) reading οἱ πέντε σίκλοι, καὶ πέντε καὶ οἱ -δέκα σίκλοι. Tischendorf’s text can hardly be right, πέντε καὶ σίκλοι, -δέκα καὶ πεντήκοντα contain two most unnatural collocations. δέκα καὶ -πεντήκοντα is absolutely absurd as a way of expressing 60. εἶς καὶ -πεντήκοντα up to ἐννεα καὶ πεντήκοντα to express 51 to 59 are reasonable -and found universally, but to add on 10 to one of the main multiples of -10 in the decimal system is a method unknown, and is just as absurd in -Greek as it would be if in English we were to say 10 and 50, meaning -thereby 60. Again in the previous clause, the words πέντε καὶ point to -some other numeral such as 10, or 20, as necessarily following. This is -obtained by taking the MS. reading πέντε καὶ δέκα σίκλοι, καὶ πεντήκοντα, -κ.τ.λ. Now the LXX. gives the plural στάθμια for “_shekel_”: στάθμια -means the actual weights employed in weighing the amounts of gold or -silver so weighed. Ezekiel is describing the various weight-units to be -employed: “And the weights are 20 gerahs (lupins), _the_ five shekel -weight, _the_ fifteen shekel weight, and fifty shekels shall be your -maneh.” The article οἱ is very rightly used before πέντε, for it refers -to the well known multiple of the shekel, of which we spoke above when -dealing with the Bull’s-head weight. The same explanation may probably -be given of _the_ fifteen shekel weight. The maneh of 50 shekels of 20 -gerahs each is the old maneh of the Sanctuary (Period II.), not the royal -maneh which contained 100 light shekels. - -Now turning to the Hebrew version we find “twenty shekels, five and -twenty shekels and fifteen shekels,”the sum of which makes a maneh of -60 shekels, or the royal Assyrian and Hebrew _commercial_ maneh. It is -also to be observed that the position of _fifteen_ is unnatural; it -ought to come in the series before “twenty” and “five and twenty.” Fifty -stands in the corresponding place in LXX. Has the Hebrew text altered 50 -into 15 so as to obtain a total of 60? But there is another question; -Why do we find “five” and “fifteen” stand first in LXX., and “twenty” -and “twenty five” in Hebrew? On the theory, that of the Septuagint -translators, that the prophet is describing a series of weight-pieces, -it is quite simple. Combine the numbers of both versions, and place them -in order thus: 1 shekel, 5 shekels, 15 shekels, 20 shekels, 25 shekels -(½ maneh), 50 shekels (maneh). This gives a rational explanation of how -the discrepancy arose. The LXX. translated from a text which probably ran -thus, 5 shekels, 10 shekels, 15 shekels, and went no further with the -series. For it is not at all improbable that the reading οἱ δέκα is due -to the fact that after οἱ πέντε σίκλοι stood οἱ δέκα, which was followed -by οἱ πεντεκάιδεκα σίκλοι. The Jews of a later date, knowing only of the -commercial mina of 60 shekels, left out some of the numerals, and altered -50 into 15 to make up 60 shekels. - -[343] Herod. III. 89, _seqq._ - -[344] _Metrol._², p. 420. - -[345] _Metrol._², p. 153. - -[346] Head, _op. cit._ p. 789. - -[347] The amount of gold in electrum varies greatly. Pliny, _H. N._ -XXXIII. 4. 23, ubicumque quinta argenti portio est, et electrum uocatur. -The Carthaginian electrum probably came from Spain (cp. p. 94). - -[348] Head, _op. cit._ p. 2. - -[349] Pliny, _H. N._ XXXIV. - -[350] Herod. I. 94, πρῶτοι δὲ ἀνθρώπων, τῶν ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν, νόμισμα χρυσοῦ -καὶ ἀργύρου κοψάμενοι ἐχρήσαντο. - -[351] Julius Pollux, IX. 83. - -[352] Head, _op. cit._ p. 544. - -[353] _H. N._ XXXIII. 4. 23, ubicumque quinta argenti portio est, et -electrum uocatur. - -[354] _River of Golden Sand_, II. p. 78. - -[355] Head, _op. cit._ p. 545. - -[356] _Ibid._ p. 503. - -[357] Pollux, III. 87, εὐδόκιμος δὲ καὶ ὁ Γυγάδας χρυσὸς καὶ οἱ -Κροίσειοι στατήρες: ix. 84 _sq._, ἴσως δὲ ὀνομάτων καταλόγῳ προσήκουσιν -οἱ Κροίσειοι στατῆρες καὶ Φιλίππειοι, καὶ Δαρεικοὶ, καὶ τὸ Βερενικεῖον -νόμισμα καὶ Ἀλεξανδρεῖον, καὶ Πτολεμαικὸν καὶ Δημαρετεῖον, κ.τ.λ. - -[358] _Annuaire de Numismatique_, 1884, p. 119. - -[359] _Zeitschr. für Assyriologie._ Vol. II. 48 (1887). - -[360] _Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology_, 1883-4, p. 87. - -[361] IV. 166, Δαρεῖος μὲν γὰρ χρυσίον καθαρώτατον ἀπεψήσας ἐς τὸ -δυνατώτατον νόμισμα ἐκόψατο. - -[362] _Or._ XII. 70 τρία τάλαντα ἀργυρίου καὶ τετρακοσίους κυζικηνοὺς καὶ -ἑκατὸν δαρεικοὺς καὶ φιάλας ἀργυρίου τέσσαρας. - -[363] Thuc. VIII. 28; Xen. _An._ I. 1. 9; I. 3. 21; I. 7. 18; V. 6. 18; -VII. 6. 1; _Cyrop._ V. 27; Dem. XXIV. 129; Aristoph. _Eccl._ 602; Arrian -_Anab._ IV. 18. 7; Diod. XVII. 66, etc. - -[364] Plutarch, _Cimon_, X. 11, φιάλας δύο, τὴν μὲν ἀργυρείων -ἐμπλησάμενον Δαρεικῶν, τὴν δὲ χρυσῶν. - -[365] _Thes._ XXV., ἔκοψε δε νόμισμα βοῦν ἐγχαράξας. - -[366] p. 27 (ch. 10) (Kenyon’s ed.), ἐν μὲν οὖν τοῖς νόμοις ταῦτα δοκεῖ -θεῖναι δημοτικά, πρὸ δὲ τῆς νομοθεσίας ποιησάσθαι τὴν χριῶν ἀποκοπήν, -καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα τήν τε τῶν μέτρων καὶ τῶν σταθμῶν καὶ τὴν τοῦ νομίσματος -αὔξησιν. ἐπ’ ἐκείνου γὰρ ἐγένετο καὶ τὰ μέτρα μείζω τῶν Φειδωνείων, -καὶ ἡ μνᾶ πρότερον ἔχουσα παραπλήσιον ἐβδομήκοντα δραχμὰς ἀνεπληρώθη -ταῖς ἑκατόν. ἦν δ’ ὁ ἀρχαῖος χαρακτὴρ δίδραχμον. ἐποίησε δὲ καὶ σταθμὸν -πρὸς τὸ νόμισμα τρεῖς καὶ ἑξήκοντα μνᾶς τὸ τάλαντον ἀγούσας, καὶ -ἐπιδιενεμήθησαν αἱ μναῖ τῷ στατῆρι καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις σταθμοῖς. - -[367] I have translated the παρὰ [μικρὸν] of Kaibel and Wilamowitz -instead of Kenyon’s παραπλήσιον. According to Plutarch (Solon. 15) the -old (silver) mina contained 73 drachms. The apparent discrepancy is -easily explained. In the prae-Solonian mina there were 70 drachms of 92 -grs. each. Plutarch writing at a later time took the number of drachms -of 92 grs. in the post-Solonian mina of 6750, which is just 73. The -information supplied by the _Polity_ is evidently older and better. - -[368] The. Reinsch needlessly regards ἦν δὲ ὁ ἀρχαῖος κ.τ.λ. as an -interpolation. - -[369] Kaibel and Wilamowitz read σταθμὰ instead of σταθμὸν. - -[370] Pollux IX. 59. - -[371] Pollux IX. 58 ἔχων στατῆρας χρυσίου τρισχιλίους. - -[372] Thuc. (I. 27) speaks of Corinthian drachms not _staters_; and (V. -47) of Aeginetic _drachms_. - -[373] Cp. p. 214. - -[374] P. Gardner, _Types of Greek Coins_, _passim_. - -[375] Comparetti, _Leggi antiche della città di Gortyna in Creta_, 1885; -_Museo Italiano_ II. 195, no. 39: _ibid_, II. 222. Roberts, _Greek -Epigraphy_, p. 53. - -[376] _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, 1888, p. 405 seqq. (where -he gives an engraving of a stater so countermarked). Mr B. V. Head -(_Numism. Chron._ 3rd ser. IX. 242) in a notice of this paper lends his -great authority to the support of Svoronos’ view. - -[377] Head, _op. cit._ 450, who quotes Marquardt’s _Cyzicus_, p. 45. - -[378] Fishermen offered to Poseidon the first tunny they caught (Athen. -p. 346), but this was simply an offering of first fruits and not because -the tunny was sacred. - -[379] _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, X. 144 _seqq._ - -[380] The tunny is a very large fish, usually four feet long, and is -hardly likely to have been sold by the basketful. - -[381] _Apud Stephanum Byzant._ s.v. Τένεδος. - -[382] X. 14. 1. - -[383] _Iliad_, XXIII. 850-1, - - Αὐτὰρ ὁ τοχευτῇσι τίθει ἰόεντα σίδηρον, - κὰδ δ’ ἐτίθει δέκα μὲν πελέκεας, δέκα δ’ ἡμιπέλεκκα. - -[384] No doubt the axe was often used as a religious emblem; -double-headed axes borne in procession are seen on Hittite sculptures -(Perrot et Chipiez, _Histoire de l’Art dans l’antiquité_, IV. p. 637). It -was also the symbol of Dionysus at Pagasae. So amongst the Polynesians we -find processional axes as well as real ones like our sword of state as -contrasted with real swords. - -[385] _Ib._ 882-3, - - ἀν δ’ ἄρα Μηριόνης πελέκεας δέκα πάντας ἄειρεν, - Τεῦκρος δ’ ἡμιπέλεκκα φέρεν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας. - -[386] Although Mr Frazer (_Golden Bough_, I. 8) has given abundant -evidence to show that kings were in some places worshipped as gods, no -one can maintain that the Persians, who were Zoroastrians, would have -treated their king as a god. - -[387] The electrum coins with the lion’s head with open jaws formerly -ascribed to Miletus are now assigned to the Lydian king Alyattes by M. J. -P. Six, _Num. Chron._ N. S. Vol. x. 185 _seqq._ (1890). - -[388] Head, _Op. cit._ 6. 88. - -[389] Lindsay, _Survey of the Coinage of Ireland_, p. 6 _seqq._ - -[390] _Il._ VII. 468 _seqq._ - -[391] A. Dobbs, _Account of Hudson’s Bay_ (1744). - -[392] _Politics_ II. 1257 B ὁ γὰρ χαρακτὴρ ἐτέθη τοῦ πὸσου σημεῖον. - -[393] Plutarch, _Solon_ 18. - -[394] _Ibid._ 23 Εἰς μὲν γε τὰ τιμήματα τῶν θυσιῶν λογίζεται πρόβατον -καὶ δραχμὴν ἀντὶ μεδίμνου· τῷ δ’ Ἴσθμια νικήσαντι δραχμὰς ἔταξεν ἑκατὸν -δίδοσθαι, τῷ δ’ Ὀλύμπια πεντακοσίας· λύκον δὲ τῷ κομίσαντι πέντε δραχμὰς -ἔδωκε, λυκιδέα δὲ μίαν, ὧν φησιν ὁ Φαληρεὺς Δημήτριος τὸ μὲν βοὸς εἶναι, -τὸ δὲ προβάτου τιμήν. - -[395] Lysias, _de Sacra oliva_, 6. - -[396] Strabo, XVII. 836. - -[397] Diodorus Siculus V. 26. 2 διδόντες γὰρ τοῦ οἴνου κεράμιον -ἀντιλαμβάνουσι παῖδα κτλ. - -[398] Baumeister, _Denkmäler_, s.v. Silphium. Studicyna, _Kyrene_, p. -22. Birch, _Ancient Pottery_ (frontispiece). The vase is in the Paris -Bibliothèque. - -[399] The only evidence to show that Demeter was worshipped at Metapontum -is that a female head on certain of her coins is accompanied by the -legend Σωτηρία. It has been inferred that this is an epithet of Demeter, -but this is most unlikely, for in that case we should expect Σὼτειρα, as -on the coins of Hipponium, Syracuse, Agrigentum, Corcyra, Cyzicus, and -Apamea, not Σωτηρία, as the adjective. Thus we always find Ζεὺς Σωτήρ, -not Σωτήριος: cf. Σώτειρα Εὐνομία, Pind. _Ol._ IX. 16, Σώτειρα Τύχα, -_Ol._ XII. 2, Σώτειρα Θέμις, _Ol._ VIII. 21. Σωτηρία is rather _Safety_ -(Lat. _Salus_), who, as my friend Mr J. G. Frazer points out to me, -was worshipped at Patrae and Aegeum, two of the chief towns of Achaea -(Pausan. VII. 21. 7; VII. 24. 3). We also find such names of divinities -as Ὑγιεία, Ὁμόνοια and Νίκα on the coins of Metapontum. As Metapontum was -an Achaean colony, it is likely that _Salus_ was worshipped there also. -Besides it was to Apollo, and not to Demeter, that they dedicated their -golden ear as a harvest thank-offering. Θέρος is the ear cut from the -stalk after the ancient way of reaping, cf. θέρη σταχύων, Plut. - -[400] Athenaeus XIII. p. 589 ab; Schol. on Aristophanes, _Plutus_, 179; -Suidas, _s.v._ χελώνη. - -[401] _Voyage of the Sunbeam_, p. 276 (London, 1880). [L.M.R.] - -[402] We learn from Strabo, 773, that the Greeks were familiar with the -employment of tortoise shells, for a tribe called Tortoise-eaters on the -north coast of Africa used the shells of these animals, which were of -large size, for roofing purposes. Pausanias (VIII. 23. 9) tells us that -there were large tortoises well suited for making lyres in Arcadia, but -the people would not touch them as they were under the protection of Pan. -As Pan was lord of the forest and mountain, the tortoise being especially -large would naturally be regarded as his special property. - -[403] Mansfield Parkyn, _Abyssinia_, Vol. I. p. 407. - -[404] Pausan. IX. 34. - -[405] Pausan. I. 25. - -[406] _Iliad_ XVII. 381. - -[407] _Iliad_ XXII. 158. - -[408] Strabo 192, ὅθεν οἱ ἄρισται ταριχεῖαι τῶν ὑείων κρεῶν εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην -κατακομίζονται. Hucher, _Art Gaulois_, Pl. 78. The swine is also found on -coins of Bellovaci, Pictones and Armorican Gauls. - -[409] On the plastron of the sea-tortoise eight triangular patches are -made very conspicuous by pigmentation. - -[410] Photius _Lex._ _s.v._ Λάμβδα. Eustathius on Homer p. 293. 39 seqq. -Xenophon _Hell._ IV. 4. 10 (which shows that the letter was on the front, -cf. Pausan. IV. 28. 5). - -[411] Pollux, V. 66. - -[412] Xenoph. _De Vectigalibus_, iv. 10, εἰ δὲ τις φήσειε καὶ χρυσίον -μηδὲν ἧττον χρήσιμον εἶναι ἢ ἀργύριον, τοῦτο μὲν οὐκ ἀντιλέγω, ἐκεῖνο -μέντοι οἶδα ὅτι καὶ χρυσίον ὅταν πολὺ παραφανῇ, αὐτὸ μὲν ἀτιμότερον -γίγνεται, τὸ δὲ ἀργύριον τιμιώτερον ποιεῖ. - -[413] Strabo, IV. 208, συνεργασαμένων δὲ σὺν βαρβάροις τῶν Ἱταλιωτῶν ἐν -διμήνῳ, παραχρῆμα τὸ χρυσίον εὐωνότερον γενέσθαι τῷ τρίτῳ μέρει καθ’ ὅλην -τὴν Ἰταλίαν. - -[414] Pindar, _Olymp._ VII. 58 _sq._ - -[415] _Numismatic Chron._ VII. 185. That the Cyzicene staters were at -some time and at some places (Cyzicus itself?) less in value than a -Daric is made possible from the new-found Mimiambi of Herondas (VII. 96 -_seqq._); where 4 Darics seem worth more than 5 staters: - - ταύτηι δὲ δώσεισ κε[ῖ]νο τὸ ἕτερον ζεῦγοσ - κόσου; πάλιν πρήμηνον ἀξίαν φωνὴν - σεω<υ>τοῦ. - - Κ. στατήρασ πέντε ναὶ μὰ θεοὺσ φο[ι]τᾶι - ἡ ψάλτρι’ <Εὐ>έτηρισ ἡμέρην πᾶσαν - λαβεῖν ἀνώγουσ’· ἀλλ’ ἐγώ μιν [ἐχθα]ίρω - κἢν τέσσαράσ μοι δαρεικοὺσ ὑπόσχηται - ὁτεύνεκέν μευ τὴν γυναῖκα τωθάζει - κακοῖσι δέ[ν]νοισ. ει ... χρείη. - -[416] Xen. _Anab._ V. 6. 23; VII. 3. 10. Dem. _Phorm._ p. 914. - -[417] _Op. cit._ p. 449. - -[418] _Corp. Inscr. Graec._ 125, ἀγέτω ἡ μνᾶ ἡ ἐμπορικὴ Στεφανηφόρου -δραχμὰς ἑκατὸν τριάκοντα καὶ ὀκτὼ πρὸς τὰ σταθμία τὰ ἐν τῷ ἀργυροκοπείῳ. - -[419] Cf. Wharton, _Etyma Latina_, s.v. _litra_. - -[420] Pollux, IX. 80. - -[421] Cf. Shakespeare, _I. Henry IV._ II. 4, 590, in Falstaff’s tavern -bill: “Item, Anchovies and sack, 6_d._ Item, bread, Ob. O monstrous! But -one halfpenny worth of bread to such an intolerable deal of sack!” - -[422] Head, _op. cit._ p. 105. - -[423] The forms _scripulum_, _scrupulum_, _scrupulus_ are all due to its -simply being regarded in later times as a _weight_, and thus falsely -identified with _scrupulus_, a small pebble. - -[424] Book of Aicill, p. 335. - -[425] Caesar, _B. G._ III. 13. - -[426] _Blacas_, Mommsen, I. p. 177. - -[427] It is worth noticing that Plutarch (_Poplicola_ 11) translates the -_libral asses_ of early Rome by the Greek _obolos_; ἦν δὲ τιμὴ προβάτου -μὲν ὀβολοὶ δέκα, βοὸς δὲ ἑκατόν· οὔπω νομίσματι χρωμένων πολλῷ τότε τῶν -Ῥωμαίων, ἀλλὰ προβατείαις καὶ κτηνοτροφίαις εὐθηνούντων. It is quite -possible that Plutarch embodies a genuine tradition that the original -_as_ and _obol_ were the same. Otherwise like Dionysius of Halicarnassus -he would have represented the asses by the value in Greek money of his -own time. For he can hardly have supposed that at any time an ox was -worth only 100 of the obols of his own time. - -[428] So the word _mark_ means not only a weight but is also used as a -linear measure = 48 _alen_, and also as a measure of _area_, as in the -term _arable mark_ etc. See Appendix. - -[429] Many of the Roman unciae in the British Museum are under 410 grs. - -[430] ὁ δὲ νοῦμμος δοκεῖ μὲν εἶναι Ῥωμαίων τοὔνομα τοῦ νομίσματος, ἔστι -δὲ Ἑλληνικὸν καὶ τῶν ἐν Ἰταλίᾳ καὶ ἐν Σικελίᾳ Δωριέων. - -[431] Pollux IX. 84. - -[432] Evans, _Horsemen of Tarentum_, pp. 9-11. - -[433] _Tabulae Heracleenses_ (Boeckh _Corp. Inscrip. Graec._ 5774-5; -Cauer, _Delectus_ 40, 41) I, 122. αἱ δέ κα μὴ πεφυτεύκωντι κατὰ -γεγραμμένα, κατεδικέσθεν πὰρ μὲν τὰν ἐλαίαν δέκα νόμως ἀργυρίω πὰρ τὸ -φυτὸν ἕκαστον, πὰρ δὲ τὰς ἀμπέλως δύο μνᾶς ἀργυρίω πὰρ τὰν σχοῖνον -ἑκάσταν. - -[434] Boeckh, _Metrol. Unters._ 160, takes the _Sicilicus_ as originally -the Silician _quadrans_ in the Roman silver reckoning. Cf. Mommsen, -_Blacas_, I, 243. Hultsch, _Metrol._ p. 145. - -[435] _Étude des monnaies de l’Italie antique._ Première partie, pp. 8 -and 16. - -[436] _Ibid._ p. 29. - -[437] _Ibid._ p. 30. - -[438] Soutzo, _ibid._ p. 31. - -[439] If we take the καινὸν κόμμα of Aristophanes (_Ranae_ 720) to refer, -as the scholiast _ad loc._ asserts on the authority of Hellanicus and -Philochorus, to a gold issue in B.C. 407, which was much alloyed. As -Mr Head says it is quite possible that Aristophanes alludes to the new -bronze coinage issued the year before the Frogs was acted (_Hist. Num._ -314). No such base gold coins of Athens are known, and as her gold coins -are of excellent quality, it is better to refer them with Head to 394 -B.C., the period of her restored prosperity, when Conon and Pharnabazus -brought aid from the great king. - -[440] Varro ap. Non. p. 356 nam lateres argentei atque aurei primum -conflati atque in aerarium conditi. _Lateres_ is used in this sense by -Tacitus, _Annals_, XVI. 1. - -[441] Gaius I. 122. This passage is unhappily corrupt. The Verona -MS. runs asses librales erant et dupondii——unde etiam dupondius. As -_dupondius_ is really a masculine adjective used as a noun, a masculine -noun must be understood, this can only be _as_. Dupondius then is simply -a two-pound bar. - -[442] XXXIII. 3. 13. - -[443] Before striking silver at Rome the Romans had struck silver coins -with type of quadriga and ROMA in Campania. Hence it is that Pliny -regarded these the _quadrigati_ and _bigati_ as the oldest issue instead -of the coins with the Dioscuri (Fig. 54). The _biga_ came next, after it -the genuine Roman _quadriga_. - -[444] Varro, _R. R._ II. 1, 9. - -[445] Varro ap. Non. p. 189 _aut bovem aut ovem aut vervecem habet -signum_. Probably _uerrem_, not _ueruecem_, is the true reading, since -Plutarch says that the coins were marked with an ox, a sheep or a _swine_ -(βοῦν ἐπεχάραττον ἢ πρόβατον ἢ ὗν). _Popl._ 11. - -[446] Festus fragm. p. 347 Müller _s.v._ _Sextantari asses_. - -[447] V. 173 Müller. - -[448] Deux. Partie p. 41. “Le poids normal de l’as oncial est de 27 gr. -25, mais il alla en s’affaiblissant progressivement du commencement à la -fin de la periode.” - -[449] _Ancient Laws of Ireland_, Vol. I. p. 61. O’Curry, _Manners and -Customs of the Ancient Irish_, Vol. I. pp. 100 seq. - -[450] _Survey of the Coinage of Ireland_, p. 3. - -[451] _Ecclesiastical Architecture of Ireland_, p. 213 seqq. - -[452] Folio 24 c. - -[453] The bracketed words are interlined in a recent hand; but the final -word shows that they were a portion of the text. - -[454] Near Croghan Hill, in the north of King’s Co. - -[455] See note on Irish text. - -[456] O’Donovan has omitted _caerach_ of the MS. - -[457] _Norges Mynter_, IV-V. - -[458] I am indebted to Mr E. Magnússon for the translation of Holmboe. - -[459] Polybius XXXIV. 8. - -[460] _Solon_ 23, see p. 324 _supra_. - -[461] Wasserschleben, _Die Bussordnungen d. Abendländisch. Kirchen_ (De -disputatione Hibernensis Sinodi et Gregori Nasaseni sermo), p. 137. - -[462] Beside the difficulty about _numo aureo_ there is a further variant -between _anulis ferreis_ and _taleis ferreis_ (bars of iron). Can Caesar -have in reality written both? May the original reading have been: utuntur -aut aere aut numo aureo, aut aureis anulis, aut taleis ferreis etc.? -Caesar speaks of the Britons having iron of their own, and it is highly -probable that they employed ingots or bars of it as money, as the wild -tribes of Annam and Africa do at present. They probably used their gold -or bronze rings and armlets as money also. - -[463] These are taken from Sir W. Wilde’s Catalogue, but for the weights -of articles acquired since 1862 I am indebted to the kindness of the -Curator, Major Macenery. - -[464] My friend Mr F. Seebohm has shown me that as a _weight_ the Swedish -_Jungfrau_ is equal to the Irish _Cumhal_. - - - - -INDEX. - - - Abdera, 340 - - Abraham, 112, 113, 197 - - Abrus, 172 - - Absalom’s hair, 120, 275 - - Abyssinian gold in beads, 82 - - Actus, 365 - - Aegina, 211, 328 - - Aeginetan measures, 306 - - ⸺ obol, 366 - - ⸺ standard, 9, 21, 311 - - ⸺ ⸺ its origin, 217 - - ⸺ ⸺ used for copper, 345 - - ⸺ system, 307 - - Aelian, 144 - - Aes, 86 - - Aes grave, 378 - - Aes rude, 355, 376 - - Agariste, 212 - - Agathocles, 138 - - Agerept, 150 - - Agonistic types, 337 - - Agrigentum, 347, 350 - - Aicill, Book of, 353 - - Airgid, 63 - - Alalia, 130 - - Alamanni, 140 - - Alaska, 47 - - Alexander, 29, 198, 342 - - Alexandrine talent, 244 - - Alfred’s penny, 180 - - Al-li-ko-chik, 15 - - Alphabet, the, 227 - - Alps, gold of, 88 - - Altun (= gold), 70 - - Alyattes, 71 - - Amber, 227 - - ⸺ beads, 46 - - ⸺ golden, 110; red, 110 - - Anaxilas, 336 - - Angala, 354 - - Annals of Four Masters, 31 - - Annam, 23 - - ⸺ barter system of, 164 - - Ant coins, 22 - - Ants, gold-digging, 66 - - Apis, worship of, 50 - - Apollo, 107 - - Apulia, 370 - - Aquileia, 87 - - Arab weights, 179, 182 - - Arabia, gold of, 75 - - Archimedes, 36, 100 - - Argippaei, 68 - - Argos, 215, 335 - - Arimaspians, 66, 68 - - Aristaeus, 314 - - Aristeas, 108 - - Aristotle, 96, 106, 131, 138, 213, 318, 323, 336 - - ⸺ Polity of Athenians, 305 - - Armlets, 42 - - Arpi, 367 - - Arrows, 24, 43 - - Arrugia, 101 - - Artabri, 97 - - Arverni, 90 - - As, 350 - - ⸺ derivation of, 353 - - ⸺ divisions, 351 - - ⸺ land measure, 351 - - ⸺ linear measure, 351 - - ⸺ of empire, 362 - - ⸺ reduction of, 380 - - ⸺ sextantal, 362 - - ⸺ symbol of, 369 - - ⸺ used only of bronze, 351 - - As libralis, 135 - - Assam coinage, 177 - - Asser, 354 - - Asses, sacrifice of, 107 - - Assis, 354 - - Assurbanipal, 201 - - Assyrian weights, 183, 199, 249 - - Astronomy, 199 - - Asturia, 101 - - Astyra, 71 - - Aternian law, 134 - - Athene, statue of, 211, 220 - - Athenian coinage, 124, 306, 372 - - Athens, Polity of, 214, 305 - - Attic choenix, 214 - - ⸺ didrachm, 5 - - Aulus Gellius, 135 - - Aura (old Norse), 63 - - Aurès, 183, 254 - - Aurum, 87 - - Ausum (aurum), 61 - - Axe, 318 - - Axes, Tenedos, 50 - - ⸺ West African, 40 - - Aymonier, 23, 161 - - Aztec money, 192 - - ⸺ numerals, 192 - - Aztecs, 17, 59 - - - Babylonian metric system, 251 - - ⸺ standard, 78, 163, 206, 261, 387 - - ⸺ system, 197 - - Bactria, coins of, 126 - - Baetis, 97 - - Bag of rice, 162 - - Bahnars, 23 - - Ball, V., 68 - - Balux, 101 - - Bamboo-joint, 163, 171 - - Bar, 39, 158 - - ⸺ (Assyrian), 185, 285 - - ⸺ of silver, 25 - - Barley, 178 - - Barleycorn, 177, 179 - - ⸺ = Troy grain, 181 - - Barrel, 115, 175 - - Bars, 371 - - Barter, age of, 11, 114, 196 - - Bassak, 161 - - Baug-brotha, 37 - - Baugr, 37 - - Beaver, 314 - - ⸺ skin, 12, 153, 323 - - Beag, 37 - - Bear skins, 16 - - Bee, 320 - - Bekah, 277 - - Belgic tribes, 94 - - Bells, 43 - - Bereniceum, 297 - - Bermion, 71 - - Bes, 351 - - Betzer, 36 - - Bhascara, 177 - - Bigae, 377 - - Bigati, 377 - - Bimetallism, 338 - - Bisaltae, 340 - - Blanket currency, 17 - - Bo, 33 - - Boar, 332 - - Boeckh, 1, 238, 365 - - Boeotia, 77 - - Boeotian shield, 331 - - Bonny River, 40 - - Boroimhe, 32 - - Bortolotti, 241 - - Bosman, 185 - - βοῦς ἐπὶ γλώσσῃ, 8 - - Boyd Dawkins, 110 - - Bracelets, 35 - - Brahmegupta, 177 - - Brandis, 129, 195, 294 - - Brandy, 323 - - Brass rods, 41 - - Brassey, Lady, 330 - - Britain, gold coins, 93 - - ‘Britons’’ money-system, 179 - - Bronze in Italy, 368 - - ⸺ in Northern Europe, 86 - - Brugsch, 122, 195, 196 - - Buffalo, 24, 164 - - ⸺ value of, 154 - - ⸺ worth a stick of gold, 168 - - Buffaloes, 25 - - Bull, 322 - - ⸺ on coins, 321 - - Bull’s-head weight, 282 - - Burgundians, 141 - - Bushel, 115 - - ⸺ how fixed, 191 - - - Cacao seeds, 17, 193 - - Cadmus, 71, 227 - - Caesar, 179 - - Calculus, 192 - - Caldron, 25 - - Caldrons, Irish, 32 - - Caldwell, W. H., 152 - - Calf, 374 - - Calves’ heads, 322 - - Camarina, 347 - - Cambodia, 25, 160 - - Cambridge, 182 - - Camirus, 339 - - Campania, 216 - - Candarin, 158 - - Cappadocae, 78 - - Carchemish, 202 - - Carmania, gold in, 74 - - Carob, 181 - - Carthage, 288 - - Carthaginian coinage, 131, 289 - - ⸺ gold unit, 130 - - ⸺ trade in gold with West Coast of Africa, 83 - - Cartload, 175 - - Cash, 157 - - Cat’s eyes, 21, 27 - - Cattle at Rome, 31 - - ⸺ chief wealth of Britons, Gauls, Italians, etc., 51 - - ⸺ in Avesta, 27 - - Catty, origin of, 162, 174 - - Cauer, 365 - - Cayley, Prof., 231 - - Centupondium, 136, 360 - - Centussis, 370 - - Ceramus, 82 - - Chabas, M., 239 - - Chabinus, 76 - - Chalci, 346 - - Chalcis, 227, 361 - - Χαλκός, 86 - - Chariot of Hera, 116 - - Chariots in Veda, 26 - - Charlemagne, 34 - - Charutz, 60 - - Chautard, 225 - - Chauter, 45 - - Chinese coinage, 10 - - ⸺ shell-money, 21 - - ⸺ weight-system, 156 - - Chios, 322, 343 - - Chisholme, 199 - - Χρυσός, 60 - - Chrysûs, 277 - - Cicero, 134 - - Cilicia, silver of, 286 - - Cloth, 35 - - ⸺ silken, 22 - - Cnidus, 321, 322 - - Cocoanut, 162, 171 - - Coinage, invention of, 203 - - ⸺ of gold, 125 - - ⸺ of silver at Rome, 136 - - Coins, early Lydian, 293 - - ⸺ normal weight of, 218 - - Coin-standards, 210 - - Colaeus, 62, 96 - - Colchis, 70 - - Colebrooke, 176 - - Colpach, 33 - - Commercial weights, 344 - - Comparetti, 314 - - Compensation for wounds, 30 - - Concha, 328 - - Conchylion, 329 - - Constantine, 384 - - Constantine’s solidus, 181 - - Conti, Nicolo, 27 - - Convention, 47 - - Coomb, 115 - - Copper coins in Greece, 361 - - ⸺ ⸺ in Britain, 94 - - ⸺ in Greece, 312 - - ⸺ in Meroe, 78 - - ⸺ in relation to gold, 77 - - ⸺ native, 58 - - ⸺ of Haidas, 17 - - ⸺ rings, 22 - - ⸺ standards, 348 - - ⸺ wire, Calabar, 40 - - Corcyraean wine jars, 106 - - Corinthian standard, 362 - - ⸺ system, 311 - - Corn sold by measure, 115 - - Cotton as money, 45 - - Counters, 192, 228 - - Coventry tokens, 336 - - Cow, 2 seqq., 370 - - ⸺ among Ossetes, 30 - - ⸺ at Delos, 5 - - ⸺ at Syracuse, 31 - - ⸺ equal centumpondium, 360 - - ⸺ Hebrew, value of, 148 - - ⸺ in Avesta, 26 - - ⸺ in Rig Veda, 25 - - ⸺ in Scandinavia, 35 - - ⸺ in Welsh Laws, 32 - - ⸺ names for, Sanskrit, Zend, etc., 51 - - ⸺ on coins of Eretria, 5 - - ⸺ suckling calf, 321 - - ⸺ unit of assessment at Rome and Syracuse, 393 - - ⸺ value of, in Gaul and Germany, 140 - - ⸺ ⸺ in Greece, Italy, 133 - - ⸺ ⸺ at Rome, 135 - - ⸺ ⸺ in Scandinavia, 141 - - ⸺ ⸺ in Sicily, 137 - - ⸺ ⸺ Persian, 151 - - ⸺ ⸺ Phoenician, 143 - - ⸺ ⸺ (Table), 153 - - ⸺ ⸺ the same over wide area, 52 - - Cowell, Prof., 176 - - Cowries, 13, 177 - - ⸺ as counters, 229 - - Cows among Madis, 43 - - ⸺ in Darfour, 44 - - Crab’s claw, 350 - - Crab’s eyes, 186 - - Crawfurd, John, 170 - - Crenides, 74, 341 - - Croesus, 204, 297 - - Crosoch, 36; crosóg, 396 - - Croton, 328 - - Cubit, royal, 265 - - Cucurbita, 258 - - Cumhal, 33 - - Cunningham, 55, 117, 127 - - Curtius, E., 201, 212 - - Cuttle-fish, 327 - - Cyathus, 258 - - Cyrene, 326 - - Cyzicene staters, 342 - - Cyzicenes, 301 - - Cyzicus, 316, 342 - - - Damba, 186 - - Damleg, 45 - - Danes, 321 - - Danube, 106 - - ⸺ flows into Adriatic, 107 - - ⸺ source of, 107 - - Dapper, 43 - - Darfour, 44 - - Daric, 126, 277, 297 - - ⸺ as talent, 6 - - ⸺ derivation of, 300 - - ⸺ = Homeric talent, 7 - - Datum, gold mines, 74 - - Debae, 75 - - Decalitron, 362 - - Decimal system, 203, 228, 371 - - ⸺ ⸺ in Homer, 308 - - Decussis, 356, 369, 370 - - Deecke, 130 - - Degradation, 226 - - ⸺ of coin weights, 223 - - ⸺ of weight, 338 - - Delian priests, 108 - - Delphium, 106 - - Delos, 215 - - Demareteion, 297 - - Demeter, 327 - - Denarius, 357, 363 - - Deunx, 351 - - Dewarra, 20 - - Dextans, symbol of, 369 - - Dhalac, 330 - - Digitus, 353 - - Dinar, 63 - - Diodorus, 81 - - Dionysius, 31, 225 - - ⸺ of Halicarnassus, 134 - - ⸺ of Syracuse, 224 - - Dioscuri, 377 - - Dirham, 148, 182 - - Dodona, 215 - - Dodrans, 351 - - Dogs, 94 - - Dollar, Maria Theresa, in Soudan, 56 - - ⸺ Mexican, 24; Spanish, 44 - - Double Unit, 267 - - Doukha, 45 - - Drachm at Athens, 324 - - ⸺ Corinthian, 311 - - ⸺ origin of, 214, 310 - - Draco, 5 - - Dragon’s eye, 22 - - Dublin, 321 - - Duck weight, 83 - - ⸺ ⸺ suggested origin, 247 - - Duck weights, 199, 245 - - Dungi, 248 - - Duodecimal system, 371 - - Dupondius, 376 - - Dyer, Dr Thiselton, 186 - - Dyrrachium, 322 - - - Earring, 35 - - Ebusus, coinage of, 290 - - Echinus, 328 - - Egypt, coinage of, 219 - - ⸺ gold in, 78 - - Egyptian gold-mines, described by Diodorus, 79 - - ⸺ measures, 122 - - ⸺ Monad, 129 - - ⸺ records, 236 - - ⸺ weights, 122 - - Egyptian weight system, 237 - - Electrum, 98, 204, 290 - - ⸺ at Carthage, 289 - - ⸺ Lydian, 70, 294 - - ⸺ why coined, 207 - - Elephant, price of, 24 - - Elephant’s tusk, 25 - - Ellis, 187 - - Emporiae, 290 - - English coinage, 224 - - ⸺ Imperial weights and measures, 266 - - ⸺ penny, 225 - - ⸺ weights, 186 - - Ephorus, 211 - - Epicharmus, 137, 364 - - Eretria, 322 - - Erman, 146, 242 - - Erythia, 110 - - Eryx, 144 - - Esterlings, 225 - - Etruria, 374 - - Etruscan gold coins, 130 - - ⸺ gold unit, 359 - - ⸺ silver, 363 - - ⸺ standard, 130 - - Etruscans, 64 - - Etymology, danger of, 65 - - Euboic-Attic system, 311 - - Euboic standard, 9, 210 - - ⸺ ⸺ origin of, 222 - - Eustathius, 125 - - Evans, A. J., 271, 365, 366 - - ⸺ Dr J., 94 - - Exagion, 183 - - Ezekiel, 121, 282 - - - Falgo, 45 - - Fanam, 173 - - Fee, 4, 34 - - Felkin, 43, 263 - - Fen Ditton, 182 - - Fertyt tribe, 46 - - Festus, 134 - - Fetiches, 187 - - Fibulae, 41 - - Fifteen-stater standard, 286 - - Fiji, 21 - - Fines, 135 - - Fiorino, 385 - - Fish-hooks, 28 - - Florin, 385 - - Foot, Roman, 359 - - Foucart, 219 - - Fractions, 357 - - Frankincense, 6 - - Frazer, J. G., 30, 320 - - French metric system, 1 - - Fuel sold by bulk, 115 - - - Gades, coinage of, 290 - - Gaius, 8, 376 - - Galetly, A., 30 - - Gallaecia, 101 - - Gardner, Dr, 126, 342 - - ⸺ P., 222, 313, 364 - - Gaul, 325 - - Gaulish gold unit, 131 - - Gauls, 332 - - ⸺ in Italy, 61 - - ⸺ value of cow with, 140 - - Gaus, 51 - - Gelon, 142 - - Gerah, 277 - - Germans, 131 - - Geryon, 110 - - Gill, 23, 296 - - Gold, 57 seqq. - - ⸺ alone weighed in Homer, 117 - - ⸺ among Salassi, 89 - - ⸺ at Vercellae, 88 - - ⸺ bat, 163 - - ⸺ Coast, 105 - - ⸺ coinage, 372 - - ⸺ coinage, Athens, 124; Macedon, 125; Thasos, 125; Cyzicus, 125 - - ⸺ coinage, Roman, 362 - - ⸺ coins, Athens, 372 - - ⸺ distribution of, 65 - - ⸺ equal distribution of, 114 - - ⸺ first coinage at Rome, 378 - - ⸺ first of all articles weighed, 114 - - ⸺ from India, 257 - - ⸺ in Bactria, 67 - - ⸺ in California, 58 - - ⸺ in China, 22 - - ⸺ in Gaul, 90 - - ⸺ in Meroe, 78 - - ⸺ in Noricum, 87 - - ⸺ in quills, 17, 186, 192 - - ⸺ in Rig Veda, 25 - - ⸺ in rings from Sennaar, 82 - - ⸺ in Swiss lake-dwellings, 85 - - ⸺ in Thibet, 66 - - ⸺ in Wales, 94 - - ⸺ measured, 168 - - ⸺ measured by quills, 186 - - ⸺ mining, methods of, 101 - - ⸺ not weighed, 187 - - ⸺ nuggets of, 75 - - ⸺ of Tolosa, 92 - - ⸺ ornaments of Gauls, 92 - - ⸺ Irish, 402 - - ⸺ placer, 98 - - ⸺ poured into jars, 259 - - ⸺ relation of, to silver in Etruria, 140 - - ⸺ relation of, to silver and copper in Italy, 139 - - ⸺ relative value, and silver, 75 - - ⸺ scarce in Greece, 221 - - ⸺ standard, 211 - - ⸺ Talent of, 3 - - ⸺ unit, the same everywhere, 133 - - ⸺ unit of Attopoeu, 163 - - ⸺ units, table of, 132 - - ⸺ Ural-Altai, 67 - - ⸺ wedge of, 270 - - ⸺ weighed in Veda, 122 - - ⸺ weighing, 167, 172 - - ⸺ white, 97 - - Golden Bough, 320 - - ⸺Fleece, legend of, 70 - - Goliath, 120 - - Gortyn, 314 - - Gourds, 43, 258 - - Greek (old) standard, 306 - - ⸺ standard (table), 310 - - ⸺ system, 304 - - ⸺ weights, 181 - - Griffins, 68, 70 - - Guadalquivir, 97 - - Gunjá, 176, 178 - - Gygadas, 206 - - Gyges, 71, 201, 204, 293 - - - Hachâchah, 45 - - Haddon, 105 - - Hair weighed, 275 - - Hakon the Good, 34 - - Haliartus, 334 - - Hamilcar, 289 - - Handfuls of rice, 170 - - Hanno, voyage of, 83 - - Hare, 336 - - ⸺ hunting of, 337 - - Hares at Carpathus, 337 - - Hare-skin, 13 - - Harich, 45 - - Harpoon, 105 - - Harris papyrus, 239 - - Hasdrubal, 289 - - Haxthausen, 4 - - Head, 130, 138, 196, 314, 316 - - Hebrew system, 269 - - ⸺ system, tables, 283 - - Hectae, 342 - - Hectare, 1 - - Helbig, 36, 84 - - Helix, 36 - - Helvetii, 90 - - Heraclea, 365 - - Herakles, 107, 227 - - ⸺ road of, 111 - - Hercynian forests, 106 - - Herodotus, 107, 258, 260 - - Herondas, 342 - - Hexâs, 348 - - Hide (of land), 391 - - Hides, 51 - - ⸺ as money, 332 - - Hierapolis, 202 - - Himera, 142, 347 - - Hindu weights, 177 - - Hiranya-pindas, 26, 258 - - Hissarlik, 73 - - Hittites, 202 - - Hoe money, China, Annam, 22 - - Hoes, 45, 165, 312, 371 - - Hoffmann, 36 - - Homeric Greeks, analogy of, to modern barbarians, 50 - - ⸺ Poems, 2 - - ⸺ Trial Scene, 8, 389 - - Honey, 34, 122 - - Horapollo, 129 - - Horse, value of, 147 - - Hottentots, 42 - - Hucher, 131 - - Hultsch, 95, 129, 202 - - Hyksos, 50 - - Hyperborean maidens, 109 - - Hyperboreans, 107 - - Hyperoché, 109 - - - Ialysus, 339 - - Iceland, 18 - - Icelandic proclamation, 18 - - Illyria, 378 - - Incas, weight, 193 - - Incuse on coins of Magna Graecia, 334 - - ⸺ square, 333 - - India, mediaeval, 27 - - Indian weight standards, 176 - - Ireland, gold in, 95 - - Irish currency, early, 31 - - ⸺ weights, 180, 401 - - Iron in Homer, 117 - - ⸺ ingots, 25, 163 - - ⸺ money, 373 - - ⸺ needles of, 27 - - ⸺ plates, 43 - - ⸺ rings, 40 - - Issedones, 68 - - Istir, 148 - - Istropolis, 107 - - Italian system, 350 - - Ivory tusks, 42 - - - Jade, 48, 105 - - Janiform head, 318 - - Japanese Bean money, 295 - - Jars in Annam, 24 - - Jersey torque, 405 - - Job, 35 - - Jol, 288 - - Jones, Quayle, 186 - - Jordan, 112 - - Josephus, 277 - - Jugerum, 358 - - Juno Moneta, 215 - - - Kaibel, 306 - - Karnak, 239 - - Kat, 238 - - Keller, Dr, 85 - - Kelts, 31 - - ⸺ their early knowledge of gold, 104 - - Kenrick, 143 - - Kenyon, 306 - - Keseph, 270 - - Kesitah, 270 - - Kettle, 31 - - Kettles, 24 - - Kid, 33 - - Kikkar, 264, 279, 309 - - King’s weight, 275 - - Klaproth, 69 - - Knife money, 156 - - Knives, 312 - - Koehler, 219, 317 - - Kolben, 43 - - - Lacedaemonian shield, 334 - - Lachish, 258 - - Lady Godiva, 336 - - Lais, 330 - - Lake dwellings, 84 - - Lamb, 271 - - Laodicé, 109 - - Laos, weight system of, 161 - - Larins, 28 - - Lassen, 66 - - Lateres, 375 - - Latham, R. G., 57 - - Laurium, 99 - - ⸺ mines of, 59 - - Layard, Sir A. H., 85 - - Leake, Col., 313 - - Lebetes, 314 - - Lehmann, 195 - - Leinster, king of, 32 - - Lelantum, 222 - - Lemnos, 323 - - Lenormant, 129, 242 - - Leocedes, 212 - - Lex Flaminia, 378 - - ⸺ Tarpeia, 31 - - Libella, 357, 374 - - Libra, 347, 358 - - Lindus, 339 - - Linguistic Palaeontology, 60 - - Lingurium, Greek derivation of, 110 - - Lion and Bull, 296 - - ⸺ on coins, 321 - - ⸺ weights, 199, 245 - - Litra, 347 - - ⸺ its subdivisions, 348 - - ⸺ silver, 361 - - ⸺ translation of libra, 360 - - Litre, 1 - - L. M. R., 330 - - Load, 173, 263 - - ⸺ as unit, 172 - - ⸺ Greek, 309 - - Lupinus, 278 - - Lusitania, 97 - - Lycia, 332 - - Lydia, 201 - - Lydian coinage, 299 - - ⸺ coins, 321 - - ⸺ electrum, 296 - - ⸺ system, 293 - - Lynx, 110 - - Lyre, 329 - - Lysias, 301, 324 - - - Macedonian standard, 346 - - ⸺ talent, 125, 304 - - Machpelah, 246 - - Madagascar, 187 - - Madden, 240 - - Madi tribe, 43, 263 - - Maine, Sir H. S., 8 - - Maize, grain of, 166 - - Makrizi, 182 - - Malay weights, 171 - - Malays, 309 - - Manā of gold, 26, 122 - - Mancipatio, 121, 358, 376 - - Mancus (of silver), 34 - - Maneh, its origin, 256 - - Mansous, 46 - - Manu, 177 - - Maris, 203 - - Mark, 358, 397 - - Marquardt, 181 - - Marsden, W., 172 - - Marseilles, inscription at, 142 - - Massilia, 62 - - ⸺ court of, 111 - - Mathematical hangmen, 231 - - Measure of corn or oil, 324 - - Medbh, 36 - - Medimnus, 324 - - Melitaea, 323 - - Melkarth, 227 - - Men, 327 - - Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin, 247 - - Meinnan, 33 - - Mentores, 106 - - Mermnadae, 205 - - Meroe, gold, copper, iron in, 78 - - Mesha, 272 - - Mesopotamia, cattle in, 50 - - Messana, 336 - - Metals, first objects to be weighed, 114 - - ⸺ relations of, in Greece, 219 - - ⸺ their discovery, 57 - - Metapontum, 319, 327 - - Metre, 1 - - Metric systems, 198 - - Midas, 71 - - Miletus, 205, 210, 226, 296 - - Milk of cow, 33 - - ⸺ of goat, 33 - - ⸺ of sheep, 33 - - Millies, 157 - - Mill-sail incuse, 334 - - Mina, Greek, 309 - - ⸺ Hebrew, 274 - - ⸺ in Ezekiel, 284 - - ⸺ origin of, 258 - - ⸺ use of, 309 - - Mines of Spain, 97 - - Mithkal, 183 - - Moda, 46 - - Modius, 121 - - Moeun, 162 - - Mohurs, 35 - - Moïs, 24 - - Mommsen, 88, 134, 205, 348, 364, 380 - - Money, development of, 48 - - Monro, D. B., 226 - - Moriae, 324 - - Moschos, 137 - - Moura, 160, 175 - - Movers, 143 - - Muk, in Annam, 24 - - Murex, 330 - - Mycenae, 72 - - ⸺ rings at, 77 - - Mytilene, 322 - - - Naaman, 280 - - Nails, 159, 312 - - Naucratis, 241 - - Naxos, 348 - - Nehemiah, 280 - - Nejd, 29 - - Nero, 378 - - New Britain, 20 - - New Carthage, 289 - - ⸺ ⸺ mines of, 99 - - Niebuhr, 135 - - Nile, source of, 107 - - ⸺ water, 242 - - Nineveh, 85 - - Nissen, 195, 239 - - Nomads, 75 - - Nomisma, 366 - - Nomos, 369 - - ⸺ bronze, 367 - - ⸺ of Heraclea, 364 - - ⸺ Sicilian, 364 - - Noummos of Tarentum, 364 - - Nub (gold), 60 - - ⸺ its derivation, 78 - - Nubia, 78 - - Numerals on coins, 130, 363 - - Nummus, 131, 137 - - Numus, 364 - - - Oats, 34 - - Ob, 349 - - Obol, 346 - - ⸺ Attic, Aeginetic, 346 - - ⸺ copper coin, 361 - - ⸺ its subdivisions, 349 - - ⸺ origin of, 310 - - Oenone, 211 - - Olbia, 67, 316 - - Olive trees, 365 - - Olives, 324 - - Olympic victor, 324 - - Oncia, 348 - - Onesicritus, 74 - - Onions, 45 - - Oppert, 183 - - Oppian Law, 139 - - Or (gold in Irish), 61 - - Orang Glaï, 25 - - Orchomenus, 72 - - Ordlach, 353 - - Öre, 397 - - Ornan’s threshing-floor, 148 - - Örtug, 397 - - Ossetes, 4, 30 - - Ostiaks, 4 - - Ostracism, 329 - - Ostrakon, 329 - - Owls, 225 - - Ox, fore part of, on coins of Samos, 313 - - ⸺ in _Capitulare Saxonicum_, 34 - - ⸺ name of coin, 4 - - ⸺ on coins of Eretria, 313 - - ⸺ value of, in Egypt, 146 - - Oxus, 204 - - - Pactolus, 70, 206 - - Padi, 192 - - Paeonia, gold mines of, 74 - - Pahlavi texts, 148 - - Paille, 101 - - Palacrae, 101 - - Palae, 98, 101 - - Palestine, 269 - - Pallegoix, 161 - - Pangaeum, 71, 220 - - Panormus, 130, 289 - - Parkyns, Mansfield, 82 - - Parthenon, 310 - - Pauli, 89 - - Pausanias, 212 - - Pea, scarlet, 172 - - Peach, 78 - - Pecunia, 4, 376 - - Pegasus, 362 - - Pendeo, 358 - - Pening, 397 - - Penny, its cognates, derivation, 64; weight, 385 - - Pentacosiomedimni, 324 - - Pentonkion, 348 - - Pericles, 215 - - Perseus, 107 - - Persian Gulf, 27 - - ⸺ silver standard, 261 - - ⸺ standard, 300, 303 - - ⸺ tribute, 129 - - ⸺ wars, 220 - - ⸺ weights, 179 - - Persians coin money in Egypt, 219 - - Pertz, 141 - - Peru, 193 - - Petrie, W. M. F., 216, 240, 241, 258 - - Phanes, 320 - - Pharaoh, 113 - - Pheidias, 211, 310 - - Pheidon, 211, 311 - - Pheidonian weights, 213 - - Philip II., 74, 341 - - Philippi, 74 - - Philippus stater, 140 - - φλjορι, 61 - - Phocaea, 205, 322 - - Phocaean standard, 210 - - Phocaeans, 62, 96, 110, 130, 132 - - Phoenicia, 86, 200 - - Phoenician inscription of Marseilles, 142 - - ⸺ standard, 206, 261 - - ⸺ ⸺ origin of, 286 - - ⸺ system, 285 - - ⸺ weights, 201 - - ⸺ ⸺ from Jol, 288 - - Phoenicians, 117 - - Phtheirophagoi, 70 - - Picul, 263, 309 - - ⸺ origin of, 174, 190 - - Pig, 25 - - Pindar, 170, 211 - - Pinginn, 33 - - Pipilika, 67 - - Plutarch, 135, 378 - - Po, 110 - - Pollex, 353 - - Polo, Marco, 14, 146 - - Polybius, 62, 139 - - Polygamy, 54 - - Pondus, 358 - - Poole, R. S., 271 - - Posidonius, 91, 97 - - Pottery, in shape of gourds, 258 - - Pound, English, 266 - - ⸺ of 16 ounces, 18 ounces, 24 ounces, 360 - - ⸺ of silk, 259 - - Powell, 20 - - Priam, 71 - - Propontis, 210 - - Ptolemaic coinage, 299 - - ⸺ standard, 338 - - ⸺ stater, 279 - - Pump, Egyptian, 99 - - Pylus, 214 - - Pyrenees, 99 - - Pytheas, 257 - - ⸺ his voyage, 83 - - - Qesitah, 270 - - Quadrans, 348, 352 - - Quadrigae, 377 - - Queen Charlotte Islands, 17 - - Queensland blacks, 152 - - Queipo, 179, 200 - - Quills of gold, 17 - - Quincunx, symbol of, 369 - - - Rakat, 172 - - Rameses II., 128 - - Ratti, 127, 176, 186 - - Red Sea, 76 - - Regenbogenschüsseln, 140 - - Reindeer, 4 - - Relation of gold to silver, to copper, 135 - - Rhegium, 336 - - Rhinoceros, horn of, 25 - - Rhoda, 290, 322 - - Rhodes, 132, 322, 339 - - Rhodian standard, 338, 339 - - Rhys Davids, 29 - - Rice, 178 - - ⸺ bag of, 162, 172 - - ⸺ grains, 187 - - Rig Veda, 25, 59, 122, 257 - - Ring money, 35, 394 - - Rings, Egyptian, 242 - - ⸺ gold, 34, 128 - - ⸺ ⸺ of Egypt, 129 - - ⸺ in Homer, 36 - - ⸺ Mycenaean, 36 - - ⸺ of tin, 44 - - Road, sacred, 111, 216 - - Robes, in Homer, 49 - - Roman coins of Campania, 216 - - ⸺ foot, 359 - - ⸺ (later) weights, 181 - - ⸺ pound, 234 - - ⸺ system, 374 - - Romans, use of weights by, 121 - - Rose, 320 - - Rotl, 46 - - Royal standards, 250 - - Rubat, 45 - - Ruding, 180 - - Rupee, 4 - - ⸺ purchasing power of, 152 - - Rye, 34 - - - Saggio, 23, 146 - - Salamis, 142, 272 - - Salassi, 89 - - Sallet (von), 317 - - Sallust, 110 - - Salt, 45 - - Samhaisc, 33 - - Samos, 222 - - Samoyedes, 3 - - Sapec, 24, 157 - - Sarah, 113 - - Sardes, 206 - - Sassanide kings, 151 - - Saxon coins, 321 - - Sayce, 202 - - Scales of silver, 193 - - ⸺ used, 226 - - Scandinavian currency, 34 - - Scapte Hyle, 73 - - Schliemann, 129, 231 - - Schoenus, 365 - - Schrader, 60, 69, 70, 92 - - Scillinga, 39 - - Sciron, 331 - - Screapall, 33 - - Scriptulum, 351 - - Scripulum, 135 - - Scrupulus, 352 - - Scythians, 67 - - ⸺ use gold, but not copper, 69 - - Seal, 322 - - Sedâcy, 44 - - Seebohm, F., 404 - - Sembella, 379 - - Semis, 369 - - Sequani, 332 - - Servius, 376 - - Sestertius, 363, 379 - - Sexagesimal system, 198 - - Sextantal as, 362 - - Sextans, 348 - - Sextula, 351, 384 - - Shakespeare, 349 - - Shayast, 150 - - Sheep, 33, 324, 370, 374 - - ⸺ as coin type, 272 - - ⸺ as unit, 272 - - ⸺ weights, 271 - - Shekel, 35 - - ⸺ as unit of Hebrew system, 273 - - ⸺ earlier than mina, 246 - - ⸺ heavy, 259 - - ⸺ light, heavy, 201 - - ⸺ of Sanctuary, 273 - - Shekels, 269 - - Shell money, 14 - - Shells of silver, 22 - - Shield, 331, 334 - - ⸺ in Homer, 331 - - Shilling, 37 - - Siamese bullet-money, 28 - - ⸺ coins, 161 - - Sicanians, 347 - - Sicels, 347 - - Sicilian gold unit, 131 - - ⸺ silver coinage, 359 - - ⸺ system, 346 - - ⸺ talent, 131, 137, 304, 359 - - Sicilicus, 368 - - Sicily, 31 - - Siculo-Punic coins, 289 - - Sicyonian shield, 334 - - Sidonians, 117 - - Sierra Leone, 39 - - Siglos, 261 - - Silenus, 323 - - Siliqua, 182 - - Silphiomachos, 326 - - Silphium, 314, 325 - - ⸺ on coins of Cyrene, 50 - - Silver, 57 - - ⸺ at Rome, 139, 373 - - ⸺ coinage, Roman, 362 - - ⸺ coins, origin of Greek, 315 - - ⸺ discovery of, 98, 100 - - ⸺ found in Cilicia, 146 - - ⸺ furnaces for, 98 - - ⸺ in Cilicia, 286 - - ⸺ in Gaul, 93 - - ⸺ in Greece, 310 - - ⸺ in Palestine, 147 - - ⸺ not weighed in Homer, 117 - - ⸺ relation to bronze, 380 - - ⸺ scarce in Egypt, 146 - - ⸺ standard, 260 - - ⸺ standards, table, 209 - - ⸺ ⸺ variation of, 337 - - ⸺ value of, 146 - - Silverlings, 269 - - Silvestre, 157 - - Sipylus, 71 - - Six, M., 321 - - Sjögren, 70 - - Slave-boy, 326 - - Slave, foreign, more valuable, 55 - - ⸺ Hebrew, value of, 148 - - ⸺ in Homer, 30 - - Slaves, 11, 323 - - ⸺ constancy of price, 54 - - ⸺ in Congo, 42 - - ⸺ in Darfour, 46 - - ⸺ in Wales, 32 - - ⸺ male, female, 54 - - Soanes, 70 - - Solidus, 33, 181, 384 - - Solomon, 147 - - Solon’s coinage, 306, 324 - - ⸺ standard, 306 - - Sophocles, 204 - - Sophron, 364 - - Sophytes, 127 - - Soteria, 327 - - Soudan, 312 - - Soul, weighing of, 150 - - Soumyt, 46 - - Soutzo, M., 134, 203, 347, 368, 380 - - ⸺ view of relation between the metals, 136 - - Spain, mines of, 96, 97 - - Spata, 84 - - Spear-brooch, 36 - - Spices weighed, 276 - - Spirals, 36 - - ⸺ Keltic, 38 - - ⸺ Scandinavian, 37 - - Squirrel skin as unit, 4 - - Stater, use of, 308 - - Sterlings, 225 - - Stiver, 186 - - Stockfish, 18, 316 - - Strabo, 71, 97 - - String of cash, 24 - - Sumatra, 172 - - Sun’s diameter, 203 - - Suvarṇa, 127, 178 - - Svoronos, 314 - - Swine, 378 - - ⸺ with Gauls, 333 - - Symbol as mark of worth, 324 - - Syracusan standard, 362 - - Syracuse, coinage of, 225 - - Szins, 25 - - - Taberdier, 158 - - Tacoe, 186 - - Tael, 158 - - Taku, 186 - - Talanton, 228, 304 - - Talent, 244 - - ⸺ Homeric, 2 seqq. - - ⸺ Macedonian, 125, 304 - - ⸺ origin of, 262 - - ⸺ Sicilian, 304 - - Tantalus, 71 - - Tapaks, 167 - - Taras, 364 - - Tarbelli, 92 - - Tarentum, 364 - - Tarneih, 44 - - Tarshish, 97 - - Tartessus, 96, 97 - - Taurisci, 87, 339 - - Tax, hut, 25 - - Tea as money, 23 - - Teanum, 369 - - Tectosages, 90 - - Temples as banks, 215 - - Tenedos, 318 - - Teos, 210, 340 - - Testudo, 329 - - Tetl, 192 - - Tetras, 348 - - Teutonic peoples, 34 - - Thasos, 220, 323, 344 - - ⸺ mines of, 73 - - Thebes, 334 - - Theocritus, 137 - - Theseus, 331 - - Thomas, 176 - - Thothmes III., 128 - - Thracian coinage, 342 - - Thracians, 340 - - Thucydides, 72, 211 - - Thumb, 353 - - Thurii, 322 - - Tibetan currency, 23 - - Tical, 29 - - Timaeus, 51, 379 - - Time, measurement of, 198 - - Timoleon, 225, 289 - - Tin, 97, 173 - - ⸺ Cornish, 83 - - ⸺ discovery of, in Sumatra, 100 - - ⸺ coins, 225 - - ⸺ rings of, 44 - - Tiryns, 84, 231 - - Tjams, 24 - - Tmolus, 70 - - Tobacco, 45 - - Tola, 177 - - Tolosa, 90 - - Tomme, 353 - - Torres Straits, 105 - - Tortoise, 313, 333 - - ⸺ Island, 331 - - ⸺ (sea), 215 - - ⸺ shell, 328 - - ⸺ ⸺ currency, 21 - - ⸺ ⸺ masks, 105 - - Tortoises of terra cotta, 329 - - ⸺ of wood, 330 - - ⸺ ⸺ and earthenware, 330 - - Toukkiyeh, 44 - - Trade routes, 105 - - Tremissis, 385 - - Trias, 348 - - Trichalcum, 346 - - Triens, 348 - - Tripods, 314 - - Troy grain, origin of, 181; of ounce, 386 - - Tschudi, 70 - - Tunny coins of Olbia, 317 - - ⸺ fish, 315 - - ⸺ ⸺ Cyzicus, 50 - - ⸺ ⸺ Olbia, 50 - - Turdetani, 97 - - Turkey rhubarb, 83 - - Turti, 97 - - Types parlants, 322 - - Tyre, 200 - - ⸺ fall of, 141 - - Tylor, 229 - - - Umbrians, 64 - - Uncia, derivation of, 353 - - ⸺ Roman, 359 - - Unga, 33 - - Unguis, 354 - - Ur, 197 - - Ural-Altaic range, 204 - - ⸺ region, 68 - - Uten, 203, 238 - - - Varro, 375, 378 - - Venusia, 369 - - Victoriatus, 377 - - Victumulae, mines of, 88 - - Vieh, 4 - - Vines, distance apart, 366 - - Vomis, 354 - - Vulci, 354 - - - Wadai, 44 - - Wade, Sir T., 158 - - Wai wai, 105 - - Wales, 31 - - Wall paintings, 128 - - Walrus hide, 47 - - Wampum, 14 - - Weapons, 35 - - Weighing of the soul, 150 - - Weight, its origin, 12 - - ⸺ of potatoes, 358 - - ⸺ unit, how fixed, 168 - - Weights, false, 241 - - ⸺ in connection with currency, 271 - - ⸺ in form of animals, 153, 401 - - ⸺ ⸺ oxen, 128 - - ⸺ in shape of cows, 243 - - Weissenborn, 212 - - Welsh currency, 32 - - West, E. W., 148 - - Whale’s teeth, 21 - - Wheat, 122 - - ⸺ corn, 179 - - ⸺ corn in Assyria, 183 - - ⸺ corns, 180 - - ⸺ ear, 327 - - ⸺ grain, 182 - - Wheaten straw, 109 - - Wicklow, gold in, 334 - - Wife, payment for, 44 - - ⸺ price of, 44, 105 - - Wilamowitz, 306 - - Wine, 323 - - ⸺ cup, 323 - - ⸺ jar, 323 - - ⸺ trade, of Carthage, of Gauls, 326 - - Wolf, 335 - - Wood as currency, 42 - - Woodpeckers’ scalps, 15 - - Wool merchants, 117 - - ⸺ weighed in Homer, 118 - - ⸺ weighing of, 116 - - - Xenophanes, 205, 293 - - Xenophon, 337 - - ⸺ _De Vectigalibus_, 338 - - - Yard, English imperial, 266 - - ⸺ of butter, 358 - - ⸺ of land, 358 - - - Zancle, 348 - - Zechariah, 148 - - Zend Avesta, 149 - - ⸺ physicians’ fees, 26 - - Zulus, 2, 42 - - - Cambridge: - PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, - AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. - - - - -SOME PUBLICATIONS OF - -The Cambridge University Press. - - -=The Types of Greek Coins.= By PERCY GARDNER, Litt. D., F.S.A. With 16 -Autotype plates, containing photographs of Coins of all parts of the -Greek World. Impl. 4to. Cloth extra, £1. 11_s._ 6_d._; Roxburgh (Morocco -back), £2. 2_s._ - -=The Engraved Gems of Classical Times=, with a Catalogue of the Gems in -the Fitzwilliam Museum, by J. HENRY MIDDLETON, M.A., Slade Professor of -Fine Art. Royal 8vo. Buckram, 12_s._ 6_d._ - -=Illuminated Manuscripts in Classical and Mediaeval= TIMES, their Art and -their Technique. By J. H. MIDDLETON, M.A. With Illustrations. Royal 8vo. - [_Nearly ready._ - -=An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy.= - -Part I. The Archaic Inscriptions and the Greek Alphabet. - -By E. S. ROBERTS, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Gonville and Caius College. -Demy 8vo. With Illustrations. 18_s._ - -=A Catalogue of Ancient Marbles in Great Britain=, by Prof. ADOLF -MICHAELIS. Translated by C. A. M. FENNELL, Litt. D., late Fellow of Jesus -College. Royal 8vo. Roxburgh (Morocco back), £2. 2_s._ - -=Essays on the Art of Pheidias.= By C. WALDSTEIN, Litt. D., Ph.D., Reader -in Classical Archaeology in the University of Cambridge. Royal 8vo. 16 -Plates. Buckram, 30_s._ - -=The Literary Remains of Albrecht Dürer=, by W. M. CONWAY. With -Transcripts from the British Museum MSS., and Notes by LINA ECKENSTEIN. -Royal 8vo. 21_s._ (_The Edition is limited to 500 copies._) - -=The Growth of English Industry and Commerce during= THE EARLY AND MIDDLE -AGES. By W. CUNNINGHAM, D.D., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Demy -8vo. 16_s._ - -=The Growth of English Industry and Commerce in= MODERN TIMES. By the -same Author. Demy 8vo. [_Nearly ready._ - - London: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, - CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, - AVE MARIA LANE. - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ORIGIN OF METALLIC CURRENCY AND -WEIGHT STANDARDS *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/old/66160-0.zip b/old/66160-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 7ea63b2..0000000 --- a/old/66160-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h.zip b/old/66160-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f3bcce8..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/66160-h.htm b/old/66160-h/66160-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 2439734..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/66160-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,23805 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> - <title> - The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Origin of Metallic Currency and Weight Standards, by William Ridgeway, M.A. - </title> - - <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> - -<style type="text/css"> - -a { - text-decoration: none; -} - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -h1,h2,h3 { - text-align: center; - clear: both; -} - -h2.nobreak { - page-break-before: avoid; -} - -hr.chap { - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - clear: both; - width: 65%; - margin-left: 17.5%; - margin-right: 17.5%; -} - -div.chapter { - page-break-before: always; -} - -ul { - list-style-type: none; -} - -li.indx { - margin-top: .5em; - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -li.ifrst { - margin-top: 2em; - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -p { - margin-top: 0.5em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: 0.5em; - text-indent: 1em; -} - -table { - margin: 1em auto 1em auto; - max-width: 40em; - border-collapse: collapse; -} - -td { - padding-left: 0.25em; - padding-right: 0.25em; - vertical-align: top; -} - -th { - padding-left: 0.25em; - padding-right: 0.25em; - font-weight: normal; - font-size: 85%; -} - -.tdc { - text-align: center; -} - -.tdr { - text-align: right; -} - -.contents td { - padding-left: 2.25em; - padding-right: 0.25em; - vertical-align: top; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.contents .tdc { - text-align: center; - padding-top: 0.75em; - padding-left: 0.25em; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.contents .pad-top { - padding-top: 0.75em; -} - -.contents .tdpg { - vertical-align: bottom; - text-align: right; - padding-left: 0.25em; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.contents .tdr { - text-align: right; - padding-left: 0.25em; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.borders th { - border: thin solid black; -} - -.borders th.super { - border: none; - font-size: 110%; -} - -.borders td { - border-right: thin solid black; - padding: 0.25em; -} - -.borders .bb { - border-bottom: thin solid black; -} - -.borders .bl { - border-left: thin solid black; -} - -.borders .nobl { - border-left: none; -} - -.borders .nobr { - border-right: none; -} - -.blockquote { - margin: 1.5em 10%; -} - -.caption { - text-align: center; - margin-bottom: 1em; - font-size: 90%; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.center { - text-align: center; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.ditto { - margin-left: 1.5em; - margin-right: 1.5em; -} - -.ditto1 { - margin-left: 0.75em; - margin-right: 0.75em; -} - -.figcenter { - margin: auto; - text-align: center; -} - -.footnotes { - margin-top: 1em; - border: dashed 1px; -} - -.footnote { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; - font-size: 0.9em; -} - -.footnote .label { - position: absolute; - right: 84%; - text-align: right; -} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: none; -} - -.frac { - padding-right: 1em; -} - -.gesperrt { - letter-spacing: 0.1em; - margin-right: -0.1em; - font-style: normal; -} - -.gothic { - font-family: 'Old English Text MT', 'Old English', serif; -} - -.hanging { - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.there-is-always-one { - padding-left: 2em; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.larger { - font-size: 150%; -} - -.nw { - white-space: nowrap; -} - -.pagenum { - position: absolute; - right: 4%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; - font-style: normal; -} - -.poetry-container { - text-align: center; - margin: 1em; -} - -.poetry { - display: inline-block; - text-align: left; -} - -.poetry .stanza { - margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em; -} - -.poetry .verse { - padding-left: 3em; -} - -.poetry .indent0 { - text-indent: -3em; -} - -.poetry .indent2 { - text-indent: -2em; -} - -.poetry .indent8 { - text-indent: 1em; -} - -.poetry .indent18 { - text-indent: 6em; -} - -.right { - text-align: right; -} - -.smaller { - font-size: 80%; -} - -.smcap { - font-variant: small-caps; - font-style: normal; -} - -.allsmcap { - font-variant: small-caps; - font-style: normal; - text-transform: lowercase; -} - -.tb { - margin-top: 2em; -} - -.titlepage { - text-align: center; - margin-top: 3em; - text-indent: 0em; -} - -.x-ebookmaker img { - max-width: 100%; - width: auto; - height: auto; -} - -.x-ebookmaker .poetry { - display: block; - margin-left: 1.5em; -} - -.x-ebookmaker .blockquote { - margin: 1.5em 5%; -} - -.x-ebookmaker .gesperrt { - font-style: italic; - margin-right: 0; - letter-spacing: 0; -} - </style> - </head> -<body> - -<div style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Origin of Metallic Currency and Weight Standards, by William Ridgeway</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online -at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you -are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this eBook. -</div> - -<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: The Origin of Metallic Currency and Weight Standards</p> - -<div style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: William Ridgeway</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: August 28, 2021 [eBook #66160]</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>Character set encoding: UTF-8</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Produced by: MFR and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)</div> - -<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ORIGIN OF METALLIC CURRENCY AND WEIGHT STANDARDS ***</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_i"></a>[i]</span></p> - -<h1>THE ORIGIN OF<br /> -METALLIC CURRENCY AND<br /> -WEIGHT STANDARDS.</h1> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;"> -<img src="images/cover-illus.jpg" width="300" height="250" alt="Drawing of a man and a large pair of weighing scales" /> -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_ii"></a>[ii]</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage"><span class="gothic">London:</span> <span class="smcap">C. J. CLAY and SONS</span>,<br /> -CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,<br /> -<span class="smcap">Ave Maria Lane</span>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;"> -<img src="images/c-u-p.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="Logo of Cambridge University Press" /> -</div> - -<p class="center"><span class="gothic">Cambridge:</span> DEIGHTON, BELL AND CO.<br /> -<span class="gothic">Leipzig:</span> F. A. BROCKHAUS.<br /> -<span class="gothic">New York:</span> MACMILLAN AND CO.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_iii"></a>[iii]</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage larger">THE ORIGIN OF<br /> -METALLIC CURRENCY AND<br /> -WEIGHT STANDARDS</p> - -<p class="titlepage"><span class="smaller">BY</span><br /> -WILLIAM RIDGEWAY, M.A.,<br /> -<span class="smaller">PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN QUEEN’S COLLEGE, CORK,<br /> -LATE FELLOW OF GONVILLE AND CAIUS COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE.</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage">ἌΝΘΡΩΠΟϹ Ἢ <ΒΟὟϹ Ἢ> ὟϹ ἊΝ ΕἼΗ ΜΈΤΡΟΝ ἉΠΆΝΤΩΝ.</p> - -<p class="titlepage">CAMBRIDGE:<br /> -AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS<br /> -1892</p> - -<p class="center smaller">[<i>All Rights reserved.</i>]</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_iv"></a>[iv]</span></p> - -<p class="titlepage smaller"><span class="gothic">Cambridge:</span><br /> -PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS,<br /> -AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_v"></a>[v]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="PREFACE">PREFACE.</h2> - -</div> - -<p>The following pages are an attempt to arrive at a knowledge -of the origin of Metallic Currency and Weight -Standards by the Comparative Method. As both these institutions -played a not inconsiderable part in the development -of civilization, it seemed worth while to approach the subject -from a different point of view from that from which it had been -previously studied. Hitherto Numismatists when studying -the Origins of Coinage had confined themselves to the materials -presented to them in the earliest money of Lydia, Greece -and Italy, and on the other hand the Metrologists had almost -completely limited their range of observation to the systems -of Babylon, Egypt, Greece and Rome. As the Comparative -Method has yielded such excellent results in the study of other -human institutions, I have endeavoured by its aid to get some -new principles which may throw some fresh light on the first -beginnings of monetary and weight systems.</p> - -<p>The leading principle which I have here endeavoured to -establish by the Inductive Method, I had already put forward in -a short paper, but there are various other doctrines now published -for the first time, such as the origin of the earliest Greek -coin types, the origin of the earliest Greek silver coins, of the -Greek Obolos, the Sicilian Litra, and Roman As, of the Mina, -and its sixty-fold the Talent.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_vi"></a>[vi]</span></p> - -<p>In treating of the Distribution of gold and the priority of -its discovery to that of the other metals, I have been led to -criticise the principles of the science of Linguistic Palaeontology, -which have gained such currency in this country from -Schrader’s <i>Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryans</i>, and from Dr -Isaac Taylor’s popular little book, <i>The Origin of the Aryans</i>. -I have been led to conclude that Comparative Philology taken -alone is a misleading guide in the study of Anthropology.</p> - -<p>From the nature of this work, a certain amount of polemic -was inevitable; but I trust that not a line will be found which -contains anything which could be offensive to the living, or is -disrespectful to great scholars now no more. I owe so much to -the works of distinguished men, from whose principles I am -obliged to dissent, that I feel myself almost an ingrate who -assails his benefactors with the very means provided for him -by their labours.</p> - -<p>It now only remains for me to thank many friends, who -have aided me and taken an interest in this work.</p> - -<p>To Mr J. G. Frazer, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, -I am under obligations which I cannot adequately express in -words. He has read through the proofs of the whole of this -work, and there is scarcely a page which has not benefited from -his most careful and acute criticism. Besides this his vast -knowledge of the manners and customs of barbarous peoples -has furnished me with many most valuable references, and his -fine Ethnological Library has been ungrudgingly placed at my -disposal. Professor W. Robertson Smith has read the proofs of -those pages which deal with Semitic systems, and Prof. J. H. -Middleton those treating of the Greek.</p> - -<p>By their kind sacrifice of time and labour which have been -robbed from important works of their own, the many shortcomings -of this book have been rendered far less numerous than -they otherwise would be, but of course I alone am responsible -for the manifold ones which remain.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_vii"></a>[vii]</span></p> - -<p>I must also express my gratitude to Mr Head, Mr Wroth -and Mr Grueber of the Coin Department of the British Museum -for their kindness and courtesy in affording me every facility -for studying the coins under their charge.</p> - -<p>I have to thank the Syndics of the Cambridge University -Press for having undertaken the publication of this work.</p> - -<p class="tb hanging"><span class="smcap">Queen’s College, Cork</span>,<br /> -<i>Christmas Eve, 1891</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_viii"></a>[viii]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_ix"></a>[ix]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak">CONTENTS.</h2> - -</div> - -<table summary="Contents" class="contents"> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td class="tdpg smaller">PAGE</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER I.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>The Ox and the Talent in Homer</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_I">1</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER II.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Primitive Systems of Currency</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_II">10</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER III.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>The distribution of the Ox and the distribution of Gold</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_III">47</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER IV.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Primaeval Trade Routes</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_IV">105</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER V.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>The Art of Weighing was first employed for Gold</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_V">112</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER VI.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>The Gold Unit everywhere the value of a Cow</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VI">124</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER VII.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>The Weight Systems of China and Further Asia</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VII">155</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER VIII.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>How were Primitive Weight Units fixed?</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_VIII">169</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER IX.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Statement and Criticism of the Old Doctrines</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_IX">195</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_x"></a>[x]</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">PART II.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER X.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>The Systems of Egypt, Babylon, and Palestine</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_X">234</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XI.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>The Lydian and Persian Systems</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XI">293</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc" colspan="2">CHAPTER XII.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>The Greek, Sicilian, Italian and Roman Systems. Conclusion</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#CHAPTER_XII">304</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="pad-top">Appendix A</td> - <td class="tdpg pad-top"><a href="#APPENDIX_A">389</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="pad-top">Appendix B</td> - <td class="tdpg pad-top"><a href="#APPENDIX_B">391</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="pad-top">Appendix C</td> - <td class="tdpg pad-top"><a href="#APPENDIX_C">394</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="pad-top">Index</td> - <td class="tdpg pad-top"><a href="#PART_II">407</a></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_xi"></a>[xi]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak">LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.</h2> - -</div> - -<table summary="Contents" class="contents"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr smaller">FIG.</td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdpg smaller">PAGE</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1.</td> - <td>Cowrie Shell</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure1">13</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">2.</td> - <td>Wampum</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure2">14</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3.</td> - <td>Al-li-ko-chik</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure3">15</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">4.</td> - <td>Burmese silver shell money</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure4">22</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">5.</td> - <td>Chinese hoe money</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure5">23</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">6.</td> - <td>Fish-hook money</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure6">28</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">7.</td> - <td>Siamese silver bullet money</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure7">29</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">8.</td> - <td>Silvered brass bars</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure8">30</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">9.</td> - <td>Rings found in the tombs of Mycenae</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure9">37</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">10.</td> - <td>Gold rings found in Ireland</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure10">38</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">11.</td> - <td>West African axe money</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure11">40</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">12.</td> - <td>Old Calabar copper-wire formerly used as money</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure12">41</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">13.</td> - <td>Irish bronze fibulae and West African manillas</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure13">42</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">14.</td> - <td>Ancient British Coins</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure14">93</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">15.</td> - <td>Barbarous imitation of Drachm of Massalia</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure15">111</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">16.</td> - <td>Gold Stater of Philip of Macedon</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure16">125</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">17.</td> - <td>Persian Daric</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure17">126</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">18.</td> - <td>Gold Stater of Diodotus of Bactria</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure18">126</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">19.</td> - <td>Egyptian wall painting showing the weighing of gold rings</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure19">128</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">20.</td> - <td>Regenbogenschüssel</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure20">140</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">21.</td> - <td>Chinese knife money</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure21">157</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">22.</td> - <td>Egyptian Five-Kat weight</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure22">240</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">23.</td> - <td>Lion weight</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure23">245</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">24.</td> - <td>Assyrian Duck weight</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure24">245</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">25.</td> - <td>Weights in the form of Sheep</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure25">271</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">26.</td> - <td>Coin of Salamis in Cyprus</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure26">272</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">27.</td> - <td>Bull’s-head Five-shekel Weight</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure27">283</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">28.</td> - <td>Lydian Electrum Coin</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure28">295</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">29.</td> - <td>Coin of Croesus</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure29">298</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">30.</td> - <td>Coin of Eretria</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure30">306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">31.</td> - <td>Coin of Cyrene with Silphium plant</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure31">313</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">32.</td> - <td>Coin of Cyzicus with tunny fish</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure32">316</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">33.</td> - <td>Coins of Olbia in the form of tunny fish</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure33">317</a><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_xii"></a>[xii]</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">34.</td> - <td>Coin of Tenedos with double-headed axe</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure34">318</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">35.</td> - <td>Coin of Phanes, earliest known inscribed coin</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure35">320</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">36.</td> - <td>Archaic Coin of Samos</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure36">321</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">37.</td> - <td>Coin of Cnidus</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure37">321</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">38.</td> - <td>Coin of Thurii</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure38">322</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">39.</td> - <td>Coin of Rhoda in Spain</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure39">322</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">40.</td> - <td>Tetradrachm of Athens</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure40">325</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">41.</td> - <td>Vase from Cyrene, showing the weighing of the Silphium</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure41">326</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">42.</td> - <td>Coin of Metapontum</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure42">327</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">43.</td> - <td>Coin of Croton</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure43">328</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">44.</td> - <td>Tortoise of Aegina</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure44">328</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">45.</td> - <td>Coin of Boeotia with Shield</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure45">331</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">46.</td> - <td>Coin of Lycia</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure46">332</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">47.</td> - <td>Coin of Messana</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure47">336</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">48.</td> - <td>Aes Rude</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure48">355</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">49.</td> - <td>Bronze Decussis, with figure of Cow</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure49">356</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">50.</td> - <td>As (<i>Aes grave</i>)</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure50">361</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">51.</td> - <td>As (semi-uncial)</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure51">362</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">52.</td> - <td>As, 3rd Cent. <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> (<i>Third Brass</i>)</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure52">362</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">53.</td> - <td>Didrachm of Corinth</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure53">362</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">54.</td> - <td>Sesterce of First Roman Silver coinage</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure54">363</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">55.</td> - <td>Didrachm of Tarentum</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure55">364</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">56.</td> - <td>Romano-Campanian coin</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure56">377</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">57.</td> - <td>Victoriatus</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure57">377</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">58.</td> - <td>Sextans (<i>aes grave</i>)</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure58">379</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">59.</td> - <td>Gold Solidus of Julian the Apostate</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure59">384</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60.</td> - <td>Tremissis of Leo I.</td> - <td class="tdpg"><a href="#figure60">385</a></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_1"></a>[1]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_I">CHAPTER I.<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Ox and the Talent in Homer.</span></h2> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">ἮΜΟϹ Δ’ ΟΎΤ’ ἌΡ ΠΩ ἨῺϹ, ἜΤΙ Δ’ ἈΜΦΙΛΎΚΗ ΝΎΞ.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<p>The object of this essay is to enquire into the origin of -Metallic Currency and Weight Standards. Since August Boeckh -in his metrological enquiries<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> put forth the idea that the weight -standards of antiquity had been obtained scientifically, all -subsequent writers with scarcely an exception have followed -in the same path. This theory was undoubtedly suggested by -the fact that the French Republic had established a new -scientific metric system. Yet reflection might have shown -scholars that even the French system was not a wholly independent -outcome of science, for beyond doubt the <i>mètre</i> and -<i>litre</i> and <i>hectare</i> were only varieties of older measures of length, -capacity and surface, then for the first time scientifically -adjusted. The discovery of certain weights of bronze and -stone in the ruins of Nineveh, Khorsabad and Babylon lent force -to the theory of Boeckh; the imaginations of scholars were -excited by the marvellous remains of Chaldaean and Assyrian -civilization which had just been brought to light by Sir A. H. -Layard, and they hastened to conclude that in the mathematical -science of Mesopotamia the source of all weight-standards -was to be found. Egypt however put in her claim -to priority, and standards based on the measurements of the -Great Pyramid, or on the weight of a given quantity of Nile-water, -have entered the lists against the astrologers of Chaldaea. -This battle still rages hotly, Assyriologists and Egyptologists<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_2"></a>[2]</span> -hurling at each other statements drawn from tablets and -papyri, as regards the translation of which no two of these -savants are agreed. In spite of this all modern works on -metrology start with the systems of Babylon and Egypt and -from these they derive the systems of Greece and Italy. It -would at least be more scientific to move backwards from the -known to the unknown, but beguiled by the glamour of a -“scientific” metrological system, scholars have turned their backs -upon scientific method. Whilst our knowledge of the Assyrian -and Egyptian weight systems is most imperfect, being derived -from literary monuments, or from inscriptions on weights not -half understood, the systems of Greece and Rome are known to -us not simply from the vast literatures written in languages -thoroughly intelligible, but likewise from the evidence of -immense numbers of coins struck in gold and silver, by the -weights of which we are enabled to check off and substantiate -the literary sources.</p> - -<p>As Greece coined money several centuries before Italy, and -as its literature reaches much further back than that of Rome, -it is plain that any sound enquiry into the origin of weight -standards must commence with Greece. We shall therefore -without further preface proceed to investigate the evidence -afforded to us by the oldest Greek records.</p> - -<h3><i>The Homeric Talent.</i></h3> - -<p>In the Homeric Poems, which cannot be dated later than -the eighth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, there is as yet no trace of coined money. -We find nevertheless in those Poems two units of value; the -one is the cow (or ox), or the value of a cow, the other is -the Talent (τάλαντον). The former is the one which has -prevailed, and does still prevail, in barbaric communities, such -as the Zulus of South Africa, where the sole or principal wealth -consists in herds and flocks. For several reasons we may -assign to it priority in age as compared with the Talent. -In the first place it represents the most primitive form of -exchange, the barter of one article of value for another, before -the employment of the precious metals as a medium of currency;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_3"></a>[3]</span> -consequently the estimation of values by the cow is older -than that by means of a Talent or “weight” of gold, or silver -or copper. Again, in Homer, all values are expressed in so -many oxen, as “golden arms for brazen, those worth one -hundred beeves, for those worth nine beeves<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a>” (<i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 236).</p> - -<p>The Talent on the other hand is only mentioned in Homer -in relation to <i>gold</i> (for we never find any mention of a Talent -of <i>silver</i>) and we never find the value of any other article expressed -in Talents. But the names of monetary units hold their -ground long after they themselves have ceased to be in actual -use as we observe in such common expressions as “bet a guinea,” -or worth a “groat,” although these coins themselves are no longer -in circulation, and so the French <i>sou</i> has survived for a century -in popular parlance, and the <i>Thaler</i> has lived into the new -German monetary system. Accordingly we may infer that the -method of expressing the value of commodities in kine, which -we find side by side with the Talent, is the elder of the twain.</p> - -<p>Was there any immediate connection between the two systems -or were they as Hultsch (<i>Metrologie</i>², p. 165) maintains -entirely independent? It is difficult to conceive any people, -however primitive, employing two standards at the same time -which are completely independent of each other. For instance -when we find in the <i>Iliad</i><a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> that in a list of three prizes appointed -for the foot-race, the second is a cow, the third is a half-talent of -gold, it is impossible to believe that Achilles or rather the poet -had not some clear idea concerning the relative value of an ox -and a talent. Now it is noteworthy that, as already remarked, -nowhere in the Poems is the value of any commodity expressed -in Talents; yet who can doubt that Talents of gold passed -freely as media of exchange? A simple solution of this -difficulty would be that the Talent of gold represented the -older ox-unit. This would account for the fact that all values -are expressed in oxen, and not in Talents, the older name prevailing -in a fashion resembling the usage of <i>pecunia</i> in Latin.</p> - -<p>A complete parallel for such a practice can be still found -at the present moment among some of the Samoyede tribes<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_4"></a>[4]</span> -of Siberia. Thus we read in the account of a recent traveller: -“He finally came to the conclusion that for the consideration -of five hundred reindeer, he would undertake the contract. -This I regarded as a very facetious sally on his part. The -reindeer however I found was the recognised unit of value, -as amongst some tribes of the Ostiaks the Siberian squirrel. -For this purpose the reindeer is generally considered to be -worth five roubles<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a>.” Again forty years ago Haxthausen<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> tells -us that the Ossetes, a Caucasian tribe dwelling not very far -from Tiflis, although long accustomed to stamped money, -especially on the border of Georgia, kept their accounts in cows, -five roubles being reckoned to the cow. Here then in Siberia -and in the Caucasus, in spite of a long experience not merely -of a metallic unit, but of actual coined money, we still find -values estimated in reindeer, and in cows, the older units, just -as in Homer they are stated in oxen.</p> - -<p>We shall likewise find that when the ancient Irish borrowed -a ready made silver unit (the <i>uncia</i>) from the Romans, they -had to equate this unit to their old barter-unit the cow, just as -in modern times the wild tribes of Annam when borrowing the -<i>bar</i> of silver from their more civilized neighbours have had to -equate it to their native standard, the buffalo; facts in close -accord with the well known derivation of Latin <i>pecunia</i>, <i>money</i> -from <i>pecus</i>, English <i>fee</i> from <i>feoh</i>, which still meant cattle, as -does the German <i>Vieh</i>, and <i>rupee</i> (according to some) from -Sanskrit <i>rupa</i>, also meaning cattle.</p> - -<p>Let us now see if we have any data to support this hypothesis. -That most trustworthy writer, Julius Pollux, says -in his <i>Onomasticon</i> (<span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 60): “Now in old times the Athenians -had this (<i>i.e.</i> the didrachm) as a coin and it was called an -ox, because it had an ox stamped on it, but they think that -Homer also was acquainted with it when he spoke of (arms) -‘worth an hundred kine for those worth nine<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a>.’ Moreover in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_5"></a>[5]</span> -the laws of Draco there is the expression, to pay back the -price of twenty kine: and at the time when the Delians -hold their sacred festival, they say that the herald makes -proclamation whenever a gift is given by any one, that so -many oxen will be given by him, and that for each ox two -Attic drachms are offered: whence some are of opinion that -the ox is a coin peculiar to the Delians, but not to the -Athenians; and that from this likewise has been started the -proverb, an ox stands on his tongue, in case any man holds -his tongue for money<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a>.”</p> - -<p>According to Pollux then the Attic didrachm, or at least -a coin employed by the Athenians (perhaps certain coins of -Euboea), was called an ‘ox.’ Plutarch (<i>Theseus</i>, c. 25) goes -further and asserts that Theseus struck money stamped with -the figure of an ox (ἔκοψε δὲ νὸμισμα βοῦν ἐγχαράξας), and -the Scholiast on the <i>Birds</i> of Aristophanes (1106) quotes -from Philochorus, an Athenian antiquary of the third century -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span><a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a>, the same account of the Attic didrachms being marked -with an ox.</p> - -<p>On the other hand the highest authorities on numismatics -assert that the Athenians never struck any such coins. Yet -after making due allowance for the additions made by Plutarch -to the more crude statement of Pollux and Philochorus, -it is hard to conceive that such a belief could have arisen without -some foundation, and a probable solution may be found in -the fact that certain uninscribed coins, bearing the type of an -ox-head, which in recent years have been assigned to Euboea, -are for the most part found in Attica. We know that Eretria, -and Chalcis, the great cities of Euboea, were amongst the -earliest places in Greece to strike money, and it is quite possible, -nay probable, that these Euboic coins formed (along with -the Aeginetan didrachms) the currency in use at Athens before<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_6"></a>[6]</span> -the time of Solon (<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 596). Why the name <i>ox</i> was especially -recollected in after years as that of the earliest currency, we -can readily understand; the name derived from the old unit -of barter would at once attach itself to the coin which bore -the image of the ox, and in the course of time two traditions, -one that the ancient unit was the ox, the other that the first -coins current at Athens bore the symbol of an ox, would -merge into one, and finally patriotic feeling would ascribe the -first coinage to Theseus, who was regarded as the father of -so many Athenian institutions.</p> - -<p>That, at all events, the name might be applied to a certain -sum, or coin, is rendered highly probable by the fact that -Draco, with true legal conservatism, retained in his code the -primitive method of expressing values in oxen. Now it is -evident that the term, ‘price of twenty oxen’ (εἰκοσάβοιον), -must have been capable of being translated into the ordinary -metallic currency, whether that consisted of bullion in ingots -or coined money. The “cow” therefore must have had a -recognized traditional and conventional value as a monetary -unit, and this is completely demonstrated by the practice at -Delos. Religious ritual is even more conservative than legal -formula, so we need not be surprised to find the ancient -unit, the ox, still retained in that great centre of Hellenic -worship. The value likewise is expressed in the more modern -currency. But we are not yet certain whether the two Attic -drachms, which are the equivalent of the ox, are silver or gold. -Now Herodotus (<span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 97) tells us that Datis, the Persian general -(<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 490), offered at Delos three hundred <i>talents</i> of frankincense. -Hultsch (<i>Metrol.</i> p. 129) has made it clear that the -talent here indicated must be the gold Daric, that is the light -Babylonian shekel. For if they were either Babylonian or -Attic talents, the amount would be incredible. Frankincense -was of enormous value in antiquity; wherefore Hultsch is -probably right in assuming that in the opinion of the Persian -who made the offering, the three hundred “weights” of -frankincense, each of which weighed a Daric, were equal in -value likewise to 300 Darics. We shall see in a moment that -there was a distinct tradition that the Daric was a <i>Talent</i>, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_7"></a>[7]</span> -that the Homeric one. Now the gold Daric = two Attic gold -drachms; but as the cow at Delos also = two Attic drachms, -and the offering of frankincense at Delos is made in <i>Talent</i>, -each of which is equivalent to two <i>gold</i> Attic drachms, there -is a strong presumption that this Talent is the equivalent of -the ox, and that the Attic drachms mentioned by Pollux -are <i>gold</i>. Besides, it is absurd to suppose that at any time -two <i>silver</i> drachms could have represented the value of an -ox. Even at Athens, in a time of extreme scarcity of coin, -Solon, when commuting penalties in cattle for money in -reference to certain ancient ordinances, put the value of the -ox at <i>five</i> silver drachms<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a>. Moreover it is not at all likely -that the substitution of silver coin for gold of equal weight -would have been permitted by the temple authorities. But -we get some more positive evidence of great interest from -the fragment of an anonymous Alexandrine writer on Metrology, -who says<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a>, “the talent in Homer was equal in amount -to the later Daric. Accordingly the gold talent weighs two -Attic drachms.” Here we can have no doubt that Attic -drachms mean <i>gold</i> drachms. Are we wrong then in supposing -that at Delos still survived the same dual system which we -found in Homer, the Ox and the Talent? But that at Delos -both were of equal value we can have little doubt. For the -ox = 2 Attic drachms = 1 Daric = 1 Talent = (130 grains -Troy). Who can doubt that at Delos was preserved an unbroken -tradition from the earliest days of Hellenic settlements -in the Aegean? Modern discovery comes likewise to our -support, and we shall find that it is probable that the gold rings -found by Dr Schliemann in the tombs at Mycenae were made -on a standard of about 135 grs.</p> - -<p>This identification of the ox and the Homeric Talent is of -importance: for it gives a simple and natural origin for the -earliest Greek metallic unit of which we read. It likewise -incidentally explains the proverb, βοῦς ἐπὶ γλώσσῃ which dates<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_8"></a>[8]</span> -from a time long before money was yet coined, or even the -precious metals were in any form whatever employed for -currency; it possibly explains why the ox was such a favourite -type on coins, without having to call to our aid recondite -mythological allusions; and it clears up once for all some -interesting points in Homer. In the passage of the <i>Iliad</i> -(<span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 750 sq.) already referred to the ox is second prize, whilst -an half-talent of gold is the third. The relation between them -is now plain; the ox = 1 talent, and the half-talent = a half-ox.</p> - -<p>The vexed question of the Trial Scene<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> can now be put -beyond doubt. In the <i>Journal of Philology</i> (Vol. <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> p. 30) the -present writer argued that the two talents represented a sum -too small to form the blood-price (ποινή) of a murdered man, -and consequently must represent the <i>sacramentum</i> (or payment -made to the Court for its time and trouble, as in the Roman -<i>Legis actio sacramenti</i> described by Gaius, Bk. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 16), as proposed -by that most distinguished scholar and jurist, the late -Sir H. S. Maine<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a>. We know that the two talents are equal -to two oxen, but in the <i>Iliad</i>, <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 705, the second prize for -the wrestlers was a slave woman “whom they valued at four -oxen<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a>.” Now if an ordinary female slave was worth four oxen -(= four talents) it is impossible that two talents (= two oxen) -could have formed the bloodgelt or <i>eric</i> of a freeman. Probably -four oxen was not far from the price of an ordinary -female slave. Of course women of superior personal charms -would fetch more, for instance, Euryclea,</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">“Whom once on a time Laertes had bought with his possessions,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">When she was still in youthful prime, and he gave the price of twenty kine<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a>.”</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>The poet evidently refers to this as an exceptional piece -of extravagance on the part of Laertes. We can likewise now<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_9"></a>[9]</span> -get a common measure for the ten talents of gold and the -seven slave women who formed part of the requital gifts proffered -by Agamemnon to Achilles<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a>, and can form some notion -of the comparative value of the prizes for the chariot race and -other contests<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a>.</p> - -<h3><i>The wider question of Weight-standards in general.</i></h3> - -<p>But results far more important than merely the determination -of the value of Homeric commodities may be obtained -as regards the weight-standards of Europe and their congeners -in Asia. For by taking as our primitive unit the cow or ox, -we may be able to give a much more simple account of the -genesis of those standards than that which hitherto has been -the received one.</p> - -<p>We have found the Homeric ox and talent identical -with the didrachm or stater of the Euboic-Attic standard. -All the silver coinage of Greece proper was struck either -on this standard or the Aeginetic, and what is still more -important for us it was on the Euboic-Attic standard alone -that gold was estimated in every part of Greece. Practically -the stater of this system was of the same weight as the famous -Persian daric which in historical times formed the chief coin-unit -of all Asia from India to the Aegean shores.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_10"></a>[10]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_II">CHAPTER II.<br /> -<span class="smcap">Primitive Systems of Currency.</span></h2> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">ἘΞ ἈΝΆΓΚΗϹ Ἠ ΤΟΫ ΝΟΜΊϹΜΑΤΟϹ ἘΠΟΡΊϹΘΗ ΧΡΗϹΙϹ.</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse right"><span class="smcap">Aristotle.</span></div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<p>Let us here propound the doctrine which seeks to obtain -an explanation of the origin for weight-standards more in -accordance with the facts of history and the process of development -as exemplified both in ancient and modern times.</p> - -<p>In early communities<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> all commodities alike are exchanged -by bartering the one against the other. The man who possesses -sheep exchanges them for oxen with the man who -possesses oxen, the owner of corn exchanges his commodity -for some implement or ornament of metal with the owner of -the latter. The metals are only regarded as merchandise, not -yet being in any degree set apart to serve as a medium of -exchange in the terms of which all other commodities are -valued. This is the practice which prevails in so civilized a -country as China down to our own days. The only coinage -which the Chinese possess is copper <i>cash</i>. According to M. -le Comte Rochechouart (<i>Journal des Économistes</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">XV.</span> p. -103) both gold and silver are treated simply as merchandise, -and there is not even a recognized stamp or government -guarantee of the fineness of the metal. The traveller must -carry these metals with him, as a sufficient quantity of strings<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_11"></a>[11]</span> -of <i>cash</i> would require a waggon for their conveyance. Yet in -exchanging silver or gold he is sure to suffer loss both from -the falsity of balances and of weights and the uncertain fineness -of the metal.</p> - -<p>When in a certain community one particular kind of commodity -is of general use and generally available, this comes to -form the unit in terms of which all values are expressed. The -nature of this barter-unit will depend upon the nature of the -climate and geographical position, and likewise upon the stage -of culture to which the people have attained. In the hunting -stage, all the property of each individual consists in his weapons -and implements of war and the chase, and the skins of wild -beasts which form his clothing, and sometimes the cover of his -hut or wigwam. At a later stage, when he has succeeded in -taming the ox, the sheep, or the goat, or the horse, he is -the owner of property in domestic animals, whose flesh and -milk sustain him and his family, and whose skins and wool -provide his clothing.</p> - -<p>By this time too he has found out that it is better to -make the captive whom he has taken in war into a hewer -of wood and drawer of water than merely to obtain some -transient pleasure from eating him after putting him to death -by torture, or by wearing his skull or scalp as personal decorations.</p> - -<p>This is now the pastoral or nomad stage.</p> - -<p>Next comes the more settled form of life, when the cultivation -of land and the production of the various kinds of -cereals renders a permanent dwelling-place more or less necessary.</p> - -<p>Property now consists not merely in slaves and domestic -animals, but likewise in houses of improved construction, and -large stores of grain. Man now possesses certain of the metals, -gold and copper being the first to be known. How does -he appraise these metals when he exchanges them with his -neighbour? We shall find that he estimates them in terms -of cattle, and that he at first barters them all by measures -based on the parts of the human body, a method which continues -to be employed for copper and iron long after the art of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_12"></a>[12]</span> -weighing has been invented; next he estimates his gold by -certain natural units of capacity such as a goosequill, and -finally fixes the amount of gold which is equivalent to a cow, -by setting it in a rude balance against a certain number of -natural seeds of plants. Such is the process which history -tells us has taken place in the temperate regions of Asia -and Europe, Africa and America. Just as it is impossible -to learn the history of the growth of the earth’s crust by confining -our observations to one locality, and as the geologist -only succeeds in gaining a true insight into the relations -between the various strata by a study of the phenomena of -many regions, so we shall only be able to comprehend properly -the various stages in the growth of metallic currency and the -origin of weight-standards by observing the facts revealed to -us in various countries. Whilst in some places we shall meet -with but one or two steps, in others we shall find traces of -many, though often, broken strata. Like advance, however, -seems impossible under the extremes of heat and cold. Hence -in the latter regions the conditions of life remain almost unaltered. -In the extreme north the rigour of an arctic winter -forbids the keeping and rearing of domestic animals, or the -cultivation of corn and vegetables. Hence the hunter form -of existence remains almost unaltered. The sole or chief -wealth of the people consists of the skins of the fur-bearing -animals such as the seal, the beaver, the marten, or the fox, -or stores of dried fish, which they exchange with traders for -a few scant luxuries, or which form their own sustenance and -protection against the pitiless frosts and snows.</p> - -<p>In these regions therefore we find the skins of certain -animals serving as units of account, in spite of the difference in -value between those of different quality and rarity. In the -Territory of the Hudson’s Bay Company, even after the use -of coined money had been introduced among the Indians, the -skin was still in common use as the money of account. A -gun nominally worth forty shillings brought twenty ‘skins.’ -This term is the old one used by the Company. One skin -(beaver) is supposed to be worth two shillings, and it represents -two martens and so on. “You heard a great deal about skins<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_13"></a>[13]</span> -at Fort Yukon, as the workmen were also charged for clothing, -etc., in this way<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a>.” Similarly in the extreme north of Asia we -find some Ostiak tribes using the skin of the Siberian squirrel -as their unit of account.</p> - -<p>The name of a small coin equal to a quarter kopeck indicates -that originally the Slavs had a like form of currency. It -is called <i>polooshka</i>. <i>Ooshka</i> (properly little ears) means a -hare-skin, and <i>polooshka</i> means <i>half a hare-skin</i><a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;" id="figure1"> -<img src="images/figure1.jpg" width="200" height="100" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 1.</span> Cowrie Shell (<i>Cypraea moneta</i>).</p> -</div> - -<p>When we turn to the torrid zone, where clothes are only -an incumbrance and Nature lavishly supplies plenteous stores -of fruits and vegetables, the chief objects of desire will not -be food and clothing but ornaments, implements and weapons. -Hence we find amongst the inhabitants of such regions in -especial strength that passion for personal adornment, which -is one of the most powerful and primitive instincts of the -human race. Shells have from very remote times formed -one of the most simple forms of adornment in all parts of -the world. Shells which once perhaps formed the necklace -of some beauty of the neolithic age are found with the -remains of the cave men of Auvergne. Strings of cowries -under their various names of <i>changos</i>, <i>zimbis</i>, <i>bonges</i> or porcelain -shells are both durable, universally esteemed, and portable, -and therefore suited to form a medium of exchange, and as -such they are employed in the East Indies, Siam, and on -the East and West Coasts of Africa; on the tropical coasts -they serve the purposes of small change, being collected on -the shores of the Maldive and Laccadive islands and exported -for that object. The relative value varies slightly according -to their abundance or scarcity. In India the usual ratio -was about 5000 to the rupee. Marco Polo found the cowry<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_14"></a>[14]</span> -in use in the province of Yunnam. He says (<span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 62, Yule’s -Transl.): “In Carajan gold is so abundant that they give one -Saggio of gold for six of the same weight of silver. And -for small change they use the porcelain shell. These are -not found in the country but are brought from India.” How -ancient is their use in Asia is shown by the fact that Layard -found cowries in the ruins of Nineveh.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 100px;" id="figure2"> -<img src="images/figure2.jpg" width="100" height="575" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 2.</span> Wampum (made from the <i>Venus mercenaria</i>).</p> -</div> - -<p>Beyond all doubt the wampum belts of the North American -Indians served the purpose of currency. They consisted of -black and white shells rubbed down, polished and made into -beads, and then strung into belts or necklaces, which were -valued according to their length, colour and lustre, the black -beads being the most valuable. Thus one foot of black peag -was worth two feet of white peag. It was so well established -as a currency among the natives that in 1649 the Court -of Massachusetts ordered that it should be received as legal -tender among the settlers in the payment of debts up to forty -shillings<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_15"></a>[15]</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;" id="figure3"> -<img src="images/figure3.jpg" width="200" height="500" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 3.</span> Al-li-ko-chik.</p> -</div> - -<p>Nor has this employment of strings of shells as money -even yet disappeared from North America. Thus Powers -writes<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> of the Karoks and other tribes of California: “For -money they make use of the red scalps of woodpeckers, which -rate at $2.50 to $5.0 a piece, and of the dentalium shell, of -which they grind off the tip, and string it on strings, the -shortest pieces are worth 25 cents, and the longest about two -dollars, the value rising rapidly with the length. The strings -are usually about as long as a man’s arm. It is called <i>al-li-ko-chik</i> -(in Yarok this signifies literally Indian money) not -only on the Klamath but from Crescent city to Eel river, -though the tribes using it speak several different languages. -When the Americans first arrived in the country an Indian -would give 40 or 50 dollars gold for a string, but now the -abundance of the supply has depreciated its value and it is -principally the old Indians who esteem it.” Again he writes,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_16"></a>[16]</span> -“Some of the young bloods array their Dulcineas for the dance -with lavish adornments, hanging on their dress 30, 40 or 50 -dollars worth of dimes, quarter dollars and half dollars arranged -in strings.” This shows that the new currency of silver is -treated by them in exactly the same way as the old shell -strings, both of them deriving their value as media of exchange -from the fact that they are the objects most universally prized -as ornaments for the person.</p> - -<p>Elsewhere the same writer observes: “Immense quantities -of it (shell money) were formerly in circulation among the -Californian Indians, and the manufacture of it was large and -constant to replace the continual wastage caused by the sacrifice -of so much on the death of wealthy men, and by the propitiatory -sacrifices performed by many tribes, especially those of the -coast range. From my own observations, which have not been -limited, and from the statements of pioneers and of the Indians -themselves, I hesitate little to express the belief that every -Indian in the state in early days possessed an average of at -least 100 dollars worth of shell money. This would represent -the value of almost two women (though the Nishinam never -actually bought their wives), or two grizzly bear skins, or 25 -cinnamon bear skins or about three average ponies. The young -English-speaking Indians hardly use it at all except in a few -dealings with their elders or for gambling. One sometimes -lays away a few strings of it for he knows he cannot squander -it at the stores. It is singular how old Indians cling to this -currency when they know it will purchase nothing for them -at the stores; but then their wants are few, and mostly supplied -from the sources of nature, and besides that the money has a -certain religious value in their eyes, as being alone worthy to -be offered up on the funeral pile of departed friends or famous -chiefs of their tribes<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Here we see how amongst the Indian tribes there was a -fully developed system of inter-relations between the various -objects which formed their wealth.</p> - -<p>The horse was but a new comer into America, but he had -his place soon allotted in the scale of values, being little less<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_17"></a>[17]</span> -valuable than a squaw. We cannot doubt that if the Indian -had succeeded in domesticating the buffalo before the advent -of the white man, it would have formed the most general -unit in use, as we shall find its congeners being employed in -all parts of the old world. But before the coming of the -Spaniards at least one race of North America had advanced a -stage beyond shell money. The Aztecs<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> of Mexico were employing -a currency of gold and cacao seeds. The former in the -shape of dust was placed in goose quills, which formed a natural -unit of capacity, for weights were as yet unknown to the Aztecs; -whilst the cacao seeds were placed in bags, each containing -a specified number.</p> - -<p>In Queen Charlotte Islands the dentalium shell was recognized -as a medium of exchange by most of the coast tribes, but -not so much as a medium of exchange for themselves as for -barter with the Indians of the interior. With the Haidas it is -still sometimes worn as an ornament though it has disappeared -as a medium of exchange. The blanket of the trader has now -however supplanted the <i>skin</i> as the principal unit. Not only -among the Haidas but all along the coast it takes the place of -the beaver-skin currency of the interior of British Columbia and -of the North West Territory. The blankets used in trade are -distinguished by the points or marks on the edge, woven into -their texture, the best being four-point, the smallest and -poorest one-point. The acknowledged unit of trade is a single -two and a half-point blanket, now worth a little over $1.50. -Everything is referred to this unit, even a large four-point -blanket is said to be worth so many <i>blankets</i>. There is also -the “Copper,” “an article of purely conventional value and -serving as money. This is a piece of native metal beaten out -into a flat sheet and made to take a peculiar shape. These -are not made by the Haidas—nor indeed is the native metal -known to exist in the islands, but are imported as articles of -great worth from the Chilcat country north of Sitka. Much<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_18"></a>[18]</span> -attention is paid to the size and make of the copper, which -should be of uniform but not too great thickness, and should -give forth a good sound when struck with the hand. At the -present time spurious coppers have come into circulation, and -although these are easily detected by an expert, the value of -the copper is somewhat reduced and is often more nominal -than real. Formerly ten slaves were paid for a good copper as -a usual price, now they are valued at from forty to eighty -blankets”.<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> It is obvious that such costly imported articles, -though now used as occasional higher units of account—much -as we employ fifty-pound notes—must have had some definite -use, owing to which they were so highly prized. The -attention paid to their tone would lead us to conjecture that -they were employed as a kind of gong, and further on we shall -find certain peoples of Further Asia paying a large price in -buffaloes for gongs.</p> - -<p>Before we quit finally the northern latitudes, it is worth -our while to observe the method of currency employed by the -Icelanders. As metals and other products of the land were -scarce in their bleak home, the stockfish (dried cod) formed -naturally their chief commodity, and hence it appears on the -arms of Denmark as the emblem of Iceland. There is still -extant a proclamation for the regulation of English trade with -Iceland issued sometime between 1413 and 1426. As, <i>mutatis -mutandis</i>, it affords admirable insight into the methods by which -trade was carried on between men of different nations in the -emporia of the Mediterranean, and in fact everywhere else, it is -worth giving it <i>in extenso</i><a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a>.</p> - -<p>“I, <i>N. M.</i> do proclaim here to-day a general market between -the English and the Icelandic men, who have come here with -peace and fair dealing, and between the Icelandic men and the -men of the islands who wish to carry on their trade here.</p> - -<p>“First I proclaim this market on conditions of peace and -lawful security between one and the other, so that each can -entirely dispose of his own if he buy or if he sell. Price list in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_19"></a>[19]</span> -stockfish: of fish 2, 2½, or 1¾ lbs., 80 lbs. must be the equivalent -of a hundred (of cloth, i.e. 129 <i>alens</i> of <i>vadme</i>, a cloth formerly -used as a medium of exchange), provided the persons concerned -cannot agree as to the price.</p> - -<table summary="Exchange rates at the market, expressed in stockfish"> - <tr> - <th colspan="2">Price of (foreign) goods.</th> - <th>Stockfish.</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">48</td> - <td><i>alen</i> of good and full width trade cloth</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">120</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">48</td> - <td><i>alen</i> linen cloth double width</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">120</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">6</td> - <td>tonder (tuns) malt</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">120</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">4</td> - <td><span class="ditto1">do.</span> trade flour</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">120</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3</td> - <td><span class="ditto1">do.</span> wheat</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">120</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">4</td> - <td><span class="ditto1">do.</span> beer</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">120</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>tonde clean and clear butter</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">120</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td><span class="ditto1">do.</span> wine</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">100</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td><span class="ditto1">do.</span> pitch</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">80</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td><span class="ditto1">do.</span> raw tar</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">60</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>cask of iron, containing 400 pieces</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">120</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">⅛</td> - <td>tonde honey</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">15</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">⅛</td> - <td><span class="ditto1">do.</span> blubber</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">15</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">½</td> - <td>lb. of coppers (i.e. copper cauldrons) by weight</td> - <td class="tdr">2½</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>pair black (leather) shoes</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">4</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>pair of women’s shoes</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">3</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>trade rug</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">30</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>“alen” timber, in planks or spars</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">5</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">⅛</td> - <td>tonde salt</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">5</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">½</td> - <td>lb. wax</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">5</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td colspan="2">Horse shoes of iron for 5 horses</td> - <td class="tdr"><span class="frac">20</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td colspan="3">Caps, knives, and other small mercer’s wares, - according to mutual agreement.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>“I charge all, not only the people from the country, but also -the inhabitants of these islands, that ye do in no way compass -any disorder or disturbance to the strangers, from the moment -the guard flag is hoisted, unless they themselves allow it.</p> - -<p>“They, who here are annoyed by word or deed, have a right -to demand double indemnity therefor.</p> - -<p>“Also I charge, and the merchants in no way the least, that -they use aright the “alen” and other lawful measure for everything, -as the law demands, especially as regards butter, wine -and beer, flour or malt, honey or tar, so that no one deals false -or with deceit with another.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_20"></a>[20]</span></p> - -<p>“He who does so intentionally shall have sinned as greatly -against the state as if he had stolen goods of like value, whereas -the bargain becomes void, and damages moreover must be -given to him who was deceived.</p> - -<p>“Let us now, Ye good men, eschew all malice and trickery, -riot or disturbance, quarrels and careless words: but let every -man be the other’s friend, without deceit.</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">“Prizing unity</div> - <div class="verse indent0">And old custom,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">And abiding in God’s peace.”</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Some such proclamations were probably often made in the -marts of the Aegean, such as Aegina, when Greek, Phoenician -and Etruscan met for traffic under the control of some local -potentate, and the protection of the god of some neighbouring -shrine.</p> - -<p>Passing to the islands of the Pacific we shall find shell -money playing an important part among the primitive peoples, -such as those who inhabit New Ireland, New Britain, the -Pelew and the Caroline groups. It will suffice for our purpose -to describe the form in which it is employed in New Britain. -Mr Powell<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> tells us that the native money in New Britain -consists of small cowrie shells strung on strips of cane, in Duke -of York Island it is called Dewarra. It is measured in lengths, -the first length being from hand to hand across the chest with -arms extended, second length from the centre of the breast to -the hand of one arm extended, the third from the shoulder to -the tip of the fingers along the arm, fourth from the elbow -to the tip of the fingers, fifth from the wrist to the tip of the -fingers, sixth finger lengths. Fish are generally bought by the -length in Dewarra unless they are too small. A large pig will -cost from 30 to 40 lengths of the first measure (fathom) and a -small one ten. The Dewarra is made up for convenience in -coils of 100 fathoms or first lengths; sometimes as many as -600 fathoms are coiled together, but not often, as it would be -too bulky to remove quickly in case of invasion or war, when -the women carry it away to hide. These coils are very neatly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_21"></a>[21]</span> -covered with wickerwork like the bottom of our cane chairs.... -At Moko and Utuan they use another kind of money as well -as this, the other being a little bivalve shell, through which -they bore a hole and string it on pieces of native made twine<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a>. -It is also chipped all round until it is a quarter of an inch in -diameter and then smoothed down into even discs with sand -and pumice. Here we find strings of shells, which undoubtedly -in the first instance were used for personal adornment, converted -into a true currency. The simple savages whose possessions -were exceedingly few and scanty, equated their fish to -strings of shells which formed their only ornament, and when -they got a more valuable possession in the pig, they quickly -learned to appraise that animal in shell worth, just as the -North American Indians learned to estimate the horse in -<i>Wampum</i>. Instead of shells the natives of Fiji are said to have -employed whales’ teeth as currency, red teeth (which are still -highly prized) standing to white ones somewhat in the ratio of -sovereigns to shillings with us<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a>. Passing on to the mainland of -Asia we shall find that the Chinese, who in the course of ages -have developed a bronze coinage of their own apart from the -influences of the Mediterranean people, had in early times an -elaborate system of shell money. Cowries appear in the <i>Ya-King</i>, -the oldest Chinese book, 100,000 dead shell fishes being an -equivalent for riches. Tortoise shell currency is also mentioned -in the same book. The tortoise of various kinds and sizes was -used for the greater values which would have required too many -cowries. Tortoise shell is still elegantly used to express coin. -Several kinds of <i>Cypraea</i> were used, including the purple shell, -two or three inches long; all the shells except the small ones were -employed in pairs. A writer of the second century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span><a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> speaks -of the purple shell as ranking next after the sea tortoise shells, -measuring one foot six inches, which could only be procured -in Cochin China and Annam, where they were used to make<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_22"></a>[22]</span> -pots, basins and other valuable objects. So attached were the -Chinese to these primitive coins that the usurper Wangmang -restored a shell currency of five kinds, tortoise shell being the -highest. From this time we hear no more of cowries in -China Proper, but they left traces of themselves in the small -copper coins shaped like a small Cypraea, called Dragon’s eye -or Ant coins<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a>. It is doubtless to a similar survival that we -owe those curious silver coins made in the shape of shells -which come from the north of Burmah and of which there are -several specimens in the British Museum. They are about the -size of a cowrie, and doubtless served as a higher unit in a -currency, of which the lower units were formed by real shells.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure4"> -<img src="images/figure4.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 4.</span> Burmese silver shell money.</p> -</div> - -<p>In 685 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> in parts of China pearls and gems, gold, knives -and cloth were the money, and under the Shou dynasty -(1100 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) we understand from ancient Commentaries that -the gold circulated in little cubes of a square inch, and the -copper in round, tongue-like plates by the <i>tchin tchu</i>, while -the silk cloth 2 feet 2 inches wide in rolls of 40 feet formed -a <i>piece</i>.</p> - -<p>In the <i>Shu King</i>, when in 947 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> commutation for punishment -was enacted, the culprit according to the offence was to -pay 100, 200, 500 or 1000 <i>hwars</i>, or rings of copper weighing -6 <i>ounces</i>. The Chinese likewise used hoes as money, just as -we shall find the wild people of Annam doing at the present -hour. But in the course of time the hoe became a true -currency and little hoes, such as that here figured, were employed -as coins in some parts of China (<i>tsin</i>, agricultural -implements). The copper knives which played so important -a part in the development of Chinese coinage will be dealt<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_23"></a>[23]</span> -with more particularly in a later chapter. In Marco Polo’s -time cowries were in full use, as in the province of Yunnan<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 350px;" id="figure5"> -<img src="images/figure5.jpg" width="350" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 5.</span> Chinese hoe money.</p> -</div> - -<p>On the borders of China and Tibet we may still find a -state of things not far removed from that existing in the -China of 2000 years ago<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a>. The Tibetans, who in recent years -employ Indian rupees, for purposes of small change cut up -these coins into little pieces, which are weighed by the careful -Chinese, but the Tibetans do not seem to use the scale, and -roughly judge of the value of a piece of silver. Tea, moreover, -and beads of turquoise are largely used as a means of -payment instead of metal.</p> - -<p>Speaking of this same region (called by him Kandu), Polo -says<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a>: “The money-matters of the people are conducted in this -way: they have gold in rods which they weigh, and they -reckon its value by its weight in <i>saggi</i>, but they have no -coined money. Their small change again is made in this -way: they have salt which they boil and set in a mould, and -every piece from the mould weighs half-a-pound. Now eighty -moulds of this salt are worth one <i>saggio</i> of fine gold.” Tea -seems to have taken the place of salt in modern times.</p> - -<p>Turning next to the southern frontier of China, we shall -find among the tribes of Annam a system of currency which -strongly reminds us of that found in the Homeric Poems.</p> - -<p>Among the Bahnars of Annam who border on Laos, “everything,” -says that excellent observer M. Aymonier, “is by barter, -hence all objects of general use have a known relationship: if -we know the unit, all the rest is easy. Here is the key: a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_24"></a>[24]</span> -<i>head</i>, that is to say, a male slave is worth six or seven -buffaloes, or the same number of pots (<i>marmites</i>; so in Homer, -<i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXIII.</span> 885, an ox is estimated at a kettle); the buffalo and -the pot have the same value, which naturally varies with the -size and age of the animal and the size and quality of the pot.</p> - -<p>“A full-grown buffalo or a large pot is worth seven earthenware -jars of a grey glaze, after the Chinese shape, and with -a capacity of fifteen litres. One jar = 4 <i>muk</i>. (The <i>muk</i><a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> is -an unit of account, but originally meant some special article.) -1 <i>muk</i> = 10 <i>mats</i>, that is to say ten of these <i>hoes</i>, which are -manufactured by the Cédans, and which are employed by all -the savages of this region as their agricultural implement. -The hoe is the smallest amount used by the Bahnars. It is -worth 10 centimes in European goods, and is made of iron<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a>.” -Thus the buffalo is worth 280 hoes, or a little more than an -English sovereign, since each hoe is worth a penny (10 centimes). -The Bahnars have sheet tin ½ millim. thick cut into pieces 11 -centim. square, to be used to ornament sword-belts or to make -earrings (iv. p. 390). A stick of virgin wax the size of an -ordinary candle = 1 hoe, a pretty little cane hat = 2 hoes; a -large bamboo hat = 2 hoes; a Bahnar knife = 2 hoes; a fine -sword and sheath = 1 jar, 1 <i>muk</i>, 3 hoes; a crossbow and -string = 3 hoes; ordinary arrows are sold at 30 for 1 hoe; -arrows with movable heads, 20 for 1 hoe, and poisoned arrows -5 for 1 hoe; a lance-head = 3 hoes; a lance with palm handle -= 4 hoes; a horse = 3 or 4 pots or buffaloes; a large elephant -= 10 to 15 <i>heads</i> (slaves).</p> - -<p>The same method of using the buffalo as the chief unit -is employed by the Moïs, among whom a slave is reckoned -at 10 buffaloes. Again, among tribes such as the Tjams, -with whom the string of copper <i>cash</i> (or sapecs) borrowed -from the Chinese, is employed as their lowest unit, a full-grown -buffalo = 100 strings;<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> the Mexican <i>piastre</i> or dollar<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_25"></a>[25]</span> -circulates freely as in China, a small pig costs 10 strings, -pork by retail costs two strings per lb. (<i>livre</i>), ducks cost -1½ to 2 strings. A large caldron costs 3 buffaloes; a handsome -gong = 2 buffaloes; a small gong = 1 buffalo; 6 copper -platters = 1 buffalo; two swords = 1 buffalo; 2 lances = 1 -buffalo; a rhinoceros’ horn = 8 buffaloes; a pair of large elephants’ -tusks = 6 buffaloes; a small pair = 3 buffaloes. When -the wild people have dealings with the more civilized peoples -of the plain, who employ the Chinese cash and silver dollars, -a large buffalo = 100 strings of cash, a small one = 50 strings; -a fine horse = 100 strings; a she goat = a piece of cloth. The -Orang Glaï have often to buy elephants’ tusks, at the rate of -8 buffaloes for a pair, or 8 bars of silver (640 francs). The -Szins of Kharang have often to pay a tax of a buffalo per -hut, or for the whole village 10 buffaloes, the horns of which -must be at least as long as their ears<a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a>. In Cambodia iron -ingots<a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> form a special kind of money. These ingots are not -weighed, but they are as long as from the base of the thumb to -the tip of the forefinger; they are in breadth two fingers, and -one finger in thickness in the middle, tapering off to either end.</p> - -<p>Cowries and other shells seem to have gone out of use altogether -among these tribes, but we may recognize in the practice -of reckoning the <i>cash</i> by the string a distinct survival of the -olden time when shells were so employed. It is of great importance -to note that where silver has come into use, its unit, -the bar, is equated to the buffalo, the unit of barter, just as we -find the Homeric gold Talent equal to the ox.</p> - -<p>Next let us turn to India, and to the Aryans of the Rig -Veda, who dwelt in the north-west of the Punjaub at the time -when we first meet them. From their prayers and invocations -it is easy to learn in what the wealth of this simple folk consisted. -One or two examples will serve for our purpose: “The -potent ones who bestow on us good fortune by means of cows, -horses, goods, gold, O Indra and Vaya, may they, blessed with -fortune, ever be successful by means of horses and heroes in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_26"></a>[26]</span> -battle<a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a>.” Again, “O Indra bring us rice cake, a thousand <i>soma</i> -drinks, and an hundred cows, O hero. Bring us apparel, cows, -horses and jewels, along with a <i>mana</i> of gold.” Yet once more: -“Ten horses, ten caskets, ten garments, ten gold nuggets -(<i>hiranya pindas</i>) I received from Divodāsa. Ten chariots -equipped with side horses, and an hundred cows gave the -Açvatha to the Atharvans and to the Pāyu.” Even without -further evidence than that which we have already drawn from -the wild people of Annam, we might well assume that there -were definitely fixed relations in value between the cows, -horses, gold, rice, and cloth of the Vedic people. But absolute -proof is at hand, for their close kinsmen, the ancient Persians, -have left us in the Zend Avesta ample means of observing -their monetary system. Thus we read in the ordinances which -fix the payment of the physician that “he shall heal the priest -for the holy blessing; he shall heal the master of an house for -the value of an ox of low value; he shall heal the lord of a -borough for the value of an ox of average value; he shall heal -the lord of a town for the value of an ox of high value; he -shall heal the lord of a province for the value of a chariot and -four; he shall heal the wife of the master of a house for the -value of a she ass; he shall heal the wife of the master of a -borough for the value of a cow; he shall heal the wife of the -lord of a town for the value of a mare; he shall heal the wife -of the lord of a province for the value of a she camel; he shall -heal the son of the lord of a borough for the value of an ox of -high value: he shall heal an ox of high value for the value of -an ox of average value; he shall heal an ox of average value -for the value of an ox of low value; he shall heal an ox of low -value for the value of a sheep; and he shall heal a sheep for -the value of a meal of meat<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a>.” So too in the fees of the Cleanser -we read: “Thou shalt cleanse a priest for a blessing; the lord -of a province for the value of a camel of high value; the lord -of a town for the value of a stallion; the lord of a borough for -the value of a bull; the master of an house for the value of a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_27"></a>[27]</span> -cow three years old; the wife of the master of an house for the -value of a ploughing cow; a menial for the value of a draught -cow; a young child for the value of a lamb<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a>.” Again in the -chapter on Contracts: “The third is the contract to the amount -of a sheep, the fourth is the contract to the amount of an ox, -the fifth is the contract to the amount of a man (human being), -the sixth is the contract to the amount of a field, a field in -good land, a fruitful one in good bearing<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a>.”</p> - -<p>From these extracts it is plain that the ancient Persians -had a system of clearly defined relations in value between all -their worldly gear, whether the object was a slave or an ox, or -a lamb or a field, precisely like that existing at the present -moment among the hill tribes of Annam. But not simply was -it between one kind of animal and another, but they had -evidently strict notions as regards the inter-relations in value -of different animals of the same kind; thus the ox of high -value, the ox of low value, the cow of three years old, or the -bull all stood to one another in a fixed relationship. We may -without hesitation conclude that the same system of conventional -values prevailed among the ancient Hindus. Nor can -we doubt that articles of every kind, such as arrows, spears, -axes, and articles of personal use and adornment all had their -regularly recognized prices, and that the less valuable of them -were used as small change. Gold, no doubt, occupied an important -place in relation to the other forms of property in -portions of fixed size or weight, as in the days of Marco Polo. -In mediaeval times in parts of India money consisted of pieces -of iron worked into the form of large needles, and in some parts -stones which we call cat’s eyes, and in others pieces of gold -worked to a certain weight were used for moneys, as we are told -by Nicolo Conti, who travelled in India in the 15th century<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a>. -If iron was so employed at this late date we may well infer -that bronze and afterwards iron were probably so used by the -ancient Indo-Iranian people.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;" id="figure6"> -<img src="images/figure6.jpg" width="300" height="475" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 6.</span> Fish-hook money (<i>Larina</i>).</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;" id="figure7"> -<img src="images/figure7.jpg" width="500" height="300" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 7.</span> Siamese silver bullet money: A. B. Early form as simple piece of wire. -C. Last stage of degradation.</p> -</div> - -<p>Among the fishermen who dwelt along the shores of the -Indian Ocean, from the Persian Gulf to the southern shores of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_28"></a>[28]</span> -Hindustan, Ceylon and the Maldive islands, it would appear -that the fish-hook, to them the most important of all implements, -passed as currency. In the course of time it became a -true money, just as did the hoe in China. It still for a time -retained its ancient form, but gradually became degraded into -a simple piece of double wire, as seen in Nos. 3 and 4 of our -illustration. In its conventional form it is known as a <i>larin</i> -or <i>lari</i>, a name doubtless derived from Lari on the Persian Gulf. -These <i>larins</i> made both of silver and bronze were in use until -the beginning of the last century, and bear legends in Arabic -character. Had the process of degradation gone on without -check, in course of time the double wire would probably have -shrunk up into a bullet-shaped mass of metal, just as the -Siamese silver coins are the outcome of a process of degradation<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_29"></a>[29]</span> -from a piece of silver wire twisted into the form of a -ring and doubled up, which probably originally formed some kind -of ornament. The bullet-shaped <i>tical</i> is now struck as a coin of -European form. Just as perhaps the silver shells of Burmah became -the multiple unit of a large number of real cowries, so the -fish-hook made of silver came into use as a multiple unit, when -the bronze fish-hook had already become conventionalized into -a true coin. The silver <i>larins</i> of Ceylon weigh about 170 grs. -troy, and those of Southern India are said by Professor Wilson -to weigh the same, although some of them weigh only 76 grs. -or less than half. As the rupee weighs about 180 grs. the -silver fish-hook may represent the usual unit employed for -silver, strong national conservatism requiring that the silver -currency should take the same form as the ancient fish-hook -currency of bronze<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a>. There are still in circulation in Nejd in -Arabia small bars of silvered brass, which bear on the back -Arabic inscriptions. It is hardly possible to doubt that in these -little pieces of metal we have the last surviving descendants of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_30"></a>[30]</span> -the old fish-hook. In the Maldive Isles a silver <i>larin</i> was -worth 12,000 cowries.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;" id="figure8"> -<img src="images/figure8.jpg" width="200" height="300" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 8.</span> Silvered brass bars used as money in Nejd<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a>.</p> -</div> - -<p>Advancing westward we find the Ossetes of the Caucasus -at the present moment employ the cow as their unit of -value, the prices of all commodities being stated as one, two, -three or four cows, or even at one-tenth or one-hundredth of -the value of a cow. The ox is worth two cows, and the cow is -worth ten sheep. This people regulate compensation for wounds -thus: they measure the length of the wound in barley corns, -and for every barley corn which it measures a cow has to be -paid<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a>. We can have little doubt that over all Hither Asia the -same method of employing the cow as the principal unit of -value obtained. It is that which we found among the Greeks -of the Homeric Poems, who were in full contact with Northern -Asia Minor, and was almost certainly that of the Semites who -dwelt in the South. Just as we find the buffalo, and the pots, -bronze platters, arrows, lances and hoes standing side by side -in well defined mutual relation among the Bahnars of Cochin -China, so we find in Homer that whilst the cow is the principal -unit, the slave is employed as an occasional higher unit, and -the kettle (<i>lebes</i>), the pot (<i>tripous</i>), the axe and the half axe,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_31"></a>[31]</span> -hides, raw copper and pig iron stand beside the cow as multiples -or sub-multiples. When Ajax and Idomeneus make a bet on -the issue of the chariot race, the proposed wager is a pot or -a kettle<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a>, whilst from another passage we learn that the usual -prizes given at the funeral games of a chieftain were female -slaves and pots (Tripods).</p> - -<p>Passing from Greece into Italy we have no difficulty -in proving that the cow was the regular unit of value in -that peninsula and the adjacent island of Sicily. Down to -451 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> all fines at Rome were paid in cows and sheep. By -the Tarpeian Law these were commuted for payments in -copper, each cow being set at 100 asses, each sheep at 10 asses. -As I shall deal with the whole question of the Roman As at considerable -length later on I shall here simply note that the Italian -tribes had evidently the same system of adjusting the relations -between their cattle and sheep and their metals which we found -among the Persians and modern Ossetes. In Sicily it is clear -that the cow had played the same part as elsewhere, for we -learn from Aristotle<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> that when the tyrant Dionysius burdened -the Syracusans by excessive taxation, they ceased in a great -degree to keep cattle, inasmuch as the unit of assessment was -the cow. If then in the 4th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> at Syracuse, the most -advanced community in Sicily, the cow still continued to be -the unit of assessment, <i>à fortiori</i>, at an earlier period that -animal must have been the monetary unit of the whole island.</p> - -<p>From the Italians we pass on to their close kinsmen the -Kelts. We are told by Polybius<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> that when the Gauls entered -Italy, their wealth consisted of their cattle and gold ornaments, -but although an argument will be offered below to show that -the cow was the monetary unit of both Gauls and Germans, -we have no definite evidence respecting the barter system. -But fortunately the Ancient Laws of Wales and Ireland -afford us ample insight into the Keltic system. Irish tradition -goes back far beyond the date at which the Brehon Laws were -compiled, and from it we get a glimpse of a system almost -Homeric: thus we read in the <i>Annals of the Four Masters</i><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_32"></a>[32]</span> -under the year 106 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> that the tribute (<i>Boroimhe</i>, literally -cow-tax) paid by the King of Leinster consisted in 150 cows, -150 swine, 150 couples of men and women in servitude, 150 -girls and the king’s daughter in like servitude, 150 caldrons, -with two passing large ones of the breadth and depth of five -fists<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a>. As this tradition makes no mention of payment in -metals, but only of slaves, cattle and caldrons, which doubtless -stood to one another in well defined relations, we need have no -hesitation in assuming that the cow formed the chief unit of -the earlier, as it did of the later Kelts.</p> - -<p>The Welsh naturally adopted the monetary system which -sprang up after the reign of Constantine the Great in the Later -Empire. Accordingly we find in certain of their Ancient Laws<a id="FNanchor_51" href="#Footnote_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> -tables giving in <i>denarii</i>, <i>solidi</i> or <i>librae</i> the values of various -kinds of property. From these we can learn with accuracy the relations -in value which existed between various kinds of property. -Thus the calf from March (when the cows calved) to November -was worth 6 <i>denarii</i>, to the following February 8 <i>den.</i>, till May -10 <i>den.</i>, till August of the second year 12, till November 14 -<i>den.</i>, till February 15 <i>den.</i>, till February of the third year 28 <i>den.</i> -The heifer is then in calf, her milk is worth 16 <i>den.</i> Thus the -milch cow is worth 46 <i>den.</i>, and up to August she is worth -48 <i>den.</i>, up to November 50 <i>den.</i>, and up to May of the fourth -year is worth 60 <i>den.</i> A month’s milk is worth 4 <i>den.</i>; a bull -calf 6 <i>den.</i>, the young ox when put to the plough is worth 28 -<i>den.</i>, when he can plough, 48 <i>den.</i>, that is the same as the -young milch cow of the same age; a gelding is worth 80 <i>den.</i>, -a farmer’s mare 60 <i>den.</i>, a trained horse is worth half a <i>libra</i>; -a bow with twelve arrows is worth 7 <i>denarii</i> and an <i>obolus</i>; a -queen bee (<i>modred af</i>) is worth 24 <i>den.</i>, the first swarm 16 <i>den.</i>, -the second 12, the third 8; a foal is worth 18 <i>den.</i> to 24 <i>den.</i>, -a two year old 48 <i>den.</i>, a three year old 96 <i>den.</i> A young male -slave (<i>iuvenis captivus</i>) is worth 1 <i>libra</i>, a slave both young and -of large stature (<i>captivus iuvenis et magnus</i>) is worth 1½ <i>libra</i>. -It would appear that the Welsh, when taking over the Roman -system, had adjusted their own highest barter-unit, the slave<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_33"></a>[33]</span> -(probably female as well as male), to the <i>libra</i> or pound, the -highest unit in the Roman system. Of course slaves of exceptional -strength or beauty would always command a higher -price. But the regulations for the value of cattle are especially -of interest, as shewing the extraordinary minuteness with which -pastoral peoples discriminate the values of animals of different -ages, and estimate the milk of a cow in proportion to her actual -value. The full-grown cow is worth exactly ten times the newborn -calf, an estimate which holds good just as much in 1890 -as it did 1000 years ago, for it is not a mere convention but is -based upon a natural law. At the present moment a calf is -worth from 30 to 35 shillings, a cow from £15 to £17. 10<i>s.</i> -The yearling calf was worth one-sixth of the full-grown cow, -a relation which still holds good.</p> - -<p>The Irish Kelts borrowed their silver system from Rome -at a period probably before Constantine, as they seem never to -have employed the <i>libra</i> and <i>solidus</i>, but simply the <i>uncia</i> -(<i>unga</i>) and <i>scripulus</i> (<i>screapall</i>), adding thereto a subdivision -called the <i>pinginn</i> or penny, borrowed doubtless from the -Saxon invader at a later period. Thus 1 unga = 24 screapalls; -1 screapall = 3 pinginns. They equated the principal silver -unit, the <i>uncia</i>, to the old chief barter-unit, the cow (<i>bo</i>). As -elsewhere, however, the slave formed occasionally the highest -unit, and was reckoned nominally at three cows. The slave -woman (<i>cumhal</i>, <i>ancilla</i> in Latin writers) was in course of time -used as a mere unit of account.</p> - -<table summary="Exchange rates"> - <tr> - <td>Slave woman (<i>cumhal</i>, <i>ancilla</i>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>3 ounces (<i>unga</i>)</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Full-grown cow (<i>bo mor</i>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 ounce = 24 screapalls</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Heifer now in third year (<i>samhaisc</i>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>½ ounce = 12 screapalls</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Heifer of second year (<i>colpach</i>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>6 screapalls</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Yearling (<i>dairt</i>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>4 screapalls</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>A cow’s milk for summer and harvest</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>6 screapalls</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>A sheep</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>3 screapalls</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>A goat’s milk for summer and harvest</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1¾ pinginn</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>A sheep’s fleece</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1½ pinginn</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>A sheep’s milk</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>½ pinginn</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>A kid (<i>meinnan</i>)<a id="FNanchor_52" href="#Footnote_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>⅔ pinginn.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_34"></a>[34]</span></p> - -<p>Here again the yearling is worth one-sixth of the cow. -Gold was abundant among the ancient Irish, (almost certainly -obtained in large quantities from the Wicklow mountains,) and -passed from hand to hand in the form of rings, which were -weighed on a system different from and probably far older -than that employed for silver (see <a href="#APPENDIX_A">Appendix A</a>).</p> - -<p>Passing to the Teutonic peoples we find traces of the same -ancient practice. For according to one system a <i>mancus</i> of -silver (a mere unit of account) corresponded with the value of -an ox. Similarly the <i>pound</i> (<i>libra</i>) was generally regarded as -the silver equivalent of the worth of a man<a id="FNanchor_53" href="#Footnote_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a>. But the strongest -proof is that Charlemagne in his dealings with the Saxons -found it necessary to define the value of his <i>solidus</i> of 12 pence -(<i>denarii</i>) by equating it to the value of an ox of a year old of -either sex in the autumn season, just as it is sent to the stall. -In the same law we find a list of regulation prices for other -commodities, such as oats, honey, rye, similar to those already -quoted from the Welsh laws<a id="FNanchor_54" href="#Footnote_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a>. The English word <i>fee</i>, which -originally meant an ox, as is shown not only by the German -<i>Vieh</i>, which still retains its original meaning, and by such -expressions in Anglo-Saxon as <i>gangende feoh</i>, is in itself a proof -that cattle served as the most generally recognized form of -money. It might be expected that much the same state of -things existed among the Scandinavian peoples. Their chief -media of exchange were cows, and woollen cloths, slaves, and -gold ornaments. By the laws of Hakon the Good penalties -could be paid in cows, provided that they were not too old,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_35"></a>[35]</span> -in slaves, provided they were not under fifteen years of age, -in cloths, and in weapons<a id="FNanchor_55" href="#Footnote_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a>.</p> - -<p>Gold and silver were employed by the northern peoples in -the form of rings.</p> - -<p>This has led people to talk much about <i>ring money</i> as if -it was a true currency, circulating like the stamped money -of later times. The truer view seems to be that these rings, -whether employed by the ancient Egyptians or the prehistoric -inhabitants of Mycenae, the Kelts or Teutons, were nothing -more than ornaments and passed in the ordinary way of barter, -having a recognized distinct relation to other forms of property, -such as cattle and slaves. It has been the custom in all countries -for the person who desires to have an article of jewellery -made to give to the goldsmith a certain weight of gold or -silver, out of which the latter manufactures the desired ornament. -Such is the practice at the present day in India; you -give the goldsmith so many gold mohurs or sovereigns, or -rupees, as the case may be; he squats down in your verandah, -and with a few primitive tools quickly turns out the article you -desire, which of course will weigh as many mohurs or sovereigns -as you have given him (provided that you have stood by all the -time, keeping a sharp look-out to prevent his abstracting any -of the metal). That in like fashion gold ornaments for ordinary -wearing purposes were regularly of known weights in ancient -times is shown clearly by the account of the presents given to -Rebekah by Abraham’s servant, ‘a gold earring of half a shekel -weight and two bracelets for her hands of ten shekels weight’ -(Genesis xxiv. 22). The same word appears in Job xlii. 11: -‘Then came there unto him all his brethren and all his sisters -and all that had been of his acquaintance before ... every man -also gave him a piece of money and every one an <i>earring</i> of -gold.’ Consequently Rebekah’s golden ring (whether it was -to adorn her nose or ear) of half a shekel weighed 65 grains, -being half the light shekel or ox-unit. We are not told the -weight of the earrings contributed by his sympathetic kinsfolk -for the afflicted patriarch, but it is evident that they were of a -uniform standard. No doubt such rings had from time immemorial<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_36"></a>[36]</span> -passed in the ordinary course of barter from hand to -hand. This is strongly supported by a piece of evidence -produced independently of the previous suggestion by Dr -Hoffmann of Kiel, who has showed<a id="FNanchor_56" href="#Footnote_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> that <i>betzer</i> (בצר) the word -used for gold in Job xxii. 24-25 (<i>bĕtzĕr</i>) and in Job xxxvi. 19 -(<i>b’tzar</i>), from a comparison of its cognates in Hebrew and -Arabic means simply a <i>ring</i>, which through the extended -meaning <i>ring-gold</i> came finally to be used as a name for -the metal simply. To take another example from a very different -region, the golden ornaments of the ancient Irish (of -which numerous specimens exist in the Museum of the Royal -Irish Academy) were made according to specified weight. -Thus queen Medbh is represented as saying: ‘My spear-brooch -of gold, which weighs thirty ungas, and thirty half ungas, and -thirty crosachs and thirty quarter [crosachs].’ O’Curry, <i>Manners -and Customs of Ancient Irish</i>, iii. 112. But we need not -go beyond Greek soil itself for such illustrations. The well-known -story of Archimedes and the weight of the golden crown, -which led to the discovery of specific gravity, is sufficient to -show that the practice in Greece was such as I describe.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;" id="figure9"> -<img src="images/figure9.jpg" width="300" height="400" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 9.</span> Rings found in the tombs of Mycenae.</p> -</div> - -<p>The rings seen on Egyptian monuments (of which we give a -representation in a later chapter) are of round wire; those -found by Schliemann in the tombs of Mycenae<a id="FNanchor_57" href="#Footnote_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> (<a href="#figure9">Fig. 9</a>) consist -both of round wire rings like the Egyptian, and likewise of -spirals of quadrangular wire. As <i>finger</i> rings (δακτύλιοι) are -not mentioned in Homer, it has been assumed that the Homeric -Greeks did not employ rings at all. Hence in a famous passage -where the ornaments made by Hephaestus for the goddesses -are described, we find mention of brooches, <i>bent spirals</i> (ἕλικες) -ear-drops<a id="FNanchor_58" href="#Footnote_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a>, and chains. Helbig<a id="FNanchor_59" href="#Footnote_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> explains the <i>helikes</i> as a -kind of brooch made of four spirals, such as are worn in parts -of Central Europe, but it is difficult to believe that people who -were using brooches with pins and necklaces would not have -known and employed the far simpler ring. Again, why should<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_37"></a>[37]</span> -we find two distinct words for brooches coming thus together? -Is it not far more likely that in the spirals of Mycenae we have -the real <i>bent helikes</i> of Homer? These spirals would serve not -only for finger rings, but might be used in the hair, or more -probably still were used as a means of fastening on the dress, -being passed through eyelet holes or loops, on the principle of -the modern key ring<a id="FNanchor_60" href="#Footnote_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a>. On comparing them with the Scandinavian -spiral (<a href="#figure1">Fig. 1</a>) the reader will see that this primitive -form of employing gold was widely diffused over Europe. The -Scandinavians used such ornaments of <i>bent</i> wire (O.N. <i>baugr</i>, -A.S. <i>beag</i> from root <span class="allsmcap">BUG</span>, <i>to bend</i>) very commonly, beside oxen -and other property, as media of exchange. Thus both <i>beag</i> in -Anglo-Saxon, and <i>baugr</i> in Old Norse became used as general -names for treasure. Thus <i>baugbrota</i> (cf. <i>hring brota</i>), literally<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_38"></a>[38]</span> -<i>ring-breaker</i>, was used as an epithet of princes, meaning <i>distributor -of treasure</i><a id="FNanchor_61" href="#Footnote_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;" id="figure10"> -<img src="images/figure10.jpg" width="400" height="350" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 10.</span> Nos. 1, 2, found in Tipperary; 3, Scandinavian; 4, 5, found in -Co. Mayo; 6, 7, 8, ordinary Irish type.</p> -</div> - -<p>The same spirals of quadrangular wire were probably employed -by the Kelts, as that shown in <a href="#figure10">Fig. 10</a>, No. 3 was found -in Ireland; Nos. 4 and 5 are of quadrangular wire but are -simple hoops, whilst in Nos. 6, 7, 8, we get the regular Irish -type of a round wire not completely closed<a id="FNanchor_62" href="#Footnote_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a>. The latter -probably represent a more advanced state of art, as their -makers must have had considerable metallurgic skill, No. 8 -being made of gold plated over a copper core.</p> - -<p>As we shall see further on, the Egyptian rings are made on -a standard almost identical with the Homeric talent, and I -have shown elsewhere that the rings from Mycenae were made -on almost the same standard<a id="FNanchor_63" href="#Footnote_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a>. I shall endeavour to show in -an Appendix that the Irish rings also show evidence of being<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_39"></a>[39]</span> -made on a definite standard, whilst it has been long well known -that the Scandinavian rings and armlets have likewise a -standard of their own.</p> - -<p>When occasion arose they cut off a piece of this bent wire -(for it was really nothing more), and gave it by weight. -Such a piece was called a <i>scillinga</i>, and is the direct ancestor -of our own <i>shilling</i><a id="FNanchor_64" href="#Footnote_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a>. It is not unlikely also that the ancient -inhabitants of Portugal employed similar pieces of wire, as -Strabo tells us that the Lusitanians have no money, but that -they employ silver wire, from which they cut off a portion -when necessary<a id="FNanchor_65" href="#Footnote_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a>.</p> - -<p>We now pass on to Africa, where we shall find most varied -systems of currency. Thus on the West Coast of Africa the -<i>bar</i> is the unit. In fact all merchandise is reckoned by the -bar<a id="FNanchor_66" href="#Footnote_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a>, which now at Sierra Leone means 2<i>s.</i> 3<i>d.</i> worth of any kind<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_40"></a>[40]</span> -of commodity, although originally it meant simply an iron bar -of fixed dimensions, which formed the chief article of exchange -between the natives and the earliest European traders. In -other parts of the same region axes serve as currency; these -are too small to be really employed as an implement, but are -doubtless the survival of a period not long past when real -axes served as money. Thus we get a complete analogy to -the hoe money of the Chinese and the fish-hook currency of -Ceylon and the Maldive Islands. In Calabar they formerly -employed bunches of quadrangular copper-wire as currency. -Each wire was about 12 inches long, and they were of course -meant to be made into necklets and armlets<a id="FNanchor_67" href="#Footnote_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;" id="figure11"> -<img src="images/figure11.jpg" width="300" height="500" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 11.</span> Axe Money (West Africa).</p> -</div> - -<p>In other parts of the West Coast, as in the Bonny River -territory, iron rings very closely resembling in shape the bronze<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_41"></a>[41]</span> -fibulae found in Ireland, which probably were armlets, are employed -as money. Those which I have seen seem too small to -be used as bracelets, and are now probably a true money, retaining -the old conventional shape (see <a href="#figure12">Fig. 12</a>)<a id="FNanchor_68" href="#Footnote_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 175px;" id="figure12"> -<img src="images/figure12.jpg" width="175" height="600" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 12.</span> Old Calabar copper-wire formerly used as money.</p> -</div> - -<p>In the region of the Upper Congo brass rods are employed -as currency for articles of small value. This wire, made at -Birmingham, about the thickness of ordinary stair-rod, is sent -out in coils of 60 lbs., and is then cut into pieces of a foot<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_42"></a>[42]</span> -long<a id="FNanchor_69" href="#Footnote_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a>. Short brass rods and armlets are also largely exported -from Birmingham for the African trade.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;" id="figure13"> -<img src="images/figure13.jpg" width="400" height="375" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 13.</span> -1. Bronze Irish Fibula found in Co. Cork. -2. Bronze Irish Fibula found in King’s Co. -3. Iron Manilla from W. Africa. -4. Iron Manilla used as money in Bonny River Territory.</p> -</div> - -<p>There is no absolute standard length—and thus while -36 inches is the one most commonly used, the length varies -from 32 to 36 inches.</p> - -<p>They go out in boxes containing 100, in straight lengths, -and soft to admit of their being wound into armlets, &c.</p> - -<p>The diameter of the rod varies from ³⁄₁₆ in. to about ⅜ in.—but -a rod weighing about 24 oz. to 3 ft., and ⅜ in. thick, is the -one most often made.</p> - -<p>Arm rings are made from solid brass rod about ⁷⁄₁₆ in. thick -and are usually 2½ in. to 3½ in. in diameter—they are also made -in large quantities from brass tubes of ½ in. to ⅝ in. diameter, -more frequently from ⁹⁄₁₆ in., the rings being from 2½ in. to 3½ in. -in diameter, and weighing from 2½ to 4 oz. each<a id="FNanchor_70" href="#Footnote_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a>.</p> - -<p class="tb">Slaves and ivory tusks form the chief units in the same -region. The slave usually is worth a tusk. In other parts<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_43"></a>[43]</span> -pieces of precious wood of a red colour, each piece being a -foot long, were employed as currency<a id="FNanchor_71" href="#Footnote_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a>.</p> - -<p>When we come to regions where the ox can live we at once -find that animal occupying a foremost place. Thus when the -Cape of Good Hope was first colonized, the Hottentots employed -cattle and bars of iron of a given size as currency<a id="FNanchor_72" href="#Footnote_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a>, and -at the present moment the cow is the regular unit among the -Zulus, ten cows being the ordinary price paid for a wife, -although as in Homeric Greece fancy prices are paid by the -chiefs for ladies of uncommon attractions. But our chief interest -must centre in the peoples north of the Equator, who -from time immemorial have been in contact with the ancient -civilization of the Mediterranean.</p> - -<p>Thus among the Madis of Central Africa, a pure negro -tribe, cattle form the chief wealth; a rich man may have as -many as 200 head, a very poor one only 3 or 4. The average -number possessed by one man is from 30 to 40. They keep the -milk in gourds.</p> - -<p>“A regular system of exchange is carried on in arrows, beads, -bead necklaces, teeth necklaces, brass rings for the neck and -arms, and bundles of small pieces of iron in flat, round, or oval -discs. All these different articles are given in exchange for -cattle, corn, salt, arrows, etc. The nearest approach to money -is seen in the flat, round pieces of iron which are of different -sizes, from three-quarters to two feet in diameter and half an -inch thick. They are much employed in exchange. This is -the form in which they are kept and used as money, but they -are intended to be divided into two, heated and made into -hoes. They are also fashioned into other implements, such as -knives, arrow-heads, etc. and into little bells hung round the -waist for ornament or round wandering cows’ necks. Ready-made -hoes are not often used in barter. Iron as above-mentioned -is preferred and is taken to the blacksmith to be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_44"></a>[44]</span> -fashioned according to the owner’s requirements. Any tools -may be obtained ready made from a smith, and can be used in -barter when new.</p> - -<p>“Compensation for killing a woman or any serious crime -must be paid for in cattle. No cowries are used as coins in -this district, no measure of weight, quantity or length is used. -The payment for a wife must be made in cows of a year old, or -in bulls of two or three years<a id="FNanchor_73" href="#Footnote_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a>.”</p> - -<p>But it is in Darfour and Wadai that we find the primitive -system in its fullest form. Wives are bought with cows, 20 -of which with a male and female slave are the usual price of -a wife, hence the Darfouris prefer daughters to sons. Hence -the proverb that girls fill the stable, but boys empty it, which -recalls the <i>cow-winning maidens</i> of Homer (παρθένοι ἀλφεσίβοιαι). -There is absolutely no metal of any kind in Darfour, -except that which is imported. Having no money, they accept -certain articles as having a certain monetary value.</p> - -<p>Facher was the first place in Darfour which had anything -like a currency; it consisted of rings made of tin, which were -employed in the purchase of every-day necessaries of life. -These rings are called <i>tarneih</i> in Darfouris. There are two -kinds, the heavy ring and the light ring; the light serves for -buying the most trivial articles. For purchasing articles of -value they have the <i>toukkiyeh</i>, a piece of cotton cloth six -cubits long by one broad. There are two kinds of this -stuff, <i>chykeh</i> and <i>katkât</i>. Four pieces of the former and 4½ -pieces of the latter are worth a Spanish dollar. Buying and -selling is also carried on by means of slaves: thus one says, -“this horse is worth 2 or 3 <i>sedâcy</i> (a name given to a negro -slave, who measures six spans from his ankle to the lower part -of his ear)<a id="FNanchor_74" href="#Footnote_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a>.” A <i>sedaciyeh</i> is a female negro slave of the same -height. A <i>sedâcy</i> is worth 30 <i>toukkiyeh</i>, or six blue <i>chauter</i>, -or 8 white <i>chauter</i> or six oxen, or 10 Spanish pillar dollars, the -only coined money known in Darfour, where it is called <i>abou<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_45"></a>[45]</span> -medfa</i>, i.e. <i>cannon</i> piece, the pillars being taken for cannons. -The inhabitants of Kobeih employ beads for money, which -are called <i>harich</i>. They are green and blue and circulate in -strings of 100 each. This bead takes the place of the tin ring -(<i>tarneih</i>) used at Facher in the purchase of cheap commodities. -The <i>harich</i> as money is employed in numbers of from 5 to -100 beads (the string), from one string to ten and indefinitely -further<a id="FNanchor_75" href="#Footnote_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a>.</p> - -<p>The <i>toukkiyeh</i> is worth in the markets mentioned 8 strings -of <i>harich</i>. Thus a <i>sedâcy</i> is worth 240 strings. At Guerly -and its environments the <i>falgo</i> or stick of salt almost as big -as one’s finger is employed. This salt is obtained artificially, -and when liquid is poured into little moulds of baked clay. -This salt is sold by the <i>falgo</i>, not by weight, and one buys -by 1, 2 or 3 <i>falgo</i> according to the value of the article.</p> - -<p>At Conca tobacco is used as money. At Kergo, Ryl, and -Chaigriyeh articles of moderate value are bought with hanks -of cotton thread. These threads are ten <i>ells</i> long, and there -are only 20 threads in each hank. For common articles raw -cotton with the pods attached is given; it is not weighed but -simply estimated by guess. At Noumleh onions are employed -as money for common articles, and the <i>rubat</i> or hank of thread, -and <i>toukkiyeh</i> for the more valuable, whilst the <i>chauter</i> and -dollar are unknown.</p> - -<p>At Ras-el-Fyk<a id="FNanchor_76" href="#Footnote_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a> the hoe (<i>hachâchah</i>) serves as currency. It -is simply a plate of iron fitted with a socket. A handle is -fitted into this socket, and one has an implement suited for -chopping the weeds in the corn fields. Purchases of small value -are made with the hoe from 1 to 20: above that amount the -<i>toukkiyeh</i> is employed and likewise the <i>chauter</i>.</p> - -<p>At Temourkeh they use as moneys cylindrical pieces of -copper (called <i>damleg</i>) for articles of some value, whilst a kind -of glass bead called <i>chaddour</i> is used for small articles. Near -Ganz, the eastern part of Darfour, the principal article of -exchange is the <i>doukha</i> for articles of moderate value. They -give it by the handful, or by the double handful up to the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_46"></a>[46]</span> -amount of half a <i>moda</i>; whilst as elsewhere articles of value -are bought by the <i>toukkiyeh</i> or dollar. In a very great number -of places merchandise is exchanged against oxen; thus the -horse is worth 10 to 20 oxen.</p> - -<p>Accordingly while each district of Darfour has some peculiar -form of currency for small change the higher currency is the -same everywhere, the piece of cloth, the ox, the slave<a id="FNanchor_77" href="#Footnote_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a>.</p> - -<p>In the region of Wadai the same shrewd Arab tells us that -cattle are kept by even the most barbarous tribes<a id="FNanchor_78" href="#Footnote_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a>. Thus the -Fertyt tribe, who go in a state of almost complete nudity, and -thus have no need of cloth, possess large herds of cattle, which -are not branded, but each owner distinguishes his cattle by -giving a peculiar shape to their horns as soon as they begin to -grow. In the less barbarous communities of Wadai slaves and -beads are employed as currency as well as cattle. The bead -used is called the <i>mansous</i>. It is of yellow amber and of -different sizes. Number 1 is so called because one string (containing -100 beads) weighs one <i>rotl</i> (pound) of 12 ounces; -Number 2 because two strings weigh a <i>rotl</i>; Number 3 -because 3 strings make a <i>rotl</i> and so on. The first is the most -costly of all beads. Often a single bead of this sort (<i>soumyt</i>) is -worth two slaves; if it is abundant each bead is worth a slave.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_47"></a>[47]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_III">CHAPTER III.<br /> -THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE OX AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF GOLD.</h2> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">And round about him lay on every side</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Great heapes of gold that never could be spent,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Of which some were rude owre not purified</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Of Mulciber’s devouring element.</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Some others were new driven and distent</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Into great Ingowes and to wedges square,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Some in round plates with outen ornament,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">But most were stampt and in their metal bare</div> - <div class="verse indent0">The antique Shapes of Kings and Kesars straunge and rare.</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse right"><span class="smcap">Spenser</span>, <i>Faerie Queen</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> vii.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<p>Let us now take a general survey of the results of our -observations. First of all it is apparent that the doctrine of -a primal convention with regard to the use of any one particular -article as a medium of exchange is just as false as the -old belief in an original convention at the first beginning of -Language or Law. Every medium of exchange either has an -actual marketable value, or represents something which either -has or formerly had such a value, just as a five-pound note -represents five sovereigns, and the piece of stamped walrus -skin formerly employed by Russians in Alaska in paying the -native trappers represented roubles or blankets<a id="FNanchor_79" href="#Footnote_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a>.</p> - -<p>To employ once more the language of geology, we have -found evidence pointing to certain general laws of stratification. -In Further Asia we have found a section which presents us -with an almost complete series of strata, whilst in other places -where we have been only able to observe two or three layers,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_48"></a>[48]</span> -we have nevertheless found that certain strata are invariably -found superimposed upon others, just as regularly as the coal -seams are found lying over the carboniferous limestone. As -soon as the primitive savage has conceived the idea of obtaining -some article which he desires but does not possess by giving in -exchange to its owner something which the latter desires, the -principle of money has been conceived. Shells or necklaces of -shells are found everywhere to be employed in the earliest -stages. When some men began to make weapons of superior -material, as for instance axes of jade instead of common stone, -such weapons naturally soon became media of exchange; when -the ox and the sheep, the swine and the goat are tamed, -large additions are made to the circulating media of the more -advanced communities; then come the metals; the older ornaments -of shells and implements of stone are replaced by those -of gold (and much later by silver) and by weapons of bronze as -in Asia and Europe, and by those of iron in Africa. Copper -and iron circulate either in the form of implements and weapons, -such as the axes of West Africa, the hoes of the early Chinese -and modern Bahnars, and the ancient Chinese knives, all of -which remind us of the axes and half-axes in Homer; or in the -form of rings and bracelets, like the manillas of West Africa and -the ancient Irish fibulae; or else in the form of plates or bars of -metal, ready to be employed for the manufacture of such articles, -as we saw in the case of the iron bars of Laos, the iron discs of -the Madis, and the brass rods of the Congo. Again we are reminded -of the mass of pig-iron, which Achilles offered as a prize<a id="FNanchor_80" href="#Footnote_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a>.</p> - -<p>It is of the highest importance to observe that such pieces -of copper and iron are not weighed, but are appraised by -measurement. We shall find that it is only at a period long -subsequent to the weighing of gold that the inferior metals -are estimated by weight. The custom of capturing wives -which prevails among the lowest savages is succeeded by the -custom of purchasing wives. The woman is only a chattel -on the same footing as the cow or the sheep, and she is -accordingly appraised in terms of the ordinary media of exchange -employed in her community, whether it be in cows,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_49"></a>[49]</span> -horses, beads, skins or blankets. Presently male captives are -found useful both to tend flocks and, as in the East and in the -modern Soudan, to guard the harem. With the discovery of -gold, ornaments made at first out of the rough nuggets supersede -other ornaments, and presently either such ornaments or portions -of gold in plates or lumps are added to the list of media, -and the same follows with the discovery of silver. Such ornaments -or pieces of gold and silver are estimated in terms of -cattle, and the standard unit of the bars or ingots naturally is -adjusted to the unit by which it is appraised. Thus we found -the Homeric talent, the silver bar of Annam, the Irish <i>unga</i> -all equated to the cow, and the Welsh <i>libra</i>, Anglo-Saxon <i>libra</i>, -similarly equated to the slave. With the discovery of the art -of weaving, cloths of a definite size everywhere become a -medium, as the silk cloth of ancient China, the woollen cloths -of the old Norsemen, the <i>toukkiyeh</i> of the Soudan, and the -blanket of North America. This fact once more recalls Homer -and makes us believe that the robes and blankets and coverlets -which Priam brought along with the talents of gold to be the -ransom of Hector’s body all had a definite place in the Homeric -monetary system<a id="FNanchor_81" href="#Footnote_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a>.</p> - -<p>We have seen the Siamese piece of twisted silver wire -passing into a coin of European style, and we shall find that the -Chinese bronze knife has finally ended by becoming a <i>cash</i>, just -as we have already found the Homeric talent of gold appearing, -in weight at least, as the gold stater of historical times. Thus -in every point the analogy between what we find in the -Homeric Poems and in modern barbarous communities seems -complete. We may therefore with some confidence assume that -we are at liberty to fill up the gaps in the strata of Greek -monetary history which lie between Homer and the beginning -of coined money on the analogy of the corresponding strata -in other regions. This assumption, resting on a broad basis of -induction and confirmed, as we shall see, by a good deal of -evidence special to Greece and Italy, will be found to explain -the origin, not only of weight standards in those countries, but<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_50"></a>[50]</span> -also of the Greek <i>obol</i> and Roman <i>as</i>, as well as of the types on -the oldest coins, such as the cow’s head of Samos, the tunny fish -of Olbia and Cyzicus, the axe of Tenedos, the tortoise of Aegina, -the shield of Boeotia, and the silphium of Cyrene.</p> - -<p>Let us now turn to the races who both in modern and in -ancient times have dwelt around the basin of the Mediterranean -and Black Sea, whether in Asia Minor, Central Asia, Europe or -Africa. In what did their wealth consist? When we first -meet in history the various branches of the Aryan, Semitic, and -Hamitic races, they are all alike possessed of flocks and herds. -To deal first with the Aryans; we have already had ample -evidence that such was the case with the early Greeks. The -ox plays a foremost part, and they likewise possessed sheep, -goats and swine, whilst slaves formed also an important commodity. -Further east again, in the Zend-Avesta the cow is -found playing the principal part in every phase of the primitive -life there unfolded, both as the chief article of value and in -reference to their religious ceremonies. Still further to the east -we find from the Rig-Veda that among the ancient Hindus the -same important <i>rôle</i> was assigned to the cow. Turning now to -Mesopotamia we find that in the time of Abraham the keeping -of herds and flocks was the chief pursuit of the Semites. Passing -on to Egypt, the hoary mother of civilization, we find evidence -that although “every shepherd was an abomination to the Egyptians,” -yet the worship of their great divinity Apis (Hapi) under -the form of a bull and the worship of the sacred ram indicate -that at a period preceding the invasion of the Hyksos the -Egyptians regarded the ox and the sheep with love and veneration. -Whether the Egyptians came from Asia into the valley -of the Nile, or whether they came from some region of Africa -more to the south, one thing at least is certain, and that is that -in either case they came from a country eminently fitted for the -rearing and keeping of cattle. The functions of the ox became -limited under altered conditions, and their ancient esteem for -the cow as one of their chief means of subsistence survived only -in religious observances. So too in modern India the reverence -for the sacred cow amongst a people who regard as an abomination -the eating of beef is a survival from the time when in a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_51"></a>[51]</span> -more northern clime cattle formed the principal wealth of their -forefathers.</p> - -<p>In the Soudan, as we have seen to this day, slaves and oxen -are the chief kinds of property. Crossing back to Europe we -find the Italian tribes represented in the earliest records as a -cattle-keeping people. The story of their invasion of Italy took -the form of their driving before them a steer and following -obediently to whatever new home it might lead them<a id="FNanchor_82" href="#Footnote_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a>.</p> - -<p>The same holds of the more northern peoples. When the -Gauls entered the plains of Northern Italy they drove before -them vast herds of cattle. Caesar found the Britons keeping -large numbers of cattle, and especially those in the interior of -the island subsisting almost entirely on their produce<a id="FNanchor_83" href="#Footnote_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a>. Strabo -writing about <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> 1, mentions hides as among the articles -exported from Britain to the Continent<a id="FNanchor_84" href="#Footnote_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a>.</p> - -<p>The linguistic argument fully supports the literary evidence. -All the Aryan or Indo-European peoples possess a common -name for the cow. The Sanskrit <i>gaus</i>, Greek βοῦς, Lat. <i>bos</i>, -Irish <i>bo</i>, German <i>kuh</i>, Eng. <i>cow</i>, taken together indicate that -before the dispersion of the various stocks (whether the original -home of the Aryans was in Northern Europe, as Latham -first suggested, or in the Hindu Kush, as Prof. Max Müller -maintains) they all possessed the cow. This is further supported -by the name for the bull which is found amongst -various stocks, the Greek ταῦρος, Lat. <i>taurus</i>, Irish <i>tarb</i>, and -the name of the <i>ox</i>, which corresponds to the Sanskrit <i>uksha</i>, -and finally the name of <i>steer</i><a id="FNanchor_85" href="#Footnote_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a>. Here then we have undoubted -evidence of the universal possession of cattle by the Aryans at -a very early period.</p> - -<p>Archaeology lends its support likewise. We have already -found in the case of the Greeks the cow used as a unit of -currency side by side with gold. This leads us to the question -of the precious metals, which in course of time have come to be -almost the sole medium of exchange. In the case of the Greeks -we saw reason to believe that the barter-unit was older than<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_52"></a>[52]</span> -the metallic. Is this the case universally? The evidence, I -think, which I shall adduce will lead us to this belief.</p> - -<p>First of all it is certain that man must have been acquainted -with the ox long before he ever gathered a grain of gold from -the brook. When primaeval man first stood on the plains of -Europe and Asia vast herds of wild cattle met his eye on -every side. The process of domestication was long and slow, -but yet in all the ancient refuse heaps of Scandinavia and -Germany, whilst the remains of the ox are found in plenty -there is yet no trace of gold.</p> - -<p>At this point it will be well to remind the reader that the -area occupied by the cattle-keeping races whom we have -enumerated was continuous. There was no insuperable barrier -between Indian and Persian, Persian and Mede, Mede and the -dweller in Mesopotamia, or again, between Persian and Armenian, -Armenian and the Scythian who lived in his ox-waggon -on the plains of what is now Southern Russia: the Scythian was -in contact with the tribes of the Balkan Peninsula, who in turn -were in contact with the Greeks and the dwellers along the -valley of the Danube, who in their turn joined hands with the -peoples of Italy, Helvetia and Gaul. Hence the value of cattle -would be more or less constant from one end of this entire -region to the other. The purchasing power of the cow might -be greater in some parts than in others, just as with ourselves -a sovereign has the same value from Land’s End to John -o’Groats, although the purchasing power of the sovereign as -regards the necessaries of life may differ widely in different -places within the limits of Great Britain.</p> - -<p>It is only when some impassable natural barrier intervenes -that there will be a difference in the value of the unit of barter. -Thus, in the case of Britain we cannot suppose that the -value of oxen was necessarily the same there as it was on -the Continent. If it was it would be merely a coincidence. -The difficulty of transporting live cattle in such ships as the -Gauls or Britons possessed would have been too great to permit -of such a free circulation of the unit as would have kept its -value exactly even on both sides of the Straits. In fact it was -only with the invention of steam that facilities for transmarine<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_53"></a>[53]</span> -cattle-trading came in which could tend to level the value on -both sides of an arm of the sea. In the earlier half of this -century cattle were extraordinarily cheap in Ireland in proportion -to the prices which they fetched in England, but yet the -difficulty and expense entailed in sending them across in -sailing ships effectually prevented the export. When the first -steamers began to convey cattle from Ireland to England the -profits were enormous, although the freight of a single cow cost, -I believe, several pounds. Steam-power has done much to -equalize prices, but still there is a considerable difference in -the value of cattle on both sides of the Irish Sea. But where -no impassable barrier of sea or forest intervened, we may fairly -assume the ox carried much the same value from Northern -India to the Atlantic Ocean.</p> - -<p>We have already proved in the case of most of the peoples -with which we have to deal that the ox was the unit of value. -We have likewise found that these primitive peoples, whilst -employing a cow or ox of a certain age as their standard of -value, had adjusted accurately to this unit their other possessions: -for instance, the heifer of the second year bore a -distinct value relatively to the cow of the third year, so likewise -the calf of the first year and the milk of a cow for -a certain period. These thus acted as submultiples of the -standard unit, and as they were the same in kind and -only differed in degree, the various sub-units of the cow remained -in constant proportion to the chief unit and to one -another. On the other hand, when there was a distinction in -kind between animals, as between oxen and sheep, the relative -value would probably differ according to the scarcity or abundance -of either kind of animal, which difference would probably -arise from a difference in the nature of the pastures and -climate. Thus we have found in some places ten sheep -regarded as the equivalent of an ox, in others again eight. -The same holds good of goats. In the case of these smaller -animals we have seen the same fixed scale of values according -to age, and the same method of rating the value of the -milk of an ewe or the goat as we find in the case of -the cow. Amongst people who possessed horses, camels and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_54"></a>[54]</span> -asses, the same principle holds good, horses and camels on -account of their great value being treated as higher units for -occasional use, just as the elephant is regarded at present in -parts of Further India. The slave, as we have before remarked, -played an important part as a higher unit or multiple of the ox, -the average slave having a fixed value, whilst of course in the -case of female captives of unusual beauty a fancy price would -be paid. As climate and pasture would not affect the keeping -of slaves, and as human beings were fairly universally spread -over the area of the ox, the probabilities are that it was almost -as easy proportionally to get slaves as oxen, and to keep the -one as to keep the other from being stolen. Thus there would -be more or less of a constant ratio between slaves and oxen. -There would be a tendency likewise to regulate the number of -slaves by the amount of work to be done, and as this work in -the pastoral stage is almost entirely that of the neatherd, the -shepherd, the swineherd and the goatherd, the number of -<i>male</i> slaves at least would be to a certain extent conditioned by -the extent of the flocks and herds. Such we may infer from -the picture of the household of Ulysses in the Odyssey was the -practice in early Greece. The faithful swineherd Eumaeus, -and his fellow the good neatherd, with the rascally goatherd -Melanthius, and their underlings, seem, with the addition -perhaps of a few house slaves who would assist in tilling the -chieftain’s demesne (<i>temenos</i>), to have comprised all the menservants. -The master of the house worked hard himself in his -field and at various handicrafts, as we find Ulysses boasting of -his expertness both as a ploughman and mower; he was -also a skilled carpenter, having with his own hands built -the chamber of Penelope and constructed a cunningly wrought -bedstead<a id="FNanchor_86" href="#Footnote_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a>. Hence the amount of help to be required from -<i>male</i> slaves, exclusive of their duties as herdsmen, would be -but insignificant. When we come to deal with the question -of <i>female</i> slaves, the conditions of their number seem at first -sight entirely different. The question of polygamy here comes -in, and we must bear in mind that they were acquired not -merely as servants to perform menial duties, but likewise to be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_55"></a>[55]</span> -wives and concubines. It is evident then that the number of -such attendants will depend on the inclination and wealth of -the house-master. But here again the problem is simplified, -for inasmuch as his wealth consisted in cattle, a man’s -power to purchase handmaidens depended on the amount of -his kine. Thus at the present day the number of women -owned by a Zulu depends entirely on the number of cattle he -possesses. Hence there was likely to be a fairly universal ratio -in value between female slaves and oxen, over such a region as we -have sketched above. The facility too in transporting human -chattels from one place to another would be an important element -in keeping the price almost the same over all parts of the -area. It is a very ancient principle with the slave captor and slave -dealer to sell their captives far away from their original home. -Among our Anglo-Saxon forefathers the slave from beyond the -sea was always worth more than a captive from close at hand<a id="FNanchor_87" href="#Footnote_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a>. -The explanation of this fact was suggested by Dr Cunningham, -and the proof of it was found by Mr Frazer in Further India; -for there the slave brought from a great distance is always -more valuable than one who comes only a short way from his -native land, as the possibility of the former’s running away and -succeeding in escaping is so much less than that of the latter. -This too seems to be the true explanation of the fact that in -Homer we regularly find persons sold into slavery beyond the sea. -Achilles sold the son of Priam to Euneos the son of Jason of -Lesbos<a id="FNanchor_88" href="#Footnote_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a>, the nurse Eurycleia had been brought from the mainland, -Eumaeus the swineherd had been sold to Laertes by the -Phoenicians who had captured him with his nurse in his distant -home<a id="FNanchor_89" href="#Footnote_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a>. This constant tendency to sell in one country the captives -taken from another would do much to equalize prices everywhere, -and the price being paid in oxen the ratio in value -between oxen and <i>female</i> as well as <i>male</i> slaves would tend to -be constant.</p> - -<p>We have now reviewed the ordinary kinds of wealth amongst -primitive pastoral people, but we have touched but lightly as -yet on the subject of the metals.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_56"></a>[56]</span></p> - -<p>We saw above that the two earliest kinds of currency -consisted either of some article of absolute necessity, such as -the skins of animals in the colder climates, or of some form of -personal ornament, which being both universally esteemed as -well as durable and portable will be readily accepted by all -members of the community. It is of pre-eminent importance -that it be universally esteemed. Travellers who have ignored -this principle have found out its truth to their cost in Central -Africa in modern times. As the chief currency consists of glass -and porcelain beads, which the traveller must carry with him -or starve, the European is too apt to assume that provided the -beads are bright and gaudy in colour all sorts will be taken -with like readiness by the natives. Sir Richard Burton in a -valuable appendix to his <i>Lake Regions of Central Africa</i> warns -travellers against this dangerous error. The African has his -own firmly rooted canons of aesthetics, and will take as payment -only those sorts of beads which he considers suitable and -becoming. Again, some explorers brought supplies of cheap -Birmingham trinkets, thinking that they would captivate the -negro eye, but they proved a complete commercial failure, for -the natives much prefer trinkets and jewellery of their own -manufacture, and which are more in keeping with their standard -of good taste. Again, the Arabs of the Soudan will not take -gold as payment, in consequence of which our army in the late -expedition had to take with them large and inconvenient -supplies of silver dollars, coined for the purpose. The Maria -Theresa dollar is the recognised currency in that region, not -because of any notions as regards currency properly speaking, -but because the Arab’s taste lies in silver ornaments for himself, -his weapons and his horse. He values then the silver -because of its utility as an ornament, whilst gold he cannot -employ to the same advantage.</p> - -<p>I have thus digressed in order that it may be clearly seen -that mankind were not seized with the <i>sacra fames auri</i> from -the very first moment when the eye of some wild hunter or -nomad first lighted on a gold nugget as it glistened under the -sunlight in the stream.</p> - -<p>A considerable period may have elapsed after mankind<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_57"></a>[57]</span> -became acquainted with gold or silver before man cast away -his necklets or bracelets of shells such as have been found -along with the most ancient remains of the human race yet -discovered in Europe, and put on his person in their stead -similar ornaments beaten out of the gold from the brook. It -is perfectly reasonable to assume that the primitive Aryan or -primitive Semite, who wore ornaments of shells, used these as -instruments of barter, or even currency, in the same way as -we have found the peoples of Asia and Africa using their strings -of cowries, the aborigines of North America their wampum -belts, and the Fijians their whales’ teeth.</p> - -<p>In what particular region mankind first employed the -precious metals to adorn his person, it is of course impossible -for us to say. But beyond all doubt already in Egypt at the -very dawn of history gold was playing an important part. The -question of the relative dates at which the metals were first -employed by man is one of great interest and importance in -studying the history of human development. Of the four chief -metals, gold, silver, copper and iron, we have no difficulty in -deciding that iron is most certainly the latest to come into use. -It is only within historical time that implements and weapons -of iron have superseded those of copper and bronze, at least -within the area occupied by the great civilized races. The -reason for this is obvious: iron is not found native, but must -be obtained by a difficult process of smelting, and even when -obtained requires great skill to make it available for use. The -Greeks of the Homeric Poems were still in the later bronze age, -although iron was known and employed for weapons and implements. -But as we have no immediate need to discuss the date -of the introduction of iron, we may pass on to the three remaining -metals.</p> - -<p>It is obvious that if a metal is found naturally in such a -condition that it can be immediately wrought into various -forms for ornament or utility, such a metal is likely to have -been employed at a much earlier period than one which is -rarely if ever found in a native condition. Now silver is a -metal which is rarely found pure, and considerable metallurgical -skill is needed to render it fit for use. On the other hand gold<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_58"></a>[58]</span> -and copper are both found in a pure state. We may then on -this ground alone infer that mankind was acquainted with gold -and copper before they as yet had learned the art of working -silver ore. It next comes to be a question of the priority of -gold or copper. The probabilities will undoubtedly be in favour -of that metal which is most universally found native, and which -is the most likely by its hue to attract the eye, and which is the -most easily worked. On all these counts gold can claim priority -over copper. Still copper is found native in various countries, -Hungary, Saxony, Sweden, Norway, Spain and Cornwall.</p> - -<p>It is of course quite possible that in a region where gold is -not native and copper is, the latter may have been the first -metal known to the aboriginal inhabitants. This can be well -illustrated from the case of iron and copper in Central Africa. -The negroes never had a copper or bronze age, but passed -directly into the iron age, for the very sufficient reason that no -native copper was found in their country, and consequently -they had no metal suited for implements until they had learned -to smelt iron. Gold of course on the other hand was known to -them from the most remote period. Finally, from a famous -modern occurrence we may come to the general conclusion that -wherever gold is a natural product of the soil there it has been -the first metal to come under the observation of man. The -great gold-field of California was first discovered on a memorable -Sunday morning, when the eye of a lounger who was -smoking his pipe by the side of Captain Sutter’s millrace -happened to light on some glittering body in the sandy bottom -of the stream. This was the first scrap of gold found in California, -and whilst that fertile land has produced many natural -treasures besides gold within the scarcely more than forty years -which have since elapsed, its gold it will be observed was the -earliest of its metals, both from the nature of its deposit and -from the brilliancy of its colour, to attract the attention of man. -In certain parts of Southern Europe, notably parts of Southern -Italy and Southern Greece, where copper is found but not gold, -copper perhaps may have been known before gold, and certainly -before silver. It will be important to bear this in mind with -reference to a stage in our future arguments.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_59"></a>[59]</span></p> - -<p>That silver came under men’s notice at a later time than -either gold or copper can be put beyond doubt by historical -evidence. In the Rig Veda, where gold (<i>heranya</i>) is already -well known and likewise copper (for there can be no doubt -that the <i>ayas</i> of the Veda, Lat. <i>aes</i>, means copper), silver is -entirely unknown; the word <i>rayatam</i>, which in later Sanskrit -means silver, does indeed occur, but only as an adjective -applied to a horse and meaning <i>bright</i>. Again, we know as -a matter of fact that it was only at a comparatively late -period that the famous silver mines of Laurium in Attica -were developed. At least Plutarch (<i>Solon</i>, ch. 16) tells us -that, owing to the scarcity of silver coin, Solon reduced the -amount of the fines levied and also of the rewards for killing -a wolf or wolf-cub, the former to five drachms, the latter to -one drachm, the rewards representing the value of a cow -and a sheep respectively. If they had already learned to work -that “well of silver, the treasure-house of their land,” in the -time of Solon (596 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), there certainly could have been no -such dearth of silver. Finally let us take a comparatively -modern case, that of the Aztecs of Mexico. When the Spanish -conquerors reckoned up their great tale of treasures found in -the royal palace, whilst the gold amounted to the large sum -of <i>pesos de oro</i> 162000 lbs., the silver and silver vessels only -weighed the small sum of 500 marks<a id="FNanchor_90" href="#Footnote_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a>. Yet this was in the -country that is now known as the richest silver-producing -region that the world has ever seen.</p> - -<p>We thus find a people in a highly advanced state of civilization, -who had invented a calendar, had devised a system of -picture-writing, who had actually a currency in gold-dust, as -we have found, and who were skilled and artistic craftsmen in -gold, and yet who were scarcely able to make the slightest use -of the silver, with which almost every crevice in their native -hills was charged.</p> - -<p>We may thus with safety rest in the conclusion that silver -only comes into use at a stage always and probably much -later than gold.</p> - -<p>We have been thus led to the conclusion that gold is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_60"></a>[60]</span> -known to man at a far earlier stage than silver; furthermore -that copper is also prior in discovery and use to silver owing -to its natural form of deposit, and that, although in a region -where gold does not exist, copper may have been the first of -the metals to come under human notice, yet wherever gold-bearing -strata are found, there is a great probability that gold -was the first metal known. Schrader (<i>op. cit.</i> p. 174) has discussed -the evidence from the Linguistic Palaeontological point -of view, and whilst much of what he says is interesting, there -are some points in his conclusions which shake one’s faith in -the infallibility of the Linguistic method for determining disputed -points in archaeology. Gold he considers was known to -the Egyptians from the remotest times, and so also to the -Semites of Asia. As gold is found in abundance in the tombs -of Mycenae (circ. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 1400) he considers that just about that -time the Greeks had acquired a knowledge of gold from the -Phoenicians. The Greek <i>Chrysos</i> (χρυσος), <i>gold</i>, is derived, -according to many scholars, from the Phoenician equivalent for -<i>charutz</i>, the Hebrew name for the same metal.</p> - -<p>There is plainly no relationship between the Egyptian -name <i>Nub</i> and the Semitic appellation. The question, however, -may arise as to whether, even granting that <i>chrysos</i> is -derived from <i>chârûz</i>, it follows that the Greeks had no knowledge -of gold prior to their contact with the Phoenicians. It -is the skilful manufacture of a metal into beautiful and useful -articles which gives it its real value. Hence arises the high -esteem in which the cunning workman is held in early times. -In Homer he is ranked along with the <i>prophet</i>, a sufficient -proof in itself of the great importance attached to his functions. -Again, in the Homeric Poems all articles of gold and -silver of especially fine workmanship, if they are not the -work of the divine smith Hephaestus himself, are the productions -of the Sidonian craftsmen. The priest Maron gave -Odysseus, amongst other presents, seven talents of well-wrought -gold. Whether this took the form simply of rings we cannot -tell, but plainly the value of the gift is enhanced by the -epithet. From these considerations it seems not unreasonable -to suppose that the Greeks, although possessing a name<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_61"></a>[61]</span> -of their own for gold, may have adopted a Phoenician name, -because they obtained the fine-wrought ornaments of that -metal which they prized so highly from the Semite traders.</p> - -<p>If any one thinks that this is a mere suggestion unsupported -by analogy, my answer is not far to seek. The Albanian -word for gold is φλjορι<a id="FNanchor_91" href="#Footnote_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a>, so called because the first coined gold -moneys of the middle ages with which they became acquainted -were those of Florence. Now I think Dr Schrader will hardly -maintain that the Albanians were unacquainted with gold as -a metal until sometime in the mediaeval period they first -obtained it from the Florentines. What took place in the -case of the Albanians may have taken place again and again -at earlier periods. A rude nation already acquainted with a -certain metal receives by trade from a more advanced people -the same metal wrought into various shapes and forms for -personal decoration or use, and along with the superior articles -it takes over the name by which the makers of those objects of -metal described them.</p> - -<p>These considerations well serve to show how unsafe is the -basis afforded by Linguistic Palaeontology alone on which to -build any theory of ethnical development. Let us now take -another case where Schrader and his followers dogmatize without -the slightest suspicion that the facts of recorded history -may step in and rudely upset their conclusions. Schrader<a id="FNanchor_92" href="#Footnote_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a> -holds that the Kelts were not acquainted with gold until -their invasion of Italy in the beginning of the 4th cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -His argument is that the Celtic word for gold (Irish <i>or</i>, Cymric -<i>awr</i>) is a loan-word from the Latin <i>aurum</i>. As the Sabine -form of the latter is <i>ausum</i>, and the change of <i>s</i> to <i>r</i> did not -take place in Latin until the fifth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, and as the -change of primitive <i>s</i> into <i>r</i> does not take place in the Keltic -languages, he infers that it was only after the change in the -form of the word had taken place in Latin that the Gauls -became acquainted with the metal. Yet who will, on reflection, -maintain that the Gauls had not already learned the use -of gold from the Etruscans with whom they had been in contact<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_62"></a>[62]</span> -long before they ever reached the Allia or sacked Rome? -The Italian dialects were still employing the form of the word -with <i>s</i>. Why should the Gauls have taken the form of the -word with which they must have come least in contact in -their invasion of Italy in preference to that used amongst -the other Italians? Finally comes the irresistible evidence of -Polybius that when the Gauls invaded Italy their only possessions -consisted of their cattle and an abundance of gold ornaments, -both of which could be easily transported from place to -place<a id="FNanchor_93" href="#Footnote_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a>.</p> - -<p>Again, we can argue forcibly that it is contrary to all experience -for primitive peoples to suddenly exhibit so strong a -predilection for metals, or objects of which they have not had -previous knowledge, as the Gauls showed in their rapacious -demands that the ransom of Rome should be in gold. The -legend that Brennus threw his sword into the scales, and -ordered them to make up its weight in addition to the stipulated -sum, shows, if it is true, that the Gauls were well acquainted -with the art of weighing, which would be only gained -from a long knowledge of the precious metals. The solution of -the difficulty involved in the Keltic <i>or</i> can be readily found. -The Iberians in Spain had long been skilled in the working -and use of the precious metals. Tradition told how Colaeus of -Samos, the first of the Greeks who ever sailed to Spain, brought -back a fabulous amount of precious metal, and that the Phoenicians -when they first traded in that region found silver so -plentiful that in their greed for gain, when the ship could hold -no more, they replaced their anchors by others made of that -metal. The Phocaeans had traded with Iberia and Gaul from -the end of the 7th century, Massalia had been founded by this -bold people about 600 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> Are we to suppose that in all -those centuries when the Kelts are in constant contact with -the Iberians, and when already all Keltike, Helvetia, Northern -Italy and even perhaps ‘the remote Britanni,’ were in constant -touch with the traders of Massalia, the Kelts waited to -learn the use of gold and silver until <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 400? The Basque -name for gold is <i>urrea</i>. It is quite possible that the Keltic<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_63"></a>[63]</span> -name was obtained from the Iberians, whom they found already -in possession of Western Europe. But there is another alternative -which is probably to be preferred. As we found the -Albanians calling gold by a name derived from the gold coins -of Florence, so the Kelts may have adopted the Latin names -for gold used by their Roman conquerors. This is made almost -certain by the fact that <i>aura</i>, in old Norse, derived from Latin -<i>aurum</i>, became the regular word for treasure, although no one -will deny that the Teutonic peoples had already <i>gold</i> and its -cognates as terms of their own for the metal. Everyone is -familiar with the influence exercised by the Roman coinage -even in the countries of the East, where Rome met with a -civilization hoary in age before Romulus founded Rome, and -from which Rome herself had ultimately derived the art of -coining. Yet by the time of Christ the Roman <i>denarius</i>, the -<i>penny</i> of our Authorized Version, had already asserted itself in -the Greek-speaking provinces of the East, and became in later -days, when the rule of Rome and Constantinople fell before the -Arab conquerors, under the form of <i>dinar</i>, the standard coin of -the great Mahomedan Empires. Did then in like fashion the -Roman form of the name for <i>gold</i>, which in all probability -varied but little from the cognate Gaulish word, supplant at a -comparatively early period that native form?</p> - -<p>The same argument may be urged in reference to the silver. -The Irish form is <i>airgid</i>, according to some a loan-word, being -simply the Latin <i>argentum</i>. We have already seen that it is -not possible that the Kelts, in constant contact with the Iberians -who were so rich in silver, could have remained in ignorance -of that metal. The Gaulish form of the name for silver was -plainly in Roman times almost the same as the Latin, as is -shown by <i>Argentoratum</i>, the ancient name of Strasburg. It is -plain then that before the Roman Conquest the Gauls had a -town called by the name for <i>silver</i>, whilst the Irish form has -no nasal, the Gaulish coincides completely with the Latin. Is -it not possible, that in this case too a native Keltic name, a -close cognate of Latin <i>argentum</i>, whose lineal descendant is seen -in the Irish form, may have been assimilated to the Latin form? -But there is plenty of evidence from other quarters to show that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_64"></a>[64]</span> -the mere existence of a foreign name for a particular object in -any language is no proof that the object in question came into -use for the first time along with the borrowing of the name. -When the Franks conquered that portion of the Roman empire -to which they gave their name, they must have had Teutonic -words of their own for <i>silver</i> and <i>gold</i>, closely related to our -own forms of the words. Yet whilst many Teutonic words -lingered and became absorbed into what became in process of -time the French language, their names for the metals disappeared -and the Latin derivatives remained in possession.</p> - -<p>Again, we get another instance of such borrowing in the -case of our own <i>penny</i>, old English <i>pendinga</i>, <i>penning</i>, German -<i>Pfennig</i>. The philologists seem agreed in recognizing this as a -loan-word from the Latin <i>pecunia</i>. Yet money was familiar to -the northern peoples long before they ever came into contact -with even the advanced posts of the Empire. The use of rings -and spirals of gold as a form of currency in Scandinavia is well -known; our word <i>shilling</i> seems to mean no more than portions -of such a coil of gold or silver wire cut off, to be used as small -change. But as the first coined money with which they became -familiar was the currency of Rome, they seem to have taken -the generic Roman name for money as their own expression for -the Roman silver coins with which they became familiar, just -as the Latin <i>aurum</i> under the form of <i>aura</i> (<i>eyrir</i>) became in -old Norse the general term for coined money or treasure in -money.</p> - -<p>We may ask why did the Kelts especially choose the -Roman form of the name for gold, if they were then for the -first time getting a name for the substance then (according to -Schrader) first known to them? Before they ever reached -Latium they had been in contact with peoples in Northern -Italy who undoubtedly were well acquainted with gold. The -Etruscans were a wealthy people, who coined gold pieces before -Rome had struck coins of any kind<a id="FNanchor_94" href="#Footnote_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a>. The Umbrians on the -east side, the ancient Italic race who had in the days before -the Etruscan Conquest held all Northern Italy up to the Alps, -which was hence known to the earliest Greek geographers by<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_65"></a>[65]</span> -the name of Ombriké<a id="FNanchor_95" href="#Footnote_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a>, were, beyond all doubt, acquainted -with the use of gold, and had a name for it probably the -same as the Sabine <i>ausum</i>. Why then did the Gauls remain -entirely ignorant of gold and of a name for it when they -had been in constant contact with those peoples who had most -undoubtedly abundance of the metal and names of their -own for it? Until some sufficient answer is given to the -objections here raised, we must on every logical and scientific -ground refuse our assent to an argument, the sole basis of which -is philological. It may not be inappropriate also here to remark -that it is most desirable in all historical enquiries to rely as -little as possible on Etymology. From the days when the -Stoics laid such importance on arguments based on the <i>originatio -verborum</i> down to the present time reasonings based on -such foundations have been as a rule founded on the sand. -Comparative Grammar as yet can hardly be described as a -science. New principles and laws are brought to light each -year, and, although of course the solid <i>residuum</i> of what may -now be regarded as more or less positive knowledge is slowly -growing in bulk, those laws which were the shibboleth of -Philologists a decade ago, are now rudely hurled from their -preeminence. The only sound scientific method in historical -research is to employ linguistic science as merely ancillary to -our enquiries.</p> - -<p>We have now seen the importance of the ox over the whole -area of Europe, Asia and Northern Africa, in which those -ancient peoples dwelt of whom history has preserved for us some -knowledge. We have likewise found that over the same area -gold was known and played an important part from a very -remote antiquity. This proof has depended of course almost -entirely on the literary remains and archaeological evidence. -Political Economists, when discoursing on the oft-vexed question -of monetary standards, lay down as one of the reasons why -gold has been found so convenient, that it is universally found. -Whether that fact is of much importance in modern times, -when the facilities of communication are so great, may perhaps -be doubted (especially when we see some of the largest stocks of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_66"></a>[66]</span> -gold existing in countries like England and France, where there -has been no production of gold for many years), but most certainly -in early times it was of great importance, as we shall see, that -the supplies of gold were not all concentrated in one or two -places, but that at many points in all the different countries -which came within the area of the ancient world, nature had -had her treasure-houses.</p> - -<p>To begin in the East, we shall first find that in all Central -Asia there are rich auriferous deposits in many places. The -stories told of the gold-digging ants and of the Griffins and -Arimaspians are familiar to all readers of Herodotus. That -historian (<span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 102-5) gives an explanation of how the Indians -are so rich in gold. To the north of India lies a region desert -and waste by reason of sand. Close to this desert dwells an -Indian tribe, who border on the city of Kaspaturos, and the -land of Paktuiké, dwelling to the north of the other Indians, -who live in the same manner as the Bactrians, and are the most -valiant of the Indians. These men go on expeditions in search -of gold. In this desert and in the sand are ants, which are in -size smaller than dogs, but larger than foxes. As these ants -make their habitations under ground they carry up the sand -just as the ants in Greece do, and they are very like the latter -in form. But the sand which is carried up is of gold. The -Indians then make expeditions in quest of this sand, each man -having yoked three camels. He then relates how the Indians -time their arrival at the ant region so as to reach the ant-diggings -at the hottest time of the day, which in that region is -the early morning. The ants are then not to be seen for they -have returned into their burrows to avoid the heat of the sun. -The Indians hastily fill the sacks they have brought with the -precious sand, and depart with all speed, as the ants from their -keen sense of smell quickly detect their presence, and at once -give chase. Their speed is such that though the camels are as -swift as horses, the Indians would never manage to return in -safety, unless they succeed in getting a good start whilst the -ants are still assembling from their various habitations.</p> - -<p>This story has been very ingeniously explained in modern -times by Lassen (<i>Alt-Ind. Leben</i>) and others. Lassen pointed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_67"></a>[67]</span> -out that a kind of gold brought from a people of Northern -India was called <i>pipilika</i> ‘ant’ (<i>Mahābhārata</i> 2, 1860) and that -it was probable that the story referred to a kind of marmot -which to this very day lives in large communities on the sandy -plateaus of Thibet. On the other hand more recent explorations -in Thibet show us that there are still communities of gold-diggers, -who in the rigour of the Himalayan winter clothe -themselves in skins and furs, which are drawn up right over -their ears in such a fashion that they present at first sight the -appearance of large shaggy dogs<a id="FNanchor_96" href="#Footnote_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a>. Whichever explanation may -be right, it may be inferred that from a very early time the -region north of the Panjab afforded vast supplies of gold. The -remark of Herodotus (<span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 105) that it was from this source that -the Indians obtained their wealth, and that there was not much -gold mined in their own land, is probably correct. It is beyond -all doubt that the gold of Thibet at all times found its way -largely into what is now the Panjab. We need have little -hesitation in believing that from a very remote epoch the rude -tribes of the Himalaya must have been acquainted with the -gold-dust, which lay in rich deposits in the various mountain -streams.</p> - -<p>To come towards the west, the great wealth of the Persian -kings seems to have been derived from the basin of the Oxus, -which was famous in antiquity for its golden sands. Thus in -the <i>Book of Marvels</i> (a work ascribed to Aristotle and largely -composed of extracts from his writings) it is stated that the -river Oxus in Bactria carries down nuggets of gold many in -number<a id="FNanchor_97" href="#Footnote_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a>. But the region from which Herodotus thought that -in his time came the greatest supply of gold was the Oural-Altai -region of Central Asia. The Greek Colonies on the -northern coast of the Black Sea, the most important of which -was Olbia at the mouth of the river Borysthenes, had a large -and lucrative trade with the Scythians, who inhabited the -wide plains of that bleak region. The Scythians were rich -in gold which they obtained from the still remoter country<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_68"></a>[68]</span> -of the Issedones, that people who, though righteous in all -other respects, had the singular fashion of devouring their -dead fathers. The Issedones again obtained by barter the -gold from the Arimaspians, a race who had but one eye, and -were hardly human<a id="FNanchor_98" href="#Footnote_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a>. They in turn, so report went, obtained -the precious article not by traffic, but by theft from the gold-guarding -griffins, who occupied the land where the gold was -found. At least Herodotus says, “How the gold is produced -I cannot truly tell, but the story is that the Arimaspians, -people with one eye, carry it off from the Grypes<a id="FNanchor_99" href="#Footnote_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a>.” He -describes elsewhere (<span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 17) this region, which lay beyond -the Scythians, where the cold was so great that the ground -was frozen hard for eight months of the year, and that it -was even cold in the summer season, that the air was so -full of feathers that no one could see, by which, as Herodotus -very properly explains, the thick falling feathery flakes of -snow were meant, and that the cattle could not grow horns. -All this seems to point beyond all doubt to the Ural and -Altai ranges. Unquestionably there was a well-established -trade route extending from the Black Sea through the country -inhabited by the Scythians proper, which Herodotus describes -as consisting of plains of rich soil, a true description of the -fertile steppes of Southern Russia. Then beyond this lay a -large area of rugged, stony land, inhabited by a people called -Argippaei, who, males and females alike, were born bald. -Their territory formed the lower part of a range of lofty mountains. -They were a peaceful and a harmless race, dwelling in -tents of white felt in the winter. It was easy to learn about -them and their country from the Scythian traders who held -intercourse with them, as likewise from the Greeks from the -factories of the Borysthenes, and from the other Greek trading -ports on the Euxine. No man could say of a truth what lay to -the north of the “Baldheads,” as on that side rose the lofty,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_69"></a>[69]</span> -impassable range of mountains, but Herodotus had heard (but -did not believe) that according to the “Baldheads” a race of -men having the feet of goats dwelt there<a id="FNanchor_100" href="#Footnote_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a>, a legend which -may be plausibly rationalized into a simple statement that a -race of mountain-folk, sure-footed as the wild goat, inhabited -the mountains. But on their east the existence of the Issedones -was an established fact.</p> - -<p>It is plain then that from a date lost in the distance of -time the gold of the Ural-Altaic region had been worked and -exported, and that consequently it was known and prized by all -the tribes who came within the influence of this wide district. -The Scythians in the fifth century before Christ were engaged in -regular trade with this region, and possessed abundant store of -the prized substance. This is shown by Herodotus in a very remarkable -passage wherein he describes the burial of a Scythian -king. After recounting the ceremonials he thus proceeds: “In -the open space round the body of the king they bury one of his -concubines, first killing her by strangling, and also his cupbearer, -his cook, his groom, his lacquey, his messenger, some of -his horses, firstlings of all his other possessions and some -golden cups; for they use neither silver nor copper<a id="FNanchor_101" href="#Footnote_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a>.” From -this passage we learn the interesting fact that the Scythians, -although possessing great quantities of gold and being able to -work it into articles of use, were yet ignorant of silver and -copper, which nevertheless, as we know now, exist in large -deposits in the Ural region. This is one of several cases -which we shall have to notice which go far to prove that the -knowledge and working of gold preceded not only that of silver, -but also that of copper.</p> - -<p>The remoteness of the age at which some branch of the -Turko-Tartar family who dwelt in the Altai region, first discovered -the treasures which Nature had stored up there, is -evidenced, as Schrader (following Klaproth) rightly points out -(p. 253), by the fact that among all the branches of that widespread -family of languages, from the Osmanli Turks on the -Dardanelles to the remote Samoyedes on the banks of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_70"></a>[70]</span> -Lena, the same word for gold is found in slightly varying forms, -<i>altun</i>, <i>altyn</i>, <i>iltyn</i>, etc., which can hardly be etymologically -separated from <i>Altai</i>, the locality from which it first became -known in far-off days. In the ancient graves of the Tschudi -in the Altaic districts, have been found abundance of gold -and silver utensils which according to Sjögren (Schrader 136), -exhibit the representation of the Griffin of Greek fable.</p> - -<p>Before passing further west into Europe we shall complete -our survey of the gold-fields of Western Asia. One of the most -beautiful of Greek stories hangs around the eastern end of -the Black Sea, where lay the land of Colchis, the goal which -Jason and his fellow Argonauts sought in their quest of the -Golden Fleece. In the Homeric poems the voyage of the ship -Argo is referred to as an event which had taken place in a past -generation. In the time of the geographer Strabo (<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 63-<span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> 21) -gold was still found in Colchis in a district occupied by a tribe -called Soanes, scarcely less famous for their personal uncleanliness -than their neighbours the Phtheirophagoi (Lice-eaters) who -bore this appellation from the filthiness of their habits. “It is -said that in their country the mountain torrents bring down -gold, and that the barbarians catch it in troughs perforated with -holes, and in skins with the fleece left on, from which circumstance -they say arose the fable of the Golden Fleece<a id="FNanchor_102" href="#Footnote_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Strabo’s explanation, which seems from his words to have -been the current one in his day, is extremely plausible, and -it appears highly probable that from the first dawn of history -the torrent-swept treasures of the Colchian land were well -known to the dwellers in both Asia Minor and Europe. But -this was not the only place in Asia Minor where gold was -found. We shall have occasion again and again to refer to the -Electrum of Sardis, obtained from the sand of the river -Pactolus which flowed down from Mount Tmolus. Scholars -are familiar with the account which Herodotus gives of these -gold deposits, but probably the most convenient thing for our -present purpose will be to quote Strabo’s enumeration of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_71"></a>[71]</span> -kings and potentates of antiquity in Asia and Europe who were -famous for their wealth, as he has added in each case the -source from which their wealth was obtained. The current -account as given by Callisthenes and others was, “that the -wealth of Tantalus and the Pelopidae was derived from the -mines of Phrygia and Sipylus, whilst the wealth of Cadmus -came from the mines of Thrace and Mount Pangaeum, but that -of Priam from the gold-mines at Astyra in the vicinity of -Abydus, of which even now there are still scanty remnants. -But the quantity of earth cast up is vast, and the diggings are -proofs of the ancient mining operations. But the wealth of -Midas came from the mines round Mount Bermion, whilst that -of Gyges and Alyattes and Croesus came from the mines in -Lydia. But in the district between Atarneus and Pergamus -there is a deserted city, with places containing worked-out -mines<a id="FNanchor_103" href="#Footnote_103" class="fnanchor">[103]</a>.” This passage gives a good picture of the gold-fields -which in ancient days were worked round the shores of the -Aegean.</p> - -<p>In the time of Strabo some of them were already worked -out and gave but a scanty yield, for he says, “above the territory -of the people of Abydus lies in the Troad Astyra, which now -belongs to the people of Abydus, a ruined city, but aforetime it -was independent, possessing gold-mines, now affording but a -scanty yield, as they are exhausted, just like the mines on -Mount Tmolus in the neighbourhood of the Pactolus.” The -latter district was still productive in the days of Herodotus, -who declared that the land of Lydia had few marvels to -chronicle except the gold-dust that is borne down from Tmolus<a id="FNanchor_104" href="#Footnote_104" class="fnanchor">[104]</a>. -Strabo too, elsewhere<a id="FNanchor_105" href="#Footnote_105" class="fnanchor">[105]</a>, when describing the river system of this -part of Asia Minor says, “the Pactolus flows from Tmolus, carrying -down that ancient gold-dust from which they say that the -famous wealth of Croesus and of his ancestors became renowned. -But now the gold-dust has failed, as has been stated.”</p> - -<p>It is interesting to observe that according to tradition the -wealth of Midas, the king of Phrygia, who is perhaps more<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_72"></a>[72]</span> -famous for his ass’s ears than his riches, came from the Bermion -Mount in that part of Macedonia, which was occupied in historical -times by the powerful tribe of the Bryges. This in itself is an -interesting indication of the intimate connection and close communication -between the countries and peoples on both sides of -the Dardanelles from the earliest epoch. There were on either -side lands gifted by nature with stores of wealth, as well as -possessing the portals of either continent. Hence the Hellespont -and Bosphorus have ever been the seat of rich cities, and -have ever been regarded amongst the greatest of prizes in the -struggles of the nations.</p> - -<p>It is possible that the ancient legend connecting the wealth -of Priam of Troy with the mines of Astyra, still worked in -Strabo’s days, may serve to explain the real cause of that -invasion of the Achaeans, which in all probability did occur, -although on what form or at what time we know not, and around -which there grew in the mouths of the rhapsodists the tale of -Troy Divine. In all our enumeration of gold-mines we do not -find a single one allotted to Greece Proper. The wealth of -Cadmus, the old Phoenician founder of Thebes, who was said to -have introduced the art of writing into Hellas, came, according -to Strabo’s tradition, from Thrace and the mines of Pangaeum. -As Cadmus is the typical wealthy potentate of Northern Greece, -so the line of Pelops are the typical wealthy potentates of -Peloponnesus. Their wealth, like that of Cadmus, is adventitious, -for it is the product of the mines of Phrygia and -Mount Sipylus. This is quite consistent with the statement of -Thucydides that “those Peloponnesians who have received the -clearest accounts by tradition from the men of former time -declare that Pelops first by means of the mass of wealth with -which he came from Asia to men who were poor, having acquired -for himself power although he was a new-comer, gave -occasion for the land to be called after him.”</p> - -<p>Of the three cities which are called rich in gold by Homer, -two are in Hellas proper, namely Mycenae in Peloponnesus, and -the Minyan Orchomenus in Boeotia. Gold has been found in -abundance in the prehistoric tombs at Mycenae, thus confirming -the ancient tradition. This gold, beyond doubt, was imported<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_73"></a>[73]</span> -from outside Greece, and we may without hesitation accept -the view of the Greeks themselves that it came from Asia -Minor. The story of the wealth of Cadmus, who came to -Boeotia as Pelops did to Peloponnesus is equally in harmony -with the Homeric tradition of a great wealthy city in Boeotia. -Dr Schliemann excavated the remains of Orchomenus, as he did -those of Mycenae, and of the ancient city at Hissarlik, but his -labours unfortunately gave no confirmation of the accounts of -the ancient wealth of Orchomenus. The reason probably was -that he came many centuries too late, as the great prehistoric -tomb known as the Treasure-house of the Minyans had long -since been repeatedly plundered and ransacked; not even one -bronze plate of those that once had probably lined its walls was -left. Still less likely was it that any vestige of gold would have -escaped the rapacity of the spoiler.</p> - -<p>The wealth of Northern Greece, then, by the earliest tradition -is connected with the rich gold regions of Thrace, which, if we -accept the same tradition, must have been worked from the -remotest age. The connection of the Cadmus legend with this -region points clearly to very early Phoenician trade in the days -when as yet the Phoenicians had undisputed mastery over the -Aegean Sea and the Hellenes had not begun to develop maritime -enterprize.</p> - -<p>As a matter of fact the name of the island of Thasos, which -lay off the Thracian shore, was directly ascribed to a Phoenician -settler. In the time of Herodotus the Thasians had a large -revenue both from the mines on the mainland and from those -in their own island. For he tells us that “from the gold-mines -of Scapte Hyle they had a revenue on the average of eighty -talents, and from those in Thasos itself a lesser one, but yet so -good that the Thasians enjoyed exemption from taxation on -produce and had a yearly revenue from the mainland and the -mines together of two hundred talents on the average, but when -the revenue was at its maximum, it was three hundred talents. -And I myself likewise saw these mines, and by far the most -wonderful were those which the Phoenicians who had colonized -the island along with Thasos had opened up, it was this Phoenician -<i>leader</i> Thasos who gave his name to the island. These<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_74"></a>[74]</span> -Phoenician mines lie in the part of Thasos between the district -of Aenyra and Coenyra; a great mountain has been upturned in -the search<a id="FNanchor_106" href="#Footnote_106" class="fnanchor">[106]</a>.” But the most famous mines on the mainland of -Thrace were those of Mount Pangaeum, Crenides, and Datum. -Strabo gives a succinct account of this wealthy district: -“There are other cities round the gulf of the Strymon, as -for instance Myrcinus, Argilus, Drabescus, Datum. The last-named -has very excellent and fruitful land and shipbuilding-yards, -and mines of gold, from which comes the proverb a -<i>Datum of riches</i>, just like <i>loads of wealth</i>.” And in another -passage he says that, “there are very numerous gold-mines at -Crenides<a id="FNanchor_107" href="#Footnote_107" class="fnanchor">[107]</a>. The city of Philippi is now seated close to the -Pangaeum Mount. And the Pangaeum Mount too has mines of -gold and silver, and so has the region both on the other side of -and on this side the Strymon as far as Paeonia. And they say -likewise that those who plough the Paeonian land find some -morsels of gold.”</p> - -<p>It was in a struggle with a Thracian tribe, the Edonians, -for the possession of the mines at Datum that Sophanes, the -son of Eutychides of Decelea, who had distinguished himself -above all other Athenians at the battle of Plataea, was killed<a id="FNanchor_108" href="#Footnote_108" class="fnanchor">[108]</a>. -The possession of Thasos and the coast of Thrace was not the -least important means by which Athens held her supremacy in -Greece, and when Philip (360-336 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) finally got supreme -control over all this region, and built his new capital of Philippi, -his path of conquest was henceforward made easy by the golden -Philippi, the <i>regale nomisma</i> of Horace,</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent18">Diffidit urbium</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Portas uir Macedo, et subruit aemulos</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Reges muneribus.</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse right">(<i>Carm.</i> <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 16. 13.)</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Passing on now to Southern Asia we find that there gold -was found in Carmania (the modern Kerman) on the Persian -Gulf. Strabo states on the authority of Onesicritus that in -Carmania a river carries down gold-dust, and that there is likewise -a mine of dug gold and of silver and of copper<a id="FNanchor_109" href="#Footnote_109" class="fnanchor">[109]</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_75"></a>[75]</span></p> - -<p>That there was gold in Arabia is placed beyond doubt by -various notices in antiquity. “He shall live and unto him shall -be given of the gold of Sheba (Saba<a id="FNanchor_110" href="#Footnote_110" class="fnanchor">[110]</a>),” says the Psalmist (Ps. -lxxii. 13), showing that the inhabitants of Palestine regarded -that country as a source from which the gold-supply came.</p> - -<p>Strabo and Diodorus give somewhat similar accounts of the -gold found along the Red Sea littoral. The former, describing -the land of the Nomads who live entirely by their camels, -which they employ for warfare and for travelling, and on whose -milk and flesh they subsist, says: “a river flows through -their land which carries down gold-dust, but they have not -skill to work it up. Now they are called Debae<a id="FNanchor_111" href="#Footnote_111" class="fnanchor">[111]</a>; some of them -are nomads, others are tillers of the soil. But I do not mention -the numerous names of the tribes on account of their uncertainty -and outlandish pronunciation. Next to them come -more civilized men, who inhabit a more genial soil. For it -is well supplied with both river and rain water. And dug -gold is produced in their land, not from dust but from nuggets -of gold, which do not need much refining. The smallest -nuggets are of the size of olive-stones (?) (πυρὴν), the medium-sized -are as big as medlars, and the largest are of the size of -chestnuts (?) (κάρυον). Having perforated these they pass a -thread of flax through them in alternation with transparent -stones and make themselves chains, and put them round their -necks and wrists. And they offer their gold for sale to their -neighbours likewise at a cheap rate, giving thrice as much gold -as they get copper in exchange and twice as much gold as they -get silver in exchange, for they have not the skill to work the -gold, and the metals which they receive in exchange are rare in -their country and more necessary for life<a id="FNanchor_112" href="#Footnote_112" class="fnanchor">[112]</a>.”</p> - -<p>This is a most interesting and important passage, as it -brings us face to face with primitive peoples in the very earliest -stage of the use of metals. The Nomads do not possess skill<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_76"></a>[76]</span> -enough to work the gold-dust of their river, although evidently -aware of its existence. Their neighbours being more favoured -by the nature of their gold deposit are able to use the metal in -the way in which we may with safety conclude that mankind -everywhere first employed it. Accustomed to use ornaments of -shells made into rude beads, they had no difficulty in adapting -for like use the small lumps of native gold. They readily -pierced the soft metal and making the nuggets into beads used -them to form their necklets and armlets. But although this -people had made some progress in the working of gold, they -were incapable of working copper and silver. We shall have to -return to this passage hereafter. Let us now hear Diodorus in -reference to the same region.</p> - -<p>He speaks of it in two separate places in his Collections, -first in his Second Book, when giving a brief general statement -of Arabia and its natural products, and again in the Third Book, -when he is giving a more detailed account of the tribes who -dwelt along the shores of the Red Sea or, as he called it, the -Arabian Gulf.</p> - -<p>The first passage runs thus (he has just been describing -certain quarries): “There are mines in Arabia likewise of the -gold that is termed ‘fireless.’ It is not refined down from gold-dust -as in other countries, but it is obtained straightway on -being dug up in size like unto chestnuts, and so fiery in colour -that the most precious stones when set in it by the craftsmen -make the most lovely of ornaments. And so great abundance -of all sorts of cattle is found in the country that many tribes -having chosen a pastoral life are able to get a comfortable -subsistence, and being completely furnished with the plenteousness -derived from their herds, they even have no need of corn -in addition<a id="FNanchor_113" href="#Footnote_113" class="fnanchor">[113]</a>.” In his second reference, after describing the hill -district, where lay the Mount Chabinus, densely clad with -forests of all kinds of trees he says: “The land which comes -next to the mountain region those Arabs called Debae inhabit. -Now these people are camel-keepers and make use of this -animal for all the most important affairs in life. For from -them, they fight against their enemies and conveying their<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_77"></a>[77]</span> -wares on the backs of these effect successfully all their business, -and they subsist by drinking their milk, and they range over -the whole region on their fleet camels. Now about midway -in their land flows a river which brings down so much shining -gold-dust that the alluvial mud deposited at its mouth positively -glitters. Now the natives are completely unskilled in the -working of the gold, but they are hospitable to strangers, not to -all comers, but to those alone who come from Boeotia<a id="FNanchor_114" href="#Footnote_114" class="fnanchor">[114]</a> and -Peloponnesus because of a certain ancient affinity of Heracles -with their nation, a tradition of which in legendary fashion -they relate they have received from their forefathers. The -next region is settled by the Alilaean and Gasandan Arabs, not -being torrid, like those near it, inasmuch as it is often overcast -with soft dense clouds, and from these arise snowstorms and -seasonable rains which make the summer season temperate. -And the land is capable of producing everything and surpasses -in excellence, yet it does not meet with proper attention, owing -to the ignorance of the folk. And finding gold in the natural -cavities in the earth they collect it in quantities, not that which -is obtained by fusion from gold-dust, but that which is native -and from the circumstance called ‘fireless.’ And as to size the -smallest piece found is similar to an olive-stone, whilst the -largest is not much less than a walnut. And they wear it -round their wrists and necks when it is perforated, the nuggets -alternating with transparent stones. But since this kind of -metal is plentiful with them, but copper and iron are scarce, -they barter these wares with the traders at an equal rate<a id="FNanchor_115" href="#Footnote_115" class="fnanchor">[115]</a>.” -Strabo probably got his information from Artemidorus, who is -his chief authority for everything connected with the Red Sea. -Diodorus, whose authority is Agatharchides, substantially agrees -with Strabo in all the main facts, such as the name of the tribe -who cannot work up the gold-dust, whilst he adds the names of -the Alilaeans and Gasandans, which are not given by Strabo<a id="FNanchor_116" href="#Footnote_116" class="fnanchor">[116]</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_78"></a>[78]</span></p> - -<p>From Arabia we naturally pass on to Egypt. We have -already seen that the archaeologists assign reasons for supposing -that the Egyptians were acquainted with gold from the -remotest ages. The Egyptian word for gold is <i>nub</i>, from which -the name Nubia, <i>i.e.</i> <i>El Dorado</i>, is commonly derived. Having -fresh in our minds the interesting fact noticed above (<a href="#Page_69">p. 69</a>) -that the universal word for gold in use amongst the Turko-Tartaric -races is probably derived from the Altai, the source -from which they first got the metal, we are tempted to reverse -the ordinary doctrine, and to derive the Egyptian name for -gold from that of the region whence they first obtained it. -The principle of naming products after the region or place -from which they have been first brought is too well known -to need illustration. Instances are familiar in all languages: -<i>Cappadocae</i>, the Latin name for lettuce; <i>Persica</i> from which -has come our <i>peach</i>, through the French; Indian corn, india-rubber, -etc. are sufficient examples. The negroes of Eastern -Africa call a certain kind of cloth <i>Merikano</i>, <i>i.e.</i> American. -Perhaps, then, the name <i>nub</i> is rather a word of this class, and -Nubia is not like Gold Coast, which belongs to the category -of names formed by epithets applied in consequence of some -article already well known having been found there.</p> - -<p>Strabo (p. 821), describing Meroe, that large and fertile -island formed by the Nile, says: “the island has many -great mountains, and some of its inhabitants are shepherds, -some hunters, and some husbandmen. And there are likewise -copper-diggings and iron-works, and gold-mines, and varieties -of valuable marbles. It is shut off from Libya by great sands,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_79"></a>[79]</span> -from Arabia by unbroken heights, and from the upper region -from the south by the junctions of the rivers, Astaboras, Astapus, -and Astasobus. On the north the Nile flows all the way -to Egypt in that tortuous fashion which I have described.” This -island virtually coincides with the modern province of Atbar. -It is probably to this same region that Diodorus refers in his -famous description of the Egyptian gold-mining. Although the -passage is one of considerable length, it is of such interest and -importance that it is perhaps advisable to give it in full: -“On the confines of Egypt, Arabia which marches with it, and -Ethiopia is a spot possessed of many great mines of gold, where -the gold is got together with much suffering and expense. -Since the earth is black and has lodes and veins of quartz of -surpassing whiteness, and which excel in brilliancy all those -natural objects which are noted for their lustre, those who are -in charge of the mining works by the numbers of the labourers -prepare the gold. For the kings of Egypt collect together and -consign to the gold-mines those who have been condemned for -crime, and who have been made captive in war, and furthermore -those who have been ruined by false slanders, and who -owing to an outburst of anger have been cast into prison, sometimes -only themselves, but sometimes likewise with all their -kindred, at one and the same time both exacting punishment -from those who have been condemned, and obtaining great -revenues by means of those who are engaged in the labour. -Those who have been consigned to the mines, being many in -number and all bound with fetters, toil at their tasks continuously -both by day and all night long, getting no rest, and -jealously kept from all escape. For guards composed of foreign -soldiers, and who speak languages which differ from theirs, are -set over them, so that no one is able by association or any kindly -intercourse to corrupt any one of the warders. The hardest of -the earth which contains the gold they burn with a good deal -of fire, and make soft, and work it with their hands, but the -soft rock and that which can easily yield to stone chisels or iron -is worked down by thousands of hapless beings. And the craftsman -who distinguishes the stone takes the lead in the whole -process, and he gives instructions to the workmen. And of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_80"></a>[80]</span> -those who have been appointed to this misery those who surpass -in bodily strength cut with iron pickaxes the glittering -rock, not by bringing skill to bear upon their tasks, but by mere -brute force, and they hew out galleries, not in a straight line, -but according to the vein of the glittering rock. They then -living in darkness owing to the bends and twists in the pits -carry about lamps fitted on their foreheads, and changing in -many ways the posture of their bodies according to the peculiarity -of the rock throw down on the floor the fragments that -are being hewn, and this they do unceasingly under the severity -and stripes of an overseer. But the boys who have not yet -reached manhood going in through the shafts into the excavations -in the rock, laboriously cast up the rock that is being -thrown down bit by bit, and convey it to the place outside the -mouth of the shaft into the light. But the men who are more -than thirty years old take a fixed measure of the quarried -stone, and pound it in stone mortars with iron pestles until -they reduce it to the size of a vetch. From these the women -and older men receive the stone now reduced to pieces the size -of a vetch, and as there is a considerable number of mills there -in a row, they cast the stone upon them, they stand beside -them at the handle in threes or twos, they grind until they -have reduced the measure given them to the fineness of -wheaten flour. And since they are all regardless of their -persons, and have not a garment to cover their nakedness, no -one who saw them could refrain from pitying the hapless -creatures owing to their excessive misery. For there is absolutely -no consideration nor relaxation for sick, or maimed, for -aged man, or weak woman, but all are forced to toil on at -their tasks until, worn out by their miseries, they die amid -their toils. Wherefore the unhappy beings regard the future -as more to be dreaded than the present owing to the excess of -punishment, and expect death as more to be longed for than -life.</p> - -<p>“But finally the craftsmen get the ground-up stone, and -complete the process. For they rub the ground-up quartz on -a broad board placed on a slight incline, pouring water on it. -Then the earthy part of it, melting away by the action of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_81"></a>[81]</span> -liquid, flows down along the sloping board, but the part that -contains the gold adheres to the board owing to its weight. -Repeating this process frequently at first with their hands -they gently rub it, but after this pressing it lightly with delicate -sponges they take up by these means the soft and earthy -part until the gold-dust is left in a state of purity.</p> - -<p>“Finally other craftsmen, taking over the collected gold -by measure and weight, put it into earthenware pots, and -in proportion to the amount they put in a piece of lead and -lumps of salt and furthermore a small quantity of tin, and -they add barley bran. Then having made a well-fitted cover -and having laboriously smeared it over with mud, they bake -it in kilns for five days and as many nights continuously. -Then after letting it cool, they find none of the other things -in the vessels, but get the gold in a pure state with but a -slight reduction in quantity. With so many and so great sufferings -is the production of gold at the frontiers of Egypt completed. -For Nature herself makes it plain, I think, that gold is -produced with toil, is guarded with difficulty, is most eagerly -sought for, and is enjoyed with mixed pleasure and pain. The -discovery of these mines is of very ancient date, inasmuch as it -was made known by the ancient kings<a id="FNanchor_117" href="#Footnote_117" class="fnanchor">[117]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Such then is the vivid picture drawn by the humane -Diodorus of the horrible torments of the unhappy bondsmen -who worked these famous mines, sufferings only to be paralleled -by the miseries endured by the miners in Spain under -Roman rule, by the Indians in the mines of Peru under the -yoke of the Spaniard, and by the helpless sufferers under -Muscovite cruelty who at this hour endure a living death in -the mines of Siberia.</p> - -<p>For our immediate purpose it is interesting to notice that -the Egyptians from a far back time obtained an abundant -supply of gold from the confines of their own territory, and -doubtless drew a further supply from those rich gold districts -along the Red Sea of which we have just spoken.</p> - -<p>Whilst in the latter case we had a most instructive instance -of the first attempts to utilize the metals made by men, so in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_82"></a>[82]</span> -the case of Egypt we find an example of the most elaborate and -scientific process of gold-mining known to the ancients. For -we shall find that the process employed in Spain by the -Romans for refining the crude gold was not nearly so elaborate -as that employed by the Egyptians.</p> - -<p>It is of course quite possible that supplies of gold either -in the form of dust or of rings may have reached Egypt from -the interior of Africa, but of that we have not as far as I am -aware any historical record. For the negroes who are depicted -in Egyptian paintings bringing tribute of gold rings might have -brought them from Nubia or from a region on the coast of the -Mediterranean further west. It is indeed a fact of great interest -that down to the present day gold in the shape of rings or links -is brought to Massowah on the Red Sea from Sennaar (Nubia). -This is the best of the three qualities which reach Massowah; -the second quality is Abyssinian gold, “in grains or beads,” and -the third is also Abyssinian gold “in ingots.” Thus two most -ancient ways of using gold are employed in this region still, for -the gold in grains or beads reminds us at once of the story of -its being employed by the Debae to form necklaces<a id="FNanchor_118" href="#Footnote_118" class="fnanchor">[118]</a>.</p> - -<p>Once more let us advance westward, and notice the last gold-field -on the continent of Africa. That gold was obtained by the -Carthaginians from a district in North Africa is put beyond doubt -by a passage of Herodotus (<span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 195), who, after describing a certain -people called the Gyzantes, who coloured themselves red with -raddle, and ate apes, says that “the Carthaginians declare that -opposite this people lies an island named Cyraunis, two hundred -stades long (25 miles) but narrow in breadth, with a crossing from -the mainland; the island is full of olives and vines, and there -is a lake in it from which the native maidens by means of birds’ -feathers smeared with pitch take up gold dust out of the silt.” -Whatever may be the exact spot meant on the coast of the -Libyan nomads we may at least conclude that there is a distinct -indication that the Carthaginians were well acquainted with -gold deposits in this quarter. Whether or not the Carthaginians -and in later times the Romans may have obtained by caravans -across the desert supplies of gold from the great gold-bearing<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_83"></a>[83]</span> -regions of West Africa, we have no means of judging, but it is -on the whole probable that they did. The voyage of Hanno, -the Carthaginian admiral, along the western side of Africa can -hardly have failed to make known to them the existence of rich -gold fields, even if they had been previously ignorant of them; -but it is still more likely that it was the knowledge of such an -Eldorado far away beyond the great Sahara that induced them -to send out the expedition.</p> - -<p>It has often happened in the history of both ancient and -modern commerce that the products of a certain region are -known long before travellers or merchants from civilized lands -have ever reached the country that produces them. Thus the -merchants of Marseilles were probably familiar with the tin -brought from Devon and Cornwall across Gaul before the -famous Pytheas ever coasted round Spain and Gaul and visited -our shores. Again, in modern times, it is only within the last -thirty years that the source of that most familiar of drugs, -Turkey rhubarb, has been discovered.</p> - -<p>By whatever means they may have learned its existence -the following passage of Herodotus (<span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 196) puts it beyond all -doubt that the Carthaginians in the fifth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> traded -by sea for gold to the west coast of Africa, and that consequently -the savages of that region must have been long acquainted -with the metal: “The Carthaginians,” he says, “also -relate the following: there is a country in Libya and a nation -beyond the Pillars of Heracles, which they are wont to visit, -where they no sooner arrive than forthwith they unlade their -wares, and having disposed them after an orderly fashion along -the beach, leave them and returning aboard their ships, raise a -great smoke. The natives, when they see the smoke, come -down to the shore, and laying out to view so much gold as they -think the worth of the wares, withdraw to a distance. The -Carthaginians upon this come ashore and look; if they think -the gold enough, they take it and go their way, but if it does -not seem to them sufficient, they go aboard once more and wait -patiently. Then the others approach and add to their gold, -till the Carthaginians are content. Neither party deals unfairly -with the other, for they themselves never touch the gold until<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_84"></a>[84]</span> -it comes up to the worth of the goods, nor do the natives ever -carry off the goods till the gold is taken away<a id="FNanchor_119" href="#Footnote_119" class="fnanchor">[119]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Let us now retrace our steps to Europe and take up our -investigation at the point from which we diverged into Asia. -We found Thrace and Thasos to have been for many ages an -inexhaustible source of gold. We must now pass on from the -Balkan peninsula to the Italian.</p> - -<p>Although according to Helbig (<i>Die Italiker in der Poebene</i>, -p. 21) no traces of gold have as yet been found in the lake-dwellings -of Northern Italy, which were erected and occupied by the -Umbrians, who occupied all that region until conquered by the -Etruscans<a id="FNanchor_120" href="#Footnote_120" class="fnanchor">[120]</a>, we cannot take this negative evidence as at all conclusive -proof that the inhabitants of these dwellings were -utterly ignorant of gold and its use. Helbig has shown that -the inhabitants of the lake-dwellings were in the bronze age at -the time of the Etruscan conquest, which can be hardly placed -later than <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 1100. Bronze implements are found in the -remains. But as a matter of fact ornaments of gold are not -generally found in the ruins of the habitations of the living, -but rather in the tombs of the dead. That certainly has been -the case at Mycenae, at Spata, on Mount Hymettus in Attica, -in the island of Thera, and at Ialysus in Rhodes. Contrast -the wealth of gold ornaments found in the tombs at Mycenae -with the complete absence of that metal in the palace at -Tiryns. Of course it may be urged on the other side that at -Hissarlik amid the ruins of a burnt city great treasure in gold -and silver has been found, and we must undoubtedly admit that -in certain cases such as that of a city suddenly destroyed by a -fire before there was time either for the owners to remove or the -enemy to pillage the valuables therein, there is the possibility of -finding such remains. If we were to apply this negative method -consistently we must conclude that Orchomenus, which Homer -called “rich in gold,” was inhabited by men who were not yet -acquainted with that metal, and we should I believe be constrained -to arrive at the same conclusion in the case of Nineveh<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_85"></a>[85]</span> -and Babylon. At least Sir Henry Layard discovered scarcely -a fragment of any articles of gold in the course of his excavations -on the site of those two cities, which nevertheless -we have the strongest grounds for believing were amongst the -wealthiest of those of ancient days. In dealing with the question -of Northern Italy we cannot separate it from the contiguous -region of Switzerland or Helvetia. Dr Keller, in his -well-known work on the Lake-dwellings (p. 459), gives instances -where gold has been found in lake-dwellings amongst remains -that indicated the owners to have been in the bronze period. -Of course it may be said and said with truth that the lake-dwellings -of Switzerland continued to be occupied down to a -time posterior to those found in the Aemilia. But when we find -that a gold ornament has been found in a dwelling of neolithic -age, we have a positive proof not simply of the knowledge, but -probably of the skill requisite to manufacture the metal. If -any upholder of the negative method urges that gold has been -found very sparingly in these lacustrine dwellings, let him -remember that the existence of one single object of gold in -these remains is sufficient to demolish all his argument. The -objects found in the lakes are chiefly débris, the offal of the -house, bones of animals, which had formed the food of the -former owners, broken and disused implements, and such like. -Ornaments of gold were not likely to have been flung into the -bottom of the lake for the purpose of getting rid of them. Such -precious articles were probably handed down with great care -from generation to generation, and possibly in later days gold -that once graced the neck or arms of prehistoric men and -women has reappeared time after time in the form of coins, -first the rude imitations of the staters of Philip of Macedon, -again under the form of Roman <i>aurei</i>, and perhaps even -bore the impress of some mediaeval monarch at a later time. -There have been issues of coins both in ancient and modern -times of which not a single specimen is at present known; -yet if any one were to argue from this against the truth -of the documentary evidence, the spade of a peasant by -turning up a single coin might on the moment wreck all -his logic. The sum of positive knowledge which we obtain<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_86"></a>[86]</span> -from this discussion is therefore that some people who inhabited -Switzerland in what is called the neolithic age (a -vague and often misleading phrase) were acquainted with the -use of gold ornaments. Could we but fix the inferior limits of -this neolithic age, we should at least obtain an approximate -date before which gold was already known. But it is most -probable that stone, bronze and even iron long continued to be -used side by side in the same areas. The man who had no -articles to barter for bronze continued to use stone implements -of his own manufacture, whilst his more fortunate coeval used -weapons made of the superior but more costly material.</p> - -<p>Granting now that bronze implements made their way -from the Mediterranean into the middle and north of Europe, -brought most likely by traders from the more civilized shores -of the Aegean, let us ask ourselves how did the men of -the neolithic stage obtain them. Did the kindly Phoenician -trader generously bestow as free gifts these articles on the barbarians -of the West? Does the trader of today among the isles -of Melanesia lavish for mere thanks his wares upon the natives -who gather round him on the beach? In Homer those Phoenician -shipmen are described by an epithet, which by the mildest -interpretation means <i>knaves</i>. The men who brought bronze -got some valuable objects in exchange for it. Such objects -must be portable: slaves, gold, silver, copper, tin, skins and furs -would probably form the main objects of barter. If we make -use of the philological method of Schrader and his school, there -can be no doubt that copper was known to the Italians before -ever a Phoenician keel grated against their shores, for the -Latin <i>aes</i> is as we said a true Aryan word. There is no -suspicion of borrowing here from the Semitic as there is in the -case of the Greek <i>chalkos</i>. In such a case as this the philological -argument has some distinct force; for whilst, as I -argued, it is easy to realize a state of things under which a -native name for a particular substance already known may -give place to a foreign one, on the other hand it is difficult -to see how a people who are receiving such a substance for the -first time from foreigners, and who would therefore naturally -apply to it a term obtained from the foreigners’ language, could<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_87"></a>[87]</span> -afterwards replace this name by one which is found applied to -the same substance by a cognate people dwelling thousands of -miles away from them. The Italians therefore probably had copper -from a very early age. But we have already seen good reason -for believing that a knowledge of gold precedes that of copper -whenever both are found in the same area. We saw that the -Scythians, who got copious store of gold from the Ural-Altai -region, made no use of copper in the fifth century before our -era, although copper is found abundantly in the same area. -From this we may infer with some probability that the Italian -stock were acquainted with gold sooner than with copper. We -may apply the same argument to gold in Italy as we did to -<i>copper</i>. <i>Aurum</i> (older <i>ausum</i>), the Latin word for gold, is -plainly not borrowed, as is perhaps the Greek <i>chrysos</i>, from the -Semites. Hence it cannot be maintained that it was only with -the Phoenicians that the knowledge of gold reached Italy.</p> - -<p>It now only remains for us to see if the Italians had the -means within their reach of discovering gold. No one I suppose -will dispute that the Italian stock entered the peninsula from -the north, driving before them older occupants. They must -then have either entered Italy by the head of the Adriatic, -coming round from the valleys of the Balkan peninsula, or -through the Alpine passes. If they came from the first quarter -it is impossible to suppose that a people in close contact with -the tribes who occupied the Balkan peninsula, and who as -we have seen above must have been acquainted with gold -from a remote time, could have remained without a knowledge -of the metal. On the other hand it will be seen from the -following evidence that there was every opportunity for the -discovery of gold in the Alpine valleys. Strabo gives various -notices of the gold workings of this region. “Polybius states -that in his own day in the vicinity of Aquileia, in the territory -of the Taurisci of Noricum, was found a gold mine so productive -that on clearing away the surface dirt to a depth of two feet -gold which could be dug was straightway found, and that the pit -did not exceed fifteen feet, and that part of the gold was pure -on the spot, being the size of a bean or a lupin, only one-eighth -being lost in refining, whilst some of it required a process of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_88"></a>[88]</span> -smelting which, though more elaborate, was still very remunerative. -When the Italians worked them along with the barbarians -for a space of two months, straightway gold coin went -down one-third in value throughout the whole of Italy; but -when the Taurisci became aware of this they expelled their -partners and held the monopoly. But now all the gold mines -are in the hands of the Romans. And there too, just as in -Iberia, the rivers in addition to the dug gold produce gold dust, -but not in such quantities<a id="FNanchor_121" href="#Footnote_121" class="fnanchor">[121]</a>.”</p> - -<p>In another passage, speaking of the town of Noreia in Noricum, -he says “this district possesses productive gold-washings -and iron-works<a id="FNanchor_122" href="#Footnote_122" class="fnanchor">[122]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Moving on again westwards, we easily find strong evidence -of active gold-mining in the Alpine regions. All the -granite strata on the southern side of the High Alps from the -Simplon to Mont Blanc are auriferous. Not only have extensive -mining operations been carried on at different points down -almost to the present day, but the mines were beyond all doubt -vigorously worked, not merely in Roman but in pre-Roman -days. In the district of La Besse, at the foot of Mont Grand -on the right bank of the Cervo between Biella and Ivrea, are -still to be seen very extensive traces of gold washings and gold -diggings<a id="FNanchor_123" href="#Footnote_123" class="fnanchor">[123]</a>. These are no other than the once famous mines of -Victumulae alluded to by Strabo when, in speaking of this -region, he says that “there is not now as much attention bestowed -on the mines as there used to be, because the mines -in the country of the transalpine Kelts and in Spain are -more profitable, but formerly they were well worked, since at -Vercelli there was a gold-digging. Vercelli is a village near -Ictumulae which is itself a village, and both of them are in -the vicinity of Placentia<a id="FNanchor_124" href="#Footnote_124" class="fnanchor">[124]</a>.” So important were these mines that -Pliny<a id="FNanchor_125" href="#Footnote_125" class="fnanchor">[125]</a> says there existed a Censorian law relating to them, by<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_89"></a>[89]</span> -which it was provided that the capitalists who farmed the -mines were not to employ more than 5000 workmen.</p> - -<p>There are also traces of ancient gold-washings on the -Cervo, on the Evenson, a small stream which comes down -from Monte Rosa, and which falls into the Doria at Bardo, -and likewise on the Doria itself from Bardo down to its junction -with the Po. This latter region was anciently the territory -of the powerful and wealthy tribe of the Salassi. The traces I -speak of are beyond doubt the remains of the gold-workings -described by Strabo. “The territory of the Salassi contains gold -mines, which the Salassi, when aforetime they were strong, kept -possession of, just as they had likewise the control of the passes -(<i>i.e.</i> the Great and Little St Bernard). The river Durias -(Doria) gave them very great assistance in their gold washing, -and on this account dividing over many places the water into -many side-channels they used to empty completely the main -bed of the river.</p> - -<p>“This was of service to them in their quest of gold, but -it did harm to the cultivators of the plains below, who were -being deprived of the means of irrigation, since the river was -not able to water their land from the others having possession -of the stream in its upper course. From this cause there -were incessant wars between the two peoples. But when the -Romans got the mastery the Salassi were expelled from the -gold-mines and from their territory, but still being in possession -of the mountain, they used to sell the water to the -farmers who had hired the gold-mines, and with whom there -were constant quarrels because of the grasping conduct of the -contractors<a id="FNanchor_126" href="#Footnote_126" class="fnanchor">[126]</a>.” This passage shows plainly that for a very long -period before the Roman Conquest the Salassi had not merely -worked the gold of their mountains, but had attained to very -considerable engineering skill in so doing. Further, in this -region have been found gold coins bearing the inscriptions -<i>Prikou</i>, etc. in one of the North Etruscan alphabets. These -coins were most probably struck by the Salassi, who were probably -not Kelts, but a remnant of the ancient Rhaetian stock<a id="FNanchor_127" href="#Footnote_127" class="fnanchor">[127]</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_90"></a>[90]</span></p> - -<p>Passing northwards by the Pennine Alps, the regular road -in ancient days from Italy into Switzerland, into the valley of -the Rhone, the so-called <i>Vallis Poenina</i>, the modern Canton of -Valais, we come to the Helvetii, whom Posidonius of Apamea, -the famous Stoic philosopher who travelled in Western Europe -about 100-90 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, describes as “wealthy in gold.” This gold -was probably derived from the same Alpine region. The Helvetii -struck both silver coins in imitation of the silver coins of -Massalia with the Lion type, and gold ones after the type of -Philip’s staters. We may now pass on to Gaul Proper, many -peoples of which were famous for their wealth, especially the -Arverni, who have left their name in Auvergne, and the Tectosages, -whose chief town was Tolosa (Toulouse). The former, -whose original home was on the upper waters of the Loire, -probably had no gold in their native mountains (for if they had, -Strabo would hardly have failed to mention it), but in the -second century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> they became the most powerful state of -Central and Southern Gaul, for “they extended their dominion -even as far as Narbo (Narbonne) and the borders of the territory -of Massalia (Marseilles), and they likewise had the control -of all the tribes as far as the Pyrenees, and as far as the Ocean -and the Rhine. And it is said that Luerius, the father of -Bituitus, who fought against Maximus and Domitius (121 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), -came to such a pitch of wealth and luxury that on one occasion, -making a display of his riches to his friends, he drove on a -waggon through a plain sowing broadcast gold and silver -coin, while his friends followed him gathering it up<a id="FNanchor_128" href="#Footnote_128" class="fnanchor">[128]</a>.” It -was the Arverni who first<a id="FNanchor_129" href="#Footnote_129" class="fnanchor">[129]</a> struck gold coins in imitation -of the gold staters of Philip II., a fact explained by the -passage just quoted, which shows that their empire extended -up to the frontiers of the great Greek emporium of Massalia, -by which they would be brought into immediate contact with -all kinds of Greek currency; furthermore their conquests put -them in possession of those districts where we have direct -evidence of the existence of gold fields<a id="FNanchor_130" href="#Footnote_130" class="fnanchor">[130]</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_91"></a>[91]</span></p> - -<p>Again Strabo says: “The Tectosages adjoin the Pyrenees, -and to a slight extent they likewise touch upon the northern -side of the Cevennes (Κέμμενα), and they occupy a land rich -in gold<a id="FNanchor_131" href="#Footnote_131" class="fnanchor">[131]</a>.” It is no doubt with reference to the same region -that Strabo, whilst describing the Spanish gold-mines, remarks -incidentally that “the Gauls advance the claims of the mines -in their country, both those in the Cevenne mountain and -at the foot of the Pyrenees, themselves<a id="FNanchor_132" href="#Footnote_132" class="fnanchor">[132]</a>.” Beyond doubt -from those mines came “the gold of Tolosa,” those vast treasures -which were plundered by the Roman General Caepio. -They were said to have amounted to fifteen thousand talents -of unwrought gold and silver. There was a current story -that, for laying sacrilegious hands on the consecrated treasure, -misfortune dogged the steps of Caepio and his family, he himself -dying in exile and his daughters, after lives of degradation, -coming to a shameful end. This was the account given by -one Timagenes, who also stated that the treasure of Toulouse -was part of the spoil taken by the Gauls from the temple of -Delphi in 279 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, the Tectosages as he alleged having formed -part of the invading host. This story doubtless is due to -the circumstance that one of the three tribes of Gauls who -settled in Asia Minor (the “foolish Galatians” of St Paul’s -Epistle) was called by the same name as the Tectosages of Gaul -(the other two being called Trocmi and Tolistobōgii). The -treasures were partly stored in shrines or sacred enclosures, -partly deposited in the sacred lakes. There can be little doubt -that Posidonius was right (as Strabo also thought) in considering -them ancient native offerings, not spoils of war. He put forward -the good argument that at the time of the attack on Delphi the -temple there was bare of treasure, as it had been plundered by -the Phocians in the Sacred War some seventy years before, that -any treasure that remained was distributed among many, and that -it was not likely that any of the Gauls returned to their own -land, since after their retreat from Greece they broke up and -were scattered into various regions. This is confirmed by what -Diodorus tells us in a remarkable chapter: “The Kelts of the -interior have a singular peculiarity with respect to the sacred<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_92"></a>[92]</span> -enclosures of the gods. For in the temples and sacred enclosures -consecrated in their country gold is deposited in -quantities, and not one of the natives touches it owing to superstition, -although the Kelts are excessively avaricious<a id="FNanchor_133" href="#Footnote_133" class="fnanchor">[133]</a>.” This -passage seems to explain thoroughly the real nature of the -treasures of Tolosa; they were doubtless ancient votive offerings -under a taboo, not, as Timagenes imagined, some of the treasure -of Delphi, dedicated to appease the wrath of Apollo, with -additions from the private resources of the Tectosages themselves. -In the same chapter Diodorus says that “there is no -silver at all found in Gaul, but gold in abundance, of which the -natives get supplied without mining or hardship. The currents -of the rivers, which are tortuous in their course, beat against -the banks formed by the adjacent mountains, and bursting away -considerable hills, fill them with gold dust. This the persons -who are engaged in the workings collect, and they grind or -break up the lumps which contain the gold dust. Then -having washed away the earthy part with water, they transfer -the gold to furnaces for smelting. In this fashion heaping up -quantities of gold, not only the women but likewise the men -employ it for adornment. For they wear bracelets round -their wrists and arms, and thick torques of solid gold round -their necks and rings of remarkable size, and moreover breastplates -of gold.” The statement regarding silver is not accurate, -as the more careful and trustworthy Strabo mentions -silver mines in various places in Gaul. Finally, in the land -of the Tarbelli, an Iberian tribe of Aquitania, who dwelt in -the extreme south-west corner of Aquitania on the shore of -the Bay of Biscay, there were extremely productive gold-mines. -“For in spots dug only to a shallow depth are found plates of -gold that sometimes require little refining, and the rest consists -of dust and nuggets which involve but little working<a id="FNanchor_134" href="#Footnote_134" class="fnanchor">[134]</a>.”</p> - -<p>I have purposely gone somewhat minutely into the gold-fields -of ancient Gaul, and the story of the sacred treasures. -For I think that no one who considers carefully the statements -of Posidonius, Strabo, and Diodorus, can help regarding as -wholly inaccurate the conclusion of Schrader, based on the Irish<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_93"></a>[93]</span> -word <i>or</i>, that the Keltic peoples were not acquainted with gold -until the fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> The sacred treasures point to -a ceremonial consecration of gold extending back through untold -ages.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;" id="figure14"> -<img src="images/figure14.jpg" width="400" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 14. Ancient British Coins.</span> A. Coin of Iceni. -B. Common type with plain obverse<a id="FNanchor_135" href="#Footnote_135" class="fnanchor">[135]</a>.</p> -</div> - -<p>It must also be borne in mind that in the treasure of Tolosa -there was a good proportion of silver which probably came -from the silver mines mentioned by Strabo<a id="FNanchor_136" href="#Footnote_136" class="fnanchor">[136]</a> as existing in the land -of the Ruteni and Gabales (Γαβάλεις), two peoples of Aquitania, -whose names are represented by the modern <i>Rovergue</i> and -<i>Gevaudan</i>. As the working of silver is so much later than -that of gold, it is impossible to believe that if the Gauls in -Italy only learnt the use of gold in the 4th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> we -should find consecrated treasures of silver, evidently of ancient -date, at Tolosa in the time of Servilius Caepio. It is also important -to observe that it is among the Iberians of Aquitania, -not the Kelts, that we find silver mines being worked. The -former people were entirely free from Roman influence, and we -shall see shortly that there is the strongest evidence for believing -that the Iberians south of the Pyrenees were acquainted not -merely with gold but with silver, centuries before ever Brennus -stood in the Roman Forum. But before we cross the Pyrenees, -we shall conclude our survey of the ancient gold fields of -Europe in the north-west by glancing briefly at Britain. When -Julius Caesar invaded the island he found the natives using -gold not simply as ornaments, but in the shape of coins, for he -says, “They have great numbers of cattle, they use for money<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_94"></a>[94]</span> -either bronze, or coins of gold, or rods of iron of a fixed -standard of weight. Tin is produced there in the inland, iron -in the coast districts, but the supply of the latter is scanty; the -copper which they use is imported<a id="FNanchor_137" href="#Footnote_137" class="fnanchor">[137]</a>.” Caesar’s statement is -fully confirmed by the existence of ancient British coins, chiefly -in gold and copper; although silver coins are likewise found, -they are for the most part imitations of the types of Roman -denarii, whilst the gold are the descendants of the Philippus, -from which the Gauls got their chief gold type. All the -Britains did not employ coins, but only the Belgic tribes in the -south and east, who had crossed over at a comparatively late -period. About a century before our era a king of the Suessiones -(<i>Soissons</i>) by name Divitiacus ruled over all Northern France -and a large part of Britain<a id="FNanchor_138" href="#Footnote_138" class="fnanchor">[138]</a>. Coins similar in type and weight -are found on both sides of the Channel, indeed the French -numismatists claim them as struck in Gaul, whilst their English -brethren have maintained that they are of British origin. Those -found in Kent are regarded by Dr Evans, in his <i>Coins of the -Ancient Britons</i>, as the prototypes of the whole British series. -Hence we may infer that the Belgic invaders brought the -Philippus type of coin into Britain, as it is most probable that -the time when the same coins were in circulation on both sides -of the Straits of Dover corresponds with the period when -Divitiacus held sway on both sides of the sea<a id="FNanchor_139" href="#Footnote_139" class="fnanchor">[139]</a>. Strabo substantiates -Caesar’s account; “It (Britain) produces wheat and -cattle, and gold and silver and iron. These are exported from -it, also hides and slaves and good hunting dogs. But the -Kelts employ even for their wars these, and their own native -dogs<a id="FNanchor_140" href="#Footnote_140" class="fnanchor">[140]</a>.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_95"></a>[95]</span></p> - -<p>There can therefore be no doubt that gold was found in -Britain although we are not told in what particular part. -Gold is still found in Wales and in several parts of Scotland, -although not in sufficient quantity to be worth working. Two -observations remain to be made on the statements of Caesar -and Strabo. Caesar tells us definitely that whilst they used -copper as money, they had to import that metal. He omits -all mention of silver, whilst Strabo, writing half-a-century -later, speaks of it as a British product. I have remarked -already that the silver coins of the Britons are all late, and -exhibit as a rule Roman influence. It would therefore seem as -if the working of silver had developed some time after Caesar’s -invasions. Thus once more we have an instance of gold in full -use long before silver. But what is still more important, though -the Britons are in the bronze period and are actually using -copper money, they have to import that metal, although copper -is actually found native in Cornwall. It still remained undiscovered -in Strabo’s time to judge by his silence, but as he -is equally silent about tin, which was known long before, we -cannot press the argument <i>ex silentio</i>. However, it is of great -importance to find a people who possess gold and copper in a -native state, already working the gold long before they have even -discovered the copper. This is completely in harmony with -what we have already seen in the case of the Scythians and -Arabs of the Red Sea coasts. At a later stage we shall have to -notice the rods or bars of iron used as currency by the Britons -in connection with a similar practice elsewhere.</p> - -<p>The writers of the classical age have left us no information -respecting Ireland save that the people practised polyandry, -and ate each other<a id="FNanchor_141" href="#Footnote_141" class="fnanchor">[141]</a>. Nevertheless there is abundant evidence -to show that there were large deposits of gold on the east side -of Ireland, in the Wicklow Mountains, and that the natives from -a very early period wrought it into ornaments of various kinds. -The vast quantity of gold ornaments to be seen in the Museum -of the Royal Irish Academy is a proof of its abundance.</p> - -<p>We shall now return to Aquitania and the Bay of Biscay, -from which we digressed to Britain, and coming into Northern<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_96"></a>[96]</span> -Spain enter that region which was to the Greek of the sixth -and fifth centuries <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> what the Spanish Main was to the -Europeans of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It -seems beyond doubt that when the Phoenicians first reached the -Spanish coasts the natives were fully acquainted with both gold -and silver. Tradition told how the Phoenicians found the native -Iberians feeding their horses from mangers made of silver, -and that after having filled every available portion of their -ship with freight of treasure, they replaced their anchors by -others made of silver. Colaeus of Samos in the eighth century -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> had been the first of all Greeks to reach Tartessus, -the Tarshish of Holy writ, having been carried away by a storm -when on a voyage to Egypt, and driven right through the -Straits of Gibraltar, “under some guiding providence,” says -Herodotus<a id="FNanchor_142" href="#Footnote_142" class="fnanchor">[142]</a>: “for this trading town was in those days a virgin -port” (<i>i.e.</i> unfrequented by merchants). “The Samians in consequence -made a profit by their return freight, a profit greater -than any Greeks had ever made before, except Sostratus, son -of Laodamas, of Egina, with whom no one else can compare.” -From the tenth part of their gains, amounting to six talents, -the Samians made a brazen vessel. At a later period the -Phocaeans made great profit by trade with Iberia, which at -that time meant East Spain as opposed to Tartessus, as well as -with the Tartessians. The king of this people, by name -Arganthonius, who reigned over them for eighty years, and -attained to the patriarchal age of one hundred and twenty, -became such a friend of the Phocaeans that he invited them -to settle in his land, perhaps through motives of policy, wishing -to have their support against the Phoenicians of Gadeira, or -Gades (<i>Cadiz</i>), the most ancient of all the daughter cities of -Tyre. When he did not succeed in persuading the Phocaeans, -afterwards having learned from them of the great growth of the -power of the Medes, he gave them treasure to enable them to -fortify their city with the strong wall by means of which they -were to withstand Harpagus, the general of Cyrus, until they -launched their ships, and embarked their wives and children,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_97"></a>[97]</span> -with that firm resolution to be free, which has made their name -memorable through the ages<a id="FNanchor_143" href="#Footnote_143" class="fnanchor">[143]</a>.</p> - -<p>The evidence of these passages is sufficient to show that -already in the seventh century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, not simply the gold, but -likewise the silver, of the Spanish peninsula was known to and -wrought by the Iberians, the oldest race of whom written -history affords any traces in the west of Europe.</p> - -<p>We shall now deal with the actual localities and mines -described for us by the ancient writers. Strabo once more is -our chief helper: he seems as usual for all statements about the -mines of the west to have drawn his information chiefly from -Posidonius, although he likewise makes use of Polybius and -others. “Posidonius averred that in the country of the Artabri, -who are the most remote people in Lusitania towards the north -and west [occupying the present province of Galicia], the earth -crops out in silver, tin and white gold (for the gold is mixed with -silver), and that the rivers carry down this earth, and that the -women scrape it up with hoes and wash it in sieves into a box<a id="FNanchor_144" href="#Footnote_144" class="fnanchor">[144]</a>.” -Here we have a description of the method employed by the -natives in the remote regions of the north-west of Spain about -100 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, before Roman influences had time to affect them, and -we may not unreasonably infer from it that the same process -was universal amongst the Iberians and Celtiberians of Spain.</p> - -<p>In his general description of Spain Strabo declares that -nowhere in the world down to his day was such plenty of -gold, silver, copper and iron to be found as in Turdetania, the -district named after the Turdetani, one of the two great tribes -into which the Turti were divided [from the name of Turti it is -probable that Tartessus, the Greek name for this region, as -also for the Baetis (<i>Guadalquivir</i>), and also the Phoenician -<i>Tarshish</i> were formed]. “Not merely is the gold got by mining -but it is swept up. The rivers and torrents carry down the -golden sand, which in many localities is likewise to be found in -places where there is no water, but there it is invisible, but -in those that water flows over the gold dust gleams out. -And flushing with water that has to be fetched the arid spots, -they make the gold dust glitter, and by digging wells and by<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_98"></a>[98]</span> -devising other means they get out the gold by washing the -sand, and what are called gold washings are now more numerous -than the gold diggings. But they say that in the gold dust -are found nuggets sometimes even half a pound in weight -(βὼλους ἡμιλιτριαίας) which they term <i>palae</i>, which need but -little refining, and they say likewise that when stones are split -little nuggets like teats are discovered, and when the gold is -refined and purified with a kind of earth which contains alum -and vitriol, the residuum is electrum. When this residuum, -which consists of a mixture of gold and silver, is again refined, -the silver is burnt away and the gold remains. But the gold is -very fusible, and on this account it is melted with chaff rather -than with coal, because the flame being gentle acts moderately -upon a metal which is yielding and easily fused, whereas the -charcoal causes excessive waste by melting it too much by its -violence, and detracting from it. In the river-beds the sand -is swept up and then washed in troughs beside the river; or -else a well is dug, and the earth that is brought up out of it is -washed. They make the furnaces for the silver high, that the -smoke from the ore may be carried up into the air: for it is -noisome and pestilential<a id="FNanchor_145" href="#Footnote_145" class="fnanchor">[145]</a>.” Then he adds that “some of the -copper works are called gold mines, from which people infer -that gold was formerly dug from them. Posidonius, when praising -the number and excellence of the mines, refrains from none -of his wonted rhetoric, but warms up with hyperboles, for he -says he cannot doubt the truth of the story that once on a -time when the woods caught fire, the earth having been melted, -inasmuch as it was permeated with silver and gold, boiled out -on to the surface over the whole mountain, and that a whole -hill was a mass of money heaped up by the bounteous hand of -fortune. And to speak generally (he says) any one who saw -these regions would say that they were Nature’s perennial store -chambers or Sovereignty’s inexhaustible treasure house. For -not merely the surface but the under-soil is rich (πλουσία—ὑπόπλουτος), -and with those people it is not Hades who dwells -in the region beneath the earth, but Pluto (Πλούτων). So -spake he in a fine figure as though he himself too were drawing<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_99"></a>[99]</span> -from a mine his diction in copious store. There was a saying -of Phalereus in reference to the eagerness of the miners of -Laurium in Attica, that they dug as continuously and earnestly -as if they expected to drag up Pluto himself. This saying Posidonius -quotes anent the energy and vigour of those who worked -the Spanish mines, for they cut deep and winding galleries, and -by means of ‘Egyptian pumps’ combated the springs which -burst into the workings<a id="FNanchor_146" href="#Footnote_146" class="fnanchor">[146]</a>.”</p> - -<p>So rich were the silver mines of New Carthage (<i>Cartagena</i>) -that in the time of Polybius (140 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) 40,000 men were -employed in working them for the Roman State, and the daily -out-put was reckoned at 25,000 drachms, or roughly speaking -about 3,000 ounces Troy.</p> - -<p>Diodorus Siculus<a id="FNanchor_147" href="#Footnote_147" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> gives an account of mines and mining in -Spain, which, as it is clearly derived from the same passage of -Posidonius as the account of Strabo, is worth quoting, especially -as it gives probably <i>in extenso</i> what Strabo has summarized. -For although it more particularly refers to the discovery of -silver mines, yet it is very relevant to our subject, since silver -invariably is later in point of discovery than gold; thus if we -can fix at an early period an inferior limit for the knowledge of -silver in Spain, we may with confidence fix the inferior limit for -the knowledge of gold at a still earlier epoch. Diodorus has -been describing the range of the Pyrenees, which like all the -early geographers he represents as running north and south, -and thus proceeds: “Since there are on them (the Pyrenees) -many forests dense with trees, they say that in ancient times -the whole mountain region was completely burned by some -shepherds having cast away a firebrand. Then since the fire -kept burning on for many days continuously, the surface of the -earth was burned and the mountains from the circumstance -were called Pyrenaean (Πυρηναῖα, <i>scorched</i>), and the surface of -the burnt region flowed with much silver, and since the natural -ore had been smelted, there ensued many lava-like streams of -pure silver. But inasmuch as the natives did not understand -the use of it, the Phoenicians trading with them, and having -learned about the occurrence, bought the silver for some small<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_100"></a>[100]</span> -return in other wares; accordingly the Phoenicians by conveying -it to Greece and to Asia and all the rest of the world -acquired great wealth. And so covetous were the merchants -that though their ships were fully freighted, when much silver -still remained over they cut out the lead that was in their -anchors and replaced it with silver. The Phoenicians by means -of such trade increased greatly and sent out many colonies, -some to Sicily and the adjacent islands, others to Libya, others -again to Sardinia and Spain. But many years afterwards the -Spaniards, having become acquainted with the peculiarities of -silver, started remarkable mines. Wherefore as they prepared -very excellent silver in very great quantities they used to get -great revenues.” Diodorus then gives a detailed account of the -working of the shafts and winding galleries which followed the -course of the veins of gold and silver, the difficulties caused -by the bursting in of springs and subterranean streams, and -the ways in which the miners overcame this latter obstruction -by means of the Egyptian pumps. But Diodorus, as a patriotic -Sicilian, takes care to tell his reader that this pump was invented -by Archimedes, the famous mathematician of Syracuse, -when, in the course of his travels, he paid a visit to Egypt. -Finally, he gives a short but graphic picture of the sufferings -of the wretched slaves who were bought wholesale by the mine -owners and endured incredible miseries until death, the only -friend they had to look to, came to end their sufferings. Strabo, -the stoic, is silent on this point, which here, as in Egypt, so -strongly moved the heart of Diodorus.</p> - -<p>The story of the discovery of silver by the burning of the -woods at first savours of the mythical, but there is really good -reason for believing that there is in it a solid nucleus of truth. -Tin was unknown in Sumatra until in 1710<a id="FNanchor_148" href="#Footnote_148" class="fnanchor">[148]</a> it was discovered -by the accidental burning down of a house (an incident which -recalls Charles Lamb’s delightful account of the discovery of -Roast Pig). It is highly probable that it was owing to some -such accident that men first became acquainted with silver, as -that metal is rarely if ever found native. It may well be therefore -that mankind has learned the art of smelting metalliferous<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_101"></a>[101]</span> -ore from observing the results of some such conflagration as -that described by Posidonius.</p> - -<p>Finally, we shall turn to Pliny the Elder for a moment. -That industrious collector has given us a minute account of the -various methods of mining carried on in Spain in his time, but -as that is beside our present purpose I shall only quote a short -passage, in which we get some interesting technical expressions -relating to gold-mining. After detailing the method of washing -soil containing gold by bringing streams of water to bear on it, -just as we found the Salassi doing in the valley of the Doria, by -which process he says 20,000 lbs. of gold were annually obtained -in Asturia, Gallaecia, and Lusitania, he proceeds: “Gold obtained -by shafting (<i>arrugia</i>) does not require refining, but is straightway -pure. Nuggets of it are found in this way; likewise in pits -nuggets are found exceeding ten pounds each. The Spaniards -call them <i>palacrae</i>, others <i>palacranae</i>. The same people term -the gold dust <i>balux</i><a id="FNanchor_149" href="#Footnote_149" class="fnanchor">[149]</a>.” Here then we have an interesting group -of technical terms, <i>arrugia</i>, <i>palacra</i> or <i>palacrana</i> and <i>balux</i>. -The latter forms at once remind us of Strabo’s <i>palae</i> (πάλαι), -and we can have little doubt that <i>palacra</i> and <i>pala</i> are simply -dialectic variants, just as <i>palacrana</i> evidently was considered -by Pliny to be a bye-form of <i>palacra</i>. Corssen has sought to -find a Latin etymology for <i>arrugia</i>, connecting it with <i>runco</i>, -<i>ruga</i>, but it is hardly possible to regard it as otherwise than -Spanish, especially as this appears to be the only place where it -is found. <i>Balux</i> (also <i>baluca</i>) is undoubtedly a native Iberian -term. On Schrader’s principles we might at once argue that as -the technical words for gold-mining and for the different kinds -of gold are native Spanish words, it is beyond doubt that the -Spaniards were acquainted with gold and knew the art of -working it before any foreign traders brought that metal to -them. Without dogmatizing in this fashion and keeping to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_102"></a>[102]</span> -our more cautious principles we may say that the evidence of -those words is strongly in favour of such a conclusion, unless -a Semitic origin be sought for those terms, which is highly -improbable. For we know beyond doubt that the Spanish -mines were worked for centuries before ever a Roman soldier -passed the Ebro. Unless then the technical terms were introduced -by the Greeks (which they were not, as Strabo considers -<i>pala</i> a native word) or by the Phoenicians, they are ancient -Iberic terms connected with gold from its first discovery. We -saw that in the Red Sea the first form in which gold was -utilized by the Arabs was that of nuggets used as rude beads. -The <i>palae</i> of the Iberians may represent the same period of -development as well as the same kind of gold. From the traditions -given us by the ancient writers there can be little doubt -that the art of mining silver was of extremely ancient date in -Spain. The founding of Gadeira (Cadiz) is placed at 1100 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -and the tradition of Posidonius regards the Phoenician colonies -in the west as long posterior to their trading for silver with -the rude natives. If this tradition could be relied on, silver -must have been known to the Spaniards in the twelfth century -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> And there is no reason to doubt the story. At Mycenae -gold and silver were found along with Baltic amber. The two -former prove that amongst the civilized races around the Aegean -the precious metals were abundantly used, the latter that the -trade routes across Europe from the Baltic and North Sea to -the Adriatic were already in use. Accordingly there is no -improbability in the supposition that in the twelfth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -the shipmen of Tyre traded for silver to North Eastern Spain -as well as to Northern Italy for amber. If the knowledge of -silver came so early in Spain, much earlier must that of gold -have been.</p> - -<p>Let us now take a general survey of the region over which -we have travelled. In the far east we had both the literary -evidence of the Rig Veda and the evidence of the traditions and -legends handed down by the historians to show that well back -in the second millennium <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> the gold deposits of Thibet were -known and worked. Silver is as yet unknown to the people of -the Rig Veda. Again in the region of the Altai and Oural<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_103"></a>[103]</span> -mountains, the tale of the “Arimaspian pursued by a griffin” -pointed to great antiquity for gold-mining in this district; the -barbarous Massagetae<a id="FNanchor_150" href="#Footnote_150" class="fnanchor">[150]</a>, who occupied the modern Mongolia and -Sangaria, were rich in gold; and to the west the Scythians, -who used neither silver nor copper, had abundant store of gold. -These tribes stretched right across Russia until they touched on -the west the Getae and the other tribes of the great Thracian -stock. Gold must early have been known throughout all Thrace. -Greek tradition and history unite in demonstrating the great -antiquity of the first Phoenician gold-seeking in Thasos and on -the mainland. The evidence in Greece itself puts it beyond -doubt that gold was in use 1500 years <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> The Balkan Peninsula -was occupied on the north-west by Illyrian tribes, some -of whom, like the Dardani, dwelt interspersed among the -Thracian clans. The Illyrians inhabited all the northern end -of the Adriatic, and originally much of the east side of all -Italy, although under the pressure of the Umbrians and Kelts -they had been almost completely crushed out of the Italian -Peninsula, only maintaining themselves in the extreme southeast -where the Messapians remained independent of both -Italian and Greek alike. The Keltic tribes were their neighbours -in Noricum, where they had succeeded the ancient Rhaetian -stock, the survivors of which, like the Salassi, had managed -to maintain themselves in the fastnesses of the Alps. We found -strong evidence that these Rhaetians must long have known -the art of working gold, for they had devised elaborate pieces of -engineering work for the purpose of developing their gold fields; -added to this was the fact that gold as an ornament seems to -have been used by the inhabitants of the Swiss lake dwellings -in the neolithic age. The Kelts must have been in contact -with this people for a considerable time before they ever invaded -Italy; again in Spain we found every token of great antiquity -in the working of gold and silver. Again, before they invaded -Italy, the Kelts must have been long in contact with the -Iberians of what in later days was Aquitania, for the Keltic -conquest of Northern Spain can hardly be placed later than in -the fifth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, and it is most probable that that conquest<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_104"></a>[104]</span> -only took place after long and stubborn struggles. The -Kelts too in Southern Gaul must have come in contact with -the Ligyes (or Ligurians), whose territory at one time extended -from the Iberus (Ebro) along the coast of the Mediterranean -to the frontiers of Etruria. The Ligurians had been in touch -with the Iberians on their western border; in fact the two -races had blended to a considerable degree, and since they had -also had communication with Etruscans, Phoenicians and Greeks -(with the last from at least 600 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, when Massilia was founded -in their country), it is impossible to suppose that this people -could have remained ignorant of the use of gold. The Kelts -thus at every point along their southern front, as they advanced, -must have been for centuries in full knowledge of gold before -they ever entered Rome. Add to this the fact that when -they entered Italy they appear to have brought nothing but -their gold ornaments and their cattle, and that in Gaul it had -been the habit to dedicate great piles of the precious metal in -the sacred precincts of their divinities.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_105"></a>[105]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_IV">CHAPTER IV.<br /> -<span class="smcap">Primaeval Trade Routes.</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>There can be little doubt that from the extreme West of -Europe to Northern India, or rather to China and the Pacific -shore, there was complete intercourse in the way of trade, from -the most remote epochs. In the lake dwellings of Switzerland -are found implements of Jade, a stone which is not found at -any spot in Europe; in fact the nearest point from which the -material was fetched must have been Eastern Turkestan on the -borders of China<a id="FNanchor_151" href="#Footnote_151" class="fnanchor">[151]</a>. If in neolithic days such communication<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_106"></a>[106]</span> -existed between Further Asia and Western Europe, it is not -unreasonable to suppose that when gold, an article existing -in almost every country across the two continents, came into -use, a like facility of intercourse must have existed. In one of -the passages of Herodotus which I have given above we had -explicit information respecting a trade route extending from -the Greek factories on the northern shores of the Black -Sea through the medium of the Scythians right away to the -remote region of the Altai. On the other hand there is good -evidence for the existence of a great trade route from the Black -Sea westward up the valley of the Danube, and so reaching the -head of the Adriatic; and again, there is equally good reason for -believing that from the mouth of the Po there ran a similar -route across Northern Italy through Liguria and Narbonese -Gaul and into Spain. In reference to the first of these routes -we may quote a tradition preserved in the Book of Wonderful -Stories before alluded to. It is there stated that once on a time -travellers who had voyaged up the Danube finally by a branch -of that river which flowed into the Adriatic made their way -into that Sea. It is there alleged<a id="FNanchor_152" href="#Footnote_152" class="fnanchor">[152]</a> that “there is a mountain -called Delphium between Mentorice and Istriana, which has -a lofty peak. Whenever the Mentores who dwell on the -Adriatic mount this crest, they see, as it appears, the ships -which are sailing into the Pontus (Black Sea). And there is -likewise a certain spot in the intervening region in which, -when a common mart is held, Lesbian, Chian and Thasian wares -are set out for sale by the merchants who come up from the -Black Sea, and Corcyraean wine jars by those who come up -from the Adriatic. They say likewise that the Ister, taking its -rise in what are called the Hercynian forests, divides in twain, -and disembogues by one branch into the Black Sea, and by the -other into the Adriatic. And we have seen a proof of this not -only in modern times, but likewise still more so in antiquity, -as to how the regions there are easy of navigation (reading<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_107"></a>[107]</span> -εὔπλωτα). For the story goes that Jason sailed in by the -Cyanean Rocks, but sailed out from the Black Sea by the Ister.”</p> - -<p>The story of the meeting between the traders from the -Black Sea and Adriatic has every mark of probability, whilst we -are possibly justified in regarding the legend of Jason as evidence -that for long ages the Greeks knew that up the valley -of the Danube traders from the Pontus made their way. -Doubtless too it was with a view to tapping the trade of this -very route that the trading factories like Istropolis were founded -on the Danube.</p> - -<p>The branch of the Danube flowing into the Adriatic can -only mean that travellers from the Danube by passing up one -of its tributaries would reach a point from which it was but a -short journey to the Adriatic shore. But a famous story in -Herodotus will yield us more efficient aid. To the Greeks of -the fifth century B.C. the extreme north was represented by the -land of those happy beings the Hyperboreans, just as the -furthest south was represented by the sources of the Nile. -Thus Pindar sings: “Countless broad paths of glorious exploits -have been cut out one after another beyond Nile’s fountains -and through the land of the Hyperboreans<a id="FNanchor_153" href="#Footnote_153" class="fnanchor">[153]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Some of the oldest legends of the young world’s prime cluster -around this shadowy region. Herakles had wandered there in -quest of the hind of the golden horns, consecrated to Artemis -Orthosia by Taygeta<a id="FNanchor_154" href="#Footnote_154" class="fnanchor">[154]</a>; “In quest of her he likewise beheld that -land behind the chilling north wind; there he stood and marvelled -at the trees.” The judge at the Olympic festival placed -round the locks of the victor “the dark green adornment of the -olive, which in days of yore Amphitryon’s son had brought from -the shady sources of the Ister, a most glorious memorial of the -contests at Olympia, when he had won over by word the -Hyperborean folk that are the henchmen of Apollo<a id="FNanchor_155" href="#Footnote_155" class="fnanchor">[155]</a>.” The hero -Perseus too had reached that land where no ordinary mortal -could find his way. “Neither in ships nor yet on foot wouldst<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_108"></a>[108]</span> -thou find out the marvellous ways to the assembly of the Hyperboreans, -but once on a time did the chieftain Perseus enter -their houses and feast, having come upon them as they were -sacrificing glorious hecatombs of asses to the god. Now -Apollo takes continuous and especial delight in their banquets -and hymns of praise, and he laughs as he beholds the -rampant lewdness of the beasts<a id="FNanchor_156" href="#Footnote_156" class="fnanchor">[156]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Herodotus felt puzzled where to place the Hyperboreans; -“For concerning Hyperborean men neither the Scythians say -anything to the point nor any other of those that dwell in this -region, save the Issedones. But as I think, not even do they say -anything to the point; for in that case the Scythians too would -have told it, as they tell about the one-eyed people” (the -Arimaspians<a id="FNanchor_157" href="#Footnote_157" class="fnanchor">[157]</a>). “But a certain Aristeas, the son of Caÿstrobius, -a man of Proconnesus, alleged in a poem that under the influence -of divine afflatus he had reached the Issedones, and that -beyond them dwelt the Arimaspians who have but one eye, and -that beyond these are the gold-guarding griffins, and beyond -these the Hyperboreans, stretching to the sea<a id="FNanchor_158" href="#Footnote_158" class="fnanchor">[158]</a>.” But where -Pindar and Herodotus hesitated, the priest of Apollo at Delos -stepped in with an explicit statement of that “marvellous road” -which Pindar said no one could find by sea or land. Accordingly -Herodotus has to resort to the men of Delos for his information -about the Hyperboreans: “Much the longest account of them -is given by men of Delos, who have alleged that sacred objects -bound up in wheaten straw are brought from the Hyperboreans -to the Scythians, and that the Scythians receive them and pass -them on to their neighbours upon the west, who continue to -pass them on until at last they reach the Adriatic, and from -thence they are sent on southwards. First of the Greeks do the -men of Dodona receive them, and from them they travel down -to the Melian Gulf and cross over to Euboea, and city sends -them on to city as far as Carystus. The Carystians take them -over to Tenos without stopping at Andros; and the Tenians -convey them to Delos.” Then he adds a further story that on -the first occasion the Hyperboreans sent two maidens, Hyperoché<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_109"></a>[109]</span> -and Laodicé, with five male protectors, but as they died -at Delos, and returned home no more, they for this reason -“bring to their borders the sacred objects packed up in wheaten -straw and lay a solemn injunction on their neighbours, bidding -them send them forward to another nation, and the men say -that being forwarded in this fashion they arrive at Delos<a id="FNanchor_159" href="#Footnote_159" class="fnanchor">[159]</a>.”</p> - -<p>From the various passages quoted we may draw the probable -conclusion that there was a well-defined trade route existing -for untold ages between the heart of Asia, the valley of the -Danube and the head of the Adriatic. The nameless poets who -framed the legends of Herakles and his wanderings would -certainly make the hero travel by the routes where both in -their own time and from tradition they knew of the existence -of highways from nation to nation. Thus in his journey to the -Hyperboreans Herakles is represented as having visited the -shady forests of the Danube, which points to the same road as -that assigned to the Hyperborean maidens by the Delian tale. -Finally it may not be farfetched to conjecture that the sacrifice -of hecatombs of asses may be taken as evidence that the -Hyperborean legend points to a people of Central Asia, which -is the natural habitat of the wild ass. However, as it seems -that there was an annual sacrifice of asses to Apollo at Delphi<a id="FNanchor_160" href="#Footnote_160" class="fnanchor">[160]</a>, -we must be careful not to lay much stress on this argument, -although it is quite possible that a vague knowledge of a far-off -region where asses abounded and were sacrificed may have -given the Greeks the idea that the Hyperboreans were worshippers -of their own god Apollo, at whose altar like offerings -were made.</p> - -<p>Having seen some reasons for believing that before the -beginning of history there was a well-defined route from Central -and perhaps Further Asia across Southern Russia to the valley -of the Danube, and then by one of the valleys of its tributaries -to within a short distance of the Adriatic, whence after crossing -the watershed it reached the head of that sea, we are now -in a position to enquire whether we have similar evidence for the -further continuance towards the west of this highroad of nations.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_110"></a>[110]</span> -We have had occasion already to remark that the legends of -the Voyage of the Argo in quest of the Golden Fleece, and the -journeyings of Herakles and such-like stories, really represent the -earliest knowledge of the regions which lay far away to the east -and north-west. There is no tale of the hero Herakles more famous -than that of his travelling to the very marge of Ocean, where in -the Pillars of Hercules he left an imperishable record of his -wayfaring for the men of aftertime. His object, so goes the -story, was the capture of the famous kine of the giant Geryon -who dwelt in the island of Erythia, in after years the site of -Gaddir, or Gadeira as the Greeks called it, the Gades of the -Romans, and the modern Cadiz. Many vague stories relating -to the early ethnology of Western Europe and Northern Africa -cycle round this expedition<a id="FNanchor_161" href="#Footnote_161" class="fnanchor">[161]</a>. But for our present purpose it is -only the fabled route by which he went with which we are -concerned. As might naturally be expected that part of Italy -with which the Greeks seem first to have become acquainted -was the district lying in the Adriatic around the mouths of the -Po (Eridanus). The reason why they came thither is not far to -seek. They doubtless simply followed the example of the -Phoenicians who probably had long traded thither to obtain -both the highly prized golden amber from the Baltic, and the -red amber of Liguria, called from that region Lingurium, or -<i>ligurion</i>, a name for which the Greeks found a strange etymology -which connected it with the lynx<a id="FNanchor_162" href="#Footnote_162" class="fnanchor">[162]</a>. According to -Herodotus, “the Phocaeans were the first of the Greeks who -made long voyages and discovered Adria, Tyrsenia (Etruria), -Iberia and Tartessus” (<span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 163). The trade routes to the amber -coasts of the north have long been well known; they passed over -the Alps, crossed the Danube at Passau, Linz or Presburg, and -proceeded then either to Samland or to the vicinity of Jutland<a id="FNanchor_163" href="#Footnote_163" class="fnanchor">[163]</a>. -As these northern routes crossed that which came up the valley<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_111"></a>[111]</span> -of the Danube, we see that by this route there was complete -communication between the Black Sea and the Adriatic. In -later times we know that active trade was carried on with all -Northern Italy from Marseilles along by the Ligurian shore, for -the coinage of Massalia, and the barbarous imitations of it struck -by the peoples of what was afterwards known as Cisalpine -Gaul, formed the currency of that region until the Roman -Conquest. But once more the Book of Wonderful Stories comes -to our aid: “They say that from Italy into Keltiké, and the -land of the Keltoligyes and Iberians, there is a certain road -called that of Herakles, by which if any journey, whether -Greek or native, he is protected by those who dwell along it, -that he may suffer no wrong. For those in whose vicinity the -wrong is done have to pay the penalty.” Here we have a clear -instance of a well-defined caravan route, connected by Greek -tradition with the name of Herakles, which was placed under a -kind of taboo, so that all travellers could use it with impunity. -We may then conclude that as from Central Asia there was unbroken -communication with Northern Italy, so likewise from -Northern Italy there was from remote ages a definite trade -route into Gaul and Spain, and that these routes were in turns -connected with the great routes which lead from the Mediterranean -to the Baltic and North Sea.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure15"> -<img src="images/figure15.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 15.</span> Barbarous imitation of Drachm of Massalia.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_112"></a>[112]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_V">CHAPTER V.<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Art of Weighing was first employed for Gold.</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>We have seen in the preceding pages that from the Atlantic -seaboard right across into Further Asia the ox was universally -spread, and from a period long before the daybreak of history -already formed the chief element of property amongst the -various races of mankind which occupied that wide region. We -have likewise seen that gold was very equally distributed over -the same area, being ready to hand in the still unexhausted -deposits in the sands of rivers. And lastly we have seen that -from the most remote times there was complete communication -for purposes of trade between the various stocks. For whilst -peoples in the pastoral and nomad stage do not dwell together -in large communities they nevertheless are within touch of one -another. No better illustration of this can be found than the -relations between Abraham and Lot as set forth in Genesis -(xiii. 5 <i>sqq.</i>): “And Lot also, which went with Abram, had -flocks, and herds, and tents. And the land was not able to -bear them, that they might dwell together: for their substance -was great, so that they could not dwell together. And there -was a strife between the herdmen of Abram’s cattle and the -herdmen of Lot’s cattle: and the Canaanite and the Perizzite -dwelled then in the land. And Abram said unto Lot, Let -there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and -between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we be brethren. -Is not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray -thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go -to the right: or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will -go to the left. And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the -plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every where, before<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_113"></a>[113]</span> -the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden -of the Lord, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto -Zoar. Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan; and Lot -journeyed east: and they separated themselves the one from -the other. Abram dwelled in the land of Canaan, and Lot -dwelled in the cities of the plain, and pitched his tent toward -Sodom.” But although, from the necessity of finding sufficient -pasturage for their flocks and herds, they had parted from one -another, they remained within touch. For we find that no -sooner had Lot and his possessions been carried away by -Chedorlaomer and his confederates, after the overthrow of the -kings of Sodom and Gomorrah, than Abraham at once hears of -his mishap and hastens to his rescue (xiv. 13 <i>sqq.</i>).</p> - -<p>The picture here given may be taken as holding good for a -large part of Asia and Europe. There is a great intermingling -of various races and untrammeled intercourse between the -various communities. Thus we find that Abraham was able to -journey from Haran into Egypt with his flocks and herds and -suffered harm or hindrance of no man. Nay, a still stronger -proof of the safety and freedom of intercourse is that when -Abraham entered Egypt, although afraid that if it were known -that Sarah was his wife the Egyptians might murder him, yet -he had no fear that they would take her away by force if she -was supposed to be his sister. Thus, when his princes told -Pharaoh that the Hebrew woman was fair to look on, though -the king commanded her to be taken into his house, he did -not act with high-handed violence against the stranger, but -“he entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, -and oxen, and he asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and -she asses, and camels.” And when Pharaoh discovered that she -was really Abraham’s wife, although on account of Abraham’s -mendacity the Lord had “plagued Pharaoh and his house with -great plagues because of Abraham’s wife,” he did not, as he might -very justly have done, take a summary vengeance upon him, -“he commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him -away, and his wife, and all that he had.” (Gen. xii. 12-20.)</p> - -<p>Such then being the general distribution of cattle and -sheep, and such again the distribution of gold, we can have<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_114"></a>[114]</span> -little hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the ox, which -we have evidence to show was the chief unit of value in all -those countries, had the same value throughout, and in like -manner that gold would have almost the same value over all -the area in which we have shown that it was so impartially -apportioned out by Nature. From this it follows that if the -unit of gold was fixed upon the older unit, the ox, the same -quantity of gold would be found serving as the metallic unit -throughout the same wide area.</p> - -<p>If then it can be proved that throughout the area in -which those weight standards arose from which all the known -systems of the ancient, mediaeval, and modern world were derived, -the same gold-unit is found everywhere, and that wherever -evidence is to hand, this unit is regarded as equal in value -to a cow or ox, the truth of our hypothesis will have been -demonstrated. For it would be impossible that such an occurrence -should be a mere coincidence if found repeated in -different areas. Furthermore, if it can be shown that in cases -at a comparatively late historical period peoples who were -borrowing a ready-made metallic system from more civilized -neighbours, have found it impossible to do so without adjusting -or equating such metallic standard to their own unit of -barter, we may infer <i>a fortiori</i> that it would have been impossible -for any people to have framed a metallic unit for the -first time for themselves without any reference to the unit of -barter. But as we have already proved that the unit of barter -is in every case earlier in existence than even the very knowledge -of the precious metals, it follows irresistibly that the -metallic unit is based on the unit of barter. We have also -given reasons for believing that gold was the first of the metals -known to primitive man, but as yet we have not proved that -the metals are the first objects to be weighed. If this can -be proved, and if furthermore it can be proved that before silver -or copper or iron were yet weighed, gold has been weighed by -that standard, which we find universal in later times, we have -still more closely narrowed down our argument and put it -beyond all reasonable doubt that weighing was first invented -for traffic in gold, and since the weight-unit of gold is found<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_115"></a>[115]</span> -regularly to be the value of a cow or ox, the conclusion must -follow that the unit of weight is ultimately derived from the -value in gold of a cow.</p> - -<p>If we begin in modern times and reflect on the articles -which are usually sold by weight, we find at once that the -more valuable and less bulky the commodity, the more -regularly is it sold and bought by the medium of the scales -and weights; furthermore, on enquiry we find that many kinds -of goods which are now sold by weight were formerly sold -simply by bulk or measure. At the present moment corn is -generally sold by weight (though sometimes still by measure), -although the nomenclature connected with its buying and -selling shows beyond doubt that formerly it was sold entirely -by dry measure. The English coomb, the Irish barrel, the -bushel and the peck are indubitable evidence. The selling of -live cattle by weight has only lately been adopted in some -markets in this country; but go back to a more remote period, -and you will find that even dead cattle were not sold by weight. -Thus we see that it is only in a comparatively late epoch that -two of the chief commodities on which human life depends -for subsistence have been trafficked in by weight. Nothing -now remains but man’s clothing, weapons, ornaments, fuel and -furniture.</p> - -<p>The more primitive the condition of life, the more scanty -and rude is the household furniture, and as even in modern -times timber is not sold by weight, beyond all doubt the -same must hold good in a still stronger degree of a time when -wood could be had for the mere trouble of sallying forth -with an axe and cutting it. The same argument applies -cogently to the question of fuel. For even though coal is -now sold by weight, both coal and coke are still sold in some -places at least in name by the chaldron, a fact that indicates -that it was only when facilities increased for weighing large -and bulky commodities that such a practice came into vogue. -Similarly, although firewood is now sold by weight on the -Continent, beyond all doubt at a previous period it was uniformly -sold by bulk, as peat or turf is now sold in Cambridgeshire, -in Scotland, and in Ireland.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_116"></a>[116]</span></p> - -<p>Weapons and ornaments and utensils now only remain. To -take the last-named first, at no period have vessels of earthenware -been sold by weight. On the other hand those of metal, -especially when made of copper and iron, are usually sold in -this fashion, although vessels of iron and tin are commonly -sold by bulk, or according to their capacity, thereby following, -as we shall shortly see, a most ancient precedent. The value -of ornaments largely consists in the artistic skill displayed in -their manufacture, hence weight is not employed in estimating -their value except when the material is gold or silver, and -therefore possesses a certain intrinsic value apart from the mere -workmanship. We may therefore infer that in early times no -decorative articles save those in metal were valued by weight. -Next comes the question of weapons, one of the most important -sides of ancient life. Of course gold and silver are unfit for -weapons and implements, save in the case of the gods, as for -instance the chariot of Hera, with its wheel-naves of silver -and its tires of gold<a id="FNanchor_164" href="#Footnote_164" class="fnanchor">[164]</a>. The spear-head and sword-blade must -be made from tougher and cheaper metals. Hence copper or -bronze (copper alloyed with tin) in the earlier periods which -succeeded the stone age, and iron at a later time, have mainly -provided mankind with weapons of offence and defence. But -precious as copper and bronze and iron were to the primitive -man, we do not find them sold by weight: a simple process -was employed; the crude metal was made into pieces or bars -of certain dimensions, so many finger-breadths or thumb-breadths -long, so many broad, so many thick, just as wooden -planks are now sold with us, when the value of a piece of -timber is estimated by its being so many feet of inch board, -or half-inch board, and of a fixed width. Lastly we come to -the question of clothing. Skins of course were sold by bulk, -the hide of an ox or a sheepskin having generally a fixed -and constant value. Even when sheep came to be shorn, -the fleece was set at an average value. But beyond all doubt -among the peoples who dwelt around the Mediterranean the -practice of weighing wool was of a most respectable antiquity. -Such, too, was the practice all through the middle ages in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_117"></a>[117]</span> -England and on the Continent. We have abundant specimens -still left of the weights carried by the wool merchants, -slung over the back of a pack-horse.</p> - -<p>Having said so much by way of preliminary, we can now -adduce testimony in support of our thesis. Once more let -us start with the Homeric Poems. The weighing of gold is -already in vogue, but the highest unit known is the small talent, -the value of an ox, weighing 130-5 grs, or 10-15 grs more than -a sovereign. Silver is not yet estimated by weight, although -large and handsome vessels of that metal are described and have -their value appraised. But it is not by their <i>weight</i> that their -value is estimated, but by their <i>capacity</i>. Thus as first prize -for the footrace Achilles gave “a wine-mixer of silver, wrought, -and it held six measures, but it surpassed by far in beauty -all others upon earth, since cunning craftsmen, the Sidonians, -had carefully worked it, and Phoenician men brought it over -the misty deep.” (<i>Iliad</i>, <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 741 <i>sqq.</i>) Here we have a -vessel wrought in silver evidently of considerable size, but it is -simply by its content that its size and value are expressed. -Among the lists of prizes in the same book we find the size -of vessels made of copper or bronze similarly indicated. Thus -the first prize for the chariot race consisted of a woman skilled -in goodly tasks; and a tripod with ears, which held two and -twenty measures; whilst the third prize was a <i>lebes</i> or kettle -which had never yet been blackened by the fire, still with all -the glitter of newness, which held four measures. So, too, in -the case of iron. As the prize for the Hurling of the Quoit, -Achilles set down a mass of pig iron, which he had taken -from Eetion. It is a piece of metal as yet unwrought, so -that here if anywhere its size and value ought to be reckoned -by weight, since no account has to be taken of workmanship. -But Achilles, instead of saying that it weighs so many talents -or minae, describes its value in a far more primitive fashion. -“Even if his fat lands be very far remote, it will last him five -revolving seasons. For not through want of iron will his -shepherd or ploughman go to the town, but it (the mass) will -supply him<a id="FNanchor_165" href="#Footnote_165" class="fnanchor">[165]</a>.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_118"></a>[118]</span></p> - -<p>Thus of the four chief metals mentioned in the Homeric -Poems, gold alone is subjected to weight. But the scales are -used for another purpose still. In the Twelfth Book of the -<i>Iliad</i> there is a curious simile wherein a fight between the -Trojans and Achaeans is likened to the weighing of wool: -“So they held on as an honest, hardworking woman holds the -scales, who holding a weight and wool apart lifts them up, -making them equal, in order that she may win a humble pittance -for her children: thus their fight and war hung evenly until -what time Zeus gave masterful glory to Hector, Priam’s son<a id="FNanchor_166" href="#Footnote_166" class="fnanchor">[166]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Without doubt one of the first uses to which the art of -weighing was applied was that of testing the amount of wool -given to female slaves<a id="FNanchor_167" href="#Footnote_167" class="fnanchor">[167]</a>, or in this case perhaps to a freed -woman, to make sure that they would return all the wool -when spun into yarn, and not purloin any portion for themselves. -Thus in the older Latin writers we constantly find -allusions to the <i>pensum</i> (<i>pendo</i> = to weigh), the portion of wool -<i>weighed</i> out to the slave. It is quite possible that in the sale -of wool the more ancient conventional fashion of estimating -the fleece as worth so much in other familiar commodities long -continued for mercantile purposes, the weighing of the wool in -small portions being only used as a check on the dishonesty -of the spinners. At all events we have found wool estimated -by the fleece in mediaeval Ireland, at a time when weights are -in common use for the metals.</p> - -<p>Such then is the condition of things in the Homeric Poems. -Gold is transferred by weight and by weight wool is apportioned -out for spinning.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_119"></a>[119]</span></p> - -<p>Let us now turn to the Old Testament and find what are -the objects which are dealt in by weight. All transactions in -money are thus carried on, as for instance the purchase by -Abraham of the Cave of Machpelah from Ephron the Hittite -when “Abraham weighed to Ephron the silver, which he had -named in the audience of the sons of Heth, four hundred -shekels of silver, current <i>money</i> with the merchant” (Gen. -xxiii. 16). So likewise in Achan’s confession: “I saw among -the spoils a goodly Babylonish garment, and two hundred -shekels of silver, and a wedge of gold of fifty shekels weight” -(Joshua vii. 21). And so too in the Book of Judges (viii. 26) -the weight of the rings taken from the Midianites and given -to Gideon was “a thousand and seven hundred shekels of gold; -beside ornaments, and collars, and purple raiment that was on -the kings of Midian, and beside the chains that were about -their camels’ necks.” And again David bought the threshing-floor -of Oman the Jebusite for six hundred shekels of gold by -weight (1 Chron. xxi. 25), although the same purchase is described -in 2 Samuel (xxiv. 24) as being effected for fifty -shekels of silver. In Solomon’s time gold has become exceedingly -abundant, and we find it reckoned by talents and -minae (pounds). For “king Solomon made a navy of ships in -Ezion-geber, which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the Red -sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram sent in the navy his -servants, shipmen that had knowledge of the sea, with the -servants of Solomon. And they came to Ophir, and fetched -from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought -it to king Solomon” (1 Kings ix. 26-8). And after the story -of the Queen of Sheba’s visit and her gift to the king of “an -hundred and twenty talents of gold, and of spices very great -store, and precious stones,” we read that “the weight of gold -that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore -and six talents of gold, beside that he had of the merchantmen, -and of the traffick of the spice merchants, and of all the kings -of Arabia, and of the governors of the country. And king -Solomon made two hundred targets of beaten gold: six -hundred shekels of gold went to one target.” Spices such as -myrrh, cinnamon, calamus and cassia (Exod. xxx. 23) were sold<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_120"></a>[120]</span> -by weight, being as costly as gold. The familiar description of -Goliath of Gath, the weight of whose coat of mail “was -five thousand shekels of brass,” and whose “spear’s head -weighed six hundred shekels of iron,” will serve to show that -articles in the inferior metals were at that time estimated -according to weight by the Hebrews and their neighbours, the -Philistines. Of the weighing of wool we find no instance, but -it is quite possible that it was from the practice of weighing -wool that Absalom when he “polled his head, (for it was -at every year’s end that he polled it: because the hair was -heavy on him, therefore he polled it:) he weighed the hair of -his head at two hundred shekels after the king’s weight” (2 -Sam, xiv. 26). But it is perhaps more probable that the habit -of weighing a child’s hair against gold or silver to fulfil a vow -(which was almost certainly Absalom’s motive) may have -suggested the employment of the scales for wool<a id="FNanchor_168" href="#Footnote_168" class="fnanchor">[168]</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_121"></a>[121]</span></p> - -<p>Finally, once in the prophet Ezekiel do we find food -weighed, but evidently under special circumstances: “And -thy meat which thou shalt eat shall be by weight, twenty -shekels a day: from time to time shalt thou eat it. Thou -shalt drink also water by measure, the sixth part of an hin: -from time to time shalt thou drink” (iv. 10, 11). In any case -we should expect to find traces of later usage in the writers -of the age of the prophets, but from the directions regarding -the amount of water, it is evident that we cannot take this -passage as a proof of the ordinary practice of the time.</p> - -<p>Unfortunately our oldest records of Roman life and habits -go back but a short way before the Christian era, and hence -we cannot get much direct information as regards the first -objects which were sold by weight. We have already seen -that in the time of Plautus (<i>flor.</i> 200 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) the habit prevailed -of weighing wool out to the women slaves.</p> - -<p>However, from the legal formula used in the solemn process -of conveyance of real property (<i>res mancipi</i>) <i>per aes et libram</i>, -we may perhaps infer that the scales were used for none but -precious articles such as copper, silver and gold. That they -were used for those metals there can be little doubt. On the -other hand, as we find all kinds of corn sold at a later period -by dry measure, such as the <i>modius</i> or bushel, we may with -certainty conclude that such too had been the practice of the -earlier period.</p> - -<p>From the literary remains then of the Greeks, Hebrews -and Latins, it is beyond all doubt that in the early stages of -society nothing is weighed but the metals and wool (for the -apportioning of tasks). In this the records of all three nations -agree, whilst from Homer we learn that the Greeks were -using gold by weight, when as yet neither silver, copper nor -iron was sold or appraised by that process.</p> - -<p>To proceed then to a people compared to whom the Greek -and Hebrews in point of antiquity of civilization are but the -upstarts of yesterday. The Egyptians seem to have used -weight exclusively for the metals; the <i>Kat</i> and its tenfold the -<i>Uten</i> seem always used in connection with metals, whilst corn -is always connected with measures of capacity. The following<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_122"></a>[122]</span> -instances taken from the list of prices of commodities given by -Brugsch (<i>History of Egypt under the Pharaohs</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 199, -English Transl.) will suffice for our purpose: a slave cost 3 <i>tens</i> -1 <i>Kat</i> of silver; a goat cost 2 <i>tens</i> of copper; 1 <i>hotep</i> of wheat -cost 2 <i>tens</i> of copper; 1 <i>tena</i> of corn of Upper Egypt cost 5-7 -<i>tens</i> of copper; 1 <i>hotep</i> of spelt cost 2 <i>tens</i> of copper; 1 <i>hin</i> of -honey 8 <i>Kats</i> of copper. Even drugs were not weighed by the -Egyptians in the time of Rameses II. The physicians prescribed -by measure, as we learn from the Medical papyrus -Ebers<a id="FNanchor_169" href="#Footnote_169" class="fnanchor">[169]</a>.</p> - -<p>Passing then to the far East, we naturally are curious to -learn whether the oldest literary monument of any branch of -the Aryan race, the Rig-Veda, throws any light on our question. -We get there but meagre help: but yet, scanty as it is, it is -of great importance. As we saw above the Indians of the -Vedic age were still ignorant of the use of silver, although -possessing both gold and copper. Now, whilst we have no evidence -bearing upon the latter metal, there are two very remarkable -and important words used in connection with gold -which beyond doubt refer to the weighing of that metal. In -the <i>Mandala</i> (<span class="allsmcap">VIII.</span> 67, 1-2; 687, 1-2) a hymn commences: -“O India, bring us rice-cake, a thousand Soma-drinks, and an -hundred cows, O hero, bring us apparel, cows, horses, jewels -along with a mana of gold.” Again, “Ten horses, ten -caskets, ten garments, ten <i>pindas</i> of gold I received from -Divodāsa. Ten chariots equipped with side-horses, and an -hundred cows gave Açvatha to the Atharvans and the Pāyu” -(<i>Mandala</i>, <span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 49, 23-4). As we shall have occasion later on -to deal with the terms <i>manâ</i> and <i>hiranya-pinda</i> at greater -length, it will suffice our present purpose to point out that -we have a distinct mention of a weight of gold in the expression -<i>manâ hiranyayâ</i>. In only these two passages have -we any allusion to weighing, and in both it is in direct connection -with gold. The Aryans of the Veda are beyond all -doubt in a far less civilized state than the Egyptians, Hebrews, -Greeks or Romans of the historical period. Hence we may<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_123"></a>[123]</span> -without danger infer that they did not use weight for any -cereals they may have cultivated. Therefore we may, with a -good deal of probability, conclude that we have got a people -who had already a knowledge of the art of weighing before -they were acquainted with either silver or iron, and that this -people used the scales for gold and nothing else. This, taken -in connection with the fact that in Homer, although silver is -known, the weighing of metals is confined to gold, leads us -irresistibly to conclude that gold was the first of all substances -to be weighed, or, to put it in a different way, the art of -weighing was invented for gold.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_124"></a>[124]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VI">CHAPTER VI.<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Gold Unit everywhere the value of a Cow.</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>We have now proved four things: (1) the general distribution -of the ox throughout our area, (2) its universal employment as -the unit of value throughout the same region, (3) the equable -distribution of gold throughout the same countries, and (4) that -gold is the first of all commodities to be weighed. Our next -step will be to show that gold was weighed universally by the -same standard, and that this standard unit in all cases where -we can find record was regarded as the equivalent of the ox or -the cow.</p> - -<p>We have already seen that the gold talent of the Homeric -Poems, which was in use among the Greeks before the art of -stamping money had yet become known, weighed about 130 -grains troy (8·4 grammes). In historical times gold was always -weighed on what was called the <i>Euboic</i> (or Euboic-Attic) -standard. Thus when Thasos began to strike gold coins in -411 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> after her revolt from Athens they weighed 135 grs. -Unless this had been the time-honoured unit employed for gold -in that island so famous for its mines the Thasians would hardly -have employed it. Certainly they would not adopt it simply -because it was the standard of the hated Athenians, especially -as they had a different standard for silver.</p> - -<p>The gold coins of Athens struck a few years later are on the -same standard of 135 grs, and when Rhodes at the beginning -of the fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> began to coin gold, she used the same -unit, although she employed for silver the unit of 240 grs. -Cyzicus also, although coining her well-known electrum<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_125"></a>[125]</span> -<i>Cyzicenes</i> on the Phoenician standard, used the unit of 130 grs -for pure gold.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;" id="figure16"> -<img src="images/figure16.jpg" width="300" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 16.</span> <span class="smcap">Gold Stater of Philip of Macedon.</span></p> -</div> - -<p>This standard, as we shall presently see, virtually remained -unchanged for gold down to the latest days of Greek independence. -It likewise prevailed in Macedonia and Thrace. For -when Philip II. coined the gold from the mines of Crenides -into staters on the so-called Attic standard of 135 grains, he -did nothing else than employ for the first gold coinage of his -country the unit which had there, as in Greece Proper, prevailed -for many ages for the weighing of gold. For since gold was -first coined in that region about 350 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, and yet silver coins had -been current in Thrace and Macedon since about 500 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, it -would be absurd to suppose that there was no unit by which -gold in ingots or rings could be appraised.</p> - -<p>I have shown elsewhere that the rings found by Dr -Schliemann at Mycenae were probably made on a standard -of 135 grains troy. It is natural to suppose that if within -the area of Greece Proper gold rings were fixed according to a -definite standard, and that standard the Homeric talent, the -Macedonians and Thracians would possess a similar unit in the -fifth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> But there is a small piece of literary evidence -to show that the Macedonians were acquainted with the gold -unit, which we already know as the Homeric ox unit. Eustathius -tells us that “three gold staters formed the Macedonian -talent<a id="FNanchor_170" href="#Footnote_170" class="fnanchor">[170]</a>.” Whether Mommsen is right in thinking that this -name was given to the talent in Egypt in consequence of its -having been introduced by the Lagidae (themselves Macedonians) -or not, it equally indicates that from of old such a talent, confined -in use to gold, and the threefold of the Homeric ox-unit,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_126"></a>[126]</span> -had existed in Macedonia. Hence Philip II. did not require to -go to Athens to seek for a standard for his new gold coinage. -Passing into Asia we find there the shekel as the Daric (Δαρεικός), -the normal weight of which is 130 grains troy. This standard -prevailed all through the Persian empire, thus extending into -the countries now represented by Afghanistan and Northern -India. Numismatists have pointed out the fact that Philip -coined his staters some five grains heavier than the rival gold -currency of the Persian empire, as if to enhance the estimation -of his new coinage. This explanation is perhaps over subtle; -at all events it is interesting to find the successors of Alexander -the Great in the Far East, the kings of Bactria, coining their -staters not on the standard of 135 grains, but rather on that of -130, in other words following the native standard which the -Daric simply represented as a coin. Thus Dr Gardner<a id="FNanchor_171" href="#Footnote_171" class="fnanchor">[171]</a> in his -Table of Normal Weights makes the Bactrian stater of what he -calls the Attic standard weigh 132 grains and the drachm -66 grains, and it is also admitted that from the time of Eucratides -the Greek kings of Bactria adopted a native standard.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;" id="figure17"> -<img src="images/figure17.jpg" width="300" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 17.</span> <span class="smcap">Persian Daric.</span></p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure18"> -<img src="images/figure18.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 18.</span> <span class="smcap">Gold Stater of Diodotus, King of Bactria.</span></p> -</div> - -<p>This new standard seems to be identical with that called by -metrologists the Persian, on which [silver] coins were struck in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_127"></a>[127]</span> -all parts of the Persian empire, notably the Sigli stamped with -the figure of the Persian king, which must have freely circulated -in the northern parts of India that paid tribute to the king. -Whether the reason given for the use of this standard is right or -not, we may see hereafter, when a different explanation will be -offered to the reader. That great Indian archaeologist, General -Cunningham<a id="FNanchor_172" href="#Footnote_172" class="fnanchor">[172]</a>, goes further, and maintains “that the earliest -Greek coins of India, those of Sophytes, are struck, not on the -Attic standard, but on a native standard which is based on the -<i>rati</i> or grain of <i>abrus precatorius</i>.” Whatever may be the -ultimate decision of this dispute, it is enough for our purpose -that whilst undoubtedly a native silver standard sooner or later -replaced the Attic, so likewise the Attic standard, if used for -gold, did not remain at its full weight of 135 grains, but rather -approximated to that of the native standard of the Daric -(130 grains). It is almost certainly a native standard which -appears as the weight of the <i>gold piece</i> (<i>suvarṇa</i>) in the tables of -weights given in the Hindu treatise called <i>Līlāvati</i>, written in -the seventh century <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>, before the Muhammadan conquest of -India, and which we shall notice presently at greater length. -This <i>suvarṇa</i> is the only unit for gold mentioned in the tables, -and its weight can be demonstrated to be about 140 grs troy. -That the gold unit only varied 10 grains in the course of 10 -centuries is very remarkable.</p> - -<p>Let us now return to the ancient peoples of Further -Asia Minor and Northern Africa. The Phoenicians and their -neighbours in historical times seem to have used the double of -the unit of 130 grains. It is quite possible that this doubling -of the unit can be explained by a simple principle, which -will likewise fit in with the threefold of the same unit, which -we have just now had to deal with under its name of Macedonian -Talent. But how far this double unit prevailed in earlier times -among the Semites it is not easy to tell. However, the evidence -to be derived from the Old Testament is in favour of the -priority of the unit of 130 grains. But this is not all our -evidence. The Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions give us considerable<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_128"></a>[128]</span> -information regarding the currency not simply of -Egypt itself but likewise of neighbouring countries. For -when Egypt was at the zenith of her glory great conquerors -like Thothmes III. and Rameses II. (the Sesostris of Herodotus) -carried their arms into all the surrounding lands and reduced -them to the position of tributary vassals. Many of the tablets -which recount their exploits contain the tale of the spoil, and -describe it as consisting amongst other things of gold rings.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;" id="figure19"> -<img src="images/figure19.jpg" width="500" height="400" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 19.</span> <span class="smcap">Egyptian Wall Painting showing the Weighing of Gold Rings<a id="FNanchor_173" href="#Footnote_173" class="fnanchor">[173]</a>.</span></p> -</div> - -<p>The wall paintings which still survive the inroads of time, -and the still ruder hands of Arabs or tourist, constantly exhibit -representations of the payment of tribute. Again and again we -see the tribute money in the form of rings being weighed in -scales, “on which solid images of animals in stone or brass in -the shape of recumbent oxen took the place of our weights<a id="FNanchor_174" href="#Footnote_174" class="fnanchor">[174]</a>.” -Erman gives several representations of such weighing scenes -(pp. 611-12), and infers from the fact that the weigh-master and -his scales are always present at such payments, that the scales -were the ordinary medium of such payments. Mere pictures -however do not tell us anything about the weight of the rings -therein pourtrayed. Fortunately however we have examples<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_129"></a>[129]</span> -of such rings. Brandis<a id="FNanchor_175" href="#Footnote_175" class="fnanchor">[175]</a>, who was the first to seek for the unit -on which these rings were fashioned, thought that they followed -the heavy shekel (260 grs.), the double of our common unit. -On the other hand F. Lenormant<a id="FNanchor_176" href="#Footnote_176" class="fnanchor">[176]</a> thinks that they are really -based on the light shekel, or rather on a lighter variety of the -light shekel, of about 127 grains, and he is followed in this by -Hultsch<a id="FNanchor_177" href="#Footnote_177" class="fnanchor">[177]</a>. For our purpose it matters not whether the rings -were made on the simple unit or its double, for there are not -really two separate standards but simply one and the same. -It is hardly likely that the Pharaohs would have done otherwise -than the kings of Persia at a later time, who made their -subject countries pay their tribute in the recognized currency of -the kingdom, the gold being reckoned (as Herodotus says) by -the Euboic talent, the silver by the Babylonian talent. There -can then be but little doubt that these gold rings give us either -actually the old Egyptian standard, or a standard so closely -related to it that there was to all intents and purposes no -material distinction between them.</p> - -<p>Schliemann noticed a resemblance between some of the -rings found at Mycenae and those represented in Egyptian -paintings. It is not preposterous to suppose that the rings -of Mycenae represent a kind of ring both in form and -weight which was employed by the peoples of Asia Minor and -Egypt, as well as in Greece. The contact between Egypt and -Asia Minor is so close, communication so free, that it would be -in itself most unlikely that any wide divergence of currency -would exist in earlier times, whilst on the other hand her -relations with the people of Ethiopia and Libya were likewise so -close that they forbid any other conclusion. This is proved -by the statement of Horapollo that the <i>Monad</i> (μονάς), which -the Egyptians held to be the basis of all numeration, was equal -to two drachms, that is, to 135 grs.<a id="FNanchor_178" href="#Footnote_178" class="fnanchor">[178]</a></p> - -<p>Passing westward let us try and learn something from the -early coinage of Italy. Unfortunately, with the exception of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_130"></a>[130]</span> -the Greek cities of Magna Graecia, all Italian mintages are of -a comparatively late date. The Etruscans were probably the -first of the non-Hellenic inhabitants to coin money, but unhappily -their gold coins are of rather uncertain date. However, -it is worth noticing that these coins are probably thirds, -sixths and twelfths of the unit 130-5 grains, the weights -respectively being 44 grs., 22 grs., 11 grs. This view borrows -considerable additional probability from the fact that the silver -coins with plain reverses, which very possibly belong to the same -age as the earlier gold, are struck on the standard of 135 grains. -Whilst in the latter case the Etruscans can be said to have -struck their coins on the Euboic-Syracusan, or Attic-Syracusan, -or Euboic-Attic standard which was in use at Syracuse, it -cannot be so alleged with respect to their gold. For not -only are the subdivisions of the unit unknown to the Attic or -Syracusan gold, but the coins bear numerals, 𐌣 = 50, 𐌡𐌢𐌢 -= 25, 𐌢𐌠𐌠< = 12½, 𐌢 = 10, which are found respectively on -the coins of 44, 22, 11 and 9 grains, while on others again which -weigh 18 grains we find the numeral 𐌡 = 5 grains<a id="FNanchor_179" href="#Footnote_179" class="fnanchor">[179]</a>. Here then -we have clear indications of a native Etruscan gold currency, -existing prior to Greek influence and able to hold its own when -the art of coining, and the very coin types themselves, were -borrowed from the Greeks.</p> - -<p>The Carthaginians were the close allies of the Etruscans -in the struggle for the maritime supremacy of the Western -Mediterranean against the Greeks, especially the bold Phocaeans, -who gained over the fleet of both peoples a “Cadmean victory” -at Alalia in Corsica (537 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>).</p> - -<p>The first Carthaginian coinage was issued in the Sicilian -cities, especially Panormus, at a comparatively late date, certainly -not earlier than 410 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> As this coinage was entirely -under Greek influences of comparatively late date, we cannot of -course get any direct evidence from it as regards the original -Phoenician standard. Carthage herself did not issue coins -until about a century later, <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 310<a id="FNanchor_180" href="#Footnote_180" class="fnanchor">[180]</a>. Hence we have no -data of an early date. The gold coins struck in Sicily are<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_131"></a>[131]</span> -didrachms of about 120 grains troy, with various subdivisions. -This is usually described as the Phoenician standard, or rather -the Phoenician gold standard of 260 grains considerably reduced. -But the full unit of 240 is never found in the coins, and -although we get coins of 2½ drachms (= 147 grains), it is more -natural to regard the didrachm of about 120 grains as the real -unit, in other words the slightly lowered common unit, which we -already found fixed at about 127 grains in the Egyptian rings. -In Sicily and Magna Graecia we are fairly certain that the unit -was in early times that of 130 grains. But whether this was -native or brought in by the Greek colonists, it is impossible to -prove. All that we know for certain is that there was in Sicily -and Magna Graecia, a small talent used only for gold; which -was equivalent to three Attic gold staters, or in other words the -threefold of our Homeric ox-unit. Thus an ancient writer says -“the Sicilian talent had a very small weight; the ancient one, -as Aristotle says, 24 <i>nummi</i>, the later 12 <i>nummi</i>. But the -<i>nummus</i> weighs three half obols<a id="FNanchor_181" href="#Footnote_181" class="fnanchor">[181]</a>.” From this it is plain that -the ancient form of this talent weighed 36 obols, that is, six -drachms, or three staters.</p> - -<p>Lastly, let us glance at those peoples who lay between -Northern Italy and the Bay of Biscay. Although we have no -direct evidence as to the unit by which the Gauls reckoned -that gold of which, as we saw above, they had great store, -before they came under the influence of either Phoenician, -Greek, or Italian, we can perhaps make a justifiable inference -from the fact that when the Gauls proceeded to strike gold coins -in imitation of the gold stater of Philip of Macedon, they did -not, as might have been expected, follow also the weight unit -(135 grs.) of that coin. For as a matter of fact scarcely any of -the Gaulish imitations exceed 120 grains troy<a id="FNanchor_182" href="#Footnote_182" class="fnanchor">[182]</a>. It would appear -then that the Gauls had already at that time a gold unit in -use, somewhat lighter than the usual weight of our “ox-unit,” -although we cannot of course ignore the possibility of its being<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_132"></a>[132]</span> -the form of the Phoenician gold standard, which we found above -was employed by the Carthaginians both in Sicily and Africa; -in other words it may be maintained that the Gauls followed -the standard on which the Phocaeans of Massalia struck their -<i>silver</i> coinage. As, however, the coins of Massalia were drachms -of about 55 grains the probability is not very high that the -Gauls had no gold standard of their own for gold until they got -one from the <i>silver</i> of Marseilles.</p> - -<p>The Teutonic tribes who likewise issued imitations of the -Philippus also followed a standard of 120 grs. for coins, from -which it is likely that they as well as the Gauls employed a unit -of 120 grs. for gold before they ever began to strike money.</p> - -<p>We have now taken a survey of the most ancient gold -standards we can find throughout the wide regions through -which the common system of weights of after years prevailed, -extending in our range from the heart of Asia to the shores of -the Atlantic.</p> - -<p>Our results will best be seen in the following table:</p> - -<table summary="Results of the survey of gold standards"> - <tr> - <th></th> - <th>Grains.</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Egyptian gold ring standard</td> - <td class="tdr">127</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Mycenaean</td> - <td class="tdr">130-5</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Homeric talent (or “Ox-unit”)</td> - <td class="tdr">130-5</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Attic gold stater (the sole standard for gold)</td> - <td class="tdr">135</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Thasos</td> - <td class="tdr">135</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Rhodes</td> - <td class="tdr">135</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Cyzicus</td> - <td class="tdr">130</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Hebrew standard</td> - <td class="tdr">130</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Persian Daric</td> - <td class="tdr">130</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Macedonian stater</td> - <td class="tdr">135</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Bactrian stater</td> - <td class="tdr">130-2</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Indian standard (7th cent. <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>)</td> - <td class="tdr">140</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Phoenician gold unit (double)</td> - <td class="tdr">260</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Carthaginian</td> - <td class="tdr">120</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Sicily and Lower Italy</td> - <td class="tdr">130-5</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Etruscan</td> - <td class="tdr">130-5</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Gaulish unit</td> - <td class="tdr">120</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>German</td> - <td class="tdr">120</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_133"></a>[133]</span></p> - -<p>A glance at the table will suffice to show the truth of the -proposition which we laid down as the object of this chapter, -viz., that over the whole of the area with which we are dealing, -the same unit with but little variations and fluctuations was -employed for the weighing of gold.</p> - -<p>Having proved the universal employment of the ox as a -chief unit of barter, the universal distribution of gold, the -priority of that metal both in discovery and in being weighed, -and finally, in the preceding pages, the remarkable fact that -to all intents and purposes the same unit of weight during -many centuries was employed in its appraising, we advance to -our next proposition, that this uniformity of the gold unit is -due to the fact that in all the various countries where we have -found it, it originally represented the value in gold of the cow, -the universal unit of barter in the same regions.</p> - -<p>It will of course be hardly possible for us to find data for -a direct proof that in all the countries given in our table as -employing the gold unit, that unit really represented the value -of the ox. In some cases we shall be able to produce a fair -amount of evidence more or less direct, whilst in others owing -to the necessity of the case the evidence will be almost wholly -inferential. Finally we shall be able to bring forward a very -cogent form of proof by demonstrating the absolute necessity -felt by barbarous persons of equating a ready made weight -standard, which is being taken over from their neighbours, to -the older unit of barter, and likewise the necessity felt by semi-civilized -peoples under certain circumstances, even when long -accustomed to the use of coined money, of returning to the -animal unit as a means of fixing the standard of their coinage.</p> - -<p>Starting first with the Greeks, we have already seen at an -early stage in this work that the talent of the Homeric Poems -was the equivalent of the ox, the older barter name being as yet -the only term used in expressing prices of commodities, and the -term talent being confined to the small piece of gold.</p> - -<p>Passing next to the Italian Peninsula and Sicily, although -possessed of certain definite statements as regards the value in -<i>copper</i> of an ox in the fifth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, nevertheless, owing to -the uncertainty which still exists as regards the relative value<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_134"></a>[134]</span> -of gold, silver and copper at Rome, we shall encounter considerable -obstacles in our attempt to find the value of an ox in <i>gold</i>.</p> - -<p>As Dr Theodore Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_183" href="#Footnote_183" class="fnanchor">[183]</a> has laid down certain propositions -in reference to inter-relations in value of the metals at -Rome, which were generally received until a very recent period, -when Mr Soutzo<a id="FNanchor_184" href="#Footnote_184" class="fnanchor">[184]</a>, in a clever brochure, put forward views of a -widely different character which have met with the approval -of some competent critics, and as the matter is still <i>sub judice</i>, -I think it best, after briefly giving the historical evidence for -the value of cattle, to give the views of both these writers.</p> - -<p>The Law known as Aternia Tarpeia (451 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) dealt with -questions of penalties; certain notices of it fortunately preserve -for us some valuable material. Cicero<a id="FNanchor_185" href="#Footnote_185" class="fnanchor">[185]</a> says, “Likewise -popular was the measure brought forward at the Comitia -Centuriata in the fifty-fourth year after the first consuls (451 -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) by the consuls Sp. Tarpeius and A. Aternius concerning -the amount of the penalty.” To the same law Dionysius of -Halicarnassus refers<a id="FNanchor_186" href="#Footnote_186" class="fnanchor">[186]</a>: “They ratified a law in the Centuriate -Assembly in order that all the magistrates might have the power -of inflicting punishment on those who were disorderly or acted -illegally in reference to their own jurisdiction. For till then -not all the magistrates had the power, but only the Consuls. -But they did not leave the penalty in their own hands to fix as -much as they pleased, but they themselves defined the amount, -having appointed as a maximum limit of penalty two oxen and -thirty sheep. And this law continued to be kept in force by -the Romans for a long time.” Festus (<i>s.v.</i> <i>Peculatus</i> p. 237 ed. -Müller) says: “Peculation (<i>peculatus</i>), as a name for public -theft, was derived from <i>pecus</i> ‘cattle,’ because that was the -earliest kind of fraud, and before the coining of copper or silver -the heaviest penalty for crimes was one of two sheep and thirty -oxen. That law was enacted by the Consuls T. Menenius -Lanatus and P. Sestius Capitolinus. As regards which cattle, -after the Roman people began to use coined money, it was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_135"></a>[135]</span> -provided by the Tarpeian Law that an ox should be reckoned at -100 asses, a sheep at 10 asses.”</p> - -<p>Again Aulus Gellius<a id="FNanchor_187" href="#Footnote_187" class="fnanchor">[187]</a> has a curious notice, too long to quote -in full, which ends “on that account afterwards by the Aternian -Law ten asses were appointed for each sheep, one hundred for -each ox.”</p> - -<p>Cicero and Dionysius are probably right (as Niebuhr thinks) -in saying that Tarpeius and Aternius fixed the number of -animals. C. Julius and P. Papinius, who were Consuls in -429 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, to whose reckoning of fines (<i>aestimatio multarum</i>) -Livy refers (<span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 30), probably changed the penalties in cattle -into money equivalents. Festus and Gellius have evidently -muddled their authorities, having interchanged the words <i>sheep</i> -(<i>ovium</i>) and <i>cows</i> (<i>bovum</i>). But the important thing is that -both are agreed in giving the value of the cow at 100 asses.</p> - -<p>Now Dr Hultsch (<i>Metrologie</i>², 19. 3), following Mommsen, -shows that gold being to silver as 12½:1, the small talent, -called the Sicilian, of which we have just spoken, confined -exclusively to gold, would be exactly equivalent to a Roman -pound of silver (135 × 3 × 12½ = 5062 grains of silver; whilst -the Roman lb. = 5040 grs.). Since at Rome, previous to the -reduction of the As in 268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, a <i>Scripulum</i> of silver was -equivalent to a pound of copper or as <i>libralis</i>, and there are -288 <i>Scripula</i> or <i>scruples</i> in the pound, it follows that the pound -of silver or its equivalent the Sicilian gold talent was worth 288 -<i>asses librales</i>. This gold talent = 3 Attic staters (or ox-units), -therefore 1 Attic stater = 96 <i>asses librales</i>. But we learned from -Festus and Gellius that the value of the cow fixed in 429 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -was 100 asses. From this it appears that the value of the ox -on Italian soil at this period was almost exactly the same as -the traditional value which it had in the Homeric Poems, and -which it continued to have in the Delian sacrifices in later -times. The mere difference between 96 and 100 asses calls for -no elaborate comment. It is enough to remark after Hultsch, -that the further we go back the cheaper copper appears to be -in relation to silver. This fact will easily explain any discrepancy.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_136"></a>[136]</span> -Thus Mommsen’s view that silver was to copper as -288:1 gives us a most interesting result.</p> - -<p>Let us now turn to Mr Soutzo’s view on the same subject. -He maintains that at no time was the relation between silver -and copper greater than 120:1, basing his argument on the -assumption (which we shall find to be against the statements -of the ancient writers) that when the first silver <i>denarius</i> or -10-<i>as</i> piece was coined in 268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, as the <i>as</i> at that time -weighed only two <i>unciae</i>, or one-sixth of a pound, silver was to -copper as 120:1. He also argues from the fact that in Egypt, -under the Ptolemies, the same relations existed between silver -and bronze. He likewise maintains that the relation between -gold and silver in Italy and Sicily at this period was as 16:1, -from which it follows that gold was to copper as 1920:1. -This of course gives us as the value of a cow about 390 -grains of gold, that is about three gold staters, or ox-units. -We would certainly be able to prove that at no time or place -in the ancient world was a cow of so great a value in gold.</p> - -<p>I shall refrain from any discussion of the merits of either -view for the present. I will only add one observation: Mr -Soutzo (p. 17) regards the Italian weight standards as borrowed -from the East, and starts with bronze as the earliest stage in -the history of the weights. The only clearly defined unit of -Roman growth according to him is the Centupondium, which -he says is the same as the Assyrian talent. From this the -Romans obtained their own libra or pound by dividing their -talents into 100 parts instead of 60. We shall find hereafter -that this is an untenable position, but meantime it is interesting -to find the Centupondium, or sum of 100 <i>asses</i> taken by -an unprejudiced writer as the basis of the Roman system in the -light of the fact that the ancient Roman value of the cow is -likewise 100 <i>asses</i>. If Mr Soutzo was right, our thesis finds -complete support, as it would plainly appear in that case that, -although the Italians received their weight-unit ready made, -they found it nevertheless necessary to equate the new metallic -unit so obtained to the cow, the older unit of barter.</p> - -<p>In Sicily we have an opportunity not merely of finding the -approximate value of a cow in gold without having to deal<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_137"></a>[137]</span> -with the disturbing question of the relative value of copper -and silver, but also of showing that Soutzo’s relation of 120:1 -as that between silver and copper in early Italy must certainly -be wrong, and that Mommsen’s view is in the main correct. -The famous Sicilian poet Epicharmus has left us a line: “Buy -me straightway a nice heifer calf for ten <i>nomoi</i><a id="FNanchor_188" href="#Footnote_188" class="fnanchor">[188]</a>.” As regards -the value of the <i>nomos</i>, or <i>nummus</i> (νόμος or νοῦμμος), Pollux -supplies us with some definite information.</p> - -<p>In passage (<span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 87) already quoted he says: “Yet the -Sicilian talent was the least in amount, the ancient one, as -Aristotle says, weighed four and twenty <i>nummi</i>, but the later -one twelve; now the <i>nummus</i> is worth three half obols.” These -three half obols plainly mean the ordinary half obols of the -Attic standard. As the Attic drachm is 67½ grains (normal), -65 grains in actual coins, the ⅙ or obol = 11 grains roughly -speaking; three half obols therefore weigh 16½ to 17 grains. -Accordingly, if we take the weight of the <i>nummus</i> or <i>litra</i> at -16 to 17 grains of silver, we shall not be wide of the mark. The -price then of a good heifer calf was 10 <i>nummi</i> or 160 to 170 -grains of silver. The term <i>moschos</i> (calf) is used rather vaguely -by various Greek writers, but fortunately by the aid of the Sicilian -poet Theocritus, we are certain that it means a calf of the -first year not yet weaned; for he speaks<a id="FNanchor_189" href="#Footnote_189" class="fnanchor">[189]</a> of putting the <i>moschos</i> -to the cows to suck. From what we have seen (<a href="#Page_32">p. 32</a>) of -the relative values of cattle of different ages, it is tolerably -certain that no full-grown cow would be worth less than six -or more than ten calves of the first year. Hence the Sicilian -cow, at the end of the sixth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, must have been worth -from 960-1020 to 1600-1700 grains of silver. We cannot -tell exactly what was the ratio between gold and silver in -Sicily or Italy at this time, but as we find it was 14 to 1 in -Attica in 440 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, the probability is that it was not very far -from that in Sicily. It certainly must have been at some -point between 15:1 and 12:1. Taking it at 12:1, the value -of the cow would range from 80 to 141¾ grains of gold, whilst -in the ratio of 15:1 the range is from 64 to 113 grains of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_138"></a>[138]</span> -gold. It is thus absolutely certain that the value of a cow in -Sicily in the sixth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> must lie within the limits of 64 -to 141 grains, and if the calf of Epicharmus is a suckling, the -range in the value of the cow must be from 113 to 140 grains. -This is all we require for practical purposes, and it will be -admitted that the value of a cow in Sicily comes very close to -our Homeric ox-unit of 130-5 grains.</p> - -<p>We are now in a position to test the truth of Mr Soutzo’s -hypothesis. It will be conceded that at the beginning of the -fifth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, the cow must have had about the same value -both in Italy and Sicily. The cow in Italy was worth 100 -Roman pounds of copper, in Sicily about 1650 grains of silver. -If Soutzo is right in saying that silver was to copper as 120:1 -on multiplying 1650 by 120 we ought to get a result in copper -corresponding to 100 Roman pounds: 1650 × 120 = 198000. -Taking the Roman pound before it was raised at about 5000 grs. -the Sicilian cow was worth 39 pounds of copper (198000 ÷ 5000 = 39). -It is absurd to suppose that even at any time the Italian cow -could have been worth 2½ times the Sicilian. Let us now apply -the same test to Mommsen’s doctrine, and multiply 1650 grs. of -silver by 300. (I take this as being more likely than 288 to have -been the relation between copper and silver in the fifth century -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>). 1650 × 300 = 495000 ÷ 5000 = 99 pounds of copper. The -result is too striking to admit of our coming to any other -conclusion than that Mommsen is right.</p> - -<p>Next let us examine his doctrine that in ancient Italy gold -was to silver as 16:1. Mr Soutzo<a id="FNanchor_190" href="#Footnote_190" class="fnanchor">[190]</a> supports this view by three -arguments: (1) that when Rome in the course of the Second -Punic War issued gold coins for the first time, gold was to -silver as 16:1; (2) Mr Head<a id="FNanchor_191" href="#Footnote_191" class="fnanchor">[191]</a> has shown that at Syracuse under<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_139"></a>[139]</span> -the despot Dionysius (405-345 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) gold was to silver as -15:1; (3) that certain symbols on the gold coins of Etruria -when interpreted as referring to silver <i>litrae</i> give the proportion -between the metals as 16:1. The same answer can -dispose of the first two arguments. The state of affairs both at -Rome in <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 207, and at Syracuse under Dionysius, was quite -exceptional. Rome was in a state of bankruptcy, her subjects -largely in revolt, the Lex Oppia (215 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) prevented women -from wearing more than half an ounce of gold ornaments<a id="FNanchor_192" href="#Footnote_192" class="fnanchor">[192]</a>. It -is therefore irrational to treat as normal the relation found to -exist between the metals at such a crisis.</p> - -<p>Similarly at Syracuse the relations between the metals were -completely upset by the wild conduct of Dionysius, who forced -his subjects to take coins of tin at the same rate as though -they were silver. Moreover any evidence to be drawn with -reference to the ratio between silver and gold at Syracuse in -the time of Dionysius is completely nullified by the fact that -in the reign of Agathocles (<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 307) gold was to silver as 12:1<a id="FNanchor_193" href="#Footnote_193" class="fnanchor">[193]</a>. -It is evident therefore that if in 207 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> gold was to silver all -over Italy as 16:1, there must have been a great appreciation -of gold. Are we not then justified in regarding the ratio of -16:1 as exceptional, and that of 12:1 as the more regular? -That great fluctuations in the relations of the metals did -take place in Italy, we know from a statement of Polybius -that in his own time in consequence of the great output -of gold from a mine in Noricum gold went down one-third in -value. Silver was scarce in Central Italy, for it was only after -the conquest of Magna Graecia that Rome found herself in a -position to issue a silver currency. On the other hand there -must have been a large and constant supply of gold coming -down from the gold-fields of the Alps in exchange for the bronze -wares of Etruria. Now as at Athens, where silver was so plenty -and gold in earlier days scarce, the ratio was never higher than -15:1, it is impossible to suppose that in Northern and Central -Italy, where the conditions were contrariwise, the ratio can ever -have been in ordinary times higher than 12:1.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_140"></a>[140]</span></p> - -<p>It is quite possible that after the Gauls got possession of -Northern Italy, the supply of gold which reached Etruria and -Latium may have been considerably reduced, and this would -perfectly explain the relation existing at a certain period between -gold and silver coins in Etruria, supposing that Soutzo’s -interpretation of the symbols is correct. But as we have no -literary evidence to check off any deductions drawn from the -coins, it is impossible for us to say whether the symbols on the -gold pieces refer to units of silver or bronze.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 425px;" id="figure20"> -<img src="images/figure20.jpg" width="425" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 20.</span> “<span class="smcap">Regenbogenschüssel</span>” -(ancient German imitation of the Stater of Philip of Macedon).</p> -</div> - -<p>Returning to the Kelts, the close kinsfolk of the Italians, -the reader will recollect that the Gauls struck their imitations -of the stater of Philip of Macedon on a standard of 120 grs., -15 grains lower than the weight of the archetype. Now similar -but still more barbarous imitations of Philips gold stater are -found in Germany. These Rainbow dishes (<i>Regenbogenschüsseln</i>), -as they are popularly termed in allusion to the picturesque -superstition that a treasure of gold lies at the foot of the -rainbow, and also to their scyphate form, are found in especial -abundance in Rhenish Bavaria and Bohemia. Like the Gaulish -imitations of the Philippus from which they are copied, they -follow a standard of 120 grs. (and like the Gauls the Germans -struck quarters of this coin, a division wholly unknown to the -Greeks)<a id="FNanchor_194" href="#Footnote_194" class="fnanchor">[194]</a>. In the region just indicated dwelt the ancient -Alamanni, and there can be no doubt that it was this people -who issued the coins found there. Now the Alamanni were -among the barbarians who after having overrun the provinces -of the Roman Empire, committed to barbarous Latin their -immemorial laws and institutions. In the Laws of the Alamanni<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_141"></a>[141]</span> -the best ox is estimated at five <i>tremisses</i><a id="FNanchor_195" href="#Footnote_195" class="fnanchor">[195]</a>, that is 1⅔ <i>solidi</i>, -or in other words 120 grs. of gold, the medium ox = 4 <i>tremisses</i> -= 96 grs. The coincidence that the value of the ox in gold is -the actual weight of the coins of the Alamanni is too striking -to admit of any other explanation than that the gold coins of -this people were struck on the native standard, the ox-unit. -The Keltic and Teutonic tribes were so intermixed that we -may plausibly infer that the Gauls had reduced the weight of -the Philippus to 120 grs. because owing to gold being less -plentiful and cattle more abundant to the north of the Alps, -from a very remote time the ox-unit throughout Gaul and -Germany was slightly lower than along the Mediterranean.</p> - -<p>In the Laws of the Burgundians the value of an ox is set at -2 <i>solidi</i> = 144 grs. of gold<a id="FNanchor_196" href="#Footnote_196" class="fnanchor">[196]</a>. This of course is considerably more -than that of the Alamannic ox, but when we consider the late -period at which the laws of the Barbarians were compiled, and -the various recensions which they underwent, the strange fact -is that the ox should have varied so little in its relation to gold -from the Homeric ox-unit of at least 1000 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span></p> - -<p>Passing into Scandinavia we once more, even so late as the -eighth century <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>, find the same strange agreement in value. -In the ancient Norse documents (where the cow is the unit -of value as we have already seen) it is reckoned at 2½ öres -(ounces) of silver = 1078 grains. But we likewise know from -the same sources that gold stood to silver as 8:1; accordingly -the cow was worth 134 grs. of gold<a id="FNanchor_197" href="#Footnote_197" class="fnanchor">[197]</a>.</p> - -<p>Besides the Hellenes and Italians there was another people -who strove for the mastery of all the Western Mediterranean. -The ancient city of Tyre had sent out many colonies into the -far West, when the nascent power of Hellas had already begun -to assert its superiority in the Aegean. Trade grew and flourished -between the colonies and the mother city in Phoenicia; -thus there was unbroken intercourse between remote Gades -and her Eastern mother until after the destruction of the latter<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_142"></a>[142]</span> -(720 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>). Henceforward the headship of the Phoenician cities -of the West falls into the hands of Carthage, the scene of the -last great act and final catastrophe in the drama of Phoenician -history. At the very time, nay some say on the very day, when -the Greeks of the East were destroying the host of Xerxes in -the Strait of Salamis, the Hellenes of the West led by brave -Gelon of Syracus were repelling a great army of Carthaginians -before the walls of Himera, and during the third and fourth -centuries <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> the Greeks of Sicily lived in constant danger from -the Carthaginians, who held the western part of the island with -their factories of Lilybaeum, Drepanum and Motyé, until at last -they were finally expelled from the island by the resistless -might of Rome (241 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>).</p> - -<p>Could we but learn the estimate put upon the ox by the -Phoenicians or Carthaginians, we would get a fair index to its -value over a wide extended area. For as in earlier times the -Phoenician influence extended from Tyre to Gades, linking both -east and west, so in later days Carthage extended her power -over all North Africa from the Pillars of Herakles to the -confines of Egypt, and over Southern Spain.</p> - -<p>Some forty years ago the longest Phoenician inscription yet -known was found at Marseilles. The inscription seems to have -belonged to a temple of Baal, and contains directions touching -sacrifices and certain payments to be made to the officiating -priest. Chemical analysis of the stone has demonstrated that it -is of a kind not found in France, but known in North Africa. -Hence M. Renan thought that it had been brought as ballast in -some ship. The names of two Suffetes stand at the head of the -inscription, which seems along with other evidence to point to -its having been engraved at Carthage. On palaeographical -grounds its date is placed in the fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, but why it -came to Massalia seems still inexplicable. It is possible that in -the fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> there was a considerable body of Carthaginians -resident at Massalia, just as on the other hand we know -that there was a large Greek community residing at Carthage. -If that were so, the Carthaginians would naturally keep up the -worship of Baal at Marseilles, and would regulate the temple -worship in accordance with the practice of the mother city. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_143"></a>[143]</span> -stone in that case may have been imported to serve as an official -declaration of the rules to be observed in sacrifices. Movers and -Kenrick regarded the sums of money named in connection with -the victims as composition for the animals named, whilst the -editors of the <i>Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum</i> (Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> Pt. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> -p. 217) regard them as fees to be paid to the priests for the -performance of the sacrifices, saying that it is analogous to the -directions for the burnt offerings, peace offerings and thank -offerings contained in Leviticus i-vii. The few lines of the -inscription with which we are concerned I shall translate from -the Latin version given in the <i>Corpus</i>.</p> - -<p>“Concerning an ox, whether it is a whole burnt offering, or -deprecatory offering or a thank offering, there shall be to the -priests ten shekels of silver, and if it is a whole burnt offering, -in addition to the fees this weight of flesh, three hundred; and -if it is a peace offering the first cuts and additions, the appurtenances -thereof, and the skin and the entrails, carcase and -the feet, and the rest of the flesh shall belong to the giver of -the sacrifice.</p> - -<p>“Concerning the calf without horns, concerning an animal -which is not castrated, or a ram, whether it is a whole burnt -offering, or a peace offering, or a thank offering, there shall be -to the priests five shekels of silver, and if it be a whole burnt -offering in addition to the fee this weight of flesh, one hundred -and fifty.</p> - -<p>“Concerning a he-goat or a she-goat, whether it is a whole -burnt offering, etc. there shall be to the priest one shekel of -silver two <i>zer</i>.</p> - -<p>“Concerning a sheep or kid or goat, whether it is etc., there -shall be etc. ¾ shekel one [<i>zer</i>] of silver.</p> - -<p>“Concerning a tame bird, or wild bird, ¾ shekel and two -<i>zer</i>.”</p> - -<p>Let me here remark that in Leviticus there is no mention -whatsoever made of any fees to the priest, also that whilst -according to the above version the giver of the victim gets the -skin, in Leviticus (vii. 8) it is the priest who gets it as his -perquisite, as seems also to have been the practice in Greece. -For we know that the Spartan kings, who in their capacity of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_144"></a>[144]</span> -priests offered all sacrifices at Sparta, always got the skins as -their payment<a id="FNanchor_198" href="#Footnote_198" class="fnanchor">[198]</a>. That the sums mentioned are really the prices -of the victims is made almost certain by the fact that at the -famous Phoenician temple of Aphrodite at Eryx in Sicily the -victims were kept ready by the priests to be sold to worshippers -who wished to sacrifice, as we know from a curious story told -by Aelian<a id="FNanchor_199" href="#Footnote_199" class="fnanchor">[199]</a>.</p> - -<p>Whilst it would be of great importance for my purpose -to have been able to regard the sums mentioned in the inscription -as the actual value set upon the animals, even if we -simply regard them as fees they still give us some aid. For -as it is most unlikely that the fee for sacrificing would exceed -the value of the victim to be sacrificed, we thus can obtain a -minimum limit of value. We may then safely assume that the -value of the ox was not less than 10 shekels of silver. On the -other hand we shall find from Exodus what must have been -the maximum value among the Hebrews at a comparatively -late date. As the Punic ox cannot have been worth less than -1350 grs. of silver, and the Hebrew not more than 1760 grs., -it is almost certain that the value of the ox at Carthage lay -between these limits.</p> - -<p>The pieces of silver mentioned in the inscription are -probably ordinary silver didrachms of the Attic standard. The -Carthaginians had coined silver in Sicily on the Attic standard -from about 410 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, but issued no silver coins at Carthage itself -until after the acquisition of the Spanish Silver Mines (241 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), -although gold, electrum, and bronze coins were minted. In -Greece Proper in the 4th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> gold was to silver as -10:1; we may therefore not be far wrong if we assume a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_145"></a>[145]</span> -similar ratio between the metals to have held at Carthage -about the same period. That silver was scarce is shown by the -fact that they did not coin it, although issuing gold, electrum -and bronze. Ten silver didrachms would therefore = 1 gold -didrachm of 135 grs., which is of course our ox-unit. This is a -remarkable result, and of itself would make one believe that -the sum represents the real value of an ox, which the practice -at Eryx puts beyond doubt. We know that at Athens the -people who were bound to provide the public sacrifices supplied -very wretched oxen, so we need not be surprised to find precautions -taken by the priests of Baal to ensure that proper -animals should be provided for the altar, especially as they -themselves got a share of the flesh.</p> - -<p>Next let us see if that most ancient of all known civilized -lands, Egypt, can produce from her store of monumental records -any evidence for our purpose. Professor Brugsch<a id="FNanchor_200" href="#Footnote_200" class="fnanchor">[200]</a>, in his <i>History -of Egypt under the Pharaohs</i>, gives from inscriptions a list of -the prices of various commodities about 1000 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>: a slave cost -3 <i>ten</i> 1 <i>ket</i> of silver; an ox 1 <i>ket</i> of silver (= 8 <i>ten</i> of copper); -a goat cost 2 <i>ten</i> of copper; 1 pair of fowls (geese?) cost ⅓ <i>ten</i> -of copper; 1 <i>hotep</i> of wheat cost 2 <i>ten</i> of copper; 1 <i>tena</i> of -corn of Upper Egypt cost 5-7 <i>ten</i> of copper; 1 <i>hotep</i> of spelt -2 <i>ten</i> of copper; 1 <i>hin</i> of honey 8 <i>ket</i> of copper; 50 acres of -arable land 5 <i>ten</i> of silver. Of course there must be more or -less uncertainty about some of these statements owing to the -imperfect knowledge which we as yet possess. At first sight -the reader naturally wonders how it is possible to calculate the -value of the ox as here given, which is only 1 ket of silver, -that is, the Egyptian ox of 1000 <i>B.C.</i> was only worth 140 -grains of <i>silver</i>, whilst an ox hitherto has been worth about the -same amount in <i>gold</i>. At first sight this is enough to stagger -us, but a moment’s reflection makes the matter very intelligible. -We have already noticed (<a href="#Page_59">p. 59</a>) that at a certain stage in the -history of the metals silver was far scarcer than gold, and that -its rarity combined with its beauty no doubt made it to be -eagerly sought and held in great esteem. We saw that the -Arabs of the Soudan down to the present day prefer silver<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_146"></a>[146]</span> -to gold; whilst in the earlier part of the present century -when Japan was opened to European commerce the Japanese -eagerly exchanged gold for silver at the rate of one to three, -and even less, as they possessed no native silver, and were -charmed with the beauty of the little known metal<a id="FNanchor_201" href="#Footnote_201" class="fnanchor">[201]</a>. Marco -Polo also tells us that “in the province of Carajan (the modern -Yunnan) gold is so plenty that they give a saggio of gold for -only six of the same weight of silver;” and of the province of -Zardandan, five days west of Carajan, he says, “I can tell you -they give one weight of gold for only five of silver<a id="FNanchor_202" href="#Footnote_202" class="fnanchor">[202]</a>.”</p> - -<p>It is almost certain that in all countries at one stage silver -must have been of higher value than gold; afterwards as its production -became greater, it became equal in value, and finally, -little by little, much less valuable, until at last the relation -between the metals is 1:22. Of course we must add that there -must have been always certain fluctuations, according as a -sudden increase of output of one or other of the metals altered -temporarily their relations. We have evidence that silver in -early times in Egypt was held in higher esteem than gold. -Thus Erman<a id="FNanchor_203" href="#Footnote_203" class="fnanchor">[203]</a> says that according to ancient Egyptian notions -silver was the most costly of the precious metals; for they -always in an enumeration mention it before gold, and in the -tombs ornaments of silver are of far rarer occurrence than those -of gold. This circumstance is simply and sufficiently explained -(thinks Erman) by the fact that Egypt herself possesses no -deposits of silver, but must have obtained the metal from -Cilicia. Under the 18th dynasty (1400 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), the Phoenicians -supplied Egypt with silver and under the new empire the -supply had so increased that it was now evidently cheaper than -gold, for the later texts always name silver after gold, just as we -do. We have previously noticed the paucity of silver articles -in the tombs at Mycenae which are commonly dated 1400 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span></p> - -<p>It is therefore reasonable to suppose that towards the end of -the Second Millennium <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> gold and silver were almost of equal -value, not alone in Egypt, but in other parts likewise of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_147"></a>[147]</span> -ancient world. The great supply of silver had not yet been -obtained which in the 10th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> made silver at Jerusalem -like stones. “As for silver,” says the sacred writer, “it was -nothing accounted of in the days of Solomon” (900 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>)<a id="FNanchor_204" href="#Footnote_204" class="fnanchor">[204]</a>, who -had “made silver and gold at Jerusalem as plenteous as stones<a id="FNanchor_205" href="#Footnote_205" class="fnanchor">[205]</a>.” -By this time silver had become very cheap in Egypt likewise. -At least if we can at all rely on the author of the books of -Chronicles. For the king’s merchants “fetched up and brought -forth out of Egypt a chariot for six hundred shekels of silver, -and an horse for one hundred and fifty: and so brought they -out horses for all the kings of the Hittites and the kings of -Syria<a id="FNanchor_206" href="#Footnote_206" class="fnanchor">[206]</a>.”</p> - -<p>The shekel here meant is probably that of 130-135 grains, -while the price of the ox in Brugsch’s list is 1 ket or 140 grains. -At a moderate computation this would make a horse worth 150 -oxen, if our documents were contemporary. But from lists of -relative prices in ancient and modern times it is preposterous to -suppose that at any time or in any place such a remarkable -difference in value existed between the horse and the cow. -From this it follows that if Brugsch is right in his translation of -his Egyptian text, the latter must date from several centuries -before 1000 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, when as yet silver was of the same or almost -the same value as gold. Finally, we have no means of knowing -the age of the ox, but as it is equal in value to only four goats, -it is possible that it was not a full-grown animal. I have dealt -with this point at some length, and have little positive gain to -show, but it is necessary to put before the reader all data which -may aid in our search, and still more necessary to do so in the -case of evidence which seems to present serious difficulties.</p> - -<p>Unfortunately for us the Old Testament gives very scanty -information on the question of the cost of various commodities, -and in no place do we get any information regarding the price -of cattle. For in the account of the purchase of the threshing-floor -and oxen of Oman the Jebusite by king David, there is -a discrepancy in price between the Second Book of Samuel -(xxiv. 24) and First Chronicles (xxi. 25), the former making<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_148"></a>[148]</span> -the sum 50 shekels of silver, the latter “six hundred shekels -of gold by weight,” and in any case, as we do not know the -number of oxen used in threshing or the value of the floor and -threshing instruments, it is impossible for us to draw any inference. -In the Book of Exodus, however, we obtain the value -of a slave, from which we may at least get an approximate -idea of the value of an ox: “If the (wicked) ox shall push a -manservant or a maidservant; he (the owner of the ox) shall -give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox -shall be stoned” (xxi. 32). Here, as in the ancient laws of -Wales and elsewhere, the value of the male and female slave -is the same, and thirty shekels or pieces of silver seems to have -been the conventional price of a slave among the Hebrews. -To this Zechariah (xi. 12) seems to allude, “So they weighed -for my price thirty pieces of silver,” in reference to which the -Evangelist writes: “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken -by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces -of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the -children of Israel did value” (Matt. xxvii. 9). The average -slave among the Homeric Greeks (as we saw above) was worth -about three oxen, amongst the Irish three, among the modern -Zulus about 10, and among the wild tribes of Annam seven -(pp. 24-5). Allowing three oxen as the value of a slave among -the Hebrews, the ox is worth 10 shekels (ancient) = 1300 -grains of silver = 130 grains of gold, taking gold to silver as -10:1, which at an early period was probably the regular ratio -in parts of Asia Minor. The result thus reached gives us once -more the Homeric ox-unit as the value of the Hebrew ox. It is -certain that it cannot have been higher, although we cannot -show that it may not have been less.</p> - -<p>The cow is estimated in the Commentary on Vendîdâd, -Fargard, <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 1-2 at 12 <i>stirs</i> or <i>istirs</i>.</p> - -<p>Our task must be now to find out the weight of this <i>istir</i>. -<i>Istir</i> or <i>stir</i> is identified with Greek στατήρ (as <i>dirham</i> is with -Greek δραχμή).</p> - -<p>The Pahlavi Texts, translated by Dr West, naturally afford -us the readiest means of discovering our object<a id="FNanchor_207" href="#Footnote_207" class="fnanchor">[207]</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_149"></a>[149]</span></p> - -<p class="center">THE VALUE OF A COW</p> - -<table summary="The value of a cow" class="borders"> - <tr> - <th class="super"></th> - <th class="super">I</th> - <th class="super">II</th> - <th class="super">III</th> - <th class="super">IV</th> - <th class="super">V</th> - <th class="super">VI</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <th class="nobl">Sins or equivalent good works</th> - <th>Shayast I. 1</th> - <th>XI. 1</th> - <th>XVI. 1-3</th> - <th>XVI. 5</th> - <th>Spiegel Rivaya</th> - <th class="nobr">Spiegel Rivaya</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Srôshô-Karanam</td> - <td></td> - <td>1 dirham 2 mads</td> - <td></td> - <td>3 coins and a half</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Farmån</td> - <td>weight of 4 stirs and each stir has 4 dirhams</td> - <td>3 dirhams of 4 mads</td> - <td>3 coins of 5 annas some say, 3 coins</td> - <td>a Farmant is a Srôshô-Karanâm</td> - <td>7 stirs</td> - <td class="nobr">8 stirs</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Agerept</td> - <td>1 dirham</td> - <td>33 stirs</td> - <td>53 dirhams</td> - <td>16 stirs</td> - <td>12 stirs</td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Avôirîst</td> - <td>1 dirham</td> - <td>the weight of 33 dirhams</td> - <td>73 dirhams</td> - <td>25 stirs</td> - <td>15 stirs</td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Aredûs</td> - <td>30 stirs</td> - <td>30 stirs</td> - <td>30 stirs</td> - <td>30 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Khôr</td> - <td>60 stirs</td> - <td>60 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td>60 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Bâzâî</td> - <td>90 stirs</td> - <td>90 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td>90 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Yât</td> - <td>180 stirs</td> - <td>180 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td>180 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Tanâpûhar</td> - <td>300 stirs</td> - <td>300 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td>300 stirs</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_150"></a>[150]</span></p> - -<p>There are in the Shayast-la-Shayast various lists of sins and -good works. These sins or good works are put in the golden -balance and weighed, in which case the <i>stir</i> is a weight, whilst -in other cases we have a money evaluation. As much confusion -arises from variations in the lists, it will be best to tabulate -the different lists, and thus get a synoptic view of the -whole.</p> - -<p>On looking at the table, we find that all our authorities -are in complete harmony as to the amounts of the last five; -Aredûs is 30 <i>stirs</i>, Khôr = 60, Bâzâî = 90, Yât = 180, and Tanâpûhar -= 300 <i>stirs</i>. Let us first consider these. We must remember -that on the third night after death the soul is judged -by having its sins and good works weighed, and according as -the one or other predominates, is the ultimate destiny of the -soul foul or fair. It is thus essentially a scale of <i>weights</i>, not -of <i>coins</i>. The arrangement of the numbers at once speaks for -itself. 30 <i>stirs</i> = ½ <i>mina</i> on the Babylonian system, as will be -seen on p. 251. 60 <i>stirs</i> (Khôr) = 1 <i>mina</i>, 90 <i>stirs</i> (Bâzâî) = 1½ -<i>minae</i>, 180 (Yât) = 3 <i>minae</i>, and finally we get 300 <i>stirs</i> (Tanâpûhar) -= 5 <i>minae</i>. What then is the weight of the <i>stir</i>? It is -none other than the light Babylonian shekel (130 grains Troy).</p> - -<p>Now let us approach the bewildering tangle of the first four -degrees. It is evident that there are mistakes of numerals in -some cases, e.g. in Column <span class="allsmcap">I.</span>, where the Agerept and Avoîrîst -are made equal, both being only ⅟₁₆ of the first degree or -Farmân, and also in Col. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> we have the Agerept greater than -the Avoîrîst and Aredûs. But in Columns <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> and <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> we -get some elements of regularity. Two of them at least introduce -coined money, thus giving us an indication that it is -owing to the constant effort to make the lower weight conform -to the monetary units of the various periods at which the -Commentaries were written that the confusion has in great -part arisen. We find the Farmân = 3 <i>dirhams</i> of 4 <i>mads</i>, to -3 coins of 5 annas, and to 3½ coins. Dr West, calculating the -anna on the basis of the old rupee of Guzarat (Pt. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span>, p. 180), -makes the coin of Col. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> = 50 grains Troy, the old rupee being -less than its present weight (180 grains). The Farmân in this -case is 150 grains. The 3 <i>dirhams</i> of 4 <i>mads</i> each probably<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_151"></a>[151]</span> -are the same in amount. So too are the three coins and a half -of Col. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> In which case each coin must weigh 43 grains -(150 ÷ 3½ = 42⁶⁄₇), that is the regular weight of the <i>dirhams</i> -struck by the Arab conquerors of Persia. Comparing Cols. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> -and <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span>, we shall find the Agerept worth respectively 53 <i>dirhams</i> -and 16 <i>stirs</i>, the Avoîrîst set at 73 <i>dirhams</i> and 25 <i>stirs</i>. We -find then a very close approximation in comparative values. -The same proportion for all practical purposes exists between -the coin of 5 annas (50 grains) and the coin of 43 grains, as -between the 53 <i>dirhams</i>, and 16 <i>stirs</i> and 73 <i>dirhams</i> and 25 -<i>stirs</i>. But it is evident that in Col. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> the coin of 5 annas is -a thing quite distinct from the <i>dirhams</i> mentioned in the same -table, or else why is there a difference in nomenclature? The -<i>dirham</i> is probably the usual <i>dirham</i> of 43-40 grains. But -as we find 53 of these <i>dirhams</i> = 16 <i>stirs</i> of Col. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> accordingly -the <i>stir</i> of Col. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> = 132 grains Troy, which is plainly the -Babylonian shekel, and 73 <i>dirhams</i> = 25 <i>stirs</i>. This gives an -average for the <i>stir</i> of 126 grains Troy, which again points -directly to the light shekel of 130 grains Troy, or in other -words to the weight of the Daric. Another piece of evidence -in the same direction is the fact that the Sassanide kings -struck their silver coins on the so-called Attic standard, which -of course was identical with that in use from the earliest times -in Asia, as the standard of the Daric. The founder of the -Sassanide Dynasty, Ardeshir, struck his first gold coins on this -standard (staters of 135-0), whilst all the silver coins of this -dynasty are half-staters (65 grains) of the same standard. The -statement in Col. <span class="allsmcap">I</span>. that each <i>stir</i> has four <i>dirhams</i> probably -refers to a later period, when 4 <i>dirhams</i> of the ordinary Muhammedan -standard (43 grains Troy) were equivalent to a -rupee (180-170 grains).</p> - -<p>If it should be objected that the <i>istir</i> of the Avesta is the -old Persic silver standard of 172 grains, my reply is that as it -is evident from what we have seen above that in this <i>weight</i> -system there were <i>sixty</i> staters in the <i>mina</i>, this must be the -<i>weight</i>, not the silver <i>coin</i>, as there were only <i>fifty</i> staters in the -<i>money</i> mina.</p> - -<p>The ox of the Zend-Avesta according to tradition is therefore<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_152"></a>[152]</span> -rated at 12 <i>stirs</i> or staters of 130 grains of silver each. -From the time of Alexander right down to the third century -after Christ it is probable that all through the Eastern Mediterranean -and Asia Minor gold was to silver as 12:1. If this -were so, the ox of the Avesta was worth 130 grs. of gold, that is -the weight of a Daric, and of the Homeric ox-unit.</p> - -<p>Such then are the approximate results that we have been -able to obtain regarding the value in gold of an ox in various -parts of the ancient world. Of course I do not pretend that -they have the same force as if they represented the value of the -ox everywhere in one particular epoch, or as if we had found the -ox directly equated to gold in every case. But on the other hand -the persistency of prices in semi-civilized countries is a fact well -known: for example, prices have changed but very slightly in -India<a id="FNanchor_208" href="#Footnote_208" class="fnanchor">[208]</a> during a long course of years, for although the silver -rupee has sunk to about two-thirds of its nominal value in -exchanges for gold, it purchases as much as ever in India. -It is likely therefore that the conventional value of the ox -would have remained unchanged for a long period of time, -and the fact that our approximate values taken from various -countries and from various centuries so closely coincide is a -strong indication that such was the case.</p> - -<p>Savages are still more conservative in their ideas of the -relative value of certain articles; and when once a standard -price has been fixed for certain commodities, it is almost impossible -to get them to change.</p> - -<p>Thus I am told by Mr W. H. Caldwell that, when he gave -half-a-crown to a Queensland black for the first specimen of a -certain kind of animal brought into camp, henceforth he had to -pay the same amount for every specimen, even when they came -in considerable numbers. So with the early men of Asia and -Europe who first possessed cattle, and later on gold. Once a -certain amount of gold was taken as the recognized value of a -cow of certain age, the idea would become strongly rooted that -so much gold was the proper equivalent of a cow. And it -would only be in the lapse of centuries and with the development<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_153"></a>[153]</span> -of cities and general commerce that the price of cattle -would begin to fluctuate.</p> - -<p>But even when such variation in price arose, it made no -difference as regards the weight standard. The unit had -already long been fixed and it remained unaltered, just as the -beaver skin of account still means only two shillings, although a -real beaver skin is now worth many times that amount.</p> - -<p>Another reason why the price of cattle would remain -stationary would be that in early times as all the cows were -kept under more or less similar conditions of food, and there -was no attempt at the development of superior breeds, there -would be little difference in the value of animals of the same -age.</p> - -<p>The connection between the cow and the gold unit is -rendered all the more probable not merely by the fact so often -noticed that the words for <i>money</i> in different languages originally -meant <i>cattle</i>, but by the remarkable fact that the earliest known -weights are in the form of cattle. The relation between <i>weight</i> -and money must always be close, but it comes still more -prominently into view, when as yet there is no coinage, but -gold and silver pass by weight alone. If then the value of -a cow formed the first gold unit, we can at once understand -why the first weights took the form of oxen and sheep.</p> - -<p>It was not for mere artistic reasons, for whilst such animal -weights appear on Egyptian paintings, the numerous known -Egyptian weights are of a very conventional form, as we shall -find below. Doubtless the horns and ears made a cow’s head -exceedingly ill-suited for a weight, and in course of time utility -prevailed over the traditional idea that the weight unit ought -to take the shape of the animal, whose value in gold it was -meant to represent.</p> - -<p>The following table sums up briefly the results of this -chapter:</p> - -<table summary="Value of an ox"> - <tr> - <td>Homeric ox-unit</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>130-135</td> - <td>grains of gold.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Roman ox (5th cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>135</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Sicilian (5th cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>135</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ancient German</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>120</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_154"></a>[154]</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ancient Gaulish</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>120</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Phoenician? (4th cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>135</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Egyptian (1500 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>?)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>140</td> - <td class="nw">grains of silver</td> - <td>= 140 grains of gold(?).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Hebrew</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>130</td> - <td>grains of gold.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Zend-Avesta</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>130</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Burgundian</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>140</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Alamannic</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>120</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="nw">Scandinavian<a id="FNanchor_209" href="#Footnote_209" class="fnanchor">[209]</a>(8th cent. <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>128</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>As has been remarked before, I do not include the values -of the ox or cow in the ancient Laws of Wales or Ireland, since -from the insular position of Britain and Ireland the principle -that we must have unbroken touch between the various peoples -in order to have a constant unit does not apply. There could -be no free flow of trade in cattle between Britain and the -continent until the development of steam navigation.</p> - -<p>It is worth noting that the value of a buffalo at the present -day among the Bahnars of Annam is almost the same as that -of the ancient ox. The buffalo is reckoned at 280 hoes<a id="FNanchor_210" href="#Footnote_210" class="fnanchor">[210]</a>, that -is 28 francs = £1. 2<i>s.</i> 4<i>d.</i> Taking gold at the rate of twopence -per grain, the value of the buffalo in gold is 134 grs. Troy.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_155"></a>[155]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VII">CHAPTER VII.<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Weight Systems of China and Further Asia.</span></h2> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">Subiectos Orientis orae</div> - <div class="verse indent2">Seras et Indos.</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse right"><span class="smcap">Hor.</span> <i>Carm.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 12. 56.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<p>We have now found that within the area where our -weight standards arose the ox was universally diffused, and -regarded as the chief and most general form of property and -medium of exchange; that over the same area gold was found to -be more or less equally distributed in antiquity; that the -metallic unit is found in all cases adapted to the chief unit of -barter, whether that be ox or reindeer, beaver skin, or squirrel, -as soon as peoples have learned the use of metal; and finally -that over our special area from the Atlantic to Central Asia the -cow at various times and places retained a value which fluctuated -only from 120 to 140 grains of gold. When therefore -we recall the fact, also pointed out above, that the gold unit -employed from Gaul to Central Asia was one that only fluctuated -from 120 to 140 grains, and when we recollect further that -this unit in the ancient Greek Epic is called not a talent but an -<i>ox</i>, when prices, and not merely the actual ingots of gold are -mentioned, the conclusion follows that not merely in Greece but -in all the other countries the gold unit represented originally -simply the conventional value of the cow as the immemorial -unit of barter.</p> - -<p>Next follows an important question, How was the primitive -weight standard fixed? In other words, how did mankind -arrive at the general opinion that a weight of gold of about<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_156"></a>[156]</span> -130 English grains was the equivalent to the conventional -value of the animal?</p> - -<p>If we could but discover a region in which the weight -and monetary systems still in use are essentially independent -of our Graeco-Asiatic standards, and where it could be -proved that the monetary system is an independent native -development, and where this development is of such recent date -that the record has been preserved in a written document, not -merely reaching us in the dim form of a tradition, blurred and -broken in the long and misty space of years that lie between -us and those who first shaped our system, we would undoubtedly -discern more clearly the stages of its evolution.</p> - -<p>The Chinese empire with the neighbouring peoples who -have participated in its civilization afford us just the case which -we desire. It will be seen from what follows that not merely -the monetary system of China, but her weight system is of an -origin almost wholly unaffected by Western influences.</p> - -<p>We saw above that the earliest form of money in Greece -took the form of <i>spits</i> or small rods of copper, no doubt of a -specified size; we found in Annam that iron hoes, in mediaeval -India iron formed into large-sized needles, in modern times -in Central Africa pieces of iron of given dimensions, bars of iron -among the Hottentots and among the peoples of the West -Coast of Africa, brass rods of fixed length in the region of the -Congo, and pieces of a precious wood likewise of fixed dimensions, -have served or do still serve as media of exchange, and as -units by which the values of other commodities are measured. -In all these cases mere <i>measure</i> not <i>weight</i>, is the -method of appraisement. As the archaic Greek “spit” or <i>obolus</i> -of bronze eventually became a round bronze coin, familiar to us -as Charon’s fee, and in still later times under the abbreviation -<i>ob</i>. as the accountant’s symbol for a half-penny, as <i>d.</i> (<i>denarius</i>) -denotes the penny, so we shall find that the common Chinese -copper coins pierced with a square hole in the centre have -had an almost identical history.</p> - -<p>At the time when the Chinese made their great invasion -into South-eastern Asia (214 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) they still were employing a -bronze currency under the form of knives, which were 135<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_157"></a>[157]</span> -millimetres (5⅖ in.) in length, bearing on the blade the -character <i>minh</i>, and furnished with a ring at the end of the -handle for stringing them. Under the ninth dynasty (479-501 -<span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>) they used knives of the same form and metal, but -180 millim. (7⅕ in.) in length, furnished with a large ring -at the end of the handle and inscribed with the characters -<i>Tsy Kú-u Hoa</i>. Next the form of the knife was modified, the -handle disappeared, and the ring was attached directly to the -blade, but now as weight was regarded of importance, its thickness -was increased to preserve the full amount of metal, and -the ring became a flat round plate pierced with a hole for -the string<a id="FNanchor_211" href="#Footnote_211" class="fnanchor">[211]</a>. Later on these knives became really a conventional -currency, and for convenience the blade was got rid of, -and all that was now left of the original knife was the ring in -the shape of a round plate pierced with a square hole. This is -a brief history of the <i>sapec</i> (more commonly known to us as -<i>cash</i>) the only native coin of China, and which is found everywhere -from Malaysia to Japan<a id="FNanchor_212" href="#Footnote_212" class="fnanchor">[212]</a>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;" id="figure21"> -<img src="images/figure21.jpg" width="400" height="325" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 21.</span> <span class="smcap">Chinese Knife Money</span> -(showing the evolution of the modern Chinese coins).</p> -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_158"></a>[158]</span></p> - -<p>Except where foreign coins such as American silver dollars -are employed, all payments in silver and gold are made by -weight, the only money being the copper <i>cash</i>. The Chinese -metric system, like our own, is based on natural seeds or grains -of plants. Thus ten of a kind of seed called <i>fên</i> (the Candarin) -probably placed sideways make 1 <i>ts’un</i> (the Chinese inch<a id="FNanchor_213" href="#Footnote_213" class="fnanchor">[213]</a>), just -as our forefathers based the English inch on 3 barleycorns -placed lengthwise. So with their monetary system,</p> - -<table summary="Chinese money values"> - <tr> - <td>10 <i>li</i><a id="FNanchor_214" href="#Footnote_214" class="fnanchor">[214]</a> (copper cash)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>fên</i> (<i>Candarin</i>) of silver.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>10 <i>fên</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>chi’en</i> (<i>mace</i>).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>10 <i>chi’en</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>liung</i> (or <i>tael</i> or Chinese ounce).</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>This <i>liung</i> or, as it is more commonly called, <i>tael</i> is the -maximum monetary weight. Hence we hear always of payments -in silver as being 1000 or 2000 ounces and so on, but -never in the higher commercial units of the <i>catty</i> or pound, and -<i>pical</i> or hundredweight, to which we shall come immediately. -But though the Chinese never employed any coinage of gold or -silver, beyond all doubt they have possessed and employed both -metals for almost an incalculable time in the form of ingots of -rectangular shape, and of very accurately fixed dimensions. The -maximum unit employed in commercial relations between -China, Cochin-China, Annam and Cambodia is the <i>nên</i> or <i>bar</i>. -It is of course among her less advanced neighbours that we can -best see how the system developed and worked. For whilst -China herself now reckons exclusively by the <i>tael</i> or ounce, -Annam and Cambodia still employ ingots of fixed weights -and dimensions as metal units almost to the present time. -Thus when Msg. Taberdier in 1838 published his account of -the money of Annam, they had no coins except the ordinary -cash or <i>sapec</i> with a square hole in its centre, and which is -there made of zinc and called <i>dong</i><a href="#Footnote_214" class="fnanchor">[214]</a>, they had no coinage in the -proper sense of the term. However they employed ingots of -gold and silver of a parallelopiped shape. Five sizes of ingots -were employed for both gold and silver alike.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_159"></a>[159]</span></p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Gold.</span></p> - -<table summary="Gold coins of Annam"> - <tr> - <td>1.</td> - <td><i>Nên-Vang, loaf of gold</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>lu’ong</i> or <i>taels</i> (ounces).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>2.</td> - <td><i>Thoi-Vang</i> or <i>Nua Nên-Vang</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>5 <i>lu’ong</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>3.</td> - <td><i>Lu’ong-Vang, nail of gold</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>lu’ong</i> (39·05 grammes).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4.</td> - <td><i>Nua-Vang, half nail of gold</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>½ <i>lu’ong</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>5.</td> - <td>The quarter <i>lu’ong</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>¼ <i>tael</i> (9·762 gram.).</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Silver.</span></p> - -<table summary="Silver coins of Amman"> - <tr> - <td>1.</td> - <td><i>Nên-bac, loaf of silver</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>lu’ong</i> or <i>taels</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>2.</td> - <td><i>Nua Nên-bac, half loaf of silver</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>5 <i>lu’ong</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>3.</td> - <td><i>Lu’ong</i> or <i>Dinh-bac, nail of silver</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>tael</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4.</td> - <td>Half <i>Lu’ong, half nail</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>½ <i>tael</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>5.</td> - <td>Quarter <i>Lu’ong</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>¼ <i>tael</i> (9·762 gram.).</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>The lowest unit then was the quarter <i>nail</i> of 152½ grains -troy, whilst the largest was the <i>nên</i> of 6500 grains. These -ingots did not circulate freely but were generally kept in -wealthy families as reserve treasure.</p> - -<p>In very similar manner in Greece and Italy gold and silver, -fashioned into talents and bars or wedges, were employed side -by side with the bronze <i>oboli</i> or <i>spits</i> which served as the -ordinary currency of every-day life.</p> - -<p>We have now seen that the highest unit employed for silver -and gold is the <i>Nên</i> or bar of ten <i>taels</i> or ounces. Before going -further it will be convenient to describe briefly what we may -term the Chinese system of <i>avoirdupois</i> weight. Then we shall -give the system borrowed from the Chinese and used in Cambodia -and Cochin-China.</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Chinese.</i></p> - -<table summary="The Chinese system of avoirdupois weight"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">10</td> - <td><i>fên</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>ch’en</i> (mace).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">10</td> - <td><i>ch’en</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>liang</i>, <i>tael</i> or ounce.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">16</td> - <td><i>tael</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>chin</i>, commonly known as catty, = 1⅓ lbs. English.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - <td>catties</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>tan</i> or <i>shih</i>, commonly known to us as the <i>picul</i> (= 133⅓ lbs. English).</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_160"></a>[160]</span></p> - -<p class="center"><i>Cambodia.</i> Money system.</p> - -<table summary="The system used in Cambodia"> - <tr> - <td>60 cash or sapecs of zinc</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>tien</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>10 <i>tien</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 string.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>10 strings</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>nên</i> or bar of silver (90 francs).</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>The <i>nên</i> is an ingot of silver of parallelopiped form, which -is invariably worth 100 strings of zinc cash<a id="FNanchor_215" href="#Footnote_215" class="fnanchor">[215]</a>. This <i>nên</i> is -subdivided for money of account as follows:</p> - -<table summary="Subdivisions of the nên"> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>nên</i> (375 grammes)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>denh</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>denh</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>chi</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>chi</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>hun</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>hun</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>li</i>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>They employ a coin of silver called a <i>prac-bat</i> or <i>preasat</i>, -worth 4 strings or ⅟₂₅ <i>nên</i><a id="FNanchor_216" href="#Footnote_216" class="fnanchor">[216]</a>.</p> - -<p>The Mexican piastre, which circulates also, is worth on the -average about 6 strings of cash.</p> - -<p>1 gold ingot = 16 <i>nêns</i> of silver.</p> - -<p>The half ingot of gold is also used = 8 ingots of silver.</p> - -<p>The unit of commercial or <i>avoirdupois</i> weight is the <i>catty</i> -(called by the Cambodians the <i>neal</i>) or pound.</p> - -<table summary="Subdivisions of the Cambodian catty, neal or pound"> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>neal</i> (catty) (600 grammes)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>16 <i>tomlongs</i> or <i>taels</i> (ounces).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>tomlong</i> (37·5 grammes)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>chi</i> (of 3·75 grammes).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>chi</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>hun</i>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>The preceding weights are plainly borrowed from the -Chinese, whilst the following are regarded as native in origin.</p> - -<table summary="Cambodian weights and measures"> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>pey</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>0·292 grammes.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4 <i>pey</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>fuong</i> (1·174 grammes).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>2 <i>fuong</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>slong</i> (2·344 grammes).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4 <i>slong</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>bat</i> (9·375 grammes).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4 <i>bat</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>tomlong</i> (37·5 grammes).</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>For heavy merchandise they employ the <i>hap</i> or <i>picul</i>.</p> - -<p>There are three varieties of <i>picul</i>: (1) that of the weight of -40 strings of cash (= 100 catties), (2) that of 42 strings, (3) -that of 45 strings.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_161"></a>[161]</span></p> - -<p>It will be noticed that the first-mentioned is simply the -standard of the Chinese <i>picul</i> of 133⅓ lbs. English, whilst the -others are native.</p> - -<p>In Annam we found that the ingots of gold and silver, -consisting of ten <i>luongs</i> or <i>nails</i>, were called <i>nên</i>. The -<i>luong</i> was equal in weight to the Chinese <i>liung</i>, and Cambodian -<i>tomlong</i>, and was also called <i>dinh</i> (<i>dinh-bac</i>, <i>nail of -silver</i>), thus being identical with the ten <i>denh</i> into which the -Cambodian <i>nên</i> or bar is divided.</p> - -<p>In Laos<a id="FNanchor_217" href="#Footnote_217" class="fnanchor">[217]</a> we again find the Chinese <i>picul</i> as the highest -weight unit. It is divided into 100 catties (here called <i>Chang</i>) -of 600 grammes each (1⅓ lb. Eng.).</p> - -<table summary="Subdivisions of the picul"> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>picul</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>100 <i>catties</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>catty</i> (<i>chang</i>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>damling</i> (60 grammes).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>damling</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>4 <i>bat</i> (15 grammes).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>bat</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>4 <i>chi</i> (3·75 grammes).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>chi</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>hun</i>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>All these or their equivalents are used as money of account. -“If there is but little coin in Laos,” says M. Aymonier, “there -are monies of account in abundance.” In the south-west of the -country, Bassak and Attopoeu, Cambodian currency is employed, -and they count by the <i>nên</i> or bar of silver.</p> - -<table summary="Subdivisions of the nên in Bassak and Attopoeu"> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>nên</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 <i>denhs</i> (money of account).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>denh</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 strings of <i>cash</i>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>The <i>string</i> is also money of account and is worth the same -as the string of Annam, which is equal to the <i>sling</i> or Siamese -franc (which is worth 75 or 80 centimes). The <i>nên</i> is also -divided into 100 <i>chi</i>, and as there are 100 strings in the <i>nên</i>, -the string of cash is equivalent to a <i>chi</i> of silver (3·75 gram.). -The Siamese coins known also to Cambodia were the weight -and money units of the ancient Cambodians, who probably -weighed their precious metals. In Laos all of them except -the <i>tical</i> are only monies of account. The <i>tical</i> or <i>bat</i> which -under the ancient round form<a id="FNanchor_218" href="#Footnote_218" class="fnanchor">[218]</a> was called <i>clom</i> in Cambodia is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_162"></a>[162]</span> -actually struck as a small piastre in Cambodia and Siam in -imitation of European money. This <i>tical</i> is worth 4 Siamese -<i>slings</i>, but the only monetary division of it known in Laos is -the local <i>lat</i> or small ingot of copper.</p> - -<table summary="Laotian monetary divisions"> - <tr> - <td>4 copper <i>lats</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 silver <i>tical</i> (= 4 <i>sling</i> = 3 francs).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4 <i>tical</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>damling</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>20 <i>damling</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>catty</i> (<i>chang</i>).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>50 <i>catties</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>picul</i>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>The <i>chang</i> or <i>catty</i> of silver is a double one, hence 50 -<i>catties</i> of silver are equal to 100 <i>catties</i> of ordinary commercial -weight.</p> - -<p>The <i>catty</i> of silver thus weighs 1200 grammes instead of -600 grammes.</p> - -<p>They likewise use the <i>moeun</i> of silver = 10 <i>changs</i> = ⅕ <i>picul</i>, -but more generally the <i>moeun</i> is used as a measure of capacity -which contains 20 <i>catties</i> of shelled rice, but as a measure of -capacity it varies and is sometimes equal to 20 <i>catties</i>, sometimes -to 25 <i>catties</i> of rice. That it really is a measure of -capacity incorporated at a later date into the weight system -like our own <i>bushels</i>, <i>barrels</i> and <i>quarters</i>, is made probable -by the fact that in the provinces of Tonlé, Ropon, and Melou -Préy they employ a <i>tramem</i> or <i>bag</i> containing 10 Cambodian -<i>catties</i>, and in the province of Siphoum the <i>moeun</i> is sometimes -the name given to a bag or pannier of a cubit in depth, -and a cubit in width at the mouth. It is usually called <i>kanchoen</i> -(<i>pannier</i>), and contains 25 <i>catties</i> of rice, and 36 <i>kanchoen</i> make -a <i>cartload</i>.</p> - -<p>We learn from another part of Laos an interesting fact -which also throws some light on the development of the larger -weight units from measures of capacity. For since in some -parts of that country the cocoanut is used as the measure of -capacity, and as <i>neal</i>, the native Cambodian name for the <i>catty</i>, -means simply a cocoanut, it looks as though this was the real -origin of the catty universally employed over all Further Asia. -This likewise gives us the reason why the catty of silver is -twice the weight of a catty of rice. If a weight unit is derived -from a measure of capacity, according to the nature of the substance<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_163"></a>[163]</span> -or liquid with which the measure is filled, the weight -unit derived will be heavier or lighter, just as the Irish barrel -of wheat is 6 stones heavier than the barrel of oats. A cocoa-nut, -or bamboo-joint filled with silver will give a far heavier -weight unit than if it is weighed when filled with rice.</p> - -<p>We have now had a survey of the monetary and weight -systems of China, Annam, Cambodia and Laos, and everywhere -found that the <i>nên</i> or bar of 10 <i>taels</i> is the highest known -metallic unit, and that except in Laos the counting of money even -by the catty or pound is unknown, the Chinese themselves only -employing the <i>tael</i> as their highest monetary unit, the catty -being kept as in Annam and Cambodia itself for ordinary -goods. This is borne out by the practices in the weighing of -gold. In Attopoeu, the region where gold is found, 8 <i>chi</i> (= 2 -<i>ticals</i> or <i>bats</i> = 4 <i>slings</i> = 30 grammes) are exchanged for a bar -of silver (= 100 <i>chi</i> = 375 grammes). M. Aymonier thinks -that the gold <i>bat</i>, that is to say the weight in gold of a <i>tical</i> -(15 grammes, 234 grains Troy), must have been the unit for -weighing gold, as formerly it was necessary to give a gold <i>bat</i> -in order to marry a girl of the blood royal. This gets considerable -support from the fact that in Sieng-Khan the gold -<i>bat</i> has only the weight of a <i>sling</i> or <i>chi</i> (58½ grains Troy), that -is the quarter of a <i>tical</i>, and the weight of the <i>tical</i> or <i>bat</i> is -called a <i>damling</i>. In fact they hardly reckon gold in any other -way than by this small <i>damling</i> which is only the weight of -a <i>tical</i> (234 grains Troy). In reference to my argument -that as gold is the first of all things to be weighed, the -primitive weight unit is certain to be small, as no man has, as -a rule, any need to weigh his gold by the hundredweight or -large mercantile talent, this fact that the highest unit for -weighing gold in Attopoeu is so small, not even reaching the -weight of the Graeco-Phoenician heavy gold shekel or double -ox-unit of 260 grains, is of considerable importance.</p> - -<p>This region supplies us with yet another point which can -help to clear up the history of early metallic currency. The -iron ingots which come from the Cambodian provinces of Kompong -Soai form a special kind of money. These ingots are not -weighed, but they have the length of the space between the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_164"></a>[164]</span> -base of the thumb and the tip of the forefinger, they are in -breadth two fingers, and one finger in thickness in the middle, -thinning off to either end. Three of these ingots = 1 <i>chi</i> = 1 -<i>sling</i> = 1 string of cash; thus 12 ingots = 1 <i>tical</i> of silver. -These ingots are also counted by bags of 20; thus 1 <i>nên</i> or -bar of silver = 15 bags = 300 ingots of iron.</p> - -<p>At Bassak the iron ingot is replaced by the <i>lat</i>, the copper -ingot of Laos, which varies in value in the different moeungs -(provinces) according to its size. Here is a remarkable confirmation -of my contention that it was only at a period considerably -later than the weighing of gold that the scales were -employed for copper and iron, the catty being kept as in -Annam and Cambodia for ordinary goods.</p> - -<p>We can now make a further advance in our quest of the -first beginnings of money and weights in this interesting region. -There are many wild tribes in Annam and Laos, who still -employ no method save that of barter, when dealing one with -another, although when they touch on the more civilized -regions they have to conform their native systems in some -degree to the more developed currency of their neighbours, -from whom they have to procure the few luxuries of their -simple life. We saw above that among the wild tribesmen -all articles have a well-defined relationship to each other, -some particular article being usually taken as the common -measure of all the rest, or rather two or three so that they -may have units for estimating their more common as well as -their more valuable possessions. So in Annam the buffalo -often serves as the general unit of value for the more valuable -articles. Thus a large chaldron is worth three buffalos, -a handsome gong two buffalos, a small gong one buffalo, six -copper dishes one buffalo, two lances one buffalo, a rhinoceros -horn eight buffalos, a large pair of elephant’s tusks six buffalos, -a small pair three buffalos<a id="FNanchor_219" href="#Footnote_219" class="fnanchor">[219]</a>. Thus the buffalo which takes the -place of the ox in China and South-Eastern Asia, is used as the -commercial unit in like fashion as we found the ox employed -among the Homeric Greeks, the ancient Italians, the ancient<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_165"></a>[165]</span> -Irish, and the modern Ossetes. But the Annamites themselves -employ as currency the silver bar and string of cash as we -saw above: accordingly when the hill tribes have dealings with -the people of the plain the full grown buffalo is reckoned at a -bar of silver, or, its equivalent, 100 strings of cash<a id="FNanchor_220" href="#Footnote_220" class="fnanchor">[220]</a>, while the -small buffalo is set at fifty strings.</p> - -<p>Thus the Orang Glaï have often to buy a pair of elephant’s -tusks at the cost of eight buffalos or eight bars of silver. -Taxes are paid in buffalos; thus the Tjrons of Karang pay a -buffalo for each house, or compound for the whole village by a -payment of ten buffalos whose horns are at least as long as -their ears<a id="FNanchor_221" href="#Footnote_221" class="fnanchor">[221]</a>. Here then we find that exactly as the ancient -Irish when they borrowed the Roman system of <i>unciae</i> and -<i>scripula</i> (<i>unga</i> and <i>screapall</i>) equated the ounce of silver to -their own unit, the cow, so we find these wild tribes of Annam -forced to adapt their primitive unit to the metallic unit -of their more cultured neighbours. Again, the Bahnars of -Annam, who dwell on the borders of Laos, have much the -same system. With them the highest unit is the <i>head</i>, <i>i.e.</i> -a male slave, who is estimated, according to his strength, age -and skill, at 5, 6, or 7 buffalos, or the same number of kettles, -as the buffalo and the kettle have the same value, which -naturally varies with the size and age of the animal and -the quality of the kettle. A full grown buffalo, or a large -kettle, is worth seven glazed jars of Chinese shape with a -capacity of 10 to 15 litres each. One jar is worth 4 <i>muks</i>. -The <i>muk</i> was originally the name of some special article, but -now is simply used as a unit of account. Each <i>muk</i> is worth -10 <i>mats</i>, or iron hoes, which are manufactured by the Cédans, -and which form the sole agricultural implement of the wild -tribes of all these regions. This hoe is the smallest monetary -unit used by the Bahnars, and is worth about one penny in -European goods. This <i>mat</i> or hoe serves them as small currency -and all petty transactions are carried on by it. Thus a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_166"></a>[166]</span> -large bamboo hat costs 2 hoes, a Bahnar knife 2 hoes, ordinary -arrows are sold at 30 for 1 hoe and so on. A large elephant is -worth from 10 to 15 “<i>heads</i>” or slaves, whilst a horse costs -3 or 4 kettles or buffalos. When we read of such a state -of human society we seem to be transported back into that -far away Homeric time, and as we hear of slaves, and kine, -chaldrons and kettles we think of the old Epics with their tale -of slaves valued in beeves, and “crumple-horned shambling -kine, and tripods” and “shining chaldrons.” In the light of -such analogies we at last can understand the significance of -the 10 axes and 10 “half-axes” which formed the first and -second prizes in the <i>Iliad</i><a id="FNanchor_222" href="#Footnote_222" class="fnanchor">[222]</a> when Achilles “set out for the -archers the dark-hued iron, and put down 10 axes and 10 half-axes.” -Who can doubt that these axes and half-axes played -much the same part in the Homeric system of currency as the -hoes do at this present moment in that of the Bahnars of -Annam? Probably such too were the 12 axes which Penelope<a id="FNanchor_223" href="#Footnote_223" class="fnanchor">[223]</a> -brought out from the treasure chamber to serve as a target -for the suitors in their contests with the bow of Ulysses. The -hoe is thus the lowest unit of currency among the Bahnars. -From the known interrelations of all the articles of daily life it -is easy to estimate how many hoes any even of their more costly -possessions is worth. Thus the full-grown buffalo = 7 jars = 28 -<i>muks</i> = 280 hoes, or about £1. 3<i>s.</i> 4<i>d.</i> of our money. All these -transactions require no use of weights, being reckoned by bulk -or tale. But now comes the most interesting feature for us, a -people in the complete stage of barter, but who actually possess, -work and traffic in gold.</p> - -<p>In all the streams on the side next Laos the wild people -wash gold, men, women and children all alike joining in this -laborious industry, and employ as ‘cradles’ little baskets made of -bamboo. The gold is sold in dust at the <i>rate of the weight in -gold of one grain of maize for one hoe</i>. Here then we have -finally run to ground one of the principal objects of our quest. -We have a primitive people, who carry on all their trade by -means of barter, who have no currency in the precious metals, -but who employ as their most general unit of small value the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_167"></a>[167]</span> -iron hoe. They are found to weigh one thing and one only, -namely gold, and for that purpose they do not employ any -weight standard borrowed from China or Annam, but equate a -certain amount of gold to the unit of barter, and then fix as a -constant that amount of gold by balancing it against a grain of -the corn that forms one of the chief staples of their subsistence. -Nature herself has supplied man with weights of admirable -exactitude ready to his hand in the natural seeds of plants, and -as soon as he finds out the need of determining with great -care the precious substance which he has to win with toil and -hardship from the stream, he takes the proffered means and -fashions for himself a balance and weights.</p> - -<p>We saw that a buffalo was worth 280 hoes; it is therefore -an easy task for a Bahnar to tell its worth in gold. It was -equally simple for the first Aryan or Semite who framed the -gold shekel standard to compute the exact amount of gold -which would represent the value of an ox. But perhaps we -have not reached the earliest stage of all in the development of -a standard for the sale of gold. I ventured to put forward in -1887 the suggestion that the way in which the amount of gold -which represented the value of a cow was first fixed approximately -was by <i>measuring</i> it in some way, as for instance by taking -the amount which would fit in the palm of the hand, somewhat -in the fashion that rustics measure gunpowder or shot for a -gun. What was then but a mere guess may be now regarded -as fairly certain. That excellent observer, M. Aymonier, notes -that the Tapak tribe, who live at a distance of six days’ journey -from Attopoeu, wash gold. The women wade into the streams -(after having first carefully placed five flowers or five leaves at -the foot of a tree close by the stream to ensure good luck). -Each dips a water-tight bag into the sand at the bottom of the -stream, and after a long series of rewashings and cleansings at -last gets the gold dust in a state of purity<a id="FNanchor_224" href="#Footnote_224" class="fnanchor">[224]</a>. The savages carry -it to Attopoeu, and sell it at the rate of 9 <i>chi</i> of gold for a <i>nên</i> -or bar of silver (= 100 <i>chi</i>). The relative value in Attopoeu is -8 <i>chi</i> or two <i>bats</i> of gold to one bar (= 100 <i>chi</i>) of silver, or as -they express it one <i>tical</i> of gold is changed for 12 <i>ticals</i> of silver.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_168"></a>[168]</span> -“The <i>tical</i> of gold is,” it is said, “equivalent to the weight of 32 -grains of a peculiar kind of rice of the country, with large grains -and of a red colour, which is called ivory rice.” Here we have -the weighing by natural grains as before, but Aymonier adds -(p. 35) that “the natives relate that gold was formerly so -abundant that without <i>weighing it people were content to -measure</i> it. A little stick of gold an inch broad and a span -long <i>was exchanged against a buffalo</i>.”</p> - -<p>We found the Bahnars equating a small quantity of gold to -their smallest unit of barter, the hoe; now we find that in the -wild parts of Laos the unit of gold, before weights of natural -grains were employed, was based by measurement upon the -buffalo, the chief unit of barter. Thus we have found among -the remote peoples of Further Asia the very method of fixing -a metallic unit, which I have endeavoured to prove was that -followed by the Aryan and Semitic races in arriving at that -shekel of gold, which was the common standard of all the -civilized peoples of the ancient world, and which was the parent -of all our mediaeval and modern systems.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_169"></a>[169]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_VIII">CHAPTER VIII.<br /> -<span class="smcap">How were Primitive Weight Units fixed?</span></h2> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">Ordiar ex minimis.</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse right"><i>Carm. de ponderibus.</i></div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<p>We have seen that the Chinese system of weights is based -upon natural seeds of plants, and we have actually found the -wild hillsmen of Annam and Laos weighing their gold dust by -grains of maize and rice. But it may be urged by the advocates -of a Babylonian scientific origin based on the one-fifth of -the cube of the royal ell, which in turn is based upon the sun’s -apparent diameter, that the Chinese names of weights are merely -conventional terms taken from the name of certain seeds, and -on the other hand that the mere fact that a very barbarous -people like the Bahnars of Annam weigh their gold dust by -grains of rice is no evidence that people in a higher stage of -culture were content with such rude metric standards. I -propose to show in this chapter that it has been the actual -practice of peoples as far advanced in civilization as the ancient -Greeks or Italians, to employ seeds as weights down to the present -day in Asia, that it was the general practice in the middle -ages, that it was likewise the practice of the Romans of the -empire, of the Greeks, and finally that such too was the practice -of the Assyrians themselves at a period long before the -bronze Lion weights were ever cast, or the stone Duck weights -were carved. If I succeed in proving this proposition, the doctrine -that the art of weighing was scientific must give place to -the contention that it was purely empirical.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_170"></a>[170]</span></p> - -<p>As we have found among the barbarians of Asia the first -beginnings of the art of weighing by the employment of grains -of rice and maize, it is best for us to take first in order some -other Asiatic countries lying towards the same region.</p> - -<p>The great islands of the Indian Archipelago, singularly rich -in all endowments of nature, have for ages enjoyed a high -degree of culture. Conveniently placed, they have received -all the advantages of contact with the civilization of China, -India, and even that of the Arabs from the distant west of Asia. -Never were people more favourably situated for obtaining -foreign systems of weights and measures, if they felt so disposed, -than the Malays of Java and Sumatra and the other islands of -the Indian Archipelago. That admirable observer, John Crawfurd, -writing in 1820 says<a id="FNanchor_225" href="#Footnote_225" class="fnanchor">[225]</a>: “In the native measures everything -is estimated by bulk and not by weight. Among a rude -people corn would necessarily be the first commodity that -would render it a matter of necessity and convenience to fix -some means for its exchange or barter. The manner in which -this is effected among the Javanese will point out the imperfection -of their methods. Rice, the principal grain, is in -reaping nipped off the stalk with a few inches of the straw, -tied up in sheaves or parcels and then housed or sold, or otherwise -disposed of. The quantity of rice in the straw which can -be clenched between the thumb and the middle finger is called -a <i>gagam</i> or handful, and forms the lowest denomination. Three -<i>gagams</i> or handfuls make one <i>pochong</i>, the quantity which -can be clenched between both hands joined. This is properly -a sheaf. Two sheaves or <i>pochongs</i> joined together, as is always -the case, for the convenience of being thrown across a stick -for transportation, make a double sheaf or <i>gedeng</i>. Five -<i>gedengs</i> make a <i>songga</i>, the highest measure in some provinces, -or twenty-four make an <i>hamat</i>, the more general measure. -From their very nature these measures are indefinite and -hardly amount to more accuracy than we employ ourselves -when we speak of sheaves of corn. In the same district they -are tolerably regular in the quantity of grain or straw they<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_171"></a>[171]</span> -contain, but such is the wide difference between different -districts or provinces, that the same nominal measures are -often twice, nay three times as large in one as in another. For -the <i>hamat</i> or larger measure perhaps about eight hundred pounds -avoirdupois might be considered a fair average for the different -provinces of Java. This may convey some loose notion of the -quantities intended to be represented. For dry and liquid -measures they may naturally have recourse to the shell of the -cocoanut and the joint of the bamboo which are constantly at -hand. The first called by the Malays <i>chupa</i> is estimated to be -two and a half pounds avoirdupois. The second is called by -some tribes <i>kulch</i> and is equal to a gallon, but the most common -bamboo measure is the <i>gantung</i>, which is twice this -amount. To those exact and business-like dealers, the Chinese, -and in a less degree to the Arabs and people of the east coast -of the Indian Peninsula, the Indian islanders are chiefly indebted -for any precision we find in their weights. In all the -traffic carried on between the commercial tribes and foreigners, -the Chinese weights, though occasionally under native names, -are constantly referred to. The lowest of these, called sometimes -by the native name of Bungkal, but more frequently by -the Chinese name of Tahil [<i>tael</i>], varies from twenty-four pennyweights -nine grains to thirty pennyweights and twenty grains. -Ten of these make a <i>kati</i> [<i>catty</i>] or about twenty ounces avoirdupois; -one hundred <i>katis</i> make a <i>pikul</i> or 133⅓ lbs. avoirdupois, -and thirty <i>pikuls</i> make one <i>koyan</i>. Of these the <i>kati</i> and the -<i>pikul</i>, because they are constantly referred to in considerable -mercantile dealings, are the only well-defined weights. The -<i>koyan</i> by some is reckoned at twenty <i>pikuls</i>, by others at -twenty-seven, twenty-eight and even at forty. The Dutch are -fond of equalizing it with their own standards and consider it -as equal to a <i>last</i> or two tons.</p> - -<p>“The <i>Bahara</i>, an Arabic weight, is occasionally used in the -weighing of pepper, but its amount is very indefinite, for in -some of the countries of the Archipelago it amounts to 396 lbs., -and in others to 560 lbs.”</p> - -<p>Elsewhere he says<a id="FNanchor_226" href="#Footnote_226" class="fnanchor">[226]</a>, “The <i>picul</i> is strictly a Chinese weight<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_172"></a>[172]</span> -as its amount shews, though the term happens in this case to be -native. Its meaning in the vernacular languages is a natural -load or burthen, and when used in this primitive sense it, -without reference to the Chinese weight, is not found to -exceed eighty pounds avoirdupois.” This is a fact of great -importance as we shall see when we come to the development -of the <i>mina</i> and <i>talent</i> of Graeco-Asiatic commerce.</p> - -<p>Finally Crawfurd says, “The nice question of weighing gold, -the only native commodity which could not be estimated by -tale or bulk, has given rise to the use of weights among the -natives themselves. Grains of rice are still occasionally used -in the weighing of gold in the neighbourhood of the gold mines -in Sumatra” (p. 274).</p> - -<p>I have quoted at full length these passages in order that -the reader may accept with fuller confidence statements so -instructive as regards the origin of weight, the first object -to be weighed, and the origin of the <i>picul</i>, or as we may -call it the <i>talent</i> of Eastern Asia. Nine years before Crawfurd -wrote there had appeared William Marsden’s admirable -<i>History of Sumatra</i><a id="FNanchor_227" href="#Footnote_227" class="fnanchor">[227]</a>. He gives us far fuller information on -the subject of gold than Crawfurd has done. Thus he writes: -“In those parts of the country where traffic in this article -(gold dust) is considerable, it is employed as currency instead -of coin; every man carries small scales about him, and purchases -are made with it so low as to the weight of a grain -or two of <i>padi</i>. Various seeds are used as gold weights, but -more especially these two: the one called <i>rakat</i> or <i>saga-tim-bañgan</i> -(<i>Glycine abrus</i> L or <i>abrus maculatus</i> of the Batavian -trans.), being the well-known scarlet pea with a black spot, -twenty-four of which constitute a <i>mas</i>, and sixteen <i>mas</i> (mace) -a <i>tāil</i> (<i>tael</i>): the other called <i>saga puku</i> and <i>kondori batang</i> -(<i>Aden anthera pavonia</i> L), a scarlet or rather coral bean much -larger than the former, and without the black spot. It is the -candarin weight of the Chinese, of which one hundred make a -tāil and equal, according to the tables published by Stevens, to -5·7984 gr. Troy, but the average weight of those in my possession<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_173"></a>[173]</span> -is 10·50 Troy grains. The tāil differs however in the -northern and southern parts of the island, being at Natal, -Padang, Bencoolen and elsewhere twenty-six pennyweights six -grains. At Achin the <i>bangkal</i> of thirty pennyweights twenty-one -grains is the standard. Spanish dollars are everywhere -current and accounts are kept in dollars, <i>sukus</i> (imaginary -quarter dollars) and <i>kepping</i> or copper cash, of which four -hundred go to the dollar. Besides these there are silver -<i>fanams</i>, single, double and treble (the latter, called <i>tali</i>), -coined at Madras, twenty-four <i>fanams</i> or eight <i>talis</i> being equal -to the Spanish dollar, which is always valued in the English -settlements at five shillings.”</p> - -<p>He adds that copper is sold by weight (<i>picul</i>), and that tin, -which was accidentally discovered in 1710 by the burning of a -house, is exported for the most part in small pieces or cakes -called <i>tampangs</i>, sometimes in slabs (p. 172), and furthermore -they purchase bar iron by measurement instead of by weight -(p. 176).</p> - -<p>Several points of great importance are to be noticed in the -foregoing statements. Firstly, that whilst for foreign trade -with the Chinese they employ the Chinese weight, which we -know always by its Malay name of <i>picul</i>, a well-defined -weight standard of 133⅓ lbs. avoirdupois, they had evidently -a native unit of weight, their own <i>picul</i>, which simply means -and actually was as much as a man can carry on his back, -and which, as we saw, rarely exceeds 80 lbs. avoirdupois. -This seems to give us an insight into the manner in which the -most primitive highest weight unit is arrived at. A man’s -load is one of those natural standards which will vary according -to race and climate, and the conditions under which the load -has to be borne. Thus, the average weight of the load borne -by a dock porter who has to endure the strain for only some -few yards, will of course be far higher than that carried by -the porters of travellers in Central Africa, where the load has -to be borne day after day on a march of several hundred, -or a thousand miles. Thus in the case of the Madis, a pure -negro tribe, the average load seems to be about 50 pounds, -which they can carry “20 miles a day for eight or ten consecutive<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_174"></a>[174]</span> -days without shewing any signs of distress<a id="FNanchor_228" href="#Footnote_228" class="fnanchor">[228]</a>.” The -Chinese, the superiors in science of all Eastern Asia, have carefully -adjusted this “<i>load</i>,” and it makes, as we have seen above, -their highest weight unit. Its particular amount is probably -due to the fact that, having carefully fixed the weight of the -smaller units, the candarin, the mace, the <i>liung</i> or <i>tael</i>, and -the <i>catty</i>, their pound, they simply took the hundredfold of the -<i>chang</i> or <i>catty</i> as the standard for their highest unit, and thus -that which at an earlier stage was just as vague and fluctuating -as the <i>picul</i>, or back-loads in use still among the less-advanced -peoples of the Indian Archipelago, became a fixed scientific unit. -Secondly, we must notice that the Malays have not followed -the Chinese in the subdivisions of the <i>catty</i>. For whilst in -China 16 <i>taels</i> or ounces go to the catty, the Malays follow -more strictly the decimal system, and make their catty simply -the tenfold of the <i>tael</i> or ounce. This same method of division -we found already in Annam, and not only in Annam but also in -Cambodia and Laos we found the silver <i>nên</i> or bar, invariably -consisting of ten such parts, corresponding in weight to the -Chinese <i>tael</i>, sixteen of which go to the catty.</p> - -<p>It would appear, then, that here we have a combination of -units of weight and units of capacity. The higher gold and -silver unit, the <i>nên</i>, is simply the tenfold of the lower unit, the -<i>tael</i> or ounce, while the <i>catty</i>, which is never employed in -China in estimating gold or silver, but is a genuine commercial -unit, was probably originally some natural unit of capacity. -We saw strong evidence of this in Cambodia, where the name -for this weight is <i>neal</i> or cocoanut, and we have just found -the cocoanut as the chief unit of dry measure amongst -the Malays of the Indian Seas. It was probably found that -16 times the <i>tael</i> or ounce came nearer to the weight of the -contents of a cocoanut or bamboo joint (whatever kind of -matter they may have weighed in it for this purpose, whether -rice, or water), than the original 10 ounces, which formed the -<i>bar</i>, the highest genuine weight unit. Sixteen was likewise a -convenient number, its factors being numerous, and it could be<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_175"></a>[175]</span> -divided in four portions, each of which contained four other -units. It will presently be a question as to whether similar -influences have not produced our pound avoirdupois, with its -16 sub-multiples.</p> - -<p>M. Moura found a difficulty regarding the Cambodian <i>neal</i> -or cocoanut <i>catty</i>; because a <i>neal</i> of rice only weighs half the -weight, at which the <i>neal</i> is rated as a weight. But we saw -in Java that the <i>chapa</i> or cocoanut measure is estimated at -2½ pounds avoirdupois. It is then not improbable that some -liquid or substance far heavier than rice was used to fill the cocoanut, -when the value of its contents was being ascertained by -weighing so as to serve as a general unit. The same variation -in weight, owing to the different nature of its contents, has, as -mentioned before, given rise in Ireland to <i>barrels</i> of various -weights. Thus a <i>barrel</i> of wheat contains 20 stone avoirdupois, -a <i>barrel</i> of potatoes 24 stone, a <i>barrel</i> of barley 16 stone, -and a <i>barrel</i> of oats 14 stone. This diversity simply arose from -comparative lightness or heaviness of the different commodities -which were measured by one and the same unit of capacity: -the barrel itself, having been fixed by a process of measurement, -similar to that by which the milk-pan was regulated -among the Welsh, and the pannier among the natives of -Laos. The principle by which higher units of capacity or -weight are formed is likewise well illustrated by the instance -given above of the <i>cartload</i> of rice, which is simply regarded as -the multiple of the pannier or bag, which forms the smaller -unit for rice. The size of the <i>cartload</i> would be conditioned by -the size of the cart usually employed, which in turn would -depend on a variety of other things, such as the nature of the -country, or its roads, or the kind of animals employed for -draught. The vagueness in amount of the <i>koyan</i> or multiple -of the <i>picul</i> noticed by Crawfurd, may thus meet with a reasonable -explanation.</p> - -<p>We may now return to the mainland of Asia, where we -shall find in the weight system of the Hindus at least one -remarkable point of affinity with that of Sumatra. Marsden -has told us that the <i>rakat</i> or scarlet pea with a black spot is -one of the chief weights employed for gold in Sumatra. This<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_176"></a>[176]</span> -<i>rakat</i> is none other than the <i>ratti</i>, which is usually taken as -the basis of the modern Hindu weight system. “This weight,” -says that eminent scholar Colebrooke<a id="FNanchor_229" href="#Footnote_229" class="fnanchor">[229]</a>, “is the lowest denomination -in general use, commonly known by the name <i>ratti</i>, the -same with <i>rattika</i>, which, as well as <i>ṛaktika</i>, denotes the red -seed as <i>kṛishnala</i> indicates the black seed of the <i>gunjá</i>-creeper.” -Mr Thomas has shown the true weight of the <i>ratti</i> -is 1·75 grains<a id="FNanchor_230" href="#Footnote_230" class="fnanchor">[230]</a>.</p> - -<p>Many different standards have been used in India for various -purposes, one for the weighing of gold, another for the weighing -of silver, another used by jewellers, and yet another by the -medical tribe, but all alike start from the <i>ratti</i>.</p> - -<p>“The determination of the true weight of the <i>ratti</i> has done -much both to facilitate and give authority to the comparison of -the ultimately divergent standards of the ethnic kingdoms of -India. Having discovered the guiding unit, all other calculations -become simple, and present singularly convincing results, -notwithstanding that the bases of all these estimates rest upon -so erratic a test as the growth of the seed of the <i>gunjá</i>-creeper -(<i>Abrius precatorius</i>) under the varied influences of soil and -climate. Nevertheless the small compact grain, checked in -early times by other products of nature, is seen to have the -remarkable faculty of securing a uniform average throughout -the entire continent of India, which only came to be -disturbed when monarchs like Shîr Shâh and Akbar in -their vanity raised the weight of the coinage without any -reference to the numbers of <i>rattis</i>, inherited from Hindu -sources, and officially recognized in the old, but entirely disregarded -and left undefined in the reformed Muhammadan -mintages<a id="FNanchor_231" href="#Footnote_231" class="fnanchor">[231]</a>.” We shall learn shortly that in its uniformity the -<i>ratti</i> does not differ from other seeds such as wheat and barley. -Probably, however, the fact that the <i>gunjá</i>-creeper was found -everywhere in India gave it its position of a universal standard.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_177"></a>[177]</span> -Those who wish to study the elaborate systems of later times -employed in India can consult the works of Colebrooke and -Thomas already referred to.</p> - -<p>The legislators Manu, Yájnavalkya, and Nárada trace all -weights from the least visible quantity which they concur in -naming <i>trasareṇu</i> and describing as the very small mote, “which -may be discovered in a sunbeam passing through a lattice.” -Writers on medicine proceed a step further, and affirm that a -<i>trasareṇu</i> contains 30 <i>paramáṇu</i> or atoms. The legislators -above-named proceed from the <i>trasareṇu</i> as follows:</p> - -<table summary="Weight system of India: smallest quantities"> - <tr> - <td>8 <i>trasareṇus</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>likshá</i>, or minute poppy-seed.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>3 <i>likshás</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>raja-sarshapa</i>, or black mustard-seed.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>3 <i>raja-sarshapas</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>gaura-sarshapa</i>, or white mustard-seed.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>6 <i>gaura-sarshapas</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>yava</i>, or middle-sized barley-corn.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>3 <i>yavas</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>kṛishnala</i>, or seed of the <i>gunjá</i>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>But as we want to learn what was the actual usage of the -Hindus, instead of dealing with the mere theoretic statements of -late authors, I shall at once quote in full the tables given in -the <i>Līlāvati</i> of Brahmegupta, who wrote his Algebra and Arithmetic -about 600 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span><a id="FNanchor_232" href="#Footnote_232" class="fnanchor">[232]</a></p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Money</span> (<i>by tale</i>). Twice ten cowries<a id="FNanchor_233" href="#Footnote_233" class="fnanchor">[233]</a> are a <i>cácíní</i>; four of -these are a <i>pána</i>, sixteen of which must here be considered as -a <i>dramma</i>, and in like manner a <i>nishká</i> as consisting of sixteen -of these.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">Weight</span>. A <i>gunjá</i> (or seed of <i>Abrus</i>), is reckoned equal to -two barley-corns (<i>yavas</i>). A <i>valla</i> is two <i>gunjás</i> and eight of -these are a <i>dharana</i>, two of which make a <i>yadyanaca</i>. In like -manner one <i>dhataca</i> is composed of fourteen <i>vallas</i>.</p> - -<p>Half ten <i>gunjás</i> are called a <i>másha</i> by such as are conversant -with the use of the balance; a <i>karsha</i> contains sixteen of what<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_178"></a>[178]</span> -are called <i>máshas</i>, a <i>pala</i> four <i>karshas</i>. A <i>karsha</i> of gold is -named <i>suvarṇa</i>.</p> - -<p>This is quite in harmony with the <i>weight</i> of <i>gold</i> as given -by the legislators:</p> - -<table summary="Weight system of India: gold"> - <tr> - <td>5 <i>kṛishnalas</i> or <i>raktikas</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>másha</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>16 <i>máshas</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>karsha</i>, <i>aksha</i>, <i>tolaka</i>, or <i>suvarṇa</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4 <i>karshas</i> or <i>suvarṇas</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>pala</i> or <i>nishká</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>10 <i>palas</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>dharana</i> of gold.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Yájnavalkya adds that according to some 5 <i>suvarṇas</i> = -1 <i>pala</i>.</p> - -<p>All the authorities seem agreed in regarding the term -<i>suvarṇa</i> as peculiar to gold, for which metal it is also a name.</p> - -<p>We learn thus that the Hindu standards were fixed by -means of natural seeds, and at no period do they, clever mathematicians -as they were, seem to have made any effort at obtaining -a mathematical basis for their metric systems.</p> - -<p>We also observe that the weight known as the <i>suvarṇa</i> or -<i>gold</i> weight <i>par excellence</i> is the weight of a <i>karsha</i> or 80 <i>gunjás</i>, -which, if we take the <i>gunjá</i> = 1·75 grains Troy, gives the weight -of the <i>suvarṇa</i> as 140 grains. I have already (<a href="#Page_127">p. 127</a>) taken the -original Hindu gold unit as not far from this amount. From -the <i>Līlāvati</i> we may now with little misgiving assume it to -have been such.</p> - -<p>Lastly, let us observe that the barley-corn appears as -the basis of the system in the tables of Brahmegupta and -Bhascara, although the <i>ṛaktika</i> evidently overmasters it in the -course of time. This is very interesting, for it indicates that -the Hindus had learned the art of weighing in a comparatively -northern region, where barley was the chief cereal under cultivation. -If the system had been invented in the more southern -parts of India, the grain of rice, the staple of life in the southern -regions, would certainly have appeared as the sub-multiple of -the <i>ṛaktika</i>, instead of the barley. As a matter of fact, rice-grains -seem to have been occasionally used locally, for Colebrooke -remarks that “it is also said that the <i>ṛaktika</i> is equal -in weight to four grains of rice in the husk.” This supposition -is completely in accord with what we found in Persia, where<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_179"></a>[179]</span> -the modern weight system for gold, silver and medicine runs -thus:</p> - -<table summary="Weight system of Persia"> - <tr> - <td>3 <i>gendum dsho</i> (barley-corn)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>nashod</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>4 <i>nashod</i> (a kind of pea, lupin?)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>dung</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>6 <i>dung</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>miscal</i><a id="FNanchor_234" href="#Footnote_234" class="fnanchor">[234]</a>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Although the <i>miscal</i> and <i>habba</i> denote Arabic influence, we -may, without straining probabilities, conjecture that the use of -the <i>barley-corn</i> here as well as in India, where we found it at -a period anterior to Muhammadan conquest, indicates that in -Persia it existed likewise from the earliest times. The close -relationship between the ancient Hindus and ancient Persians -makes it all the more likely. It is also pointed out that -formerly the <i>nashod</i> was divided into <i>three</i> instead of four -grains. As the Arabs divide their <i>karat</i> into four <i>habbas</i>, it is -all the more likely that the 3 barley-corns = 1 <i>nashod</i> belong -to the ancient system.</p> - -<p>The Arab weight system is based on the grain of wheat, -four of which make a <i>karat</i> (the seed of the carob or St John’s -Bread)<a id="FNanchor_235" href="#Footnote_235" class="fnanchor">[235]</a>. Occasionally in the Arab writers mention is made of a -karat divided into 3 <i>habbas</i><a href="#Footnote_235" class="fnanchor">[235]</a>. The weight of the karat remains -unchanged, but the grains in this case are barley grains, since, -as we shall see presently, 3 grains of barley are equal to 4 grains -of wheat (·063 × 3 = ·047 × 4).</p> - -<p>It will now be most convenient for us to begin in the -extreme west, and once more from that work back towards -the coast of the Aegean Sea, in which our chief interest must -always be centred.</p> - -<p>Whether the Kelts of Ireland had any indigenous weight -system or not, we have no direct evidence, although we do -know as a fact that when Caesar landed in Kent he found the -Britons employing coins of gold and bronze, and bars (or according -to some <span class="allsmcap">MSS.</span> <i>rings</i>) of iron adjusted to a fixed weight. -However the earliest Irish documents reveal that people using<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_180"></a>[180]</span> -a system of weights for silver directly borrowed from the older -Roman system (although it is likely that they had a native -standard for gold). As the <i>solidus</i> and <i>denarius</i> became the -chief units of Europe from the time of Constantine the Great -(336 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>), the Irish probably received their system at an earlier -date.</p> - -<table summary="Weight system of Ireland"> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>unga</i> (<i>uncia</i>)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>24 <i>screapalls</i> (<i>scripula</i>).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>screapall</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>3 <i>pingiuns</i>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 <i>pingiun</i></td> - <td>=</td> - <td>8 grains of wheat<a id="FNanchor_236" href="#Footnote_236" class="fnanchor">[236]</a>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>When we pass to England, the very word <i>grain</i> which we -employ to express our lowest weight unit, would of itself -suggest that originally some kind of <i>grain</i> or <i>seed</i> was employed -by our forefathers in weighing, but as the grain in use among -us is the <i>grain Troy</i>, and as we have not yet learned its origin, -it will not do to argue vaguely from etymology. But a little -enquiry soon brings us to a time when the grain Troy did not -as yet form the basis of English weights, and when a far simpler -method of fixing the weight of the kings coinage was in vogue. -It was ordained by 12 Henry VII. ch. <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> “that the bushel is to -contain eight gallons of wheat, and every gallon eight pounds -of wheat, and every pound twelve ounces of Troy weight, and -every ounce twenty sterlings, and every sterling to be of the -weight of thirty-two grains of wheat that grew in the midst -of the ear of wheat according to the old laws of this land<a id="FNanchor_237" href="#Footnote_237" class="fnanchor">[237]</a>.” -Going backwards we find that in 1280 (8 Edward I.) the penny -was to weigh 24 grains, which by weight then appointed were -as much as the former 32 grains of wheat. By the Statute -<i>De Ponderibus</i>, of uncertain date but put by some in 1265, it -was ordained that the penny sterling should weigh 32 grains of -wheat, round and dry, and taken from the midst of the ear. -Going back a step still further we find that by the Laws of -Ethelred, every penny weighed 32 grains of wheat<a id="FNanchor_238" href="#Footnote_238" class="fnanchor">[238]</a>, and as the -pennies struck by King Alfred weigh 24 grains Troy, we may -assume without hesitation that they were struck on the same<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_181"></a>[181]</span> -standard of 32 grains of wheat. Thus from Alfred (871-901) -down to Henry VII. (1485-1509), we find the penny fixed by -this primitive method, and the actual weight of the coins, as -tested by the balance at the present day, affords proof positive -of the method.</p> - -<p>But all the standards of mediaeval Europe (with the exception -of the Irish) were based on the gold <i>solidus</i> of Constantine -the Great<a id="FNanchor_239" href="#Footnote_239" class="fnanchor">[239]</a>. The <i>solidus</i> (itself weighing 72 grains Troy or -⅟₇₂ of the Roman pound) was divided into 24 <i>siliquae</i>. The -<i>siliqua</i>, or as the Greeks called it <i>keration</i> (κεράτιον, from -which comes our word <i>carat</i>), was the seed of the <i>carob</i>, or as -it is often called, <i>St John’s Bread</i> (<i>Ceratonia siliqua</i> L). Thus -the lowest unit in the Roman system, as it is usually given, -is found to be the seed of a plant. The same holds of the -Greek system, for the <i>drachma</i> is described as containing 18 -<i>kerata</i> or <i>keratia</i>, whilst according to others “it contains three -<i>grammata</i>, but the <i>gramma</i> contains two <i>obols</i> and the <i>obol</i> -contains three <i>kerata</i>, and the <i>keras</i> contains four <i>wheat grains</i><a id="FNanchor_240" href="#Footnote_240" class="fnanchor">[240]</a>.” -From this we see that the <i>keration</i> or <i>siliqua</i> was further reduced -to 4 <i>sitaria</i>, or grains of wheat, whilst from another -ancient table of weights<a id="FNanchor_241" href="#Footnote_241" class="fnanchor">[241]</a> we learn that the <i>siliqua</i> likewise -equals 3 barley-corns (<i>siliqua grana ordei</i> iii). Hence it appears -that 3 barley-corns = 4 wheat grains. Thus both Greek -and Roman systems just like the English and Irish take as -their smallest unit a grain of corn. This also throws important -light on the origin of that mysterious thing, the Troy grain. -We saw above (8 Edward I.) that at the time of its introduction -into England that 24 grains Troy = 32 grains of wheat, that is -the Troy grain stands to wheat grain as 3:4. But as we have -just seen that the <i>siliqua</i> = 3 barley-corns, and also = 4 wheat-corns, -it follows that 3 barley-corns = 4 wheat-corns. And as -3 Troy grains = 4 wheat-corns, it likewise follows that 3 Troy -grains = 3 barley-corns, or in other words, the barley-corn and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_182"></a>[182]</span> -Troy grain are the same things. It thus appears that the Troy -grain is nothing more than the barley-corn, which was used as -the weight unit in preference to the grain of wheat in some -parts of the Roman empire. Furthermore this relation between -barley-corns and wheat-corns can be proved to be a fact of -Nature. In September, 1887, I placed in the opposite scales of -a balance 32 grains of wheat “dry and taken from the midst of -the ear,” and 24 grains of barley taken from ricks of corn grown -in the same field at Fen Ditton, near Cambridge, and I thrice -repeated the experiment; each time they balanced so evenly -that a half grain weight turned the scale. The grain of Scotch -wheat weighs ·047 gram, the Troy grain = ·064, ·047 × 4 = 188, -·064 × 3 = 192. Practically 4 wheat grains = 3 Troy grains.</p> - -<p>Before passing from the Greek and Roman standards I -may add that even higher denominations than the <i>siliqua</i> were -expressed by the seeds of plants. The Romans made the -lupin (<i>lupinus</i>) = 2 <i>siliquae</i> and under its Greek name of -<i>thermos</i> (θερμός), it was assigned a like value (<i>Metrol. Script.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> -81). In the <i>Carmen de Ponderibus</i> (<i>Metrol. Script.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 16), 6 -grains of pulse (<i>grana lentis</i>) are made equal to 6 <i>siliquae</i>, -and a like number of grains of spelt are given a similar value.</p> - -<p>We next advance towards the East and take up the Semitic -systems. We have already had occasion to touch upon that of -the Arabs when dealing with the modern Persians. “There can -be little doubt,” says Queipo (<span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 360), “that the Arab system of -weight was based on the grain of wheat.” The <i>habba</i> was their -smallest unit. Four <i>habbas</i> are equal to 1 <i>karat</i>, the latter of -course representing the <i>keration</i> or <i>siliqua</i>, and the former the 4 -<i>sitaria</i> or <i>wheat-grains</i>, which we saw were its equivalent. This -is the most ordinary value given to the karat in Makrizi and the -other Arabic writers on Metrology, but occasionally we find the -karat made equal to only 3 grains, which of course are barley-corns. -We saw above that in the Persian system the <i>nashod</i> was -formerly divided into 4 <i>habbi</i> of ·048 gram (which is plainly the -weight of the wheat-grain), whilst now it is divided into 3 grains -each of ·063 which represents the barley-corn, or in other words -the Troy grain of ·064 gram. Of course the objection might -be raised that as the Arabs had borrowed their higher denominations<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_183"></a>[183]</span> -such as the <i>dirhem</i> (δραχμή) and <i>dinar</i> (<i>denarius</i>, -δηνάριον), from the Greeks and Romans, and as their standard -weight the <i>mithkal</i> is nothing more than the <i>sextula</i> or ⅙ of -the Roman ounce, employed in the eastern Empire under the -name of <i>exagion</i> (ἐξάγιον, whence comes the <i>saggio</i> of Marco -Polo), so too their wheat-corns and barley-corns were not of -their own devising, but likewise adventitious. After what we -have seen above (<a href="#Page_166">p. 166</a>) to be the practice of primitive -people in the selling of gold, a traffic in which the Arabs had -been engaged for many ages, it would seem hardly necessary -to reply to such an argument, but as a more complete answer -can be given in the course of the last portion of this enquiry, we -shall deal with it in that place.</p> - -<p>We now come to the Assyrians themselves, from the -discovery of whose weights in the shape of lions and ducks, -the whole modern theory of a scientific origin for all the weight -standards of the Greeks as well as Asiatics and Egyptians has -had its origin. But even within this sacred precinct of <i>à priori</i> -metrology the irrepressible grain of corn springs up vigorously, -although almost choked by the abundant crop of tares which -have been sown around it. If we find that a Semitic people, -who were the ancients of the earth before Pelops passed from -Asia into Greece, or Romulus had founded his Asylum, employed -the wheat grain as their lowest weight unit, we may -then well argue that ages before the birth of the Prophet and -the Arab conquest of Egypt and Syria, the Semitic folks -employed grains of corn to form their lowest weight unit.</p> - -<p>M. Aurès<a id="FNanchor_242" href="#Footnote_242" class="fnanchor">[242]</a>, a well-known Assyrian metrologist, has recently -set forth the Assyrian system in its latest and most advanced -stage. Following the veteran Assyriologist, M. Oppert, he finds -that the Assyrians used a denomination lower than the obol. -In the Museum of the Louvre there is a small Assyrian weight -of the “duck” kind, which bears on its base the Assyrian -character of 22 <i>grains</i> ½. The ideogram translated <i>grain</i> is -evidently meant to represent some kind of corn with a rounded -end. The weight of this object is ·95 gram (14⁶⁄₇ grains<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_184"></a>[184]</span> -Troy). The weight is a ¾ obol, and therefore 30 grains went -to the obol. This is the obol of the heavy Assyrian system, -of which we shall presently speak. For the sake of clearness, -I take M. Aurès’ table.</p> - -<table summary="M. Aurès’ table showing the Assyrian weight system"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">30</td> - <td>grains</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 obol.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">6</td> - <td>obols</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 drachm.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">2</td> - <td>drachms</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 shekel.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">10</td> - <td>drachms</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 “stone.”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 <i>light</i> mina.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>For our present purpose it is quite sufficient to call attention -to the fact that this grain which forms the lowest unit -of the Assyrian scale weighs ·042 gram (·95 ÷ 22·5) which is -a very close approximation to the weight of the <i>wheat-grain</i> -(·047). Making allowance for some loss which the weight may -have sustained, it seems impossible to doubt that we have here -the wheat-grain being used to form the smallest unit as it is in -the modern Arabic system. The double obol of the Assyrians -weighs 30 grains; we shall also find that the Hebrew <i>gêrâh</i> or -obol (twenty of which made a shekel), weighed exactly 15 <i>grains -of wheat</i>, that is the Hebrew <i>gêrâh</i> is the light obol which stood -side by side with the heavy obol of 30 grains in the Assyrian -system. Let us treat the matter from a slightly different point -of view: As the <i>light</i> Assyrian obol contained 15 <i>Assyrian</i> -grains, the <i>light</i> shekel contained 180 <i>Assyrian</i> grs. But as we -know that this light Assyrian shekel weighed 8·4 grams, or 131 -grains <i>Troy</i>, and as we know that the <i>Troy</i> grain is really the -barley-corn and likewise that 3 barley-corns = 4 <i>wheat</i> grains, -it is obvious that 131 grains Troy = 175 <i>wheat</i> grs. nearly, a -very close approximation to the 180 <i>Assyrian</i> grs. Again as -180 <i>Assyrian</i> grs. = 8·4 grams, the <i>Assyrian</i> grain weighed -·046 gram, that is almost exactly the weight of a <i>wheat</i> grain -(·047 gram).</p> - -<p>But let us see for a moment in what fashion M. Aurès -accounts for the presence of corn-grains in a system so elaborately -scientific as he and his school maintain.</p> - -<p>Starting as usual with the old assumption that all weight -standards come from the measures of capacity and all measures<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_185"></a>[185]</span> -of capacity in their turn are derived from the linear measures, -he proceeds thus: The Assyrian ideogram which represents -<i>tribute</i>, likewise represents <i>talent</i>. Tribute being paid in corn, -no doubt the idea of weight first arose as the people carried -their quota of corn on their backs to the receipt of custom. -They accordingly weighed the measure (<i>bar</i>), which contained -the proper amount of corn and took it as their weight unit, and -then proceeded to make subdivisions of it. When their weight -system was thus fixed, for convenience instead of going to the -trouble of adjusting weights they took 30 grains of corn which -would be just equivalent to the weight of an obol. After the -many historical instances quoted in the preceding pages in -which the methods of appraising the value of corn and other -dry commodities have been set out, and also the manner in -which corn grains have been employed for fixing the higher -standard, as for instance in the adjustment of the English -bushel in the reign of Henry VII., the reader will feel that -M. Aurès has simply inverted the true order of events, and that -as we found the natives of Annam and the Malays of the Indian -Archipelago making their first essay in weighing by means of -a grain of maize, or rice, or <i>padi</i>, so the ancient inhabitants of -Mesopotamia made their first beginning, and as we have found -everywhere that gold, the most precious of objects, was the -first thing to be weighed, and as it only existed in small quantities, -thus requiring but a very small unit of weight, so the -Assyrians likewise began to weigh gold first of all, employing -the natural seeds of corn, and only in process of time arrived at -higher units by multiplying the smaller.</p> - -<p>To all the evidence collected from Asia and Europe we can -likewise add a fact of great importance from Africa. We saw -that it was highly probable that the Carthaginians traded for -gold to the West Coast of Africa, and beyond all reasonable -doubt the natives of the Gold Coast have for ages been acquainted -with that metal. Now it can be proved that these -peoples, whilst employing no weights for any other mercantile -transaction, used the seeds of certain plants for weighing their -gold; thus Bosman writing two centuries ago says, “Having -treated of gold at large, I am now obliged to say something<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_186"></a>[186]</span> -concerning the gold weights, which are either pounds, marks, -ounces or angels.... We use here another kind of weights -which are a sort of beans, the least of which are red spotted -with black and called Dambas; twenty-four of them amount to -an angel, and each of them is reckoned two stiver weights; the -white beans with black spots or those entirely black are heavier -and accounted four stiver weights: these they usually call -Tacoes, but there are some which weigh half or a whole gilder, -but are not esteemed certain weights, but used at pleasure and -often become instruments of fraud. Several have believed that -the negroes only used wooden weights, but that is a mistake; -all of them have cast weights either of copper or tin, which -though divided or adjusted in a manner quite different to ours; -yet upon reduction agree exactly with them<a id="FNanchor_243" href="#Footnote_243" class="fnanchor">[243]</a>”.</p> - -<p>I am informed by Mr Quayle Jones, Chief Justice of -Sierra Leone, that at the present day, a seed called the <i>Taku</i>, -(with a black spot) is employed by the natives of the Gold -Coast for weighing gold. He also tells me that small quantities -of gold are measured by a quill in ordinary dealings in the -market<a id="FNanchor_244" href="#Footnote_244" class="fnanchor">[244]</a>. I learn from another private source that 6 Takus = -1 ackie (20 ackies = 1 ounce). From Bosnian’s equating the -bean with the red spot to 2 stiver-weights, we can deduce its -weight as 2 grs. troy; this result combined with the colour of -the bean would make us a <i>à priori</i> conclude that the Damba was -the <i>Abrus precatorius</i>, so familiar to us already under its Hindu -name of <i>ratti</i>.</p> - -<p>Here we have a primitive people with a weight system of -their own based on the Damba and Taku, just as the Hindu -is based on the <i>ratti</i>, and here too we have another proof that -the first of all articles to be weighed is gold. From Bosman -we also learn that gold in small quantities was not always -weighed, for he says of the inferior gold which was mixed with<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_187"></a>[187]</span> -silver or copper, that it is cast into fetiches (small grotesque -figures). “These fetiches are cut into small bits by the negroes -of one, two, or three farthings. The negroes know the exact value -of these bits so well at sight, that they never are mistaken, and -accordingly they sell them to each other without weighing as -we do coined money<a id="FNanchor_245" href="#Footnote_245" class="fnanchor">[245]</a>.” This recalls the practice as regards -silver among the Tibetans at the present day.</p> - -<p>Crossing to the eastern side of Africa we find the natives of -Madagascar employing a system, the basis of which is a grain -of rice. “The Malagasy have no circulating medium of their -own. Dollars are known more or less throughout the island: -but in many of the provinces trade is carried on principally by -an exchange of commodities. The Spanish dollar, stamped with -the two pillars, bears the highest value. For sums below a -dollar the inconvenient method is resorted to in the interior, of -weighing the money in every case. Dollars are cut up into -small pieces, and four iron weights are used for the half, quarter, -eighth, and twelfth of a dollar. Below that amount, divisions -are effected by combinations of the four weights, and also by -means of grains of rice, even down so low as one single grain—“Vary -vray venty,” one plump grain, valued at the seven -hundred and twentieth part of a dollar”<a id="FNanchor_246" href="#Footnote_246" class="fnanchor">[246]</a>. The grain of rice -therefore weighs ⁵⁄₉ gr. troy (·036 gram). As gold is not found -in Madagascar<a id="FNanchor_247" href="#Footnote_247" class="fnanchor">[247]</a> the natives could not weigh it first of all things; -but they have carried out the principle of taking silver, the -most precious article they possessed, as the first object to be -weighed.</p> - -<p>In this chapter, therefore, we have sought the method by -which weight standards are fixed among primitive and semi-civilized -peoples; we have studied the system or systems of -China, Cochin-China, Cambodia, Laos and the great Islands of -the Indian Ocean. Everywhere we have received the self-same -answer, everywhere the lowest unit is nothing more than a -natural seed or grain. We found in two places in the area<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_188"></a>[188]</span> -studied, amongst the Tapaks of Annam and the Malays of -Sumatra, the art of weighing in its earliest infancy; only one -product, gold, as yet being weighed, and the weight unit employed -for it being a grain of rice or maize. We found that -this smallest natural unit of gold was amongst the Bahnars -equated to the smallest unit of barter in use among them, the -hoe, whilst their highest unit was the buffalo; and that by a -simple process based on the known relation existing in value -between the hoe, the <i>muk</i>, the jar, and the buffalo, there was -no difficulty in arriving empirically at the exact value in gold -of a buffalo. We found also that the two higher units of -weight the <i>picul</i>, and the <i>catty</i>, which in almost every case were -found to be confined to the ordinary merchandise, were beyond -reasonable doubt not originally multiples of the lower the <i>tael</i>, -but were really natural units obtained by a totally different -process; the <i>picul</i> being the amount which an average man can -conveniently carry on his back, the <i>catty</i>, as seen especially in -the case of the <i>neal</i> of Cambodia, being nothing more than the -cocoa-nut shell used as the ordinary measure of capacity, as a -gourd of a certain kind is employed at Zanzibar, as the hen’s egg -was employed by the Hebrews and also by the ancient Irish, as -the cochlea or mussel shell was taken by the Romans as the basis -of their measures of capacity, and as possibly the gourd itself -under its name of <i>Kyathos</i> formed the lowest unit of capacity -among the Greeks. We saw clearly that the catty has never -become a weight-unit for precious metals among the Chinese, -Annamites or Cambodians; the first named never having used -any higher unit for such purpose than a bar of ten <i>taels</i>, and at -the present day for the most part contenting themselves with the -<i>tael</i> or ounce, whilst the two latter still use the <i>nên</i> or bar with -its subdivisions into 10 <i>denhs</i>, or in other words, use as their -highest monetary unit the tenfold of the <i>tael</i> or ounce. We -likewise found that in Annam among the less advanced peoples -there was considerable evidence to show that the <i>bat</i> or tical -was originally the highest unit used for gold, and that this name -<i>bat</i> was applied to weights of different amount; thus the -<i>chi</i> which in commercial weight is only the quarter of a <i>bat</i>, -is itself called the gold <i>bat</i>. The <i>bat</i> itself was the third<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_189"></a>[189]</span> -of the <i>tael</i>. We also found the bar of silver, the common -monetary unit at the present moment, equated to the buffalo, -the common unit of barter among the Bahnars, and finally we -had a distinct tradition that not so long ago the wild tribesmen -who win the gold dust from the sands of their native brooks -did not as yet even weigh the metal by means of the grains -of maize which are now employed, but that they measured -off a small rod of gold an inch long as the equivalent of a -buffalo.</p> - -<p>From all these facts it seems easy to trace the history of -the development of weight standards in Further Asia; the -first stage in trafficking in gold seems to be one purely by -measure, then comes that of weighing by means of grains of -corn, the weight in gold of one or more grains of corn being -taken in the ordinary way of barter like other articles in the -common scale of exchange. A multiple of the higher unit the -<i>bat</i> was formed, possibly based on the slave as the multiple -of the buffalo. This multiple is threefold of the <i>bat</i>, in that respect -offering a strange analogy to the gold talent of Sicily, -Magna Graecia, and Macedonia, which is the threefold of the -Homeric ox-unit, and which, as I have conjectured, may have -represented the value of a slave, as we certainly know as a fact -that the highest unit in the Irish system, the <i>cumhal</i>, which -represented the value of three cows or three ounces of silver, -was neither more nor less than an <i>ancilla</i> (or ordinary <i>slave-woman</i>): -the tenfold of this <i>tael</i> was the highest unit employed -for either gold or silver by the most advanced peoples in this -region, and is very well known as the <i>nên</i> or bar. All other goods -were long appraised by measurement, the lowest unit of capacity -being the cocoa-nut or the joint of the bamboo, the former -known certainly to the Cambodians, the latter to the Chinese, -whilst both are equally familiar to the Malays. The weight of -the contents of the bamboo or cocoa-nut was presently taken, the -standard employed being the <i>tael</i>, or highest unit yet employed -for the precious metals. The weight of the contents would -depend on the nature of the substance or liquid employed, for -instance rice or some other kind of grain, or water. Thus -the Chinese equate their catty to 16 taels; no doubt too<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_190"></a>[190]</span> -convention came in at a later stage, and even though the -contents might not actually weigh 16 taels, it was found convenient -for practical purposes to regard some suitable multiple -of the tael, such as 16, as the legal weight of the catty. -A similar process was carried out in the case of the <i>picul</i> in -the more advanced communities; a <i>load</i> was equated to the -most convenient multiple of the catty, and as it was found -that 100 catties gave a sufficiently near approximation to the -ordinary load which a man could carry on his back, 100 catties -were made the legal contents of the <i>picul</i> of trade.</p> - -<p>We also learned how currency in baser metals such as -copper or iron takes its origin. The history of the ordinary -copper <i>cash</i> of the Chinese, which can be clearly traced step by -step, brings us back to a time when a bronze knife, one of the -most requisite articles of daily life, formed the ordinary small -currency of the Chinese, just as the Greek <i>obolos</i> originally was -an actual <i>spike</i> made of copper or iron, and just as the Bahnars -of Annam still use the hoe as their lowest monetary denomination, -an implement likewise similarly employed by the Chinese -at an early period, as miniature hoes at one time used as -true currency put beyond doubt. We also saw the negroes of -Central Africa employing iron made into pieces ready to be cut -into two hoes, and we also found those on the West Coast of -Africa and the Hottentots employing bars of iron in a raw state, -as a kind of currency. We also saw one most important feature -possessed by all those in common, viz. the fact that in the determination -of the value of the bar, the ingot, the piece of iron -made in the shape of two hoes, and the bronze knife, not weight -but linear measurement based on the parts of the human body, -was the method invariably employed.</p> - -<p>We then advanced to Western Asia and Europe and found -everywhere alike the weight standards fixed by means of the -seeds of plants. The process likewise was made perfectly plain. -We did not find the highest denomination taken as the unit -and the lowest reached by a long process of subdivisions, and -finally for convenience sake described as consisting of so many -grains of corn, as the brilliant French <i>savant</i> assumes in the -case of the Assyrians: on the contrary we found that the bushel<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_191"></a>[191]</span> -of Henry VII. was reached by first fixing the weight of the -penny sterling by means of 32 grains of wheat, round and dry -and “taken from the midst of the ear of wheat after the old laws -of the land.” Again the Irish Kelts did not say that the <i>unga</i> -or ounce must contain so many <i>screapalls</i>, and each <i>screapall</i> so -many <i>pingiuns</i>, but they proceeded in quite the reverse way -first fixing the weight of the <i>pingiun</i> by eight grains of wheat. -We may then well assume that such too was the process among -Greeks, Romans, Arabs and Hindus. Brahmegupta, and the -legislators quoted above support this view by starting always -with the smallest unit. It is only when we come to the system -of Babylon we are asked to reverse the process, to admit that -the idea of weights began with corn, the very commodity of all -others which, according to all the instances previously quoted, -was the last to be valued by weight, and which even amongst -ourselves at this present moment can hardly be said to be regarded -as an article appraised by weight. But furthermore if -the Assyrians regarded the Talent as their unit, and their lesser -denominations as its subdivisions, why did not the maker of the -weight mentioned above inscribe it as ¾ obol, or by some other -term to indicate that it was essentially regarded as a fraction of -a higher denomination, and not as a multiple of a lower? But -the ancient Assyrian who made the weight must plainly have -regarded it in the latter light, for otherwise he would not have -engraved on it 22 <i>grains</i> ½, actually resorting to the fraction of -a grain. The only reasonable explanation of his conduct is that -he was as firmly impressed with the idea that the basis of his -system was the grain of corn (wheat) as were Brahmagupta, or -Henry VII.’s parliament with the idea that the barley-corn and -wheat-corn were the bases of their respective systems. If the -objection be raised that the grains of corn were only devised in -days long after the scientific fixing of weight standards, my -answer is that if it was necessary to employ natural seeds as a -means of determining the accuracy of scientifically obtained -units, <i>à fortiori</i> it was necessary for mankind to have employed -such seeds as their first step in the establishing of a system of -weights.</p> - -<p>No simpler idea connected with weight could have struck<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_192"></a>[192]</span> -the primitive mind. The difficulty experienced by savages -in counting beyond 3 or 4 is met by them by the use of -counters. We are all familiar with the use of <i>pebbles</i> or small -stones among the Greeks and Romans. Our own word <i>calculate</i> -is simply an adaptation of the Latin <i>calculare</i> to count -by pebbles (<i>calculi</i>). Some nations, probably all, have been -unable to form abstract names for their numerals, and the name -of the concrete object which they habitually employed as a -counter has become firmly embedded as a suffix in the names -of their numerals. Thus the Aztec numerals end in <i>tetl</i>, a -<i>pebble</i>, because they employed small stones as counters. Similarly -the Malays whom we found weighing gold by means of -grains of <i>padi</i> employ that word as a numeral suffix, because -they employed grains of rice for their <i>calculations</i> or, to speak -more accurately, <i>seminations</i>. In the case of this people we -find coincident the most primitive forms of numeration and of -weighing, both processes being carried on by means of the same -simple instrument, which Nature put ready to hand in the corn -which formed their daily sustenance.</p> - -<p>If any one still maintains that the Indian Islander or Tapak -of Annam learned the art of weighing by grains from the -Chinese, and would maintain that the latter either invented for -themselves or borrowed from Babylonia a scientifically devised -weight system, I will go a step further and try to produce -some evidence of the process by which weight standards are -arrived at, by seeking instances in a region so isolated as to be -beyond the reach of all suspicion of having borrowed from -Babylon.</p> - -<p>From what I have said above, we cannot expect to find any -such community in the Old World. The New World on the -other hand supplies us with what we desire. When the -Spaniards under Cortes, conquered the Aztecs of Mexico, that -people, although in a high state of civilization, had as yet -no system of weights. In consequence of this want the -Spaniards experienced some difficulty in the division of the -treasure, until they supplied the deficiency with weights and -scales of their own manufacture. There was a vast treasure of -gold, which metal, found on the surface or gleaned from the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_193"></a>[193]</span> -beds of rivers, was cast into bars, or in the shape of dust made -part of the regular tribute of the southern provinces of the -empire. The traffic was carried on partly by barter, and partly -by means of a regulated currency of different values. This -consisted of transparent quills of gold dust, bits of tin cut in -the form of T, and bags full of cacao containing a specified -number of grains<a id="FNanchor_248" href="#Footnote_248" class="fnanchor">[248]</a>.</p> - -<p>From this we get an insight into the first beginnings of -weights. Some natural unit (and by natural I mean some -product of nature of which all specimens are of uniform dimension) -is taken, such as the quill used by the Aztecs. The -average-sized quill of any particular kind of bird presents a -natural receptacle of very uniform capacity. These quills of -gold-dust were estimated at so many bags containing a certain -number of grains. The step is not a long one to the day when -some one will balance in a simple fashion quills of gold dust -against seeds of cacao, and find how much gold is equal to a -nut. Nature herself supplies in the seeds of plants weight-units -of marvellous uniformity. If any one objects to my -assumption that the Aztecs were on the very verge of the -invention of a weight system, my answer is that another race -of America, whose political existence ceased under the same -cruel conditions as that of their Northern contemporaries, I mean -the Incas of Peru, who were in a stage of civilization almost -the same as that of the Aztecs, had already found out the art of -weighing before the coming of the Spaniards, although they -were inferior to the Mexicans in so far as they had not a well-defined -system of hieroglyphic writing, nor of currency such -as the latter possessed. Scales made of silver have been discovered -in Inca graves<a id="FNanchor_249" href="#Footnote_249" class="fnanchor">[249]</a>. The metal of which they are made -shows that they were only employed for weighing precious commodities -of small bulk.</p> - -<p>Unfortunately I can find no record of weights having been -found along with the silver scales in the Inca graves. If the -weights were simply natural seeds, they would easily perish, or -even if perfect when the tombs were opened, would be simply<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_194"></a>[194]</span> -regarded as part of the ordinary supply of food placed with the -dead in the grave. But I forbear from laying the slightest -stress on negative evidence of such a kind.</p> - -<p>But beyond doubt we have on the American continent, far -removed from connection with Asia, a series of facts closely -harmonising with what we have found in Further Asia, and also -among the peoples of Hither Asia, Europe and Africa. The -Aztecs are still measuring gold, but the Incas have invented the -balance. The Incas have no alphabet, the <i>quipus</i> as yet being -their greatest advance towards a means of keeping a record of the -past. It follows that it is possible for the human race to invent -a system of weighing before it has made any advance in letters -or science. Hence it is logical to infer that the civilized races -of Asia and Europe could have discovered a means of weighing -gold long before the Chaldean sages made a single step in their -astronomical discoveries, or a single symbol of the cuneiform -syllabary had as yet been impressed on brick or tablet.</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Weights of various grains.</i></p> - -<table summary="Weights of various grains"> - <tr> - <th></th> - <th>grammes</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Troy Grain</td> - <td>·064</td> - <td></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Barley</td> - <td>·064</td> - <td></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Wheat</td> - <td>·048</td> - <td></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Rice</td> - <td>·036</td> - <td></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Carob</td> - <td>·192</td> - <td>= 3 barley = 4 wheat</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Lupin</td> - <td>·384</td> - <td>= 2 carobs</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Maize (ordinary)</td> - <td>·128</td> - <td>= 2 barley</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Ratti</td> - <td>·128</td> - <td>= 2 barley</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Rye</td> - <td>·032</td> - <td>= ½ barley</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_195"></a>[195]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_IX">CHAPTER IX.<br /> -<span class="smcap">Statement and Criticism of the Old Doctrines.</span></h2> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent18">Nec Babylonios</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Tentaris numeros.</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse right"><span class="smcap">Hor.</span> <i>Carm.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 11. 2.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<p>We now proceed to the statement and criticism of the -old doctrines of the origin of metallic currency and weight -standards. To enter into an elaborate account of the various -shades of doctrine held by the followers of Boeckh would be -useless and wearisome, for as they all alike are agreed in -starting from an arbitrary scientifically obtained unit, it -matters not as far as my object is concerned. Certain -metrologists lay down that Egypt borrowed her system from -Babylon, whilst others<a id="FNanchor_250" href="#Footnote_250" class="fnanchor">[250]</a> again declare that Egypt is the -true mother of weight standards, and this battle is raging -hotly at the present moment. Thus but recently Professor -Brugsch has written a vigorous article (in the <i>Zeitschrift für -Ethnologie</i><a id="FNanchor_251" href="#Footnote_251" class="fnanchor">[251]</a>) to prove that the Chaldeans borrowed their system -from Egypt. But the Assyriologists were not prepared to -assent to a doctrine which placed the Babylonians in an inferior -position. Accordingly Dr C. F. Lehmann (<i>Zeitschrift für Ethnologie</i>, -1889, p. 245 <i>seqq.</i>) has made an elaborate defence of the -original doctrine first propounded by Boeckh and developed -and expounded by Dr Brandis and Dr Hultsch. This Assyrio-Egyptian -struggle for pre-eminence has at present no importance -for our enquiry, as it is based almost entirely on <i>à<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_196"></a>[196]</span> -priori</i> assumptions, although when we come eventually to deal -with the question of efforts at systematization which arose at a -later stage in the evolution of weight and measure standards, it -will be necessary for us to examine the respective claims. At -present we are engaged in searching for an historical basis, and -as both the Assyriologists and Egyptologists alike unite in -deriving all weights from a deliberate scientific attempt on the -part of a highly civilized people, they are perfectly agreed in -the principle, the soundness of which it is the object of the -present investigation to test. The ablest exponent in this -country of the German theory is Dr B. V. Head, who has given -an admirable summary of the position of that school in his -Introduction to his great work, <i>Historia Numorum</i> (p. xxviii.). -To ensure a fair statement of the doctrine for the reader, it will -be better for me to give here Mr Head’s exposition in preference -to any summary of my own, as any statement by the critic of -the doctrine to be criticized is always liable to the suspicion of -being <i>ex parte</i> and consequently inadequate. Such a suspicion -is avoided by letting as far as possible our opponents state their -position in their own words.</p> - -<p>“For many centuries before the invention of coined money -there can be no doubt whatever that goods were bought and -sold by barter pure and simple, and that values were estimated -among pastoral people by the produce of the land, and more -particularly in oxen and sheep.</p> - -<p>“The next step in advance upon this primitive method of -exchange was a rude attempt at simplifying commercial transactions -by substituting for the ox and the sheep some more -portable substitute, either possessed of real or invested with an -arbitrary value.</p> - -<p>“This transitional stage in the development of commerce -cannot be more accurately described than in the words of -Aristotle, ‘As the benefits of commerce were more widely -extended by importing commodities of which there was a deficiency, -and exporting those of which there was an excess, the -use of a currency was an indispensable device. As the necessaries -of Nature were not all easily portable, people agreed -for purposes of barter mutually to give and receive some<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_197"></a>[197]</span> -article which, while it was itself a commodity, was practically -easy to handle in the business of life; some such article as -iron or silver, which was at first defined simply by size and -weight, although finally they went further and set a stamp -upon every coin to relieve them from the trouble of weighing -it, as the stamp impressed upon the coin was an indication of -quantity.’ (<i>Polit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 6. 14-16, Trans. Welldon.)</p> - -<p>“In Italy and Sicily copper or bronze in very early times -took the place of cattle as a generally recognized measure of -value, and in Peloponnesus the Spartans are said to have -retained the use of iron as a standard of value long after the -other Greeks had advanced beyond this point of commercial -civilization.</p> - -<p>“In the East, on the other hand, from the earliest times -gold and silver appear to have been used for the settlement of -the transactions of daily life, either metal having its value more -or less accurately defined in relation to the other. Thus Abraham -is said to have been ‘very rich in cattle, in silver and in -gold’ (Gen. xiii. 2, xxiv. 35), and in the account of his purchase -of the cave of Machpelah (Gen. xxiii. 16), it is stated that ‘Abraham -weighed to Ephron the silver which he had named in the -audience of the sons of Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, -current with the merchants.’</p> - -<p>“As there are no auriferous rocks or streams in Chaldaea, we -must infer that the old Chaldaean traders must have imported -their gold from India by way of the Persian Gulf, in the ships -of Ur frequently mentioned in cuneiform inscriptions.</p> - -<p>“But though gold and silver were from the earliest times -used as measures of value in the East, not a single piece of -coined money has come down to us of these remote ages, nor -is there any mention of coined money in the Old Testament -before Persian times. The gold and silver ‘current with the -merchant’ were always weighed in the balance; thus we read -that David gave to Ornan for his threshing-floor [including -oxen and threshing instruments] 600 shekels of gold by weight -(1 Chron. xxi. 25).</p> - -<p>“It is nevertheless probable that the balance was not called -into operation for every small transaction, but that little bars<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_198"></a>[198]</span> -of silver and of gold of fixed weight, but without any official -mark (and therefore not coins) were often counted out by tale, -larger amounts being always weighed. Such small bars or wedges -of gold and silver served the purposes of a currency, and were -regulated by the weight of the shekel or the mina.</p> - -<p>“This leads us briefly to examine the standards of weight -used for the precious metals in the East before the invention of -money.</p> - -<h3>“<i>The metric systems of the Egyptians, Babylonians, and -Assyrians.</i></h3> - -<p>“The evidence afforded by ancient writers on the subject of -weights and coinage is in great part untrustworthy, and would -often be unintelligible were it not for the light which has been -shed upon it by the gold and silver coins, and bronze, leaden and -stone weights which have been fortunately preserved down to -our own times. It will be safer, therefore, to confine ourselves -to the direct evidence afforded by the monuments.</p> - -<p>“Egypt, the oldest civilized country of the ancient world, first -claims our attention, but as the weight system which prevailed -in the Nile valley does not appear to have exercised any traceable -influence upon the early coinage of the Greeks, the metrology -of Egypt need not detain us long....</p> - -<p>“The Chaldaeans and Babylonians, as is well known, excelled -especially in the cognate sciences of arithmetic and astronomy. -On the broad and monotonous plains of Lower Mesopotamia, -says Professor Rawlinson, where the earth has little to suggest -thought or please by variety the ‘variegated heaven,’ ever -changing with the times and the seasons, would early attract -attention, while the clear sky, dry atmosphere, and level -horizon, would afford facilities for observations so soon as the -idea of them suggested itself to the minds of the inhabitants. -The records of these astronomical observations were inscribed -in cuneiform character on soft clay tablets, afterwards baked -hard and preserved in the royal or public libraries in the chief -cities of Babylonia. Large numbers of these tablets are now in -the British Museum. When Alexander the Great took Babylon, -it is recorded that there were found and sent to Aristotle a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_199"></a>[199]</span> -series of astronomical observations extending back as far as the -year <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 2234. Recent investigations into the nature of these -records render it probable that upon them rests the entire -structure of the metric system of the Babylonians. The day -and night were divided by the Babylonians into 24 hours, each -of 60 minutes, and each minute into 60 seconds—a method of -measuring time which has never been superseded, and which we -have inherited from Babylon, together with the first principles -of the science of astronomy. The Babylonian measures of -capacity and their system of weights were based, it is thought, -upon one and the same unit as their measures of time and -space, and as they are believed to have determined the length of -an hour of equinoctial time by means of the dropping of water, -so too it is conceivable that they may have fixed the weight of -their <i>talents</i>, their <i>mina</i>, and their <i>shekel</i>, as well as the size of -their measures of capacity, by weighing or measuring the -amounts of water, which had passed from one vessel into -another during a given space of time. Thus, just as an hour -consisted of 60 minutes and the minute of 60 seconds, so the -talent contained 60 minae, and the mina 60 shekels. The -division by sixties or sexagesimal system, is quite as characteristic -of the Babylonian arithmetic and system of weights and -measures, as the decimal system is of the Egyptian and the -modern French. And indeed it possesses one great advantage -over the decimal system, inasmuch as the number 60, upon -which it is based, is more divisible than 10.</p> - -<p>“About 1300 years before our era the Assyrian empire came -to surpass in importance that of the Babylonians, but the -learning and science of Chaldaea were not lost, but rather transmitted -through Nineveh by means of the Assyrian conquests -and commerce to the north and west as far as the shores of -the Mediterranean Sea. Let us now turn to the actual monuments. -Some thirty years ago Mr Layard discovered and -brought home from the ruins of ancient Nineveh a number of -bronze lions of various sizes which may now be seen in the -British Museum. With them were also a number of stone -objects in the form of ducks<a id="FNanchor_252" href="#Footnote_252" class="fnanchor">[252]</a>.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_200"></a>[200]</span></p> - -<p>From this double series of weights Mr Head infers that -there were two distinct minae simultaneously in use during -the long period of time which elapsed between about <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 2000, -and <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 625. “The heavier of these two minae appears to have -been just the double of the lighter. Brandis is probably not -far from the mark in fixing the weight of the heavy mina at -1010 grammes, and that of the light at 505 grammes.</p> - -<p>“It has been suggested that the lighter of these two minae -may have been peculiar to the Babylonian, and the heavier to -the Assyrian empire; but this cannot be proved. But nevertheless -it would seem that the use of the heavy mina was more -extended in Syria than that of the lighter, if we may judge -from the fact that most of the weights belonging to the system -of the heavy mina have in addition to the cuneiform inscription -an Aramaic one.</p> - -<p>“The purpose which this Aramaic inscription served must -clearly have been to render the weight acceptable to the Syrian -and Phoenician merchants who traded backwards and forwards -between Assyria and Mesopotamia on the one hand, and the -Phoenician emporia on the other.</p> - -<h3>“<i>The Phoenician traders.</i></h3> - -<p>“The Phoenician commerce was chiefly a carrying trade. -The richly embroidered stuffs of Babylonia and other products -of the East were brought down to the coasts, and then carefully -packed in chests of cedarwood in the markets of Tyre and Sidon, -whence they were shipped by the enterprising Phoenician -mariners to Cyprus, to the coasts of the Aegean, or even to the -extreme West.</p> - -<p>“Hence the Phoenician city of Tyre was called by Ezekiel -(xxvii.) ‘a merchant of the people for many isles.’</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_201"></a>[201]</span></p> - -<p>“But the Phoenicians in common with the Egyptians, the -Greeks and the Hebrews etc. with whom they dealt were at no -time without their own peculiar weights and measures upon -which they appear to have grafted the Assyrio-Babylonian -principal unit of account or the weight in which it was customary -to estimate values. This weight was the 60th part of -the <i>manah</i> or mina.</p> - -<p>“The Babylonian sexagesimal system was foreign to Phoenician -habits. While therefore these people had no difficulty -in adopting the Assyrio-Babylonian 60th as their own unit of -weight or shekel, they did not at the same time adopt the -sexagesimal system in its entirety but constituted a new mina -for themselves consisting of 50 shekels instead of 60. In estimating -the largest weight of all, the <i>Talent</i>, the multiplication -by 60 was nevertheless retained. Thus in the Phoenician -system as in that of the Greeks 50 shekels (Gk. <i>staters</i>) = 1 -Mina, and 60 Minae or 3000 shekels or staters = 1 Talent.</p> - -<p>“The particular form of shekel which appears to have been -received by the Phoenicians and Hebrews from the East was -the 60th part of the heavier of the two Assyrio-Babylonian -minae above referred to. The 60th of the lighter for some -reason which has not been satisfactorily accounted for seems -to have been transmitted westwards by a different route, viz. -across Asia Minor, and so into the kingdom of Lydia.</p> - -<h3>“<i>The Lydians.</i></h3> - -<p>“‘The Lydians,’ says E. Curtius (<i>Hist. Gr.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 76), ‘became on -land what the Phoenicians were by sea, the mediators between -Hellas and Asia.’ It is related that about the time of the -Trojan Wars and for some centuries afterwards, the country of -the Lydians was in a state of vassalage to the kings of Assyria. -But an Assyrian inscription informs us that Asia Minor, west of -the Halys, was unknown to the Assyrian kings before the time -of Assur-banî-apli, or Assurbanipal (circ. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 666), who it is -stated received an embassy from Gyges, king of Lydia ‘a -remote’ country, of which Assurbanipal’s predecessors had -never heard the name. Nevertheless that there had been some<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_202"></a>[202]</span> -sort of connection between Lydia and Assyria in ancient times -is probable, though it cannot be proved.</p> - -<p>“Professor Sayce is of opinion that the mediators between -Lydia in the west, and Assyria in the east, were the people -called Kheta or Hittites. According to this theory the northern -Hittite capital Carchemish (later Hierapolis) on the Euphrates, -was the spot where the arts and civilization of Assyria took the -form which especially characterises the early monuments of -Central Asia Minor.</p> - -<p>“The year <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 1400 or thereabouts was the time of greatest -power of the nation of the Hittites, and if they were in reality -the chief connecting link between Lydia and Assyria it may -be inferred that it was through them that the Lydians received -the Assyrian weight, which afterwards in Lydia took the form -of a stamped ingot or coin.</p> - -<p>“But why it was that the light mina rather than the heavy -one had become domesticated in Lydia must remain unexplained. -We know however that one of the Assyrian weights -is spoken of in cuneiform inscriptions as the ‘<i>weight of Carchemish</i>.’ -If then the modern hypothesis of a Hittite dominion -in Asia Minor turn out to be well founded, the <i>weight of Carchemish</i> -might by means of the Hittites have found its way to -Phrygia and Lydia, and as the earliest Lydian coins are regulated -according to the divisions of the Light Assyrian mina this -would probably be the one alluded to.</p> - -<p>“From these two points then, <i>Phoenicia</i> on the one hand and -<i>Lydia</i> (through Carchemish), on the other, the two Babylonian -units of weight appear to have started westwards to the shores -of the Aegean sea, the heavy shekel by way of Phoenicia, the -lighter shekel by way of Lydia.”</p> - -<p>So far I have thought it but right to give Mr Head’s exposition -<i>in extenso</i>, that the enquirer may be enabled to fully -grasp the principles of the orthodox school, before we enter -on any criticism of them. I shall now treat more summarily -all that remains to be said.</p> - -<p>Let us briefly state the peculiar doctrines of two leading -continental metrologists. The veteran Dr Hultsch derives all -standards of weight thus: The royal Babylonian cubit was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_203"></a>[203]</span> -based on the sun’s apparent diameter; the cube of this measure -gave the <i>maris</i>, the weight in water of one-fifth of which was -the royal Babylonian talent, which was divided into 60 <i>manehs</i> -(<i>minae</i>) and each mina in turn into 60 shekels. For silver and -gold however they formed their standard by taking <i>fifty</i> shekels -to form a mina<a id="FNanchor_253" href="#Footnote_253" class="fnanchor">[253]</a>: thus after elaborating with such care a -scientific system, they abandoned it as soon as they came to -deal with the precious metals.</p> - -<p>M. Soutzo<a id="FNanchor_254" href="#Footnote_254" class="fnanchor">[254]</a> in a clever essay has maintained that all the -weight systems both monetary and commercial of Asia, Egypt, -Greece, come from one primordial weight the Egyptian <i>uten</i> -(96 grammes), or from its tenth, the <i>kat</i> (9·60 grammes). He -ascribes the origin of these weights to an extremely remote -epoch not far perhaps from the time of the discovery of bronze -in Asia, and the invention of the first instruments for weighing: -he considers also that bronze <i>by weight</i> was the first money -employed in Asia, Egypt, and Italy, and that everywhere the -decimal system of numeration has preceded the sexagesimal.</p> - -<p>The evidence which we have produced in the earlier part -of this work has I trust convinced the reader that gold, not -copper, was the first object to be weighed; M. Soutzo’s assumption -that the <i>uten</i> is the primordial unit is upset even for -the Egyptians themselves by the passage already cited from -Horapollo (p. 129).</p> - -<h3><i>The invention of coinage.</i></h3> - -<p>The evidence of both history and numismatics coincides -in making the Lydians the inventors of the art of coining -money. At first sight it may seem surprising that none of -the great peoples of the East, whose civilization had its first -beginning long ages before the periods at which our very -oldest records begin, should have developed coined money, acquainted -as they indubitably were with the precious metals, -both for ornament and exchange. But a little reflection shews -us that it has been quite possible for peoples to attain a high<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_204"></a>[204]</span> -degree of civilization without feeling any need of what are -properly termed coins. Transactions by means of the scales -are comparatively simple, and as a matter of fact we shall find -hereafter that even after a coinage had been for centuries -established, men constantly had recourse to the balance in -monetary transactions, just as down to the present moment the -Chinese, who have enjoyed a high degree of culture for several -thousand years, still have no native currency but their copper -cash, foreign silver dollars being the only medium in the precious -metals, whilst all important monetary transactions are carried -on by the scales and weights. I may here likewise point out -incidentally that where the supply of the precious metals is -only sufficient to meet the demand for personal adornment, -the establishment of a coinage in those metals will naturally -be slow, whilst on the other hand where there is so abundant -a supply of the metals, that there is more than sufficient for -purposes of personal use, the tendency to produce a coinage will -be much greater. If we enquire what were the metalliferous -regions of Asia Minor, we at once find that Lydia above all -other countries was especially rich in gold, or rather a natural -alloy of gold and silver. The wealth of two Lydian kings, -Gyges and Croesus, which has been through the ages a -proverb consisted of vast quantities of this metal, which the -Greeks called <i>electron</i> (ἤλεκτρον) or <i>white gold</i> (λευκὸς χρυσός, -Herodotus, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 50). The ancients regarded it as almost a distinct -metal, doubtless because from their imperfect methods they -experienced the greatest difficulty in extracting the pure metal. -The pure gold in circulation in Asia Minor must have come -from the valley of the Oxus, or the Ural mountains. Thus -Sophocles speaks of “the electron of Sardis and the gold of Ind<a id="FNanchor_255" href="#Footnote_255" class="fnanchor">[255]</a>.” -Even in the time of Strabo (<span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> 21), the process was regarded -as so difficult that the great geographer thinks it worth while -to quote from Posidonius (flor. 90 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), the description of how -the separation of the metals was effected (<span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 146). It is therefore<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_205"></a>[205]</span> -natural to find in Lydia, the land of gold, the first attempts -at coined money.</p> - -<p>“So far as we have knowledge,” says Herodotus<a id="FNanchor_256" href="#Footnote_256" class="fnanchor">[256]</a>, “the -Lydians were the first nation to introduce the use of gold and -silver coin.”</p> - -<p>This statement is fully borne out by the evidence of Xenophanes<a id="FNanchor_257" href="#Footnote_257" class="fnanchor">[257]</a>, -and also by the coins themselves, although some -writers, <i>e.g.</i> Th. Mommsen<a id="FNanchor_258" href="#Footnote_258" class="fnanchor">[258]</a>, have held that it was in the great -cities of Ionia, Phocaea and Miletus that money was first coined. -“From the little we know of the character of this people (the -Lydians) we gather that their commercial instinct must have -been greatly developed by their geographical position and -surroundings, both conducive to frequent intercourse with the -peoples of Asia Minor, Orientals as well as Greeks.”</p> - -<p>About the time when the mighty Assyrian empire was -falling into decay, Lydia, under a new dynasty called the -Mermnadae, was entering upon a new phase of national life.</p> - -<p>“The policy of these new rulers of the country was to extend -the power of Lydia towards the West, and to obtain possession of -towns on the coast. With this object Gyges (who, according to -the story told by Plato, was a shepherd who owed his good -fortune to the finding of a magic ring in an ancient tomb, -and who was the founder of the dynasty of the Mermnadae, -circ. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 700) established a firm footing on the Hellespont, and -endeavoured to extend his dominions along the whole Ionian -coast. This brought the Lydians into direct contact with the -Asiatic Greeks.</p> - -<p>“These Ionian Greeks had been from very early times in -constant intercourse, not always friendly, with the Phoenicians, -with whom they had long before come to an understanding -about numbers, weights, measures, the alphabet, and such like -matters, and from whom, there is reason to think, they had -received the 60th part of the <i>heavy</i> Assyrio-Babylonian mina -as their unit of weight or <i>stater</i>. The Lydians on the other -hand had received, probably from Carchemish, the 60th of the -<i>light</i> mina.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_206"></a>[206]</span></p> - -<p>“Thus then, when the Lydians in the reign of Gyges came -into contact and conflict with the Greeks, the two units of -weight, after travelling by different routes, met again in the -coast towns and river valleys of Western Asia Minor, in the -borderland between the East and the West.</p> - -<p>“To the reign of Gyges, the founder of the new Lydian -empire as distinct from the Lydia of more remote antiquity, -may perhaps be ascribed the earliest essays in the art of coining. -The wealth of this monarch in the precious metals may be -inferred from the munificence of his gifts to the Delphic shrine, -consisting of golden mixing cups and silver urns, amounting to -a mass of gold and silver such as the Greeks had never before -seen collected together.” This treasure was called the Gygadas, -and is described by Herodotus<a id="FNanchor_259" href="#Footnote_259" class="fnanchor">[259]</a>.</p> - -<p>“It is in conformity with the whole spirit of a monarch such -as Gyges, whose life’s work it was to extend his empire towards -the West, and at the same time to hold in his hands the lines -of communication with the East, that from his capital Sardes, -situated on the slopes of Tmolus and on the banks of the -Pactolus, both rich in gold, he should send forth along the -caravan routes of the East and into the heart of Mesopotamia, -and down the river valleys of the West to the sea, his native -Lydian ore gathered from the washings of Pactolus and from -the diggings on the sides of Tmolus and Sipylus.</p> - -<p>“This precious merchandize (if the earliest Lydian coins are -indeed his) he issued in the form of oval-shaped bullets or -ingots, officially sealed or stamped on one side as a guarantee -of their weight and value. For the eastern or land-trade the -<i>light</i> mina was the standard by which this coinage was regulated, -while for the western trade with the Greeks of the -coast the <i>heavy</i> mina was made use of, which from its mode of -transmission we may call the <i>Phoenician</i>, retaining the name -<i>Babylonian</i> only for the weight which was derived from the -banks of the Euphrates.”</p> - -<p>To prevent misapprehension, it may be advisable to mention -that the standards here termed <i>Phoenician</i> and <i>Babylonian</i> are -not to be confounded with the <i>heavy</i> and <i>light</i> shekels already<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_207"></a>[207]</span> -mentioned, but are the standards derived from the latter -specially for silver, in the ways shown a little lower down.</p> - -<p>Modern analysis of electrum from Tmolus shows that it -consists of 27 per cent. of silver and 73 per cent. of gold<a id="FNanchor_260" href="#Footnote_260" class="fnanchor">[260]</a>. It -consequently stood to silver in a different relation from that -of pure gold. Thus while gold stood to silver as 13·3:1, -electrum would stand at 10:1 or thereabouts. Mr Head -considers that “this natural compound of gold and silver possessed -some advantages for coining over gold. In the first -place it was more durable, harder, and less liable to injury and -waste from wear. In the second place it was more easily -obtainable, being a natural product; and in the third place, -standing as it did in the proportion of about 10:1 to silver, it -rendered needless the use of a different standard of weight for -the two metals, enabling the authorities of the mints to make -use of a single set of weights, and a decimal system easy of -comprehension and simple in practice” (p. xxxiv.). The second -of these reasons is probably the true one, the first being a good -example of the tendency of even the most able modern writers to -ascribe to early times ideas which are only the outcome of a far -later period. The idea of getting a metal which will be more -durable in circulation is purely modern, and not even received -by Orientals in modern times. Thus the gold mohurs of India -down to their latest issue were of pure gold, free from alloy (in -consequence of which they are still sought after by the native -Hindu goldsmiths in preference to the English sovereign, as the -addition of alloy makes the latter less easy to work up into -jewellery).</p> - -<p>I allude to this here because we shall find in the course of -our enquiry that most of the errors into which metrologists -have fallen, are the consequence of their failing to recognize the -great gulf which is fixed between the habits and ideas of a -primitive community, slowly evolving principles which are now -part and parcel of the common heritage of civilization, and an -era like our own, when all progress is effected by the development -and application of scientific principles long since discovered.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_208"></a>[208]</span></p> - -<p>Electrum was thus coined on the same standard as silver, -one <i>talent</i>, one <i>mina</i> and one <i>stater</i> of electrum being consequently -equal to ten <i>talents</i>, ten <i>minae</i>, or ten <i>staters</i> of silver. -The weight of the electrum stater in each district would depend -therefore on the standard which happened to be in use there -for silver bullion, or silver in the shape of bars or oblong bricks, -the practice of the new invention of stamping or sealing metal -for circulation being in the first place only applied to the more -precious of the two metals, electrum representing in a small -compass a weight of uncoined silver ten times as bulky and -ten times as difficult of transport.</p> - -<p>The invention was soon extended to pure gold and silver, -and there is good reason to believe that by the time of Croesus -(568-554 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) both these metals were used for purposes of -coinage in Lydia.</p> - -<h3><i>The Greeks begin to coin money.</i></h3> - -<p>The clever Greeks of Asia Minor, who formed the portal -through which so many of the arts of the East reached the -Western lands, were not slow to adopt, and by reason of their -superior artistic taste to improve, the great Lydian invention. -To the Ionic cities such as Phocaea and Miletus we must -probably ascribe the credit of substituting artistically engraved -dies for the rude Lydian punch-marks, and at a somewhat later -period of inscribing them with the name or rather the initial of -the people or potentate by whom they were issued.</p> - -<p>The official stamps by which the earliest electrum staters were -distinguished from mere ingots consisted at first only of the impress -of rude unengraved punches, between which the lump or -oval-shaped bullet of metal was placed to receive the blow of the -hammer. Subsequently the art of the engraver was called in to -adorn the lower of the two dies, which was always that of the -face or <i>obverse</i> of the coin, with the symbol of the local divinity -under whose auspices the currency was issued.</p> - -<p>As our object is to deal with coins from the point of view of -metrology, the short summary here given of the genesis of the -art of coining will suffice for our purposes.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_209"></a>[209]</span></p> - -<h3><i>Weight standards.</i></h3> - -<p>“Silver was very rarely at this early period weighed by the -same talent and mina as gold, but, according to a standard -derived from the gold weight, somewhat as follows:—</p> - -<p>Gold was to silver as 13·3:1. This proportion made it -difficult to weigh both metals on the same standard. That a -round number of silver shekels or staters might equal a gold -shekel or stater, the weight of the silver shekel was either -raised above or lowered below that of the gold. The <i>heavy</i> gold -shekel weighed 260 grains Troy, being the double of the <i>light</i> -gold shekel, which weighed 130 grains Troy (8·4 grammes).</p> - -<h3><span class="smcap">The Silver Standards derived from the Gold Shekel<a id="FNanchor_261" href="#Footnote_261" class="fnanchor">[261]</a>.</span></h3> - -<p>I. From the <i>heavy</i> gold shekel of 260 grains:</p> - -<table summary="Silver standards derived from the heavy gold shekel"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">260 × 13·3</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>3458 grains of silver.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3458 grains of silver</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>15 shekels of 230 grains each.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>On the silver shekel of 230 grains the <i>Phoenician</i> or Graeco-Asiatic -<i>silver</i> standard may be constructed:</p> - -<table summary="Phoenician or Graeco-Asiatic silver standard, derived from the silver shekel of 230 grains"> - <tr> - <td>Talent</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">690,000</td> - <td>grains</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">3000</td> - <td>staters (or shekels).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Mina</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">11,500</td> - <td>grains</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>staters.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Stater</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">230</td> - <td>grains.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>II. From the <i>light</i> gold shekel of 130 grains we get the -so-called Babylonian or Persian standard:</p> - -<table summary="Babylonian or Persian silver standard, derived from the light gold shekel of 130 grains"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">130 × 13·3</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1729 grains of silver.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1729 grains of silver</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>10 shekels of 172·9 grains each.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>On the silver shekel or stater of 172·9 grains the <i>Babylonic</i>, -<i>Lydian</i>, and Persian <i>silver</i> standard may be thus constructed:—</p> - -<table summary="Babylonic, Lydian and Persian silver standard, derived from the silver shekel or stater of 172·9 grains"> - <tr> - <td>Talent</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">518,700</td> - <td>grains</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">3000</td> - <td>staters</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">6000</td> - <td>sigli.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Mina</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">8645</td> - <td>grains</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Stater</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">172·9</td> - <td>grains</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">2</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Siglos</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">86·45</td> - <td>grains.”</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_210"></a>[210]</span></p> - -<p>It is desirable “to take note of the fact that in Asia Minor and -in the earliest periods of the art of coining, (α) the heavy gold -stater (260 grains) occurs at various places, from Teos northwards -as far as the shores of the Propontis; (β) the light gold -stater (130 grains) in Lydia (Κροίσειος στατήρ) and in Samos (?); -(γ) the electrum stater of the Phoenician <i>silver</i> standard, chiefly -at Miletus, but also at other towns along the west coast of Asia -Minor, as well as in Lydia, but never however in full weight; -(δ) the electrum and silver stater of the Babylonic standard, -chiefly if not solely in Lydia; (ε) the silver stater of the Phoenician -standard (230 grains) on the west coast of Asia Minor<a id="FNanchor_262" href="#Footnote_262" class="fnanchor">[262]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Here we may call attention to the fact that whilst Miletus -struck her electrum staters on the Phoenician <i>silver</i> standard -(their normal weight being 217 grains), the Phocaeans always -from the infancy of coining employed for their electrum the -<i>gold</i> standard of the <i>heavy</i> shekel (260 grains). But the proper -time for discussing why the Lydians, Milesians and Phocaeans -all struck their electrum coins of various standards, will come -further on in our enquiry.</p> - -<h3><i>The coin-standards of Greece Proper.</i></h3> - -<p>Before we attempt to examine into the connection of the -Homeric talent or ox unit, and the ancient systems of the -East, it will be advisable to get a clear view of the coin-standards -found in actual use in historical times, and to understand -the common doctrine of the derivation of the same. -As gold was not coined in Greece Proper until a comparatively -late period, owing doubtless to the fact that there was no -great supply of it to be had, and that all of it was required -to meet the demand for personal adornment, the entire early -coinage of Greece (with some few exceptions to be presently -noted) consisted of silver. These silver issues were all struck -on either of two systems; (1) the Aeginean, or Aeginetic, -and (2) the Euboic, the stater of the former weighing about -195 grains, that of the latter about 135-130 grains. But it -is a fact of paramount importance that gold, whenever and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_211"></a>[211]</span> -wherever coined in Greece, was always on the Euboic standard, -and there is likewise every reason to believe that gold bullion -in the days before gold was coined was computed according to -the same standard. Such at least was undoubtedly the case -at Athens, as we learn from Thucydides<a id="FNanchor_263" href="#Footnote_263" class="fnanchor">[263]</a>, where he describes -the resources of Athens both in coined and uncoined metal, and -in the gold plates which overlaid the famous chryselephantine -statue of Pallas Athene, the masterpiece of Pheidias, and the -glory of the Acropolis; and such also, as we shall see, was the -case, in the days of Solon.</p> - -<p>All ancient accounts are agreed in the statement that -Aegina was the first place in Hellas Proper which saw the -minting of money. That island was famous from old time as -the meeting-place of merchants, and as such under its ancient -name of Oenone was glorified by Pindar<a id="FNanchor_264" href="#Footnote_264" class="fnanchor">[264]</a>. Its position rendered -it a most convenient emporium, where the merchantmen of -Tyre met in traffic the traders from both Peloponnesus and -northern Greece. Tradition makes its population a very mixed -one: “It was called Oenone,” says Strabo, “in ancient times, -and it was settled by Argives, Kretans, Epidaurians, and -Dorians<a id="FNanchor_265" href="#Footnote_265" class="fnanchor">[265]</a>.” According to a fragment of Ephorus, to be referred -to presently, it was owing to the barren nature of the soil that -the natives turned to trade.</p> - -<p>All Greek tradition is unanimous in representing Pheidon -of Argos as the first to coin money in Hellas Proper, and to -have done so at Aegina. Much obscurity enshrouds the history -and the date of Pheidon, owing to the conflicting accounts of -the historians. For our immediate purpose it would be quite -sufficient to state simply that he cannot have lived later than -600 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, but in consequence of some prevailing doctrines -with regard to the history of Greek weights being based on -inferences (probably quite unwarrantable) which have been -drawn from the statements given about this despot, we must -take a more elaborate survey of the sources.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_212"></a>[212]</span></p> - -<p>Pausanias<a id="FNanchor_266" href="#Footnote_266" class="fnanchor">[266]</a>, writing about 174 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> says that the Pisaeans -in the eight Olympiad (747 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) brought to their aid Pheidon -of Argos, who of all despots in Hellas waxed most insolent, and -that along with him they celebrated the festival. But now comes -the testimony of Herodotus<a id="FNanchor_267" href="#Footnote_267" class="fnanchor">[267]</a>, who was writing circ. 440 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, -and who tells us (<span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 127) that when Cleisthenes the despot of -Sicyon held the <i>svayamvara</i> for his daughter Agariste; -amongst the suitors who came from all parts of Hellas, was -“Leocedes, son of Pheidon, the despot of the Argives, Pheidon, -who had made their measures for the Peloponnesians, and had -of all Greeks waxed to the greatest pitch of violence, he who -expelled the Elean presidents of the games and himself held -the festival.” There cannot be the slightest doubt that both -Pausanias and Herodotus refer to the same tyrant, but the -dates are irreconcileable. As Cleisthenes, the Athenian law-giver, -was the son of Agariste, her wooing cannot have been -much earlier than 560 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, and consequently Pheidon must -have reigned at Argos shortly before 600 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span></p> - -<p>Weissenborn (followed by Ernst Curtius) has sought to cut -the Gordian knot by emending the text of Pausanias, thus -reading 28th instead of 8th Olympiad, which would make -Pheidon help the Pisaeans in the year 668 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> But even this -drastic remedy is hardly sufficient to meet the requirements of -the statement of Herodotus.</p> - -<p>Our earliest authority for the tradition that Pheidon coined -at Aegina is a passage of Ephorus preserved by Strabo (<span class="allsmcap">VIII.</span> -376)<a id="FNanchor_268" href="#Footnote_268" class="fnanchor">[268]</a>: “Ephorus says that in Aegina silver was first struck by -Pheidon; for it had become an emporium, inasmuch as its -population, owing to the barrenness of the land, engaged in -maritime trade; whence trumpery goods are called Aeginean -ware.” According to another passage of Strabo, which may be -likewise from Ephorus, as it comes at the end of a long statement, -the first part of which Strabo expressly declares is taken from<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_213"></a>[213]</span> -that writer: (“They say) that Pheidon of Argos, who was tenth -in descent from Temenus, and who surpassed his contemporaries -in his power, whence he recovered the whole of the inheritance -of Temenus, which had been rent into several parts, and -that he invented the measures which are called Pheidonian -and weights and stamped currency, both the other kind and -that of silver.” It must be carefully observed that this is the -only ancient passage which says a word about the invention of -<i>weights</i> by Pheidon. If this statement can be taken as trustworthy -we might very well conclude that Pheidon was the -person who introduced the decimal principle and made 10 silver -pieces instead of 15 equivalent to the gold stater. If however -this is an addition of Strabo<a id="FNanchor_269" href="#Footnote_269" class="fnanchor">[269]</a>, who wrote about <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> 1-21, and -whose account of Greece Proper is the most defective portion -of his great work, we cannot let this passage weigh against -that already given from Herodotus, who is perfectly silent as -regards the invention of <i>weights</i>. Furthermore there is the fact -that Strabo does not venture to describe the <i>weights</i> as called -<i>Pheidonian</i>, but carefully limits that appellation to the measures -as we find also to be the case with Pollux, when he is describing -various kinds of vessels: “and likewise a Pheidon would be a -kind of vessel for holding oil, deriving its name from the Pheidonian -measures respecting which Aristotle speaks in his Polity -of the Argives<a id="FNanchor_270" href="#Footnote_270" class="fnanchor">[270]</a>.” Here again we find a clear mention of the -Pheidonian measures, coupled with the high authority of Aristotle’s -treatise on the Constitution of Argos in his great -“Collection of Polities,” formed to serve as the material from -which to build his great philosophic work on Politics.</p> - -<p>There is again no mention of Pheidonian <i>weights</i> in the -newly found Polity of the Athenians (which seems beyond -doubt the same as that known to the ancients under the name -of Aristotle), where it is stated that “in his (Solon’s) time the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_214"></a>[214]</span> -measures (at Athens) were made larger than those of Pheidon” -(c. 10)<a id="FNanchor_271" href="#Footnote_271" class="fnanchor">[271]</a>. Although the writer refers to the Aeginetic coin-weights -in the next clause, he does not refer to them as the -Pheidonian.</p> - -<p>Now let us pass on to a remarkable passage in the <i>Etymologicum -Magnum</i> (<i>s.v.</i> Ὀβελίσος).</p> - -<p>“First of all men Pheidon of Argos struck money in Aegina; -and having given them (his subjects) coin and abolished the -spits, he dedicated them to Hera in Argos. But since at that -time the spits used to fill the hand, that is the grasp, we, -although we do not fill our hand with the six obols (spits) call it -a <i>grasp full</i> (δραχμὴ) owing to the <i>grasping</i> of them. Whence -even still to this day we call the usurer the spit-<i>weigher</i>, since -by weights the men of old used to hand (money) over<a id="FNanchor_272" href="#Footnote_272" class="fnanchor">[272]</a>.” The -writer of this passage evidently regards Pheidon as the first -inventor of the art of coining but not of <i>weight</i> standards.</p> - -<p>Finally the Parian Marble recounts that, “Pheidon the -Argive confiscated the measures ... and remade them and made -silver coin in Aegina<a id="FNanchor_273" href="#Footnote_273" class="fnanchor">[273]</a>.” Such then is the body of evidence -which we possess, all pointing to Aegina as the first place in -Greece which saw a mint set up, and to Pheidon of Argos as -the first to establish that mint. As we have pointed out above -we have nothing but a very dubious statement of Strabo (which -is coupled with another most certainly wrong, <i>i.e.</i>, that Pheidon -was the inventor of every other kind of money as well as silver) -as regards the invention of weights by Pheidon, although from -the passage in Herodotus already quoted, metrologists one -after another have assumed that the measures (μέτρα) meant a -<i>metric system</i> in the modern sense, and have not hesitated to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_215"></a>[215]</span> -build on this somewhat crazy foundation an elaborate Aeginetic -system of weights and measures intimately related to each other.</p> - -<p>We are then probably justified in assuming that Pheidon -coined silver at Aegina. The numismatic evidence coincides -with the literary authorities. The coins of Aegina are well -known, for from first to last the symbol of the sea tortoise -(χελώνη, from which they are called in vulgar parlance <i>tortoises</i>) -is found on them. Why Pheidon set up his mint in Aegina -instead of in his own city of Argos is not very difficult to understand. -Argos was an inland town remote from the highways of -commerce, and little in contact with the merchants of the -Levant. On the other hand Aegina stood at the portal of -central Greece, intercepting the trade of Athens and Corinth; -in later days Pericles called it the “eyesore of the Piraeus.” It -would be probably here that the Greeks first saw the new -invention of the East in the hands of the foreign traders, and -it would be here, in a great emporium, that the need of a -currency would be most felt. In an inland city like Argos or -Sparta bars of bronze or iron would serve well for the small -commercial transactions of a very primitive society, as we know -that the iron currency actually did at Sparta in historical times. -E. Curtius suggested (<i>Numism. Chron.</i>, 1870) that the tortoise -on the Aeginetan coins, which is the symbol of Ashtaroth who -was the Phoenician goddess both of the sea and of trade, may -be an indication that the mint was set up in the temple of -Aphrodite, which overlooked the great harbour of Aegina. -Whilst his hypothesis as regards the origin of the tortoise type -on the coin is probably wrong, it is quite possible that the coins -were first struck in some temple, as we know that the great -shrines of the ancient world served as banks and treasuries, -as for example the temple of Athena at Athens, that of Apollo -at Delphi, and that of Juno Moneta at Rome. The temple -priests of Delphi and other rich shrines had at their command -large stores of the precious metals, which in the earliest times -doubtless were in the shape of small ingots or bullets, such -as the gold talents mentioned in the Homeric Poems.</p> - -<p>The temple shrines of Delphi and Olympia, Delos and Dodona -were centres not merely of religious cult, but likewise of trade<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_216"></a>[216]</span> -and commerce, just as the great fairs of the Middle Ages grew -primarily out of the feast day of the local saint, merchants and -traders taking advantage of the assembling together of large -bodies of worshippers from various quarters to ply their calling -and to tempt them with their wares. The temple authorities -encouraged trade in every way; they constructed sacred roads, -which gave facility for travelling at a time when roads as a -general rule were almost unknown, and what was just as important, -they placed these roads and consequently the persons -who travelled on them under the protection of the god -to whose temple they led in each case, thus affording a safe -conduct to the trader as well as the pilgrim; again at the -time of the sacred festivals all strife had to cease, the voice of -war was hushed, and thus even amidst the noise of intestine -struggles and international strife, peace offered a breathing -space for trade and commerce. Hence the probability is considerable -that the art of minting money, that is, of stamping -with a symbol the ingots or <i>talents</i> of gold or silver which had -circulated in this simple form for centuries, first had its birth -in the sanctuary of some god.</p> - -<p>On the whole then we may assume that the bullet-shaped -coins of Aegina, which are undoubtedly the earliest coins of -Greece Proper, are the Pheidonian currency mentioned in the -ancient authors and on the Parian Marble. As silver was -probably not at all plenty at Argos, but was brought to Aegina -by the traders, Pheidon had every motive for minting at -Aegina instead of at his own capital. The fact that the Romans -struck silver coins in Campania before they issued any at -Rome affords a curious parallel. A local supply of the metal -offers the explanation in each case. “It may be also positively -asserted that none of the Aeginetan coins are older than the -earliest Lydian electrum money, and that consequently the -date of the introduction of coined money into Peloponnesus -must be subsequent to circ. 700 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> It follows that Pheidon -was not the inventor of money, for already before his time all -the coasts and islands of the Aegean must have been acquainted -with the pale yellow electrum coins of Lydia and Ionia<a id="FNanchor_274" href="#Footnote_274" class="fnanchor">[274]</a>.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_217"></a>[217]</span></p> - -<p>What then was the standard on which these early coins of -Aegina were struck?</p> - -<p>The heaviest specimens of these Aeginetan staters or didrachms -weigh over 200 grains Troy, but these seem somewhat -exceptional. The best numismatic authorities are agreed in -setting the normal weight at 196 grains Troy; the drachm -consequently weighs 98 grains, and the obol about 16 grains. -The origin of this standard has caused much difficulty to -metrologists. For it is not the standard of the Babylonian gold -shekel of 130 grains, nor of the Babylonian silver shekel of 172 -grains, nor again that of the Phoenician silver shekel of 230 -grains. Various solutions have been proposed. Brandis<a id="FNanchor_275" href="#Footnote_275" class="fnanchor">[275]</a> regards -it as a raised Babylonian silver standard, 172·9 to 196 -grains. Mr Head regards it as the reduced Phoenician -standard; “The weight standard which the Peloponnesians had -received in old times from the Phoenician traders had suffered -in the course of about two centuries a very considerable -degradation<a id="FNanchor_276" href="#Footnote_276" class="fnanchor">[276]</a>.” Others, like Mr Flinders Petrie (Encyclop. -Britannica, <i>Weights and Measures</i>), regard it as Egyptian in -origin. According to Herodotus (<span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 178) the Aeginetans were -on terms of friendly intercourse with Egypt; furthermore -weights of this standard have been found in Egypt.</p> - -<p>Again, Dr Hultsch (<i>Metrol.</i>² p. 188) regards it as an independent -standard midway between the Babylonian silver -standard (172·9 grs.) on the one hand, and the Phoenician -silver standard (230 grs.) on the other, the old Aeginetan -silver mina being equivalent in value to six light Babylonian -shekels of gold (130 × 6 = 780 grs. = 10300 grs. of silver), assuming -that in Greece as in Asia Minor gold was to silver as 13·3:1.</p> - -<p>All these theories labour under serious difficulties. Brandis’ -theory was overthrown easily as soon as attention was called -to the well-defined heavy series of Aeginetic coins, he having -been led to his opinion by a comparison of the heaviest -specimen of the Babylonian standard with the lightest of the -Aeginetic. Here incidentally we may call the readers’ attention -to the fact that in numismatics the weight of the heaviest -specimens of any series must be regarded as the true index of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_218"></a>[218]</span> -the normal weight, for whatever may have been the inclination -to mint coins of a weight lighter than the proper standard, we -may rest assured that the ancient mint-master was no more -inclined than his modern representative to put into coins of -gold or silver a single grain more than the legal amount. -Hence it is a most faulty and fallacious method when dealing -with coin weights to take the average of a certain number of -specimens as the true standard. Out of 30 specimens 29 may -have lost more or less in weight by wear, whilst one may be a -<i>fleur de coin</i>, perfect as at the moment when it left the die. -No one can doubt that the evidence of that single coin as -regards the standard is worth far more than that of all the -remaining 29 examples. I have thought it well to call attention -to this question of method as the vicious principle of arriving -at standards by taking the average is still found in works of -men of great eminence.</p> - -<p>Next let us consider the probability of the derivation of the -Aeginetic standard from Egypt. The fact that weights of like -standard have been found in that country, although superficially -plausible, in reality is of little force as evidence of borrowing. -For unless we find that the Egyptians used those weights for -weighing <i>silver</i>, even the <i>prima facie</i> case breaks down at once. -As a matter of fact there is no evidence up to the present -that these weights were so employed, although there is some -evidence of their being employed for gold (Flinders Petrie, -<i>op. cit.</i>). But even granting that the Egyptians used the -same standard as the Aeginetans for silver, it does not at all -follow that there has been borrowing on either side. On the -principle laid down below it will be seen that it is quite possible -for two peoples to evolve a like <i>silver</i> standard perfectly independently -of each other. But the real difficulty which besets -the theory of an Egyptian origin is that if the Aeginetans were -to borrow their standard from abroad, the people from whom -they would in all probability have obtained it were not the -Egyptians, with whom they had but slight relations directly, -but rather the Phoenicians, with whom they were in constant -intercourse.</p> - -<p>It cannot be proved that at any time the Egyptians were a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_219"></a>[219]</span> -maritime people trading round the coasts of Greece. There -was undoubtedly intercourse between Greece and Egypt, but -that intercourse was through the medium of the shipmen of -Tyre. Why should then the Aeginetans adopt a standard from -abroad which differed from that of the Phoenicians with whom -they were in constant commercial relations? Again, if there is -any connection between the importation of weight standards -and the commencement of coinage, it may be urged that whilst -it was from the Phoenicians the Aeginetans learned the art -which had been originated in Asia Minor, or at all events from -the Greeks of the coast of Asia Minor who coined electrum -money on the Phoenician standard, we ought naturally to find -the Greeks of Aegina using this standard for their earliest -coinage rather than a standard borrowed from Egypt, which -most certainly was very backward in developing the art of -coining, seeing that it was not until after the conquest of that -country by Alexander the Great (<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 330) that money was -there struck for the first time<a id="FNanchor_277" href="#Footnote_277" class="fnanchor">[277]</a>.</p> - -<p>Passing by for the moment Mr Head’s view, let us next -deal with that of Dr Hultsch. This theory has the great merit -of granting that the Greeks were capable of evolving a <i>silver</i> -standard for themselves from a knowledge of the relative value -of gold and silver, whilst the other theories assume that they -borrowed blindly ready-made standards, which they for some -unknown reason either raised according to Brandis, or degraded -according to Head. But Dr Hultsch is met by two crucial -difficulties. (1) Why should the Aeginetans have taken six light -Babylonian shekels of gold and arbitrarily made them the basis -of their new silver standard? (2) But the fatal objection is -that whereas Hultsch’s theory depends on gold being to silver -in the same relation (13·3:1) in Greece Proper as it was in -Asia Minor, as a matter of fact it can be proved that the precious -metals there stood in a very different relation to each other. -In the <i>Journal of Hellenic Studies</i>, 1887, I gave some reasons -for believing that in early times gold was to silver in Greece in -the relation of 15:1. For whilst gold was plentiful in Asia,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_220"></a>[220]</span> -at no place in Greece Proper were there auriferous deposits. -Hence it is probable that gold had to silver a higher relative -value in Greece than it had in Asia. Certain archaeological -discoveries recently made at Athens add great strength -to the view which I then put forward. At a meeting of the -Berlin Academy of Science in 1889 Dr Ulrich Köhler discussed -certain fragments of inscriptions which refer to the famous -statue of Athena, wrought in gold and ivory by Pheidias for -the Parthenon. By combining with a fragment published by -M. Foucart (<i>Bullet. de Corresp. Hell.</i> 1889, p. 171), another -fragment previously copied by himself, Dr Köhler arrived at -the result that the fragments relate to the purchase of materials -for the construction of the statue, that is of gold and ivory. -The gold purchased is described both according to its weight -and according to the price (τιμή) paid for it in Attic silver -currency (whilst the ivory is only described by the value or -price). The sum paid for gold amounted to 526·652 drachms, -5 obols, the weight of the gold being 37·618 drachms: from -this we learn that the relative value of gold to silver at that -time was as 14:1. According to Thucydides (<span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 13), forty -talents of gold were used in the making of the statue, whilst -according to the more explicit statement of Philochorus the -amount was forty-four. The image was dedicated at the great -Panathenaic festival of the year 438 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> As not more than -10 to 11 talents of gold were used in the three years to -which the fragments refer, Köhler draws the inference that -the construction of the statue commenced in the same year -as that of the Parthenon (447 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), and that Pheidias was -engaged on his great work for fully nine years.</p> - -<p>We thus know now the relative value of silver and gold in -Attica about 450 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> But we must not regard this as the -relation which existed at earlier times. It was only after the -Persian wars that Athens had got possession of the island of -Thasos with its rich gold mines, and the equally rich districts -on the Thracian coast. The fact of her coming into the possession -of such wealthy gold-producing regions must have -materially lowered the price of gold in Athens. We know how -the development of the mines of Pangaeum by Philip of Macedon<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_221"></a>[221]</span> -in the following century lowered the value of gold throughout -Greece, for by the time of Alexander the relative value of the -two precious metals was as 10:1. In the sixth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -gold was so scarce in Greece that when the Spartans wanted to -make a dedication in gold they had to send to Asia to obtain a -sufficient supply of the metal<a id="FNanchor_278" href="#Footnote_278" class="fnanchor">[278]</a>. Hence if we conclude that -in earlier times the relative value of gold to silver in Greece -proper was as 15:1, we shall not be far from the truth. At -all events it is put beyond doubt that the relation was higher -than that of 13·3:1, and accordingly Dr Hultsch’s theory of the -origin of the Aeginetic silver standard, which is based on that -relation falls at once to the ground, unless he can shew that -such a standard, based on six light gold Babylonian shekels -had been previously fixed in Asia or Egypt, and thence adopted -by the Greeks without any regard to the relative value existing -in Greece itself between the precious metals. But as a matter -of fact Dr Hultsch does not make any such attempt. Thus -this essay at a solution breaks down.</p> - -<p>On the other hand if we make the very slight and very -probable assumption that the early Greeks had formed a -definite idea of the relative value of gold and silver, which they -would have determined exactly on the same principle as they -would arrive at a notion of the relative value of any other two -commodities, which they were in the habit of giving and taking -in exchange, that is by the simple principle of supply and -demand, we shall find a ready solution without having to -resort to either Egypt or Babylon. If gold was to silver as -15:1 in Greece, it follows that the Homeric talent, the earliest -Greek standard, being about 135 grains, ten silver pieces of -202 grains each would be equivalent to <i>one</i> gold unit.</p> - -<table summary="Demonstration of the gold value of the Homeric talent"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">135 × 15</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>2025 grs. of silver.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">2025 ÷ 10</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>202·5 grs. of silver.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>This gives a singularly close approximation to the weight of -the existing coins of the Aeginetic standard of the earliest and -heaviest kind. Taking the Homeric talent at 130 grains of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_222"></a>[222]</span> -gold, by the same process we obtain 10 silver pieces each of -the weight of 195 grains (130 × 15 = 1950; 1950 ÷ 10 = 195 -grs.)</p> - -<p>The second standard which we find in Greece at the beginning -of the historical epoch was the Euboic. This standard -was used for both <i>silver</i> and <i>gold</i>. The ordinary account -of its origin is as follows: “From Ionia possibly through -Samos the Euboeans imported the standard by which they -weighed their silver. This standard was the light Assyrio-Babylonian -gold mina with its shekel or stater of about 130 -grains. The Euboeans having little or no gold transferred the -weight used in Asia for gold to their own silver, raising it -slightly at the same time to a maximum of 135 grains, and -from Euboea it soon spread over a large part of the Greek world -by means of the widely extended commercial relations of the -enterprising Euboean cities. This may have taken place -towards the close of the eighth century and before the war -which broke out at the end of that century between Chalcis -and Eretria, nominally for the possession of the fields of Lelantum, -which lay between the two rival cities”<a id="FNanchor_279" href="#Footnote_279" class="fnanchor">[279]</a>.</p> - -<p>This Euboic standard of 135-130 grains is seen at once -to be identical in weight with the Homeric talent.</p> - -<p>Several difficulties (irrespective of the fact that there was no -need for the Greeks to borrow from Asia a standard which they -themselves already possessed from very early times) meet this -theory.</p> - -<p>(1) If the Euboeans derived their standard from Ionia -why did they not rather adopt the Phoenician standards, on -which we have already seen the great Ionian cities based their -coinages of gold, silver, and electrum? Some very early -electrum coins found at Samos (Head, <i>op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XLI.</span>), have -suggested that that island formed the link. “The theory,” -says Mr Head, “that Samos was the port whence the Euboeans -derived the gold standard subsequently used by them for silver,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_223"></a>[223]</span> -rests upon the weight of some very early electrum coins (about -44 grs.) which have been found in the island of Samos, and -of the earliest Euboean coins, Euboea and Samos having been -two of the greatest colonizing and maritime powers of the -Aegean Sea. Thus I think we may account for the fact that -the towns of Euboea, when they began to strike silver money of -their own, naturally made use of the standard which had become -from of old habitual in the island, precisely in the same way as -Pheidon in Peloponnesus struck his first silver money on the -reduced Phoenician standard which was prevalent at the time in -his dominions.” But as a matter of fact the recognized Samian -coins are of the Phoenician standard (220 grs.) in its slightly -reduced state as found at Miletus (Head, <i>op. cit.</i> 515). This -being so it would indeed be strange if the Euboeans from occasionally -coming in contact with Lydian coins at Samos would -have adopted that standard in preference to that in use in the -great cities of Ionia with which their commerce directly lay.</p> - -<p>(2) Why did the Euboeans take the Lydian <i>gold</i> standard -of 130 grs. for their own electrum and silver instead of the -Lydian <i>silver</i> standard of 172·9 grs.? According to Mr Head’s -view, as we have seen above, the early Lydian electrum was -struck on the standard of 172 grs. (the so-called Babylonian -silver) when meant for circulation in the interior of Asia Minor, -but on the Phoenician standard for circulation in trade with -the Greeks of the coast of Ionia.</p> - -<p>(3) We may ask the question, why did the Euboeans if -they were taking over a ready-made standard which had no -relation to any standard which they themselves already possessed, -adopt the <i>gold</i> standard of 130 grs. instead of the -electrum and silver standard which was in use among all the -Greek cities with which they traded?</p> - -<p>We can now conveniently revert to the theory that the -Aeginetan <i>silver</i> standard was a reduced Phoenician. Much has -been written about <i>degradation of coin weights</i> and <i>reduced -standards</i>. It may be therefore well to clear our notions on -the subject by asking ourselves what do we mean by such -terms. Both the terms and the process are equally familiar -to those at all acquainted with the history of mediaeval coinage.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_224"></a>[224]</span> -The king then controlled, as for instance in England, the -mintage. If the sovereign thought fit to reduce the amount of -silver in the groat from 80 to 72 grains his subjects had no -alternative but to take the new and lighter pieces as equivalent -to four pennies sterling. The sovereign thus was able to relieve -an exhausted treasury, making a considerable profit off -every groat and penny put into circulation. Again, the impecunious -monarch might resort to another method of making -a profit, by debasing the coinage, and might issue one such as -the fourth of Henry VIII., of exceeding base silver, and again -his subjects could simply grumble and take the new money. -These groats and pennies passed as such within the realm, but -when the question of foreign exchange came, the matter assumed -an entirely new complexion. Would a shrewd Flemish merchant -from Antwerp accept a base or a reduced English groat at the -same rate for which it passed current in England? Of course he -did no such thing, and the scales were at once called into use, -and the silver changed hands not by tale, but by <i>weight</i>. Now -the condition under which such a degradation or debasing of -the coinage as we have described can take place is that a state -or country shall be of such considerable magnitude that it has -room within its own borders to employ a large amount of coin -in internal trade without much necessity of external commerce. -Did such conditions exist among the Greek states of antiquity? -There is another condition, namely, sovereign power vested in -the hands of a monarch possessed of unlimited authority, who -has a direct personal interest in the profit to be made from the -degradation of the coinage, and who has power sufficient to -enable him to force his debased coinage on a reluctant people. -Did such conditions exist in any of the Greek states of antiquity? -Nowhere in Greece Proper do we find them fulfilled, -but if we turn to Sicily we get a good example of the practice -so often followed in after centuries by the mediaeval monarchs. -The tyrant Dionysius there put an arbitrary value on gold in -relation to silver: for although this relation was probably not -more than 12:1, this despot raised it perforce to 15:1<a id="FNanchor_280" href="#Footnote_280" class="fnanchor">[280]</a>. He<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_225"></a>[225]</span> -also issued a coinage of tin, according to Aristotle<a id="FNanchor_281" href="#Footnote_281" class="fnanchor">[281]</a>, which he -perhaps forced his subjects to take as equivalent to silver coins -of like size. In later years again when Timoleon liberated -Syracuse and the democracy was once more restored, the -state issued a coinage of electrum instead of that of pure -gold, which had previously been in currency, by this means -making a profit of 20 per cent.<a id="FNanchor_282" href="#Footnote_282" class="fnanchor">[282]</a> It is hardly necessary to -point out that whilst this coinage of Dionysius might pass -for an artificial value within the dominions of Syracuse, the -moment a Syracusan came to make payment to a foreign -merchant, its factitious value vanished and the transaction took -place according to the current value of the metals. So as long -as the English penny remained of good weight and quality it -found ready currency on the continent, and the potentates of -Flanders issued numerous imitations of them known as <i>esterlings</i>, -but when the English silver penny became debased all -foreign imitations ceased<a id="FNanchor_283" href="#Footnote_283" class="fnanchor">[283]</a>. Now the Greek states of Greece -Proper were very small in extent, and seldom had a very -strong central authority. The area being limited it was absolutely -necessary for them to have constant dealings with their -neighbours. It would have been difficult for any government -in republican times to have forced on its citizens a debased -silver currency, and even had this been possible, any benefit -derived therefrom would have been counterbalanced by the -great drawback arising to trade. If Athens had reduced her -famous “Owls” or as they were otherwise called “Maidens” -(from the head of Pallas Athena), by five grains, her credit would -have suffered and her merchants have gained nothing by it, as -the balance would have been at once resorted to, and allowance -would have had to be made on each coin of the new debased -standard. We who live in modern times are too apt to forget -the readiness with which men in older days had resort to the -scales, although at this moment large transactions in gold -between bankers and financiers are carried out by weight. -Only so late as the beginning of this century, when the gold -coinage of the country was in a wretched state, every farmer and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_226"></a>[226]</span> -trader went to fairs in Ireland equipped with a pocket balance -(which was adjusted for the guinea, half-guinea, sovereign, half-sovereign, -and gold seven-shilling-piece).</p> - -<p>It is difficult then to see what it would have availed the -Aeginetans to have reduced the standard which they are supposed -to have got from the Phoenicians.</p> - -<p>Their island state was of diminutive proportions; they -devoted themselves almost entirely to traffick by sea, their -island was an emporium where strangers resorted. In all -dealings with the Phoenicians they would have to pay a drawback -on their debased coin; for the cunning Phoenician or -Ionian was not likely to be beguiled into taking staters of -200 grs. as equivalent to 230 grs. It is plain therefore that -when we find divergencies of standard these are not due to -mere <i>degradation</i>, but to some far more practical consideration, -and this will be seen all the more clearly when we shall -find that whilst we have divergencies in <i>silver</i> standards, the -gold standard which was in use in Greece from Homeric times -down to the Roman Conquest remains almost absolutely without -variation. But there are other and stronger objections -against the Phoenician origin of the Aeginetic standard.</p> - -<p>Now if we accept the doctrine that the Greeks received -their coin-standards across the sea from Asia, the <i>Aeginetic</i> -from the Phoenician traders whose commerce lay with Aegina -and Peloponnesus, the <i>Euboic</i> on the other hand from Lydia -by way of the great Ionian cities on the coast of Asia Minor, -we become involved in a serious difficulty. At the time represented -in the Homeric Poems, there is not as yet a single -Greek colony on the coast of Asia Minor<a id="FNanchor_284" href="#Footnote_284" class="fnanchor">[284]</a>. Miletus, destined to -be in after years the Queen of Ionia, and to be one of the -greatest centres of Hellenic commerce and culture, is as yet -known only as the city of the barbarous-speaking Carians<a id="FNanchor_285" href="#Footnote_285" class="fnanchor">[285]</a>. -Yet we find the Greeks represented in these self-same poems -as already in possession of a standard for gold identical with -the light Babylonian or Lydian gold shekel (130 grs.). But -again we find from the same source that the Greeks were<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_227"></a>[227]</span> -already in full commercial intercourse with one Asiatic people, -but not a people who could serve as a bridge between Lydia -and Euboea. Everywhere in the Homeric Poems we meet the -shipmen of Tyre, who are represented as bringing the products -of the skilled artists of Sidon, beautiful cloths, and cunningly -wrought vessels of silver, articles of jewellery, necklaces<a id="FNanchor_286" href="#Footnote_286" class="fnanchor">[286]</a> set -with amber (perhaps brought from the coasts of the Baltic), -and now and then as chance arose, kidnapping women and -children to sell as slaves in the marts of the Mediterranean<a id="FNanchor_287" href="#Footnote_287" class="fnanchor">[287]</a>.</p> - -<p>If the Hellenes had got their standard from an Asiatic -source, it must have been the heavy gold shekel of 260 grains, -which the Phoenicians employed, and consequently the Homeric -Talent would have weighed 260 instead of 130 grains, or on the -other hand if it be supposed that the Greeks might borrow and -use for their own <i>gold</i> a standard used only for <i>silver</i> in Asia, -the Homeric Talent ought to have weighed 225 grains, that is -the Phoenician silver standard, which, as we have seen, it -certainly did not.</p> - -<p>A further difficulty arises in reference to the <i>Euboic</i> standard. -No one who reflects for a moment could venture to -assert that Phoenician trade and influence were limited to -Southern Greece. Yet that virtually is the tacit assumption -made by those who derive the standard from Asia. There is -evidence to shew that the Phoenicians from a very early period -frequented Euboea, doubtless attracted by its copper mines -(from which perhaps the famous city of Chalcis derived its -name)<a id="FNanchor_288" href="#Footnote_288" class="fnanchor">[288]</a>. Round no spot in Hellas do more legends cluster -which connect it with Phoenician colonists than Boeotia. It -was here that Cadmus settled, and introduced the Phoenician -alphabet, it was here according to Greek tradition that -Herakles, who is so strongly identified with the Phoenician -Melkarth, had his birth. Why then should the Euboeans have -been behind the rest of Hellas in receiving the Phoenician -standard, which, according to Mr Head, as we saw above, did<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_228"></a>[228]</span> -influence so powerfully the Ionic cities of the Asiatic seaboard, -with which their commerce was so largely connected?</p> - -<p>From these considerations it follows that before the Greeks -came into contact with either Phoenicians or Lydians they had -a weight standard of their own, the <i>Talanton</i> of the Homeric -Poems, based on the <i>cow</i>, which was as yet only employed for -the weighing of gold.</p> - -<p>This standard we have found to be identical with one of the -two chief standards employed in historical times for <i>silver</i>, and -which from first to last was the <i>only</i> standard employed for gold -in all parts of Hellas Proper.</p> - -<p>As we have seen that gold was to silver in that region as -15:1, there was not much difficulty in regarding fifteen <i>weights</i> -or staters of silver as equivalent to one of gold of like weight. -Hence there was not the same need in Greece to devise a -separate silver standard as there was in Asia, where the -relation of the precious metals stood as 13·3:1, a fact which -made simple exchange very difficult. On the other hand we -have seen that for the Aeginetans and Greeks, who used the so-called -Aeginetic standard, the decimal system, the simplest and -most primitive method of reckoning, had a powerful attraction.</p> - -<p>Primitive peoples perform all their calculations by means of -counters, using for such purposes their fingers and toes or seeds -or pebbles.</p> - -<p>Nature herself has supplied man with the simplest and most -convenient of counters in his ten fingers. Hence naturally -arises a preference amongst primitive peoples for counting by -tens, and this method, although it has at times been supplanted -partially (seldom altogether) by the duodecimal and -sexagesimal systems, which are superior by possessing a greater -number of submultiples than the decimal (<i>e.g.</i> 12 = 6 × 2, 4 × 3, -whilst 10 = 5 × 2 only), was adhered to by the Egyptians all -through their history down to the latest Pharaohs. It may -then perhaps be argued that it was through Egyptian influence -with Greece that a large part of Greece adopted for their silver -a standard based on the decimal system, especially as certain -traces of Egyptian influence in very early times have been -discovered of late. But as I have already pointed out above<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_229"></a>[229]</span> -when discussing the theory of an Egyptian origin for the -Aeginetan standard, because standards of like weight are found -in two different regions, it by no means follows that one has -borrowed from the other. If we can point out that in both -Egypt and Greece there was a standard for gold almost identical -in weight, it is at once apparent that there was no need for the -Greeks to borrow from the Egyptians the idea of making ten -silver ingots or wedges equal to one gold; especially as the -decimal idea was next to that of five the simplest and most -rudimentary form of calculation known to mankind. It is -certainly preposterous to suppose that the Greeks were too -barbarous at the time when they had attained a knowledge of -silver to devise such a simple process as that of taking the -fifteen ingots of silver, which from the natural laws of supply -and demand they regarded as the equivalent of one gold ingot of -like weight, and redividing them into ten new ingots of silver. -This surely will not seem an incredible feat for the early -Hellenes to perform when we recall to mind the extraordinary -skill in arithmetic which is found among some barbarous peoples. -“In West Africa a lively and continual habit of bargaining has -developed a great power of arithmetic, and little children -already do feats of computation with their heaps of cowries<a id="FNanchor_289" href="#Footnote_289" class="fnanchor">[289]</a>.” -To imagine that the Greeks could not perform so simple a feat -as that which I propose is to assume that they were in a far -lower condition of culture and intelligence than the negroes of -West Africa, rather resembling the lowest known tribes of men, -such as the aborigines of Australia and the savages of the South -American forests. To make such an assumption respecting a -race which has shewn such an unrivalled potentiality of progress -and development as the Greeks is absurd.</p> - -<p>At this point it will be convenient to take a general survey -of our results so far. We found in the Homeric Poems a twofold -system of currency, the gold Talanton, and the cow or ox, -the latter alone being employed to express values: we next -found that the <i>Talanton</i> was the equivalent of the cow, the -metallic unit being clearly the later in origin, and being based<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_230"></a>[230]</span> -on or equated to the older unit of barter. Through the sacerdotal -tradition of Delos we were enabled to fix the value of the -Homeric Talanton at 2 gold Attic drachms, or a Daric (135-130 -grains Troy). Next came the standards used in historical -Greece. (1) The Euboic (135 grains Troy) used for <i>silver</i> in the -great Euboic towns, in Corinth, in Athens from the time of -Solon, and as a matter of course in the Chalcidian and Corinthian -colonies, and employed as the <i>sole</i> unit for <i>gold</i> in all parts of -Greece Proper at all periods; (2) the Aeginetic (200-195 grains) -employed in Peloponnesus, in Boeotia and Central Greece. We -learned that the Euboic standard coincided with the Homeric -<i>Talanton</i>, thus finding the Greeks of historical times using the -same standard universally for <i>gold</i> which they had employed -long before the introduction of the art of coining from Asia, -and partly using this same standard for silver, whilst in other -states they employed a standard for the latter metal, which was -based on the gold unit, simply dividing the amount of silver -equivalent to it into ten parts instead of fifteen.</p> - -<p>We then put the question, “Is it rational to suppose that -the Greeks borrowed in the 7th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> along with the art -of coining from Asia a standard which they themselves already -long since possessed?”</p> - -<p>At the time when I first put this view forward, I was unable -to offer any concrete proof of the existence of such a standard -on Greek soil before the introduction of coined money, although -the literary evidence was of the strongest kind. Since then -I have been enabled to obtain some data of considerable importance. -I have already (<a href="#CHAPTER_II">Chap. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span></a>) described the rings and -spirals of gold and silver found at Mycenae, and shewn that -they were not improbably made on a standard of 135 grs. -We have thus found some definite evidence of the existence -of a gold and possibly a silver standard, corresponding to the -standard used for both metals in after ages under the name -of the Euboic or Attic. It may of course be argued that -though found on Greek soil, they are not really Greek in origin. -For instance there may be certain indications of Egyptian art -and influence in these pre-historic remains, such as the frieze -discovered in the Palace at Tiryns of alabaster inlaid with<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_231"></a>[231]</span> -blue glass which according to Lepsius and Helbig<a id="FNanchor_290" href="#Footnote_290" class="fnanchor">[290]</a> is the -mock <i>lapis lazuli</i> which the Egyptians were so fond of -making in imitation of the rare and costly real stone which -had to be brought from Tartary. Granting then for the sake -of argument that the Homeric <i>Talent</i> was a standard introduced -into Greece from Egypt at a very early period, it by no -means follows that this standard has had a scientific origin. -The Greeks it will be noticed found it necessary in taking over -this standard to equate it to their primitive barter system. If -then the process of human development is such that the Greeks, -who above all people shewed the most extraordinary power of -acquiring civilization, found it necessary even when presented -with a ready made standard for metallic currency, to bring it -into harmony with their immemorial system of appraising values -by means of the cow, there is certainly a strong presumption -that the people from whom they derived that metallic standard -had not themselves obtained it by any mathematical process.</p> - -<p>We can hardly doubt that mankind first obtained empirically -the art of weighing, and that it was only at a later period that -mathematics were called in to fix scientifically the standards -obtained by the older and cruder method. Such is the function -of mathematics still. Thus Professor Cayley observed (in his -address at Stockport), “I said I would speak to you not of the -utility of mathematics in any of the questions of common life or -of physical science, but rather of the obligations of mathematics -to these different subjects. The consideration which thus presents -itself is in a great measure that of the history of the -development of the different branches of mathematical science -in connection with the older physical sciences, Astronomy and -Mechanics. The mathematical theory is in the first instance -suggested by some question of common life or of physical science, -is pursued and studied quite independently thereof, and perhaps -after a long interval comes in contact with it or with quite a -different question<a id="FNanchor_291" href="#Footnote_291" class="fnanchor">[291]</a>.”</p> - -<p>If such then is the part played by mathematics in an age -when even the mathematician has come to the aid of the hangman,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_232"></a>[232]</span> -and the wretch meets a well-deserved doom in strict -accordance with a mathematical formula, <i>a fortiori</i> must empirical -discovery have preceded mathematical theory in the -second millennium before the Christian era. Just as countless -malefactors were successfully executed by empirical Jack Ketches -before ever the mathematician turned executioner, so we may -be certain that untold sums of gold had been weighed by means -of natural seeds and according to a standard empirically obtained -before ever the sages of Thebes or Chaldaea had dreamed of -applying to metrology the results of their first gropings in -Geometry or Astronomy.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_233"></a>[233]</span></p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_234"></a>[234]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="PART_II">PART II.</h2> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_X">CHAPTER X.<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Systems of Egypt, Babylon, and Palestine.</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>We are now in a position to approach the last stage in our -task, that which deals with the growth and development of -various weight-standards, all of which start from a common -unit. Of necessity Egypt, Babylon, Greece and Italy will -claim a chief share of our attention. The question now is, -Shall we deal with these regions according to the priority of -their civilization, that is, in the order in which I have just -named them, or shall we rather adhere to the principle which -has hitherto guided us, of working back from that which is -better known to that which is less known?</p> - -<p>On the whole the former is perhaps the better for our present -purpose. As we believe that we have discovered by the -inductive method the common unit which lies at the base of -all these systems, there is no longer the same necessity for -always starting with that which is the less ancient. Besides, -if we were nominally to pursue this course, it by no means -follows that we would be starting from that which is the best -known. <i>Prima facie</i> we ought to start with the Roman system, -the tradition of which has remained unbroken down to our own -days. We could work back through the system of the Middle -Ages to the time of Constantine the Great, from Constantine -to the early Empire, and from the Empire to the Republic. -Moreover no weight-unit is more accurately known than the -Roman pound. But the early history of Rome is so obscure<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_235"></a>[235]</span> -that we have absolutely no records of a time, when Greece had -already a literature of a venerable antiquity. Rome has no -literary remains and even not more than a very few meagre -inscriptions dating from before the first Punic War (263-241 -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), the very time when Hellas was already far advanced -in the autumn of her life. Then Italy had borrowed so -much from Hellas that the enquirer must be cautious as to -how far he may be dealing with material of true Italian or -merely adventitious origin. As we are concerned rather with -the <i>origin</i> than with the later developments of weight-systems, -it is plain that for dealing with our principal objects the -Italian systems present us with no special aid. The late period -(268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) at which the Romans struck silver coins places us -at a still further disadvantage if we start with their system. -Greece on the other hand presents us not only with abundant -literary records of great antiquity, some of them descending from -an age which knew not the uses of coined money, but also with -thousands of inscriptions cut in marble or bronze, many of -which contain data of great value for dealing with the history -of currency and weight, and finally presents us with vast series -of coins from which we can learn empirically the coin standards -employed in various times and places. But it is the very wealth -of material that is in some degree here our difficulty. The special -feature of Greek national life was its numerous autonomous -states. There was no central authority with a mint which issued -coins for a whole empire as was virtually the case in the great -Persian kingdom, and at a later period in the Macedonian empire -of Alexander the Great. In the palmy days of Hellas each petty -state issued its own coinage, following in its silver and copper -mintages whatever standard or module it pleased.</p> - -<p>To commence our constructive part with a country where -we are confronted with such an array of separate coinages and -of diverse standards would be unwise if it were possible to -start from some region where there was a single central authority, -and consequently less diversity of standards. We -are thus led to choose either Egypt or Babylonia as our starting -point. The former presents to us a system less developed -and more simple than the latter. In fact we are tolerably<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_236"></a>[236]</span> -well justified, in view of recent discussion, in regarding all that -is more complex in the system of Egypt as borrowed from -Babylonia. Yet it must not be supposed that we escape all -difficulties in thus starting with Egypt. If in Hellas we found -ourselves embarrassed by the wealth of coinages, in Egypt on -the other hand we have no native coinage to guide us, for -it was only after the conquest of Egypt by Alexander that -under the Greek dynasty founded by Ptolemy Lagos the essentially -Greek art of coining was introduced into Egypt. We -depend therefore for our knowledge of Egyptian standards -upon the actual weighings of weight-pieces and such information -as can be gleaned from the ancient Egyptian documents. -The same holds good likewise on the whole for the -Assyrian system, where however the actual weight-pieces and -statements derived from cuneiform inscriptions can in some -degree be supported by collateral evidence. At the same time -we must be careful not to assign as much importance to the -literary evidence supplied to us by Egyptian hieroglyphic or -Assyrian cuneiform as we do to the records of Greece or Rome. -The keys to the former have only been obtained within the -present century, and many of the translations of such documents -given us by that brilliant band of savants who have -opened to us the portals of a Past far exceeding in antiquity -the most remote epoch of which the literatures of Greece and -Rome contain even any tradition, must at the best in many -cases be considered only as tentative.</p> - -<p>Furthermore although the knowledge gained from actually -existing weights, which have been gleaned from the ruins of -Nineveh, Khorsabad, or Naucratis, may be regarded as positive -and more or less exact, we are met by the difficulty that in the -case of Egypt and Assyria, where there was no coined money, -we have no means of deciding what class of weight was used for -certain kinds of commodities. In Greece and in the countries -which formed the Persian empire we can be sure at all events -of the standards which were employed in the weighing of gold -and silver: the absence of this test is a serious hindrance in -the study of Egyptian and Assyrian metrology. It is easy to -illustrate by a supposed example the element of uncertainty<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_237"></a>[237]</span> -introduced. Let us suppose that in ages to come the ruins -of some English ironmonger’s shop were excavated, and a series -of weights was found therein, a set of Avoirdupois weights -ranging from a one-hundredweight to half an ounce; a set of -Troy weights ranging from one pound to half a grain, and one -of Apothecaries’ weights consisting of ounces, drachms, scruples, -and grains. Suppose likewise that some ardent metrologist -of that age, in addition to this splendid find, should be able -to add to his material from elsewhere one or two sovereign and -half-sovereign weights, a guinea, half-guinea, quarter-guinea, -and seven-shilling-piece weight, perhaps even a noble, or a -half-noble weight, and then without consulting literary sources, -or previously studying the standards on which the English -coinage had been struck at different periods, proceeded to reconstruct -the metrological system of England. It is needless -to say that his conclusions would be indeed widely aberrant -from the truth.</p> - -<p>Having thus sketched however roughly some of the difficulties -which beset our path, and after warning the reader that -in metrology if anywhere the maxim of the old Sicilian poet -is to be observed,</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">Sober keep, to doubt inclined be;</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Hinges these are of the mind<a id="FNanchor_292" href="#Footnote_292" class="fnanchor">[292]</a>,</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>I shall now proceed to set forth the method in which I conceive -the various systems gradually rose and expanded. Let us -bear in mind the fact already proved that gold was the first -of all commodities to be weighed, and that consequently the -standards employed for weighing that metal are the most archaic.</p> - -<h3><span class="smcap">Egypt.</span></h3> - -<p>As has been previously remarked, we are not concerned -with the long battle still raging between Assyriologists and -Egyptologists as regards the respective claims of Egypt and -Babylonia to the invention of measure and weight-standards.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_238"></a>[238]</span> -Boeckh himself seems instinctively to have felt this difficulty. -For whilst he took Babylonia as the birthplace and home of -all the ancient systems, nevertheless he held that contemporaneously -there must have existed a connection between Egypt -and Babylonia in remote antiquity, from which alone certain -agreements and relations between the measures and weights -of Egypt and Babylonia were capable of explanation<a id="FNanchor_293" href="#Footnote_293" class="fnanchor">[293]</a>. The -primitive measures of length are undoubtedly by the consensus -of mankind based upon the parts of the body, such as the -finger, the thumb, the foot, the arm, or both arms fully extended, -standards common to Egyptians and Chaldaeans alike. -Whilst at a later stage in the history of all civilized peoples -efforts have been made to obtain more accuracy in these -standards, which of necessity have produced certain local and -national divergencies, yet inasmuch as all alike started from -these standards which have been supplied by nature, it is -obvious that many striking similarities and relations will -always be found when any comparative study of different -systems is attempted. The same principle of course holds -good for weight-standards. According to our argument there -was a common animal unit existing in Assyria and Egypt, -which was represented by a metal unit, prevailing alike in -both regions possibly with certain modifications. Egypt and -Assyria starting with this common unit, each in their own -fashion constructed their distinctive national systems, and we -need not be surprised if at a later period under certain political -conditions certain parts of the system of one of these regions -are found exercising some influence upon that of the other.</p> - -<p>We shall now briefly state the Egyptian weight-system. -In the oldest Egyptian documents two weights continually -occur, the Kat (<i>Ket</i> or <i>Kite</i>) and the Uten (<i>Ten</i> or <i>Outen</i>). -Already in the third millennium before Christ the precious -metals were in full use in Egypt, and copper likewise was -employed in the purchase of articles of small value. Although -very large amounts are recorded, yet they had devised no larger -unit than those mentioned.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_239"></a>[239]</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 250px;" id="figure22"> -<img src="images/figure22.jpg" width="250" height="250" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 22.</span> Egyptian Five-Kat weight (Harris Collection).</p> -</div> - -<p>To M. Chabas belongs the honour of being the first to -clear up the relations between the uten and kat. The history -of this discovery is an interesting proof of the fruitlessness of -the purely empirical form of metrology which confines itself to -the measuring of buildings, and weighing of ancient weight-pieces -and coins, unless its path is made clear by means of the -light derived from ancient records. The names uten and kat -had been long known, as both of them recur frequently on the -walls of the temple of Karnak (<i>Temp.</i> Thothmes III. 1700-1600 -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), and Egyptian weights were in the museums of -Europe, but nevertheless “the exact relation of the one to the -other remained unknown until it was fortunately disclosed by -a passage in the Harris papyrus, which contains the annals of -Rameses III. (circ. 1300 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>). From this it appears that the -Uten contained ten Kats<a id="FNanchor_294" href="#Footnote_294" class="fnanchor">[294]</a>.” The uten therefore is the tenfold -of the kat: Nissen<a id="FNanchor_295" href="#Footnote_295" class="fnanchor">[295]</a> thinks that the latter was perhaps originally -a gold weight (<i>vielleicht ursprünglich ein Goldgewicht</i>). -These two units served for the weighing of gold, silver and -copper, and there seems to be no difference noted in the documents -between the units used for each purpose. In the lists of -booty we read of such sums as 3144 utens of gold and 36692 -utens of electrum. In lists of prices of commodities kats and -utens of silver and copper are frequently mentioned. The -weight of the kat has been fixed by Lepsius at 9·096 grammes -(142·1 grains) and that of the uten at 90·959 grammes (1421·2 -grains). But as it often happens in the case of coins that -one well-preserved specimen is a better index of the normal -standard than any that can be attained by taking the average -of 100 bad specimens, so in the case of weights, one good -specimen, made of some hard and imperishable substance, will -give us a truer representation of the standard unit than the -average of a large number of weights made of some less durable -material, and carelessly executed, and meant merely for traffic -in goods of little value. If such a weight as we have supposed -is inscribed with its name, and we can also get some indication<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_240"></a>[240]</span> -that it has all the authority that belongs to a weight used for -official purposes, its value becomes still greater. Such a piece -fortunately exists in the Harris Collection. It is a beautifully -preserved serpentine weight, and weighs 698 grs. Troy. Allowing -for its extremely slight loss we may suppose its original -weight to have been about 700 grs. It bears the inscription, -<i>Five Kats of the Treasury of On</i>. This gives 140 grains Troy -as the weight of the kat<a id="FNanchor_296" href="#Footnote_296" class="fnanchor">[296]</a>. This inscription also proves that -the kat was the unit. For if as is commonly stated the uten -is the unit, of which the kat is simply the one-tenth, we must -naturally expect to find this weight described as ½ uten rather -than as 5 kats. This is confirmed by a statement of the grammarian -Horapollo (or Horus, who although writing about -400 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> nevertheless preserves much valuable information) that -“with the Egyptians the didrachm is the monad. But the -monad is the source of production of all numeration.” As -two drachms were 135 grs., it is evident that it is the kat of -140 grs., and not the uten of 1400 grs. which the Egyptians -themselves regarded as the basis of their system<a id="FNanchor_297" href="#Footnote_297" class="fnanchor">[297]</a>. Mr Flinders -Petrie from the weights of 158 specimens found in the ruins -of Naucratis, which range from 136.8 grains to 153 grains, concludes -that there were two distinct kat units, one weighing<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_241"></a>[241]</span> -142 grs., the other 152 grs. But until some literary evidence is -forthcoming for the existence of this second and heavier kat<a id="FNanchor_298" href="#Footnote_298" class="fnanchor">[298]</a>, -we must suspend our judgment. It is perfectly possible that -such existed, being used for some purpose different from that -of the kat of 140 grains. For instance it might have been -used specially for copper owing to a desire to make certain -adjustments between silver and copper, but this is of course -mere conjecture.</p> - -<p>It is worth while here to see the method by which those who -believe in a scientific system of Egyptian origin obtain their unit.</p> - -<p>Signor Bortolotti (<i>Del primitivo cubito Egizio</i>) thinks that -the uten of 1400 grains is exactly the ⅟₁₀₀₀ part of the weight of -a cubic cubit of Nile water, the cubit in question being not the -ordinary royal cubit of 20·66 inches, but a measure which he<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_242"></a>[242]</span> -calls the primitive Egyptian cubit of 19·71 inches in length. -Signor Bortolotti also suggests that the standard uten of Mr -Petrie’s heavy system was 1486 grains, being the ⅟₁₅₀₀ part of -the weight of a cubic <i>royal</i> cubit (20·66 inches) in Nile water. -But as I have just pointed out the evidence is in favour of -the kat being the original unit rather than the uten. Besides -if the Egyptians obtained their system for the first time by the -scientific process, we ought naturally to find some of those -larger units such as the talent and mina, which are found in -Egypt at a later epoch. But as we have seen in the case of -Greeks, Hebrews, Chinese and Hindus, everywhere weight -systems begin with a weight for gold, and this is naturally a -small unit.</p> - -<p>There is still one element in this matter which we must not -overlook. A certain number of gold rings have been found -in Egypt. Their unit is fixed by Lenormant at 8·1 grammes -(128 grains). Brandis regarded them as Syrian in origin, and -thus got rid of all difficulty. Others regard the rings as evidently -of Egyptian manufacture, and from finding as they -think a corresponding mina appearing in Egypt in Ptolemaic -times regard this unit as a genuine ancient Egyptian standard -in use long anterior to the Persian conquest. It may thus be -very probable that the standard employed in early days in -Egypt for gold (and also electrum and silver) was this unit of -128 grains, which is of course almost identical with an ox-unit. -Silver, according to Erman<a id="FNanchor_299" href="#Footnote_299" class="fnanchor">[299]</a>, was in the time of the oldest -Egyptian records more valuable than gold, for in enumeration -it is always named before gold, whereas under the later dynasties -it is named as with us always after gold, shewing that -a great change had taken place in the relations between these -metals. It is then clearly conceivable that at the outset one -and the same unit of about 128-30 grains, under the name of -kat, served as the unit for both gold and silver (which explains -perfectly the fact that an ox is valued at a kat of silver), -but that in after days when the change in the relative values -of the metals came, there was found a need for a new silver -unit, just as the Greeks in certain places found it necessary to<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_243"></a>[243]</span> -form the Aeginetan and other standards, and the Babylonians -found themselves compelled to form that standard which alone -can with truth be termed <i>the Babylonian</i>, the silver unit of -172 grains.</p> - -<p>We have now before us the data for the early Egyptian -weight system<a id="FNanchor_300" href="#Footnote_300" class="fnanchor">[300]</a>. It is simple; the unit is the kat probably -based on the ox as we have seen already. The fact that -weights formed in the shape of cows and cows’ heads are represented -in Egyptian paintings as employed in the weighing -of rings, indicates that in the mind of the first manufacturer -of such weights there was a distinct connection between the -shape given to the weight and the object whose value in gold -(or silver) it expressed. Specimens of such weights are known, -and are always of small size, a sure indication that the commodity -for which they were employed was very precious. -The fact that we find weights in the shape of lions can be -readily accounted for by the supposition that in the course of -time when the connection between the ox and the original -weight-unit became forgotten, and different standards had been -evolved, some distinctive animal form was adopted to distinguish -the weights of a particular standard. The original unit -being thus obtained, the higher unit, the uten, was formed by -the method most familiar to all races of men. The fingers of -one hand suggested to mankind a simple means of counting; -and the combined fingers of both hands gave them the decimal -system. The Egyptians accordingly simply took the tenfold -of the ox-unit as their highest unit. As weighing in the -earliest stage was confined to the precious metals, this unit was -sufficient for all practical needs<a id="FNanchor_301" href="#Footnote_301" class="fnanchor">[301]</a>. It will be noticed that the -process employed in forming this weight-system is exactly that -which we have found in the Chinese and its related systems. -The Chinese <i>liang</i> (<i>tael</i> or ounce) corresponds to the Egyptian<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_244"></a>[244]</span> -kat (or shekel). Under its name of <i>tical</i> or <i>bat</i> we found -it as the unit of gold in South-Eastern Asia, and for the -weighing of precious metals we found that the highest unit -employed was the <i>nên</i>, the tenfold of the original unit, (the -<i>tael</i>) itself still the only unit in use in China for the precious -metals. In process of time when ordinary commodities of life -began to be reckoned by weight, the Chinese made use of the -<i>pical</i> (which originally simply meant a man’s load) as their -highest commercial unit. Much the same process seems to -have taken place in Egypt, for in later times we find <i>talents</i> -of various kinds in use. Thus the Alexandrine talent which -was employed for wood contained 360 utens. Was this talent -originally nothing more than a man’s load, which in a later -and more scientific age was adjusted to the weight standard -time out of mind employed for metals? In this talent of -360 utens we can see the influence of the <i>sexagesimal</i> systems -of Asia Minor, which, as we shall presently see, was really a -commercial standard of comparatively late development and -never at any time was employed for the precious metals. The -Alexandrine talent of 360 utens contained 3600 kats, just as -the <i>royal</i> Babylonian talent contained 3600 shekels.</p> - -<h3><span class="smcap">The Assyrio-Babylonian System.</span></h3> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;" id="figure23"> -<img src="images/figure23.jpg" width="400" height="250" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 23.</span> Lion weight.</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;" id="figure24"> -<img src="images/figure24.jpg" width="400" height="200" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 24.</span> Assyrian half-shekel weight of the so-called Duck type<a id="FNanchor_302" href="#Footnote_302" class="fnanchor">[302]</a>. -<i>A.</i> Side view showing cuneiform symbol = ½. <i>B.</i> View from above.</p> -</div> - -<p>Much has been written in the last thirty years concerning -what is known as the <i>Assyrio-Babylonian</i> system: in fact so -much has been written that it is difficult to find out the data -amidst the masses of theory. What then are the facts which -we have to go upon? Whence do we get the name <i>Babylonian</i>? -Herodotus<a id="FNanchor_303" href="#Footnote_303" class="fnanchor">[303]</a> tells us that when Darius imposed on his subjects -a fixed quota of tribute instead of the occasional gifts and contributions -which were brought to the king’s treasury under the -reigns of his predecessors Cyrus and Cambyses, those “who -brought silver got orders to bring a talent of Babylonian weight -whilst those who brought gold one of Euboic weight. But the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_245"></a>[245]</span> -Babylonian talent amounts to seventy Euboic minas.” Properly -speaking then according to the ancients, the only specific -Babylonian talent was one employed for silver and which -was one-sixth heavier than the Euboic talent. It is to be -noted carefully that the standard employed for the weighing -of gold is not regarded by Herodotus as peculiar to Babylon -or Persia, but is treated as identical with the common Euboic -standard which was used for silver in many parts of Greece, -and the stater of which was the only standard employed for -gold in Greece, even in those states where the Aeginetic system -was in use for their silver currency. Thus in the system employed -for gold in the empire of the Great King the mina contained -50 staters, and the talent 60 minas. But the discovery -of the weights known as the Lion and the Duck weights by -Sir A. H. Layard at Nineveh whilst from one point of view -most fortunate, from another may be regarded as the reverse.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_246"></a>[246]</span> -The large size of many of the weights caused scholars to fix -their attention entirely on the larger units, and ever since then -all the various efforts to reconstruct the Assyrio-Babylonian -weight system have had if nothing else in common at least -this that they have all commenced to build the pyramid from -the top downwards. They all took the highest units, the -talent or mina, as their starting-point, and proceeded to evolve -from thence the small unit or <i>shekel</i>. Yet all the evidence of -antiquity pointed in the opposite direction. In the Greek -system, which those scholars held to be borrowed from the East, -it was the small unit which was called the <i>stater</i> or “weigher,” -indicating clearly that it was regarded as the real basis of the -standard.</p> - -<p>Again the Phoenicians and Hebrews who from the earliest -times were in constant contact with Mesopotamia ought certainly -to exhibit traces in their earliest extant records of the <i>mina</i> -and <i>talent</i>, if it was from these units that the weight-system -started. Yet that is not the evidence afforded by the Old -Testament. There is no mention of a <i>mina</i> except in Kings, -Chronicles, Ezra, and Ezekiel, all books of late date. In the -Book of Genesis where sums of money are mentioned, they are -reckoned by shekels and nothing else. So when Abraham bought -the cave of Machpelah for 600 pieces of silver, what could have -been more convenient than to describe the purchase money as -consisting of 12 <i>manahs</i> (<i>minas</i>)<a id="FNanchor_304" href="#Footnote_304" class="fnanchor">[304]</a>? Thus, as we shall see later -on, the conclusion to be drawn from the ancient Hebrew writings -is the same as that which we draw from the Homeric Poems, -that it is the shekel (or stater), the small unit, which was the -first to be employed, and that it was only in the course of time -that the higher units, the <i>mina</i> and the <i>talent</i>, make their -appearance. If according to the common theory the weight -standards were the actual creations of either Chaldaeans or -Egyptians and only borrowed from them by other peoples, why -do we not find the higher units appearing from the first -amongst those supposed borrowers, if the other part of the -theory is true, that they started from a high unit?</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_247"></a>[247]</span></p> - -<p>Now for the evidence of the monuments themselves.</p> - -<p>The weights found by Sir A. H. Layard fall into two classes, -(<i>a</i>) those in the shape of Lions, which are made of bronze, and -(<i>b</i>) those in the shape of Ducks, which are of stone<a id="FNanchor_305" href="#Footnote_305" class="fnanchor">[305]</a>. “The -bronze Lions are for the most part furnished with a handle on -the back of the animal, and are generally inscribed with a -double legend, one in cuneiform characters, the other in Aramaic.” -The Ducks which are inscribed have a legend in cuneiform -characters only. These inscriptions contain not only the -name of the king of Babylon or Assyria in whose reign they -were made, but likewise a statement of the number of the -minas or fractions of a mina which each weight originally -represented. As these weights were found in the ancient -palace some have thought that they were possibly official -standards of weight deposited from time to time in the royal -palaces<a id="FNanchor_306" href="#Footnote_306" class="fnanchor">[306]</a>. This seems at least to be implied by the inscriptions -on some of them, such as those of the largest and most ancient -of the Duck weights, which run as follows:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>(1) ‘The palace of Irta-Merodach, King of Babylon [circ. -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 1050], 30 Manahs<a id="FNanchor_307" href="#Footnote_307" class="fnanchor">[307]</a>.’</p> - -<p>Wt., 15060·5 grammes, yielding a Mina of 502 gram.</p> - -<p>(2) ‘Thirty Manahs of Nabu-suma-libur, King of Assyria,’ -[date unknown].</p> - -<p>Wt., 14589 gram.</p> - -<p>A small portion of this weight is broken off; if this is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_248"></a>[248]</span> -allowed for it will yield a Mina of about the same weight as -No. 1.</p> - -<p>(3) ‘Ten Manahs’ (somewhat injured), bears the name of -‘Dungi,’ according to George Smith, King of Babylon circ. -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 2000.</p> - -<p>Wt., 4986 gram., yielding a Mina of 498·6 gram.</p> - -</div> - -<p>On three of the Lions we read as follows:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>(1) ‘The Palace of Shalmaneser [circ. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 850] King of -the Country, two manahs of the King,’ in cuneiform characters, -and ‘Two Manahs’ weight of the country’ in Aramaic characters.</p> - -<p>Wt., 1992 gram., yielding a Mina of 996 gram.</p> - -<p>(2) ‘The Palace of Tiglath-Pileser [circ. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 747], King of -the Country, two Manehs’ in cuneiform characters.</p> - -<p>Wt., 946 gram., yielding a Mina of 473 gram.</p> - -<p>(3) ‘Five Manahs of the King’ in cuneiform characters, -and ‘Five Manahs’ weight of the country’ in Aramaic characters.</p> - -<p>Wt., 5042 gram., yielding a Mina of 1008 gram.</p> - -</div> - -<p>The results which we obtain from these weights are that -there were evidently two standards used side by side in the -Assyrio-Babylonian empire, the Mina of one being about 1010 -gram., that of the other about 505 gram. In other words one -standard was simply the double of the other; also the weights -on which Aramaic legends appear are those which belong to the -double standard. Again, there is no evidence that the Talent -was as yet conceived, as all the weights are Minae or fractions -(or multiples) of Minae. Might we not equally well expect -fractions of the Talent, as for instance to find the weight of -30 Manahs described as half a Talent, if the Talent already -at this period formed part of the system<a id="FNanchor_308" href="#Footnote_308" class="fnanchor">[308]</a>?</p> - -<p>But there is one most important point to be noticed. The -single mina of 505 gram, is plainly different from the mina<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_249"></a>[249]</span> -of gold, (the Euboic mina of Herodotus) which contained 50 -shekels, staters (Darics) of 130 grains (8·4 gram.) each. For it -would require 50 shekels of 10·5 gram. (164 grains) each to -make a mina of 505 gram. On the other hand it will be found -that if we take 60 shekels of the Daric or ox-unit weight they -will exactly make up the mina of 505 gram. Neither can this -mina be the Babylonian silver mina of 50 shekels of 172 grains -(11·2 gram.) each. For the Babylonian silver mina consists of 50 -shekels of 11·2 gram., whereas the mina of 505 gram, would give -50 shekels of only 10·1 gram. each. The obvious conclusion is -that this mina of 505 gram. is neither the gold nor the silver -standard. It is a mina composed of 60 shekels of the weight of -the gold unit (Daric or ox-unit). And its talent was composed -when the system was completed, of 60 minae, as was the case -with all other talents. From the weights just described it may -reasonably be assumed that both the heavy and light systems -were employed contemporaneously in the Assyrio-Babylonian -empire. Some have suggested that whilst the light system was -employed in Babylon, its double, or the heavy one, was employed -in the northern part of the empire. But the fact that it -is on the weights of the latter standard that we find the double -legends, the second being in Aramaic characters, seems to point -irresistibly to the conclusion that the heavy standard (no -matter what it may have been employed for) was especially -used in Syria.</p> - -<p>It is of great significance that it is in this very quarter we -find in use as the gold unit not our usual Daric or ox-unit, but -its double, which is commonly known as the heavy gold shekel -of 260 grains. I have suggested elsewhere that the explanation -of this may be due to the fact that among certain peoples, -especially those who dwelt after the fashion of the Sidonians, -quiet and full of riches, and who had passed from the life -pastoral into the settled agricultural stage, the yoke or pair of -oxen would readily be regarded as the unit instead of the single -ox of primitive days. The fact that a <i>zeugos</i> or yoke of oxen -was taken as the unit of assessment by Solon for the third of -the Athenian classes lends some support to this view<a id="FNanchor_309" href="#Footnote_309" class="fnanchor">[309]</a>. We have<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_250"></a>[250]</span> -likewise seen how the ancient Irish, after borrowing the Roman -ounce, and equating an ounce of silver to the cow, made for their -silver a higher unit by taking three ounces, which represented -three cows, the ordinary price of a female slave (<i>cumhal</i>).</p> - -<p>The Phoenicians employed the double shekel as their unit, -but there is evidence to show that the light shekel was the -original unit. We have seen that in Egypt, Palestine and -Greece, from the remotest time, gold circulated in the form -of rings made of a fixed amount of gold, and also that the -unit on which they were made was our ox unit, or light shekel -(130-5 grains). From the practice of using gold rings in -currency as well as for ornament, we may safely conclude that -the standard of 130 grains upon which these were probably -made was far anterior to the use of the double shekel in Syria -and Phoenicia.</p> - -<p>The standards which we have learned from the weights -found at Nineveh and Khorsabad are now generally known as -the light royal talent, and the heavy royal talent, because on -specimens of both standards the inscriptions describe them as -weights “of the king.”</p> - -<p>It is evident that as gold and silver had each a separate -standard, the “royal” standards were not employed for the -precious metals. It is then most probable that they were -employed for the weighing of the inferior metals such as copper, -which of course played a most important part in the daily life -of both Babylonians and Assyrians. We may rest assured that -corn was not weighed but continued to be bought and sold by -dry measure, as it was with the Hebrews in the days of the -Prophets, when the <i>Homer</i> and the <i>Ephah</i> were employed to -measure it.</p> - -<p>I shall now give a tabular view of the three standards used by -the peoples of Mesopotamia and their neighbours, treating the -<i>heavy royal talent</i> as merely the double of the light one.</p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Gold.</span></p> - -<table summary="The Mesopotamian gold standard"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>Stater</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>130 grs. Troy (8·4 gram.).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>Staters</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 Mina = 6500 grs. (420·0 gram.).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>Minae</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 Talent = 390000 grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_251"></a>[251]</span></p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Silver.</span></p> - -<table summary="The Mesopotamian silver standard"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>Shekel</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>172 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>Shekels</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 Manah = 8600 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>Manahs</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 Talent = 516000 grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Royal Standard.</span></p> - -<table summary="The Mesopotamian royal standard"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>Shekel</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>130 grs. (8·4 gram.).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>Shekels</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 Manah = 7800 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>Manahs</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 Talent = 468000 grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Let us now examine for a moment the current explanation -of the origin and inter-relations of these standards and we shall -find that they all start at the wrong end, assuming as earliest -that which can be proved to be later, and deducing what are -really the earliest stages from those which were in fact the -historical outcome of the others.</p> - -<p>“The proficiency of the Chaldaeans in the cognate sciences -of Arithmetic and Astronomy is well known<a id="FNanchor_310" href="#Footnote_310" class="fnanchor">[310]</a>,<a id="FNanchor_311" href="#Footnote_311" class="fnanchor">[311]</a>. The broad -and monotonous plains of lower Mesopotamia had nothing to -attract the eye, and impelled their inhabitants to fix their -attention upon the overarching skies studded with stars -that shone with exceptional clearness and lustre in the dry -pellucid atmosphere of that region. There were no dark -mountains looming in the distance to hinder the eye from -watching down to the very horizon the heavenly bodies in their -periodic movements. Thus as Geometry may be regarded as -the special offspring of the Egyptian mind, so Astronomy and -Astrology were the children of Babylonia. The results of their -astronomical observations were duly recorded on clay tablets in -the cuneiform characters, and these tablets were then baked -hard, and stored up in the great libraries in their chief cities. -It is recorded that when Alexander the Great captured Babylon, -he obtained and forwarded to his tutor Aristotle a series of -astronomical records extending back as far as the year <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 2234, -according to our reckoning.”</p> - -<p>Certain investigations into these tablets, primarily suggested -by a fragment of Berosus which described the method of dividing<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_252"></a>[252]</span> -time employed by the Babylonians, have led scholars to -conclude that upon these observations “rests the entire structure -of the metric system of the Babylonians<a id="FNanchor_312" href="#Footnote_312" class="fnanchor">[312]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Thus was obtained the famous Babylonian Sexagesimal -system. Although the French metric system of modern days -has returned to the decimal system, which was the first employed -by primitive men, being probably suggested to them by -those natural counters, the fingers, the sexagesimal had a considerable -superiority over the older decimal system (which the -Egyptians had clung to) for certain practical purposes, as the -number on which it was based could be resolved into fractions -far more conveniently than the number 10. Dr Hultsch -(<i>Metrologie</i>², p. 393) arrives at the Babylonian weight-unit -thus: the Babylonian <i>maris</i> is equal to one-fifth of the cube -of the Royal Babylonian Ell, which is itself obtained from the -sun’s apparent diameter. The weight in water corresponding -to this measure of capacity gave the <i>light</i> Royal Babylonian -Talent; this Talent was divided into 60 Minae, and each Mina -into sixty parts or <i>Shekels</i>. Their <i>gold</i> Talent was derived from -the <i>sixtieth</i> of this Royal Mina, with the modification that now -<i>fifty</i> sixtieths of the Royal Mina made a <i>Mina of gold</i> and -sixty Minae made a Talent<a id="FNanchor_313" href="#Footnote_313" class="fnanchor">[313]</a>.</p> - -<p>It seems strange that the framers of this theory did not -consider that just as undoubtedly the Chaldaeans must have -reckoned their time by the primitive methods of sunrise, -noon and sunset, “full market,” or ox-loosing time for centuries -before they arrived at their scientific division of time, -and just as the Chaldaean artificer employed his fingers or -palm, or span or foot, as a measure of length ages before the -Royal Cubit was equated to the sun’s apparent diameter, so in -all probability they employed as measures of capacity, gourds -or eggshells (as did the Hebrews) and for weights the seeds of -plants.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_253"></a>[253]</span></p> - -<p>But since, after what we have already seen, it is perfectly -clear that the first of articles to be weighed is gold, and that -the unit of weight is consequently small, we at once join issue -with several points in the theory of Brandis and his school. -First they start with the Talent as the unit, and only arrive at -the shekel (the <i>weight</i> par excellence) by a twofold process of -subdivision; secondly, it is assumed that the Royal Talent which -we have had reason to believe was a purely commercial Talent, -seeing that it was employed neither for gold or silver, was the -first to be invented, and that it was only at a later stage that -the mina and talent specially employed for gold were developed, -not out of the primal unit obtained originally from the one-fifth -of the cube of the <i>maris</i>, but from the sixtieth of the -mina of that Royal Talent; thirdly one asks in wonder why did -the Chaldaeans, who only achieved their famous Sexagesimal -system after gazing at the stars through unnumbered generations, -abandon this precious discovery the very moment they -set about the construction of a weight-unit for gold, for instead -of taking one-sixth of the cube of the <i>maris</i>, they are represented -as following their old decimal system with invincible -obstinacy by taking one-<i>fifth</i> of the <i>maris</i> as their point of -departure; lastly, it is astonishing that the Chaldaeans did not -employ their new discovery in the weighing of the precious -metals, the thing which above all others ought to have called -for the most scientific accuracy.</p> - -<p>The fact is, that just as children find some difficulty in -realising that their parents were ever children, so when we -stand in the presence of the remains of the great cities of -Egypt and Babylonia, those ancients of the earth, we are too -prone to forget that Thebes, Babylon or Nineveh had ever -their day of small things. The familiar tale of Romulus and -Remus with their band of outlaws dwelling in their hovels -beside the Tiber has kept people in mind that “Rome was not -built in a day.” If we can but just approach the question of -the first beginnings of Egyptian or Chaldaean civilization with -the same idea, it will be far easier to project ourselves into the -past of those great races, and thus to realize far better the conditions -under which they grew and lived.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_254"></a>[254]</span></p> - -<p>There can be little doubt that the unit of the Babylonian -system was the light shekel (Daric or ox-unit) of 130-5 grs. -Troy. But I have shown that the Chaldaeans were aware of -and made use of the method of fixing weight-units by means -of grains of corn such as we have found to be the universal -practice from Ireland to China, and we have at once removed -all need for supposing that it was only when they had discovered -a scientific method of metrology that the Chaldaeans -constructed their weight-unit.</p> - -<p>After what we have shown upon p. 115 concerning the -methods employed in the buying and selling of corn, where it -has been made clear that of all commodities corn is one of the -very last to be weighed because of its bulkiness in proportion -to its cheapness, I think no one will readily accept M. Aurè’s -ingenious hypothesis<a id="FNanchor_314" href="#Footnote_314" class="fnanchor">[314]</a>.</p> - -<p>Are we not now justified in supposing that, just as the -peoples of Mesopotamia had marked their seasons and time by -primitive methods, and used their fingers and hands and feet -as measures long before they dreamed of scientific methods, -so that likewise they had employed for weighing their gold the -natural weight-unit which lay ready to their hands in the -wheat-ears that crowned their plains.</p> - -<p>Let us now start with the light shekel as our unit. According -to our argument it was nothing more than the amount -of gold which represented the value of the cow, the unit of -barter throughout all Europe, Asia and Africa, as it still is -over considerable areas of both the latter continents. There is -no reason for not believing that as among other people, all -articles of property, utensils, weapons, clothes, ornaments and -the various kinds of animals stand to one another in well-known -relations of value, so the same principle was in full -force among the Semites of Mesopotamia. We found that -the wild tribes of Laos had a regular scale commencing with -a hoe as their lowest unit, leading up through kettles and -porcelain jars to the buffalo, their main unit; we also found<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_255"></a>[255]</span> -that the weight of a grain of corn in gold was equated to a -hoe, and that thus by a simple process of multiplication it was -easy to ascertain the value of a buffalo in gold. The unit thus -attained was kept from fluctuating, as it was known to every -one how many grains of corn gave the true weight of the unit. -The practical accuracy of this method of fixing monetary units -has been demonstrated from the case of the Early English and -Mediaeval English silver penny (<a href="#Page_180">p. 180</a>). There is complete -evidence to show that the light shekel system was older than -the heavy system. Firstly the so-called Duck weights with their -cuneiform inscriptions point to the fact that Babylonia was the -special home of this system, whilst the Lion weights with their -Aramaic inscriptions point to a later period, when the Assyrian -Empire was in immediate touch with the merchants of Phoenicia. -But, in the next place, a far more powerful argument can -be drawn from the Hebrew system. In later times the heavy -shekel system prevailed in Palestine, in accordance with which -the maneh contained 50 heavy or double shekels of 200 grs. -each. But that this maneh was simply imposed on the older -light shekel system is demonstrated from the fact that when -in two parallel passages articles of a certain weight of gold are -mentioned, in the one the weight is given at three manehs, in -the other at 300 shekels, the maneh thus being counted at -100 shekels. These 100 shekels are equal to the 50 heavy -shekels of the heavy Assyrian or Aramaic maneh. Now it is -evident that if the heavy system had been the original one -employed by the Hebrews, the maneh would simply have been -reckoned at 50 (heavy) shekels. As the matter stands it is -evident that on the contrary, the heavy mina was introduced -into a system where the unit was simply the light shekel, and -the Hebrews therefore clinging to their old unit, described the -maneh as consisting of 100 shekels instead of 50. Further -evidence to the same effect will be adduced later on. Finding -thus the light shekel in Babylonia, in Palestine and in Egypt, -and current even under the Assyrian Empire side by side with -the heavy system even amongst people who used the Aramaic -system of writing, we may without any hesitation regard it as -the older.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_256"></a>[256]</span></p> - -<p>The process by which the gold Talent was arrived at was -somewhat thus:</p> - -<p>The ox-unit of 130-135 grs. is the basis.</p> - -<p>Next the fivefold of this was taken, whether from five being -the simplest multiple, since it was suggested from the primitive -method of counting by the fingers of one hand, or far less -likely from a slave being estimated at 5 oxen, somewhat as -we find among the Homeric Greeks an ordinary slave-woman -estimated at four cows, and in ancient Ireland at three cows. -This weight is known as the Assyrian five-shekel standard, and -from it Mr Petrie derives the 80-grain standard which he -detects as the unit of a certain number of weights found at -Naucratis (<i>Naukratis</i>, p. 86). Whilst the Egyptians contented -themselves with the 5 ket and 10 ket, or uten, as their highest -unit, the Chaldaeans advanced to the fifty-fold (5 × 10), and -thus obtained that which probably for a long time formed their -highest unit.</p> - -<p>What was this <i>Maneh</i>? Is it a Semitic word or is it rather -an Aryan, as the present writer has argued elsewhere<a id="FNanchor_315" href="#Footnote_315" class="fnanchor">[315]</a>? At -all events it is interesting to find the appearance of a similar -word in the Rig Veda and that too in connection with -gold: this has been regarded by some as a loan word from -Babylon<a id="FNanchor_316" href="#Footnote_316" class="fnanchor">[316]</a>. But it is equally possible, that it is a “loan -word” from India to Babylon. The maneh evidently belongs -to a period anterior to the development of the sexagesimal -system, for if it had come into use along with or subsequent to -that system, we should certainly find 60 instead of 50 shekels -in the mina of gold and the mina of silver: hence it cannot in -any wise be regarded as a distinctive feature of the Babylonian -scientific system, as it plainly existed at the time when the -decimal system was still dominant. As the latter was the -system which prevailed among the Indians of the Vedic period -there was no reason why they should borrow the Chaldaean -term. On the contrary there is rather a reason why the -Chaldaeans would have borrowed the term from India. Gold -did not pass into India from Babylonia, for as we have already<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_257"></a>[257]</span> -seen there are no auriferous strata in Mesopotamia, but it -passed from the rich surface deposit of the valley of the Oxus -and Central Asia into Chaldaea. Now if the same term intimately -associated with the same commodity is found among -two different peoples, and it is known as a matter of certainty -that one of these countries supplies the other with this particular -article, there is a considerable probability that the -peculiar term connected with the commodity has passed along -with it from the source of its production into the country which -imports it.</p> - -<p>We saw above that there was no native gold in Chaldaea -and therefore it must have been imported by those Chaldaean -merchantmen from India by way of the Persian Gulf. But was -there no gold in Chaldaea until the shipmen of Ur were able -to construct vessels capable of a voyage, even albeit only a -coasting voyage, to the mouths of the Indus? Working in -metals must have been far advanced when such ships were -built. That gold came from India we can have little doubt. -But it probably came overland for ages before anything in -the form of a ship larger than a ‘dug-out’ had ever floated on -the Indian Seas.</p> - -<p>The first voyage undertaken to the ancient El Dorado may -have been to search for the region from whence came the gold, -somewhat in the fashion that in after-times Pytheas of Massalia -sallied forth to investigate the sources of the tin and amber -which reached Marseilles overland from Britain and the Baltic. -After weighing these considerations we shall be careful to avoid -any dogmatic declarations as to the origin of the word <i>mana</i>. -One thing however is clear, and that is that the ancient Hindus -were employing certain lumps of gold probably of uniform size -in Vedic times, as we saw<a id="FNanchor_317" href="#Footnote_317" class="fnanchor">[317]</a>. The Indians of the Vedic times had -thus a gold unit of their own (and as we have shown above probably -based on the value of a cow) before they as yet knew the -use of silver or had as yet reached the sea in their downward -advance into the peninsula of Hindustan. Even granting that -they borrowed the <i>Manā</i> from Babylonia, it is plain that they -had already their own gold unit, for otherwise instead of employing<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_258"></a>[258]</span> -<i>hiranya pinda</i>, a most primitive term meaning only -<i>gold-lump</i>, they would certainly have borrowed the term <i>shekel</i> -along with the <i>maneh</i>. But the fact of most importance for us -at present is that, whether <i>maneh</i> be Semitic or Aryan, in either -case it seems to mean not a <i>weight</i> but a <i>measure</i>. It will be -remembered that we found the <i>catty</i> or pound of Further -Asia was in origin a natural unit of capacity, as was shown by -its Cambodian name <i>neal</i>, which simply means a cocoa-nut, and -that we found in China the joints of the bamboo of certain -sizes serving as their measures of capacity, and both cocoa-nuts -and bamboo joints among the Malays of the Indian Isles. This -will naturally suggest the question, Is it possible that the -<i>maneh</i> had a somewhat similar origin? Was some natural -object, such as the gourd, which is at the present moment the -ordinary unit of capacity at Zanzibar, taken to serve as a measure -of liquids or of corn? It is probable that the Greek <i>cyathus</i> -(κύαθος) like its Latin congener <i>cucurbita</i> meant originally some -kind of gourd. But there is a certain amount of probability -that the Semitic peoples used gourds in primitive times for -vessels, not simply from <i>à priori</i> considerations, but from the -fact that the most archaic pottery obtained by Mr Petrie from -his excavations on the site of the ancient city of Lachish in -1890 show unmistakable signs of being modelled after the shape -of a gourd. Although the Chinese never have employed their -<i>ching</i> (catty) for the precious metals, yet the Cambodians have -advanced to counting silver not only by the <i>catty</i> but also by -the <i>picul</i>. Did then the Babylonians make 50 shekels of gold -or silver roundly equal to their <i>maneh</i> or measure of capacity? -This is of course pure speculation, but it is at least supported -by the comparison of what has actually taken place elsewhere; -and even from the empire of the Great King himself can we -get an insight into the method by which the <i>maneh</i> (and likewise -the Talent) may have been brought into the weight system. -Herodotus<a id="FNanchor_318" href="#Footnote_318" class="fnanchor">[318]</a> tells us that when the tribute of gold (largely in -gold dust) and silver was brought to the King he stored it thus: -“he melts it and pours it into earthenware jars, and when he -has filled the vessels he strips off the earthenware, and whenever<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_259"></a>[259]</span> -he wants money, he cuts off as much as he needs on each -occasion.” We saw above that the Cambodian <i>catty</i> of silver -is twice the weight of the catty of rice, the Cambodian <i>catty</i> -being simply the cocoanut, the ordinary unit of capacity, which -after being filled with rice or silver and then weighed has -given two different <i>catties</i>. The Great King no doubt poured -his gold into jars of known capacity, and the weight of such -a jar when filled with gold was well known. It seems then -not unlikely that in this way from either a jar, or from the -gourd which preceded the jar, the mina was derived. However -the <i>maneh</i> may have been determined, it is fairly certain -that the Babylonians fixed upon 50 as a convenient multiple -of the gold unit when silver first came into use; as we have -seen above it was probably equal if not superior in value -to gold and it was naturally weighed by the same unit. But -in the course of time as it became more plentiful, and at the -same time if likewise the art of weighing began to be employed -by merchants in the traffic in the costly spices and balsams -of the east, a necessity would be specially felt among traders for -a somewhat heavier unit than the original shekel. Possibly -then the Aramaean merchants adopted the double shekel -(based on the double ox-unit) for the purpose of weighing silver -(when that metal had now become much more plentiful than -gold), and for trade in precious gums and spices. Such a -procedure can be well paralleled by the old English pound of -silk, which is simply two pounds Troy weight. Silk was of -course of great value, and was accordingly weighed after the -same system as the precious metals; but when it became less -costly and more abundant the weight unit was simply doubled. -We may therefore regard the doubling of the original shekel -as an early step towards the development of a commercial -standard. It is not difficult to understand how in the course of -time a nation of traders like the Phoenicians preferred this -double standard even for their gold, and made it perhaps, as we -shall shortly see, the basis of their silver standard.</p> - -<p>We saw above that there is every reason to believe that -when silver first became known to mankind, they esteemed it -as highly as gold, if not more so. It would naturally, therefore,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_260"></a>[260]</span> -be weighed on the same standard as gold. This would -continue until, in the course of years, a time came when the -relation between gold and silver had become fairly fixed over -all Asia Minor. We know that in the beginning of the 5th -cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> gold was to silver as 13:1 (or rather 13·3:1). -Herodotus, in the celebrated passage in which he describes -the organisation of the Persian empire into satrapies, and -details the amount of tribute appointed by Darius for each, -tells us that the gold was reckoned at thirteen times the -value of silver. Now for ordinary purposes of exchange this -relation would be extremely inconvenient, and the more accurate -relation of 13·3:1 would be still more so. It became -thus desirable to fix some separate standard for silver by which -a convenient number, such as 10, of silver ingots would be -equal to the gold ingot of the ox-unit standard. Metrologists -are wont to speak of the desirability of being able to exchange -a round number of talents of silver for a talent of gold. But -not even in the palmiest days of the wealthy Orient lands -was the ordinary individual so rich that he felt any inconvenience -in the way of exchanging <i>talents</i> of gold and silver. -The Great King might deal out talents as he pleased, but his -subjects were chiefly concerned with the exchange of silver -and gold shekels. I have made this remark because it appears -to me that many of the misconceptions connected with -this whole subject have arisen from scholars concentrating all -their attention on the talent, and taking it as their point of -departure.</p> - -<p>The Babylonians arrived at their silver standard as follows:</p> - -<p>1 gold shekel of 130 grs. was worth 1730 grs. of silver -(130 × 13·3), since gold was to silver as 13·3:1.</p> - -<p>130 grs. gold = 1730 grs. silver.</p> - -<p>They divided this amount of silver by 10, and thus:</p> - -<p>1 gold shekel of 130 grs. = 10 silver shekels of 173 grs.</p> - -<p>As we stated already, Herodotus says that the Babylonian -talent was equal to 70 Euboic minas, that is, one-sixth more -than the Euboic talent. The latter contained 390,000 grs. -Troy, therefore the Babylonian ought to give 455,000 grs. If -we multiply our silver shekel by 50 and then by 60, we shall<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_261"></a>[261]</span> -obtain a total amount for the talent of silver of 519,000 grs. -Unfortunately several inaccuracies have crept into the text of -Herodotus, numerals always being especially liable to corruption -in MSS. He seems, however, to have regarded the -relation of the Euboic to the Babylonian talent as about that -of 5:6, and also to have estimated the current weight of the -Persian silver piece at about 162 grs. Troy. But there can be -little doubt that the full standard weight of the Babylonian -silver shekel was 169 grs. (or, according to Mr Head, 172·9 grs.).</p> - -<p>From this it is easy to construct the Babylonian <i>silver</i> -system, which was employed in Lydia and in the Persian -empire.</p> - -<table summary="The Babylonian silver system"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>shekel</td> - <td>=</td> - <td colspan="4">169 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>shekels</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>mina</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>7450,</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td></td> - <td></td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>minae</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 talent 447000.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>From the double gold shekel was formed another silver -standard known as the <i>Phoenician</i>.</p> - -<p>Gold being to silver as 13:1,</p> - -<table summary="The Phoenician silver standard"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1 double shekel of 260 grs.</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>3380 grs. silver,</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3380 grs. silver</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>15 shekels of 225·3 grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>As this silver standard is found in the same area as the -double gold shekel, I have thought it best to follow the usual -derivation, but at the same time it is worth pointing out that -it may have been gained directly from the light shekel.</p> - -<p>The light shekel (which in the form of coined money appears -either as the gold of Croesus, or the Daric), in the case -of the Babylonian system was made equal to ten silver didrachms, -or 20 drachms known under the name of Sigli; it -likewise is equal in value to 15 Phoenician didrachms of -112·6 grs. Thus, whilst in one region they obtained a silver -unit, ten of which would be an equivalent to the gold unit, -in another they formed a silver unit, 15 of which would be -equivalent to the same gold unit of 130 grs. In each case a -number convenient for purposes of exchange was substituted -for the extremely unmanageable number 13 (or still more intractable -13·3) of the older system, according to which silver -was made into ingots of the same size as those of gold.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_262"></a>[262]</span></p> - -<p>These now are the systems on which depended all traffic -and currency of the precious metals throughout Western Asia -for many centuries. I have been compelled in the statement -of the two silver systems to anticipate one step in the growth -of the fully developed weight system by speaking of the <i>Talent</i>. -We have seen that the mina of silver, like that of gold, contains -only 50 shekels, thus evidently having likewise been developed -before the full elaboration of the Chaldaean system of -numeration, or at least before the application of that system -to their metric standards. But when we come to deal with -the talent we find that in every case alike, whether it be the -gold, silver, or royal talent of commerce, the talent invariably -consists of <i>sixty</i> minae. From this we may with safety infer -that it was at a period posterior to the invention of the sexagesimal -method that the <i>Talent</i> was added to the gold and -silver systems. When we turn to the royal system (both light -and heavy), we find that the mina consists of <i>sixty</i> shekels, just -as the talent consists of 60 minae, and consequently we are -constrained to believe that this royal system was fixed at a -date long after the growth of the gold and silver <i>minae</i>, and -when the sexagesimal system had now complete sway. We -have already seen good reason for considering the <i>royal</i> talent -to be essentially a mercantile unit. It certainly was not used -for gold or silver. Corn was not sold by weight, and so in -all probability it was meant for copper, iron, lead, and merchandise -of value. We have learned from our studies in the -metal trade of primitive peoples that copper and iron are not -weighed but are sold by measurement, being wrought into bars -or plates of a well defined size. It is only when communities -are well advanced in culture that they begin to employ the -scales for the buying and selling of the common metals. We -argued above that the double shekel system arose from a desire -amongst a nation of traders like the Phoenicians for a heavier -standard, more serviceable for such goods as were less valuable -than gold. It was probably the same desire which found its -complete realization in the royal system. Whilst gold and -silver had only the mina as their highest unit, there was a -new system developed scientifically from the ancient shekel or<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_263"></a>[263]</span> -ox-unit. The sixty-fold of this unit was taken to form a mina -considerably heavier than the old gold mina, and now a new -higher unit, the sixty-fold of the mina, was introduced. This -we know under its Greek name of <i>talent</i>, but it was called -<i>kikkar</i> in the Semitic languages. Now are we to suppose that -this <i>kikkar</i> or talent was purely and simply nothing more than -a higher unit formed by taking a convenient multiple of the -lower unit, just as in the French metric system the kilogram -is 1000 times the gramme; or was it rather some ancient -natural unit, originally formed empirically, and at a later epoch, -when science had advanced, fitted into the system of commercial -weight by being made exactly the sixty-fold of the -<i>mina</i>? Comparison with other systems in various lands will -incline us to the latter alternative. If we enquire for a -moment in what manner the highest unit of weight for -merchandise is fixed among barbarous and semi-civilized nationalities, -we shall find that the <i>load</i>, that is, the amount -that a man of average size and strength can carry, is the -universal unit. Readers of the various recent books of African -travel frequently meet in their dreary and monotonous pages -allusions to so many <i>loads</i> for which porters have to be supplied. -The amount of the <i>load</i> seems to vary in different -parts. Thus amongst the Madi or Moru tribe of Central -Africa, a pure negro race, according to that admirable observer -Mr Felkin, the <i>load</i> is about 50 lbs. in weight, whilst -according to Major Barttelot, the <i>load</i> carried by the Zanzibaris -on the Emin Pacha Relief expedition was 65 lbs. (besides -the man’s own rations for several days). We have already -had occasion to refer to the <i>picul</i> of Eastern Asia, which we -found was simply the Malay word for a <i>load</i>; and we also -found that the load varied in different places. Finally, we -found that the Chinese had introduced the <i>picul</i> into their -system of commercial weight, fixing it at 100 <i>chings</i> (catties), -but at the same time excluded it from their silver and gold -system, where the <i>tael</i> (ounce) has remained always the highest -unit. Yet in Cambodia we find that the further step has been -made, and that the commercial system of the catty and <i>picul</i> -has been called into service for the weighing of silver. In<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_264"></a>[264]</span> -Java, whilst gold and silver are weighed by units of small -size, copper is sold by the <i>picul</i>.</p> - -<p>It seems to me not unreasonable to suppose that the origin -of the talent has been analogous to that of the <i>picul</i>. There is -certainly nothing in either the Hebrew <i>kikkar</i> or the Greek -<i>talanton</i> to imply in the slightest degree that they represented -a numerical multiple of the mina. The Greek word means -simply a <i>weight</i>, whilst the Hebrew seems to mean nothing -more than a <i>round mass</i> or <i>cake</i> of anything, whether applied -to a tract of country, as the region round the Jordan (as in -Nehemiah vii. 28), or a loaf of bread (Exodus xxix. 23; 1 Samuel -ii. 36). For as the talent was only introduced into the Hebrew -system at a late period the term was probably applied to a -<i>cake</i> or <i>pig</i> of copper or iron the weight of the ordinary <i>load</i>. -That there was a direct connection between the kikkar and a -man’s <i>load</i> seems implied by the fact that Naaman “bound <i>two</i> -talents of silver in <i>two</i> bags, with two changes of garments, and -laid <i>them</i> upon <i>two</i> of his servants; and they bare <i>them</i> before -him” (2 Kings v. 23). As we find Naaman asking Elisha for -“two mules’ burden of earth” (v. 17) it is at least certain that -the Semites regularly estimated bulky weights by some kind of -<i>load</i>. We saw above that in Assyrian the same ideogram stands -for <i>tribute</i> and <i>talent</i>. If a <i>load</i> of corn was the regular -unit for tribute, the use of a single ideogram may be explained. -In the case of <i>talanton</i> we have no difficulty in -directly regarding it as a <i>load</i>, whilst with <i>kikkar</i> it is not -difficult to see how easy it was for the meaning of a <i>load</i> of -a certain weight to spring from the earlier meaning of the -word. Its use as a loaf is interesting in connection with the -fact noted on p. 159 that in Annam the largest unit in use for -gold and silver is called a <i>loaf</i>.</p> - -<p>When under a strong central government a metric system -more or less scientific was introduced at Babylon, it was -natural that an accurate adjustment of the old empirical unit -of merchandise, the <i>load</i>, to the mina and shekel should be -carefully carried out, just as in China the Mathematical Board -have fixed the <i>picul</i> of commerce as the hundred fold of the -<i>ching</i> (<i>catty</i>), giving it a value equal to 133⅓ lbs. avoirdupois.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_265"></a>[265]</span> -Such scientific adjustments take place in all countries with the -advance of civilization and commerce, and above all under the -influence of a strong central government. Let us reflect how -long it has taken for the English Statute Acre to conquer -the local ancient acres in use in various parts of the United -Kingdom, such as the Irish, the Scotch or the Winchester -acre. In like fashion, although the standards of weight and -capacity were regulated by Act of Parliament in 1824, local -usage still held on, and units of weight unknown to the Statute -still survive in the usage of provincial places. Now it is not -unreasonable to suppose that the name <i>royal</i> or <i>king’s weight</i> -was given to the Babylonian commercial system, which was -constructed on purely sexagesimal lines, because it was enforced -by royal proclamation and power throughout the whole of the -empire, and that in like manner the <i>royal cubit</i> mentioned by -Herodotus (<span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 178) owes its origin to the establishment of one -uniform standard for the dominions of the Great King. In fact -no better illustration of what took place can be found than -that afforded by our own terms such as <i>imperial pint</i>, or <i>imperial</i> -gallon, or in a less degree by the <i>statute</i> acre, as contrasted -with the older customary pints, or gallons, or acres. -The mistake made by metrologists, in regarding the scientifically -constructed Babylonian system as the first beginning of the -art of weighing, is just as great as if a person writing a manual -of English Metrology were to start with the metric legislation -of 1824 as the first beginning of our metrology, and were to -try and explain all traces of an earlier system or systems by -forcing the facts into some sort of conformity with our modern -standards. Undoubtedly in such an effort great facility would -be found inasmuch as the present scientific standards are simply -the ancient units of the realm accurately defined. But the -reader will best understand the relations which probably existed -between the Babylonian <i>royal</i> standard (both single and -double) by having a short account of the adjustment of our -standards laid before him. Great inconvenience having been -felt in the United Kingdom for a long time from the want of -uniformity in the system of weights and measures, which were -in use in different parts of it, an Act of Parliament was passed<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_266"></a>[266]</span> -in 1824 and came into force on January the 1st 1826, by which -certain measures and weights therein specified were declared -to be the only lawful ones in this realm under the name of -<i>imperial weights and measures</i>. It was settled by this Act -(1) that a certain yard-measure, made by an order of Parliament -in 1760 by a comparison of the yards then in common use, -should henceforward be the <i>imperial yard</i> and the standard of -<i>length</i> for the kingdom: and that, in case this standard should -be lost or injured, it might be recovered from a knowledge -of the fact that the length of a pendulum, oscillating in a -second <i>in vacuo</i> in the latitude of London and at the level of -the sea (which can always be accurately obtained by certain -scientific processes), was 39·13929 inches of this yard: (2) that -the half of a double pound Troy, made at the same time (1760), -should be the <i>Imperial Pound Troy</i> and the standard of <i>weight</i>; -and that of the 5760 grains which this pound contains, the -pound <i>Avoirdupois</i> should contain 7000; and that, in case this -standard should be lost or injured, it might be recovered from -the knowledge of the fact that a <i>cubic inch</i> of distilled water -at the temperature of 62° Fahrenheit, and when the barometer -is at 30 in., weighs 252·458 grains: (3) that the <i>imperial gallon</i> -and standard of <i>capacity</i> should contain 277·274 <i>cubic inches</i> -(the <i>inch</i> being above defined), which size was selected from its -being nearly that of the gallons already, in use, and from the -fact that 10 lbs. Avoirdupois of distilled water weighed in air -at a temperature of 62° Fahrenheit, and when the barometer -stands at 30 in., will just fill this space. On p. 180 we saw that -the standard gallon in the Tudor period ultimately depended -on the pennyweight, which was, as we found, fixed by being the -weight of 32 grains of wheat, dry and taken from the midst -of the ear of wheat after the ancient laws of the realm. It was -from the descendants of this gallon that the <i>imperial gallon</i> -of 1824 was fixed, with a slight modification so as to make -it contain 10 lbs. of distilled water weighed in air at a temperature -of 62° and when the barometer stands at 30 in. The -double pound Troy made in 1760 depended in like fashion for -its ultimate origin on the wheat-grains, and it also affords us -an interesting illustration of the doubling of the original single<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_267"></a>[267]</span> -unit, such as we find in the heavy <i>royal</i> Babylonian system. -We may find further analogies between our own system and -that of the Babylonians. Whilst at the Mint gold and silver -are weighed for coinage by Troy weight, the copper coinage on -the other hand is regulated by the lb. Avoirdupois, the ordinary -commercial standard. As already remarked, it is almost certain -from the method of elimination that copper was the principal -article for which the <i>royal</i> Babylonian system was employed, -as gold and silver had separate standards of their own, and -corn was sold by measure and not by weight.</p> - -<p>To sum up then the results of our enquiry into the -Assyrio-Babylonian system, we started with the so-called light -shekel or ox-unit as the basis of the system; and found that -gold and silver were weighed by it and by its fifty-fold, -the <i>maneh</i>, which may have been itself a natural measure of -capacity, such as the catty used in Eastern Asia, where we -know for certain that this weight was originally a measure of -capacity obtained from the joints of bamboos or the cocoanut; -that in a certain part of the empire a need was felt -for a slightly heavier unit for the weighing of silver and -precious commodities such as gums and spices, and that accordingly -the great trading Aramaic peoples used the two-fold -of the ox-unit (260 grains Troy); that at the earliest period -copper would not be sold by weight but would be sold by bars -or plates of fixed dimensions, as is still the practice with iron -and copper among the barbarous peoples of Further Asia and -Africa; that with the advance of culture the art of weighing -was extended to copper and other articles of small value in -proportion to their bulk, and that, as the maneh, or contents of -a gourd, and the <i>load</i> or amount that a man could carry on his -back, had been most probably in general use as units for common -merchandise, the time came when under the all-mastering authority -of the Great King a standard based on the ancient ox-unit, -but framed on the new scientific sexagesimal system, was -established for copper and certain other kinds of merchandise; -that in this system 60 shekels made the maneh, and the <i>load</i> -(the <i>kikkar</i> or talent) was adjusted to the new system as the -sixty-fold of the maneh; and that in the course of time this<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_268"></a>[268]</span> -higher unit of the <i>kikkar</i> or talent was added to the gold and -silver systems, sixty manehs in each case making the <i>kikkar</i> -as in the case of the royal or commercial system; that in the -case of silver, which on its first discovery and employment was -as valuable as gold, and was therefore weighed on the same -standard, when in course of time it became about thirteen -times less valuable than gold, and there was a difficulty experienced -in exchanging the units of gold and silver; a separate -standard was created by dividing into ten new parts or shekels -the amount of silver which was the equivalent of the gold -shekel (ox-unit); that this was probably developed before the -royal commercial mina of 60 shekels had been formed, as in -that case the silver mina would have contained 60 shekels -likewise; we were able to give an explanation of the name -<i>royal</i> as applied to the commercial standard by regarding it -as of late origin, created by a supreme central authority for -the regulation of the commerce of a great empire made up -of a heterogeneous mass of races, just as in the present century -our own <i>imperial</i> standards have been fixed for the whole kingdom, -being based, as was the Babylonian, on an ancient unit -empirically obtained; and just as the royal arms are stamped -on our imperial standards, so the weights of the Assyrian <i>royal</i> -system were shaped in the form of a lion, the symbol of royalty -throughout the East. Finally we found that at the base of the -Assyrio-Babylonian system lay, as the determinant of the ox-unit -or shekel, the grain of wheat, which we have already traced -all across Europe into Asia. We can therefore now come to a -very reasonable conclusion that the Assyrio-Babylonian weight -system was in its origin empirical, and that it was only at a -comparatively late date in its history, just as in the case of our -own standards, that a certain uniformity between the standards -of measures and weights was brought about by the (not complete) -application of the sexagesimal system of numeration, the -invention of which is their eternal glory.</p> - -<p>Having now dealt with Egypt, and the systems which -prevailed in the Assyrio-Babylonian empire, it will be best to -treat of the region which lay between them. In both the -former countries we found the light shekel or ox-unit in use<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_269"></a>[269]</span> -from the earliest times; and it will also be remembered that -at an earlier stage we found that Abraham was able to traverse -all the wide country that lay between Mesopotamia and the -ancient kingdom of the Nile with his flocks and herds, and -that he dwelt in the land of Canaan in close neighbourhood -and on friendly terms with the sons of Heth, or Hittites, who -were then the possessors of that land; and that furthermore -monetary transactions were then carried on by means of certain -small ingots of silver, as we see from the purchase of the Cave -of Machpelah. These ingots, translated <i>shekels</i> in the English -version and called <i>didrachms</i> in the Septuagint, are termed in -Hebrew <i>Keseph</i> (כֶּסֶף), simply <i>pieces of silver</i>, or <i>silverlings</i>. In -the old Hebrew literature values in silver and gold are expressed -either in <i>shekels</i> or by a simple numeral with the words “of silver,” -“of gold” added (where the latter method is followed the English -version supplies <i>pieces</i> or substitutes “a thousand silverlings” -for “a thousand of silver” (Isa. vii. 23). The Septuagint renders -the shekel by the Greek <i>didrachm</i>). There are several inferences -to be drawn from this. It is evident that pieces of silver (and -no doubt of gold also) of a certain quality and weight were -employed as currency in Palestine, and we may likewise suppose -with some probability that these pieces of silver were according -to the standard in common use in Egypt and Chaldaea. Again, -since we have already shown that gold in the form of rings and -other articles for personal adornment was exchanged according -to the ox-unit of 130-5 grs., as evidenced by the story of the -ring given to Rebekah, it follows that there was but one and the -same standard for gold from the Euphrates to the Nile. This -is confirmed by the story of the sale of Joseph by his brethren -to the company of Ishmaelites “who came from Gilead with -their camels bearing spices and balm and myrrh going to carry -it down to Egypt”; to these Ishmaelites or Midianites Joseph -was sold for twenty pieces of silver<a id="FNanchor_319" href="#Footnote_319" class="fnanchor">[319]</a>. Here we have evidence -that the same silver unit was current from Gilead to Egypt. -There are various other large sums of silver mentioned both -in Genesis and also in the Book of Judges and in Joshua. -Thus Abimelech, King of Gerar, is said to have given Abraham<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_270"></a>[270]</span> -a thousand [pieces] of silver<a id="FNanchor_320" href="#Footnote_320" class="fnanchor">[320]</a>, whilst the lords of the Philistines -persuaded Delilah to beguile Samson into telling her -wherein lay his great strength by the promise of eleven -hundred [pieces] of silver, which money she afterwards received<a id="FNanchor_321" href="#Footnote_321" class="fnanchor">[321]</a>. -Abimelech the son of Jerubbaal (Gideon) was enabled to form -his conspiracy by hiring ‘vain and light persons’<a id="FNanchor_322" href="#Footnote_322" class="fnanchor">[322]</a> with the -three-score and ten [pieces] of silver taken by his mother’s -brother from the house of Baal-berith. Finally, we have a sum -of eleven hundred [pieces] of silver which were stolen by that -“man of Mount Ephraim whose name was Micah” from his -mother, of which his mother took (when he had restored the -money) two hundred [shekels] and gave them to the founder, -who “made thereof a graven image and a molten image<a id="FNanchor_323" href="#Footnote_323" class="fnanchor">[323]</a>.” Now -although all these are considerable sums, all exceeding a <i>mina</i>, -yet there is no mention whatever made of the latter unit of -account in any of these passages. The story of another theft -shows that gold as well as silver was reckoned originally only -by the shekel and not by the mina. Thus Achan “saw among -the spoils a goodly Babylonish garment and two hundred shekels -of silver and a wedge of gold of fifty shekels weight<a id="FNanchor_324" href="#Footnote_324" class="fnanchor">[324]</a>.” As fifty -shekels were a mina, here if anywhere we ought to have found -the latter term. From this we infer without hesitation that -the shekel was the original unit.</p> - -<p>But there is another word besides <i>keseph</i> which is translated -<i>piece of money</i> or piece of silver. This is the term <i>qesitah</i> -(קְשׂׅיטָה) which occurs in three passages of the Old Testament. -Thus Jacob bought the parcel of ground where he had spread -his tent at the hand of the children of Hamor, Shechem’s -father, “for an hundred pieces of money” (Gen. xxxiii. 19); and -the same word is used in the parallel passage in Joshua -(xxiv. 32) where the children of Israel buried Joseph’s bones -in Shechem in the parcel of ground which Jacob bought for an -hundred pieces of money. Lastly, Job’s kinsfolk and acquaintances -gave him every man a <i>piece of money</i>, and every one a -ring of gold (xlii. 11). It has been always a matter of doubt -what this piece of money really was. The Septuagint translates<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_271"></a>[271]</span> -<i>qesitah</i> in these three passages by ἑκατὸν ἀμνῶν, ἑκατὸν ἀμνάδων, -and ἀμνάδα μίαν, thus in every case regarding it as a <i>lamb</i>. -The most ancient interpreters all agree in this, whilst some of -the later Rabbis regarded it as signifying a coin stamped with -the form of a lamb: one of them says that he found such a coin -in Africa<a id="FNanchor_325" href="#Footnote_325" class="fnanchor">[325]</a>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;" id="figure25"> -<img src="images/figure25.jpg" width="500" height="175" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 25.</span> Weights in the form of Sheep<a id="FNanchor_326" href="#Footnote_326" class="fnanchor">[326]</a>.</p> -</div> - -<p>Long ago Prof. R. S. Poole, speaking of this word, said: -“The sanction of the LXX, and the use of weights bearing the -forms of lions, bulls, and geese by the Egyptians, Assyrians, and -probably Persians, must make us hesitate before we abandon -a rendering [lamb] so singularly confirmed by the relation -of the Latin <i>pecunia</i> and <i>pecus</i><a id="FNanchor_327" href="#Footnote_327" class="fnanchor">[327]</a>.” The connection between -weights and units of currency is especially close at a time -when coined money is as yet unknown, and hence when we -find weights in the form of sheep coming from Syria, and -also recollect that sheep were employed as a regular unit in -Palestine for the paying of tribute, and with the light obtained -from primitive systems of currency, we may well conclude that -the <i>qesitah</i> was an old unit of barter, like the Homeric ox, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_272"></a>[272]</span> -as the latter was transformed into a gold unit, so the former -was superseded by an equivalent of silver. We read (2 Kings -iii. 4) that Mesha, king of Moab (now so famous from the -inscription which bears his name), was a sheep-master, and he -rendered unto the king of Israel one hundred thousand lambs, -and one hundred thousand rams with the wool. When payment -in metal came more and more into use silver served as the -sub-multiple of gold, just as sheep formed that of the ox, and -it is not surprising that in later times when coins were struck -by the Phoenicians, as at Salamis in Cyprus and many other -places, bearing a sheep or a sheep’s head, there arose some -doubt as to whether the <i>qesitah</i> was a <i>sheep</i>, a piece of uncoined -silver, or a coin stamped with a sheep. The very fact of the -Phoenicians having such a predilection for this type is in itself -an indication that the silver coin in its origin represented the -value of a sheep. At a later stage, when we come to deal with -the early Greek coin types, we shall develop this principle -more completely. The mere fact that the sheep on the -Phoenician coins is sometimes found accompanying a divinity -does not militate against our doctrine, as I shall explain when -I deal with the coins of Messana and Thasos.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure26"> -<img src="images/figure26.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 26.</span> Coin of Salamis in Cyprus.</p> -</div> - -<p>But then comes the question, which was the shekel employed -by the Hebrews? It must have been either (1) the ox-unit of -130 grs., used alike for gold and silver in early days both in -Egypt and Mesopotamia and Greece, or (2) the double of this, -or heavy shekel of 260 grs., used for gold only in parts of -Asia Minor, or (3) the Phoenician shekel of 225 grs., used only -for silver and electrum along the coast of Asia Minor, and never -employed for gold, or (4) the Babylonian or Persic standard of -172 grs., used only for <i>silver</i>. In later times the silver shekel in<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_273"></a>[273]</span> -use amongst the Jews was most undoubtedly the Phoenician -shekel, obtained, as we saw above, by dividing the amount of -silver equivalent to the double gold shekel into 15 parts. But -it may be reasonably doubted whether the silver piece or shekel -(called always a <i>didrachmon</i> in the Septuagint) mentioned in -Genesis and Judges is the Phoenician shekel. It is used without -any distinctive epithet, as if it were the weight <i>par -excellence</i>, and is employed for <i>gold</i> as well as silver. But -when we turn to certain other passages we find mention made -of a shekel called the <i>Shekel of the Sanctuary</i><a id="FNanchor_328" href="#Footnote_328" class="fnanchor">[328]</a>. This shekel is -frequently mentioned, generally in connection with silver, and -in reference to such things as the contribution of the half-shekel -to the Tabernacle, the redemption of the firstborn, the -sacrifice of animals, and the payment of the seer. Yet we find -this shekel likewise employed in the estimation of <i>gold</i>, a -fact which at once shews that it is neither the Phoenician -shekel of 220 grs. nor the Persic of 172 grs., both of which were -confined to <i>silver</i>. It must then have been either the ox-unit -of 130 grs. or the heavy shekel of 260 grs. As the latter was -confined in use to <i>gold</i> it follows that the ox-unit of 130 grs. -alone fits the conditions required. If then we can discover -what in the case of either silver or gold was the weight of this -shekel, we shall have determined it for both metals, for it will -hardly be maintained that there was one shekel of the Sanctuary -for gold and one of different weight for silver.</p> - -<p>Now we read in Exodus (xxxviii. 24 <i>seqq.</i>) that “all the -gold that was occupied for the work in all the work of the holy -[place], even the gold of the offering, was twenty and nine -talents and seven hundred and thirty shekels, after the shekel -of the Sanctuary. And the silver of them that were numbered -of the congregation was an hundred talents and a thousand -seven hundred and three-score and fifteen shekels, after the -shekel of the Sanctuary; a bekah for every man, that is, half a -shekel after the shekel of the Sanctuary, for every one that -went to be numbered from twenty years old and upward, for -six hundred thousand and three thousand and five hundred -and fifty men. And the brass of the offering was seventy<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_274"></a>[274]</span> -talents and two thousand and four hundred shekels.” From -this passage we learn that, whilst the gold and silver were -estimated on the shekel of the Sanctuary (or Holy Shekel), -the brass was probably reckoned by some other standard.</p> - -<p>It is also of importance to note that it is the shekel which -is regarded as the <i>unit</i> of the system, for we never hear of a -talent or mina of the Sanctuary. From this passage likewise -we readily discover that the talent of silver contained 3000 -shekels (603,550 ÷ 2 = 301,775 shekels - 1775 = 300,000 ÷ 100 -= 3000 shekels).</p> - -<p>Now when king Solomon made three hundred shields of -beaten gold, three minas (translated <i>pounds</i> in the Authorized -Version) went to one shield (1 Kings x. 17). But in the -parallel passage (1 Chron. ix. 1) we read that “three hundred -shields made he of beaten gold, three hundred shekels went to -one shield,” from which it is evident that a maneh of gold -contained 100 shekels<a id="FNanchor_329" href="#Footnote_329" class="fnanchor">[329]</a>. A very important conclusion follows -from these facts, for it is plain that when the Hebrews adopted -the heavy or double maneh from the Phoenicians they did not -adopt for <i>gold</i> and silver at the same time the double shekel, of -which that maneh was the fifty-fold, but on the contrary they -retained their own old unit of the light shekel, and made -one hundred of them equivalent to the Phoenician or heavy -Assyrian mina. Since this light shekel was employed in the -estimation of the gold and silver dedicated by King Solomon -for the adornment of the Temple, this shekel can hardly be -any other than the Holy Shekel of the Sanctuary.</p> - -<p>We are thus led to conclude that the shekel was the same -both for gold and silver, and was simply the time-honoured -immemorial unit of 130-5 grs.</p> - -<p>It is natural on other grounds that this should be the unit -employed by the Israelites for the precious metals, since it was -the unit employed both for silver and gold in Egypt, the land -of their bondage.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_275"></a>[275]</span></p> - -<p>The question next suggests itself, Why was the shekel called -by a distinctive name? It is only when there are two or more -examples or individuals of the same kind that any need arises -for a distinctive appellation: again, as we have already observed, -in such cases the older institution continues to prevail in all -matters religious or legal. It is important to note that in -Exodus xxi. 32, a passage which the best critics consider of -great antiquity, the penalties are expressed in shekels simply -without any distinctive appellation. At that period there was -probably only one shekel (the ox-unit of 130-5 grs.) as yet -in use, and so there was no need to distinguish the shekel -in which fines were paid. This shekel was then described in -the later part of Exodus, where there was a second standard -in use, as the holy shekel. As a matter of fact we have -another weight mentioned in 2 Samuel (xiv. 26), where it is -related of Absalom that “when he polled his head (for it was at -every year’s end that he polled it: because the hair was heavy -on him, therefore he polled it) he weighed the hair of his head -at two hundred shekels after the king’s weight<a id="FNanchor_330" href="#Footnote_330" class="fnanchor">[330]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Now it will be observed that in the passage from Exodus -quoted above, whilst the shekel of the Sanctuary is carefully -mentioned when amounts of gold and silver are enumerated, -no such addition is made in reference to the “seventy talents -and two thousand and four hundred shekels of brass.” If then -the heavy or double shekel and its corresponding mina and -talent, known to us hitherto as the royal Assyrio-Babylonian -heavy standard, had already been introduced among the -Hebrews (and we have just seen that according to the First -Book of Kings it was in use, at least a mina of 50 double -shekels (100 light) was employed for gold), nothing is more -likely than that this standard would bear a title similar to that -which it enjoyed in Babylonia and Syria, and be known as the -king’s weight or <i>stone</i>. As I have observed in the case of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_276"></a>[276]</span> -the royal Assyrian standards that they were employed for -copper, lead, and commodities sufficiently costly to be sold by -weight, so we may with considerable probability conjecture that -this king’s weight was employed regularly among the Semites -for the weighing of the less precious metals, and other merchandise. -Hence it is that there was no need to add any explanation -of the nature of the standard by which the 70 talents of -brass were weighed, and it was only because in the case of -Absalom’s hair we have an article not commonly weighed, that -it was thought necessary by the writer to make clear to us by -which of the two standards usually employed the estimate of -the weight of the year’s growth of hair was made. We may -therefore conclude with probability that “the king’s shekel” -was no other than the double shekel (260 grains). It will -have been noted that in Genesis and Judges, admittedly two -of the oldest books, there is mention made of only one kind of -shekel, and that it is only in Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus, -all of late date, that we find the shekel distinguished as that of -the Sanctuary, and that it is only in Samuel that we find reference -made to the <i>royal shekel</i>. It is also worthy of notice that -neither in Genesis nor Judges is there any mention made of a -maneh or talent, although there was full opportunity for the -appearance of the former if it had been then in use, as we find -such sums as 400 shekels (4 manehs), 1100 shekels (11 manehs) -and 1700 shekels (17 manehs), whilst in the other series of -books named we find both the maneh and the talent. It is not -unreasonable therefore to suppose, that with the advent of the -<i>maneh</i> and <i>kikkar</i> or talent from their powerful kinsfolk and -neighbours came also the practice of employing the double -shekel, the fiftieth part of the mina of gold and mina of silver, -which was employed in that part of the Assyrio-Babylonian -empire, where the use of the heavy Assyrian shekel was in -vogue. Besides gold and silver, spices were likewise weighed -according to the shekel of the Sanctuary. “Take thee also -unto thee principal spices, of pure myrrh five hundred [shekels], -and of sweet cinnamon half as much [even] two hundred and -fifty [shekels], and of sweet calamus two hundred and fifty -[shekels], and of cassia five hundred [shekels], after the shekel<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_277"></a>[277]</span> -of the Sanctuary<a id="FNanchor_331" href="#Footnote_331" class="fnanchor">[331]</a>.” If we had any doubt as to whether it was -not possible that there were two separate shekels of the Sanctuary, -one for gold, and one of different standard for silver, our -misgivings are at once dispelled by finding spices weighed after -the holy shekel. It is certainly incredible that there could -have been a separate standard of the Sanctuary for the weighing -of spices. There seems then no reasonable doubt that there was -only one shekel of the Sanctuary, and that the unit of 130 -grains. In support of this we may adduce Josephus<a id="FNanchor_332" href="#Footnote_332" class="fnanchor">[332]</a>, who -made the Jewish gold shekel a Daric (which as we have already -seen is our unit of 130 grains). This in turn derives support -from the fact that the Septuagint, which regularly renders the -Hebrew <i>sheqel</i> (which like the Greek <i>Talanton</i> means simply -<i>weight</i>) by both <i>siklos</i> and <i>didrachmon</i>, not unfrequently renders -<i>shekel of gold</i> by chrysûs<a id="FNanchor_333" href="#Footnote_333" class="fnanchor">[333]</a>, which means of course nothing -more than gold <i>stater</i>, that is a didrachm of gold, such as those -struck by the Athenians, by Philip of Macedon, Alexander and -the successors of the latter, including the Ptolemies of Egypt, -under whom was made the Septuagint Version. We have thus -found the earliest Hebrew weight unit to be that standard -which we have found universally diffused, and which we have -called the ox-unit.</p> - -<p>Next let us see how from this unit grew their system. In -several passages the shekel of the Sanctuary is said to consist -of 20 <i>gerahs</i><a id="FNanchor_334" href="#Footnote_334" class="fnanchor">[334]</a>, a word rendered simply by <i>obolos</i> in the Septuagint. -As before observed, the Hebrew metric system was essentially -decimal, like that of Egypt; in fact had Tacitus been a metrologist -he might have quoted this as an additional proof that the -Jews were Egyptian outcasts, expelled by their countrymen -because they were afflicted with a plague, perhaps the <i>scabies</i><a id="FNanchor_335" href="#Footnote_335" class="fnanchor">[335]</a>, -which so frequently affects swine. The measures of capacity, -both dry and liquid, are decimal, and so accordingly we find -a decimal division applied to the shekel. The latter is divided -into two <i>bekahs</i> (בֶּקַע, “a division,” “a half”), and each <i>bekah</i> is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_278"></a>[278]</span> -divided into 10 <i>gerahs</i> (גֵּרָה). The latter signifies “a grain” or -“bean.” The Hebrew literature does not state what kind of seed -or grain it was, although it is defined by Rabbinical writers as -equal to 16 barleycorns. But the fact is that, as we see from the -Septuagint rendering, the name in the course of time came to -be considered simply as that of one-twentieth of the shekel, -whether that shekel was the shekel of the Sanctuary, the -Phoenician silver shekel of 220 grains, or the kings shekel of -260 grains used for copper and lead. The <i>gerah</i> of the gold -shekel or shekel of the Sanctuary was probably the most ancient -and came closest to the natural seed from which it derived its -name; this <i>gerah</i> would be about 6½ grains (130 ÷ 20 = 6·5). -On an earlier page (<a href="#Page_194">p. 194</a>) we gave the weights of a number of -grains and seeds of plants, and amongst them that of the lupin, -called by the Greeks <i>thermos</i>. According to the ancient tables -the <i>thermos</i> is equal to two <i>keratia</i>, or <i>siliquae</i> (the seeds of the -carob tree); but since each <i>siliqua</i> = 4 wheat grains, the <i>thermos</i> = -8 wheat grains, or 6 barleycorns, or 6 Troy grains. If the wheat -grain in Palestine was as heavy as that of Egypt or Africa -(·051 gram, instead of ·047 gram.), the 8 wheat grains, would -= 6·4 grains troy. Again, the Roman metrologists estimated -the <i>lupin</i> as the third part of the <i>scripulum</i>, which weighed 24 -grains of wheat<a id="FNanchor_336" href="#Footnote_336" class="fnanchor">[336]</a>; thus the Roman <i>lupin</i> also = 8 wheat grains. -We may therefore have little doubt that the <i>gerah</i> was simply -the <i>lupin</i><a id="FNanchor_337" href="#Footnote_337" class="fnanchor">[337]</a>. But what about the Rabbinical <i>gerah</i> of 16 barleycorns? -In the first place let us recall the confusion which -exists in the Arab metrologists respecting the <i>habba</i>, some -making three habbas, some four equal to the <i>karat</i>. This arose, -as we saw, from confounding the wheat and barley grain. If -the 16 grains assigned to the <i>gerah</i> by the Rabbis are really -wheat grains, all is at once clear. The <i>gerah</i> to which they -refer is that of the royal or double shekel (260 grs.), or in other -words it is a double <i>gerah</i>. We have just found the <i>gerah</i> of -the Sanctuary shekel to be the lupin, and equal to 8 wheat -grains, accordingly its double will contain 16 wheat grains.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_279"></a>[279]</span> -Nothing is more common than a change in the value of a -natural weight unit, when in the course of time its real origin -has been forgotten, and it has been adjusted to meet the requirements -of newer systems. Thus the value of the Greek -<i>thermos</i> and its Roman equivalent the <i>lupin</i> both suffered -in later days, and were regarded as only equal to 6 wheat -grains instead of the original 8 owing to a like confusion -between wheat grains and barleycorns. Finally there is a -further reason why the authors of the Septuagint Version would -translate <i>gerah</i> by <i>obolos</i>. Writing at Alexandria under -Ptolemaic rule, at a time when the Ptolemaic silver stater -of 220 grains contained exactly 20 obols of the Attic or ordinary -Greek standard of 11 grains, they would all the more -readily adopt a rendering, which harmonized so well with the -monetary system of their own day; at the same time the Greek -habit of dividing all staters into 12 <i>obols</i>, no matter on what -standard the stater was struck, naturally would incline them all -the more to regard the <i>gerah</i> not as an actual weight, but simply -as the twentieth of the shekel, be the shekel what it might.</p> - -<p>The Hebrew gold standard accordingly consisted of a shekel -of 130 grains, subdivided into 2 <i>bekahs</i> or <i>halves</i>; each of which -in turn contained 10 <i>gerahs</i> or lupins: 100 such shekels made -a maneh, and according to Josephus<a id="FNanchor_338" href="#Footnote_338" class="fnanchor">[338]</a> 100 manehs made a <i>kikkar</i> -or talent. It would thus appear that, just as in the time of -Solomon the heavy mina had been introduced which was equal -to 100 shekels of the Sanctuary, so the Hebrews carried out -consistently this principle by making 100 minae go to the -talent. It is however most probable that before that time they -had employed a maneh of their own of 50 light shekels, for we -have seen above that the talent of silver mentioned in Exodus -consisted of only 3000 shekels, just as in all the other gold and -silver systems of Asia Minor and Greece: and since we have -proved that the silver shekel of the Sanctuary was the ordinary -light shekel of 130 grains, it is evident that the silver talent is -not made up of 3000 double shekels, but is really nothing more<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_280"></a>[280]</span> -than the sixty-fold of a mina which contained 50 shekels of the -ox-unit standard. If gold was weighed at all by any higher -standard than the shekel, it is almost certain that it must have -been weighed by this mina and talent<a id="FNanchor_339" href="#Footnote_339" class="fnanchor">[339]</a>. However, by the time -of the monarchy it is most probable that the double or heavy -mina had been introduced for silver as well as for gold. In fact -the probabilities are that it was applied for the weighing of -silver before that of gold. Thus when Naaman the leper set -out to go to the Hebrew prophet, “he took with him ten -talents of silver, and six thousand [pieces] of gold, and ten -changes of raiment<a id="FNanchor_340" href="#Footnote_340" class="fnanchor">[340]</a>.” Here the 6000 gold pieces are perhaps -the 6000 light shekels which would make a talent of the -heavy Assyrian standard after the ordinary Phoenician system -of 50 shekels = 1 mina, and 60 minae = 1 talent: and doubtless -Naaman counted these 6000 gold pieces as a talent of gold; but -inasmuch as the Hebrews had a peculiar system of their own, by -which 100 minae, and 10,000 light shekels went to the <i>kikkar</i>, -these 6000 are not described as a talent by the Hebrew writer. -We may thus regard the silver talent as consisting of 3000 light -shekels, at the earliest period, and later on as of 3000 heavy -shekels: finally, when coinage was introduced and money was -struck under the Maccabees on the Phoenician silver standard, -it consisted of 3000 shekels of 220 grs. each. But there is one -period about which we find great difficulty in coming to any -conclusion. After the return from the Babylonian captivity -what standards were employed for gold and silver? As Judaea -formed part of the dominions of the Great King, we would -naturally expect to find in Nehemiah and Ezra traces of the -standard then employed throughout the Persian Empire for -the precious metals. As we have found that the light shekel -formed the unit for gold from first to last, and as it was also the -gold unit of the Babylonians and Assyrians, we may unhesitatingly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_281"></a>[281]</span> -assume that it formed the basis of the Jewish system -in the days of Nehemiah (446 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>). As regards the silver -standard we have fortunately one piece of evidence, which may -give us the right solution. We found that in Exodus each -male Israelite contributed a <i>bekah</i>, or half a shekel (of the -Sanctuary) to defray the cost of the tabernacle: this half-shekel -was a drachm of about 65 grs. Troy. Now after the Return -from Captivity, we find Nehemiah (x. 32) writing: “We made -ordinances for us, to charge ourselves yearly with the third part -of a shekel<a id="FNanchor_341" href="#Footnote_341" class="fnanchor">[341]</a> for the service of the house of our God.” Why the -third of a shekel instead of the half of earlier days? When we -read of the generous and self-sacrificing efforts made by the -Jews to restore the ancient glories of the Temple worship, we -can hardly believe that it was through any desire to reduce the -annual contribution. The solution is not far to seek when we -recollect that the Babylonian silver stater of that age weighed -about 172·8 grs. This formed the standard of the empire, and -doubtless the Jews of the Captivity employed it like the rest -of the subjects of the Great King. The third part of this stater -or shekel weighed about 58 grains; so that practically the third -part of the Babylonian silver shekel was the same as the half of -the ancient light shekel, or shekel of the Sanctuary. From this -we may not unreasonably infer that after the Return the Jews -employed the Babylonian silver shekel as their silver unit, and -this probably continued in use until Alexander by the victories -of Issus and Arbela overthrew the Persian Empire, and erected -his own on its ruins. But although the Babylonian shekel was -the official standard of the empire there can be no doubt that -the old local standards lingered on, or rather held their ground -stubbornly in not a few cases. We saw above that the -Aramaean peoples had especially preferred the double shekel, -and from it they developed the so-called Phoenician or Graeco-Asiatic -silver standard. Gold being to silver as 13·3:1, one -double shekel of 260 grains of gold was equal to fifteen reduced -double shekels of silver of 225 grains each. Now it is important -to note that the Phoenician shekel or stater was always -considered not as a didrachm but as a tetradrachm; a fact which<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_282"></a>[282]</span> -is explained by its development from the old double shekel, -which of course was regarded as containing four drachms, and -which at the same time explains why it is that in the New -Testament the Temple-tax of the half shekel is called a <i>didrachm</i>, -the term applied to the shekel itself in the Septuagint. -When the Jews coined money under the Maccabees, they struck -their silver coins on this Phoenician standard, and their shekel -was always regarded as a tetradrachm. For the ancient half -shekel of the Sanctuary they soon substituted the half of their -shekel coins, that is about 110 instead of 65 grains of silver. -This change probably took place under the Maccabees; silver -had then probably become much more plentiful in Judaea as -shown by the fact that they were able to issue a silver coinage. -When those who collected the Temple-tax asked Christ for his -didrachm, he bade Simon Peter go to the sea and catch a fish, -in the mouth of which he would find a <i>stater</i>, “that give him, -said he, for both me and thee.” As the stater evidently -sufficed to pay a didrachm for each, there can be no doubt that -the shekel or stater was considered by the Jews to be a tetradrachm.</p> - -<p>It is very uncertain whether the Hebrews at any time -employed a <i>maneh</i> of 60 shekels. They most certainly did not -do so for gold and silver, and probably not even for copper -and other cheap commodities. Very unfortunately the famous -passage in Ezekiel (xlv. 12), which deals with weights and -measures, is so confused in the description of the maneh that we -cannot employ it as evidence. The one element of certainty is -that the gold shekel never varied from first to last. It is likewise -probable that, whilst the heavy maneh was introduced for -gold silver and copper alike, the shekel always remained the -same, 100 shekels being counted to the mina of gold and silver -in the royal system, whilst 50 shekels always continued to be -regarded as composing the maneh of the Sanctuary, such as we -found it in the Book of Exodus. To confirm this view of the -shekel we can cite the Bull’s-head weight (<a href="#figure27">fig. 27</a>), which came -from Jerusalem, and weighs 36·800 grammes, which represents -the amount of 5 light shekels (making allowance for a small -fracture), the light shekel being 8·4 grams. (130 grs.). It is plain<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_283"></a>[283]</span> -that this is a multiple of the light and not of the heavy shekel, -for it is not likely that such a multiple as 2½ would be employed. -On the other hand, we found the five-fold multiple of the light -shekel appearing in the Assyrian system, and also the Egyptian.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;" id="figure27"> -<img src="images/figure27.jpg" width="200" height="250" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 27.</span> Bull’s-head Five-shekel Weight.</p> -</div> - -<p>The Hebrew systems, as we have tentatively set them forth, -may be seen in the following tables.</p> - -<p>I. Earliest period. Shekel of 130-5 grs. alone employed for -gold and probably silver.</p> - -<p>II. Mosaic period. <i>Gold and Silver.</i> (The old light shekel -or ox-unit is now called shekel of the Sanctuary to distinguish -it from its double.)</p> - -<table summary="Hebrew system of the Mosaic period"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>light Shekels</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>Maneh</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3000</td> - <td>light Shekels</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>Manehs = 1 Kikkar (<i>talent</i>).</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>III. Regal period. <i>Gold.</i></p> - -<table summary="Hebrew system of the Regal period"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - <td>light</td> - <td>(= 50 double) shekels</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>heavy Maneh</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">5000</td> - <td class="tdr">heavy</td> - <td>(= 10,000 light) <span class="ditto1">”</span></td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - <td>heavy Manehs</td> - <td>= 1 talent.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>The same system was probably employed for <i>silver and -copper</i>, but instead of counting 100 light shekels to the Maneh -as in the case of gold, they reckoned silver and copper by -the double shekel, probably called the king’s shekel in contradistinction -to that of the Sanctuary.</p> - -<p>IV. After the Return. The light shekel still retained for -<i>gold</i>, and the Babylonian, or Phoenician silver standard, employed -for <i>silver</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_284"></a>[284]</span></p> - -<p>V. Maccabean Period. <i>Gold</i> on the old standard, and <i>silver</i> -(now first coined) struck on the Phoenician silver standard of -220 grains.</p> - -<p><i>Copper</i> was estimated most probably on the old double -shekel system; and most likely the royal Assyrian heavy -system of 60 shekels to the maneh and 60 manehs to the -talent was adopted in its entirety for copper and other articles -of no great value in proportion to their bulk<a id="FNanchor_342" href="#Footnote_342" class="fnanchor">[342]</a>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_285"></a>[285]</span></p> - -<h3><span class="smcap">Phoenician Standard.</span></h3> - -<p>The total loss of the literature and records of the Phoenicians, -and the fact that neither in their own country nor -in the greatest of their colonies, Carthage, did they employ -coined money until a comparatively late period, make the task -of restoring their weight system very difficult if not hopeless. -The <i>silver</i> standard called Phoenician or Graeco-Asiatic is the -sole evidence to show that they employed as their unit for gold -the heavy Babylonian shekel of 260 grs. On the other hand -we have just seen that their close neighbours, the Hebrews, -from first to last, and the ancient people of the Nile with whom -the Phoenicians were in the closest trade relations (having -large trading communities settled in the Delta, and from whom<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_286"></a>[286]</span> -they had borrowed the hieroglyphic syllabic symbols, which -with them became the Alphabet), had employed the light -shekel, the only <i>gold</i> unit that likewise from first to last prevailed -throughout the vast regions of Central Asia Minor, and -as we have seen, was the unit of Greece even in the early days -when the great cities of Mycenae and Tiryns were in direct -contact with, and deriving their arts and civilization from Asia -or from Egypt.</p> - -<p>The derivation of the Phoenician <i>silver</i> standard of about -225 grs. (14·58 gram.) according to the hitherto received doctrine -is as follows. As the Babylonians formed their silver standard -by making into <i>ten</i> pieces the amount of silver equivalent to -the “light gold shekel,” so the Phoenicians and Syrians are -supposed to have divided the amount of silver equivalent to -“the heavy shekel” into <i>fifteen</i> pieces, gold being to silver in -each case as 13·3:1. But we ask why did the Phoenicians -adopt so awkward a scale as the quindecimal when it was -possible for them to employ the decimal or duodecimal? In -the next place by the supposed system 7½ silver shekels were -equal to one light shekel, that is the gold unit which was -universally employed amongst all the peoples with whom they -traded: and what number could be more awkward for purposes -of exchange than 7½? If therefore we can show that it is -probable that at one period silver was exceedingly abundant in -Phoenicia compared with gold, and that consequently gold was -worth considerably more than 13 times its weight in silver, the -sole support for the heavy shekel being the Phoenician unit is -removed, and the theory of the <i>fifteen stater</i> system falls to the -ground. It is well known that the Phoenicians had much of -the trade of Cilicia and the other coast regions of Asia Minor -in their hands. It was Cilicia that produced the chief supplies -of silver for Western Asia<a id="FNanchor_343" href="#Footnote_343" class="fnanchor">[343]</a>. From this land therefore the -Phoenicians obtained vast quantities of silver, and it was from -them almost certainly the Egyptians, who had no native silver, -obtained a supply of that metal. But this was not all. About -1000 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> the Phoenicians, in their quest after new and unexhausted -regions, made their way westward and reached<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_287"></a>[287]</span> -Spain. I have already related the ancient stories which -embody the account of the marvellous amount of silver which -the first bold explorers brought back. We need not wonder -then if in the days of king Solomon, “silver was nothing accounted -of” in Syria and Palestine. We also saw that the -relative value of gold and silver was just as liable to fluctuate -in ancient, as in modern times, according to the supply of either -metal, and when we come to deal with the Greek system we -shall find many instances of this. If we then suppose that -gold was to silver as 17:1 in Phoenicia, the gold shekel of -130 grs. would be worth ten silver pieces of 220 grs. each. -(130 × 17 = 2210; 2210 ÷ 10 = 221). This is in reality far closer to -the actual weight of the coins than the result obtained by the -old hypothesis: 260 × 13·3 = 3466 ÷ 15 = 231 grs. Troy, which -is about 10 grs. higher than the actual coin weights.</p> - -<p>The approximation gained by our conjectural relation of -17:1, is far closer than that obtained by that of 13·3:1. The -conclusion is probable that silver was far cheaper in Phoenicia -and the contiguous coasts than elsewhere in Asia Minor, -and that it was natural that the weight of the silver unit -was increased in order to preserve the relation in value -between one gold unit, and ten silver units. Lastly we may -point out that at no place on the coast of Phoenicia or Asia -Minor, the region especially in contact with the Phoenicians, -do we find <i>gold</i> pieces struck on the heavy shekel. <i>Electrum</i> -certainly was coined on this foot; but of this we shall be able to -give a satisfactory explanation. We have (with the exception -of some Lydian pieces) to go as far north as Thasos or Thrace -before we find a gold coin of such a nature, which is of course -nothing more than a double stater.</p> - -<p>The Phoenician gold mina was probably like the Hebrew, -which was most likely borrowed from it, the fifty-fold of the -heavy shekel, 100 gold shekels and 100 silver shekels constituting -a maneh, as amongst the Hebrews in the time of -Solomon. But we can conjecture with some probability that -at an earlier stage they weighed their gold and silver according -to the old common ox-unit, which we found in use among the -Hebrews under the name of the Holy Shekel or shekel of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_288"></a>[288]</span> -Sanctuary. No doubt the mina for gold always contained 100 -light or 50 heavy shekels, and when their own peculiar shekel -of 220 grs. came into vogue for silver, 50 such shekels made a -mina. Finally, there can be little doubt that 60 minas invariably -went to the talent.</p> - -<p>In the case of commercial weights, it is most probable that -60 heavy shekels made a mina: this is rendered almost perfectly -certain by the Lion weights with Phoenician as well as cuneiform -inscriptions found at Nineveh, 60 heavy minas forming a -heavy talent.</p> - -<h3><span class="smcap">The Phoenician Colonies.</span></h3> - -<p>It is worth while before going further to enquire whether -we can gain any light from the systems of weight employed by -the famous daughter-cities of Phoenicia, such as Gades and -Carthage. A weight bearing in Punic characters the name of -the Agoranomos and the numeral 100 has been found at Jol -(Julia Caesarea) in North Africa, but unfortunately it has -suffered so much by corrosion from water and the loss of its -handle that it is impossible to make any tolerable approximation -to its original weight. Hultsch<a id="FNanchor_344" href="#Footnote_344" class="fnanchor">[344]</a> conjectures with some -probability that, making allowance for its loss, it represents -100 <i>drachms</i>, and deduces from this that the Carthaginians -treated the drachm as their <i>shekel</i>, but for this latter hypothesis -there seems no sufficient evidence. If this supposition -were true, the weight would represent a half-mina of the -Phoenician <i>silver</i> standard. But there is one thing which this -weight does prove, and that is that, whether it be a mina or -half-mina, it is the drachm or shekel, which was evidently -regarded as the unit of the system, not the mina. Thus once -more we get a confirmation of our general thesis that the mina -and talent are the multiples, and that it is the shekel or stater -which is the basis. Nor does the coinage of Carthage furnish -us with all the information that could be desired, for it was -only after 410 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> that that great “mart of merchants” began -to strike coins, and even then it was only in her Sicilian possessions<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_289"></a>[289]</span> -that she did so, no doubt induced to adopt the practice -by constant contact with her Greek enemies: for not only the -type (of Persephone) was borrowed from Syracusan coins, but -the very dies were engraved by the hands of Greek artists. The -gold coins are struck on a standard of about 120 grs. Troy, whilst -the silver issue consists of tetradrachms of the so-called Attic -(or more simply light shekel or ox-unit) standard of 130-135 -grs. Since during the same period (405-347 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) Syracuse<a id="FNanchor_345" href="#Footnote_345" class="fnanchor">[345]</a> was -issuing gold pieces on the Attic standard, it is most probable -that it is only through the want of heavier specimens that we -are compelled to set the Siculo-Punic coins issued at Panormus -(Palermo) and other places in Italy so low as 120 grs. It -was not until about the time of Timoleon (340 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) that money -was coined at Carthage itself. This coinage consists wholly -of gold, electrum and bronze, down to the time of the acquisition -of the rich silver mines of Spain, and the foundation of -New Carthage in that country by Hasdrubal, the son-in-law of -Hamilkar Barca and brother-in-law of Hannibal, in the interval -between the First and Second Punic wars (241-218 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), -when large silver coins both Carthaginian and Hispano-Carthaginian -seem to have been first struck<a id="FNanchor_346" href="#Footnote_346" class="fnanchor">[346]</a>.</p> - -<p>The gold and electrum coins of the first period are of -the following weights: <i>gold</i> 145 and 73 grs.; <i>electrum</i> 118, -58 and 27 grains. The gold unit is thus some 10 grains -higher than the normal value of the ox-unit. If these coins -belonged to an earlier period we might with some confidence -affirm that the variation was due to the plentiful supply of -gold derived by the Carthaginians from the still unexhausted -gold deposits of Western Africa. This is perhaps the true -explanation even at the late period when the coins were issued, -but there may have been a desire to adjust the three metals, -gold, electrum and silver, so that they might be conveniently -exchanged. It will be observed that the electrum coins are -struck on a unit of 118 grs., and it is not at all improbable that -silver was reckoned by the same unit, even though not yet -coined; for when the silver coins appear they are struck on a -standard of 118 or 236 grs. It will be at once noticed that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_290"></a>[290]</span> -this standard is considerably higher than the Phoenician silver -standard found along the coasts of Asia Minor. It may thus -have been found convenient to raise by a few grains the weight -of the gold unit so as to harmonize the relations between the -three metals. Further speculation is vain, as we do not know -the proportion of gold contained in the electrum coins<a id="FNanchor_347" href="#Footnote_347" class="fnanchor">[347]</a>. From -what we shall shortly learn about the electrum of Cyzicus, -it is not impossible that the gold piece of 73 grs. was worth -an electrum stater of 118 grs.</p> - -<p>Coming to the Phoenicians of Spain we find that Gades, -which did not begin her coinage until about 250 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, employed -a standard for her silver of 78 grains, and that the island of -Ebusus (<i>Iviza</i>) struck didrachms of 154 grs., a half-drachm of -39 grs. and a quarter-drachm. This coincides closely with the -78 grain drachm of Gades. It is palpable that there is no -connection between this standard and the Phoenician standard -of 220 grs. As the same system is found in the cities of -Emporiae and Rhoda (<i>Ampurias</i> and <i>Rosas</i>) in the north-east -of Spain, and in the earliest drachms of Massilia (<i>Marseilles</i>)<a id="FNanchor_348" href="#Footnote_348" class="fnanchor">[348]</a>, -it is far more reasonable to suppose that the relations between -gold and silver throughout Spain were such that, in order to -make a certain fixed number of silver pieces equivalent to the -gold ox-unit, it was found necessary to make the silver didrachm -of about 156 grs. and the drachm of 78 grs.</p> - -<p>It would thus seem that the principle which we shall seek -to establish for the Greek silver standards held true of the -Phoenician likewise,—that whilst the gold unit, the basis of all -weight, remains unchanged or was but very slightly modified -even at a late period (when the idea of the original ox-unit -must have become dimmed by time), in order to effect a more -complete harmonizing of a threefold system of gold, electrum -and silver, the silver units shew every kind of variety, which -can only be accounted for by supposing that owing to the -different relations between gold and silver in various regions<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_291"></a>[291]</span> -and at various periods in the same regions, it was found -necessary from time to time to increase or diminish the -weight of the silver unit. Thus if gold was to silver as -12:1 in the 3rd century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, we find a ready explanation for -the standard of Gades and Emporiae. The gold unit of -130 grs. would be worth ten silver units of 156 grs. each -(130 × 12 = 1560 ÷ 10 = 156). So too the 118 gr. standard of -Carthage may be explained by supposing that gold was to -silver as 11:1; for then 1 gold unit of 130 grs. = 12 silver -of 118 grs. each (130 × 11 = 1430 ÷ 12 = 119 grs.), duodecimal -division perhaps being preferred to the decimal owing to the -relations between electrum and silver, the former perhaps being -as in Lydia<a id="FNanchor_349" href="#Footnote_349" class="fnanchor">[349]</a> counted at 10 times the value of the latter. If -gold was to silver as 12:1, and electrum to silver as 8:1, -electrum being thus nearly two-thirds gold, one gold piece -of 75 grs. = 1 piece of electrum of 118 grains, and 8 pieces -of silver of 116 grs. each (75 × 12 = 900; 116 × 8 = 928), and -1 piece of electrum of 118 was worth 8 pieces of silver of -116 grs. each. All this is, be it remembered, purely conjectural, -as we know nothing of the actual relations existing between -any pair of the metals.</p> - -<p>However, when we come to deal with the electrum of Cyzicus -we shall be able to produce some data, which will at least show -that our suggested explanation of the relations existing between -gold, electrum and silver at Carthage is not purely chimerical.</p> - -<p>Lastly comes the question of the commercial weight-system. -We have already spoken of the badly preserved weight from -Jol, but we could not say whether it was used for the precious -metals, or more ordinary merchandize. However, the great -Phoenician inscription of Marseilles, already referred to, makes -it plain that even in the weighing of meat they reckoned by -the shekel and not by the mina; for we find in it mention -of 300 [shekels] and 150 [shekels] of flesh from the victims. -This completely accords with the 20 shekels of food mentioned -by Ezekiel (iv. 10), and clearly indicates that even in what -we may well believe to be the heavy commercial shekel, the -ancient decimal system had not been superseded by the sexagesimal;<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_292"></a>[292]</span> -and, further, that the mina had not succeeded in -supplanting the more ancient fashion of counting by shekels; -for had such been the case, the weight of the meat would have -been expressed in 6 manehs, or 3 manehs. This piece of -evidence confirms the results which we arrived at in the case -of the Hebrews—that it was only at a later period that reckoning -by manehs came into use. The Phoenician colonies of the -West, including Carthage herself, had probably been planted -before the influences of the Chaldaean system had obtained -a solid footing in Palestine. We may however not unreasonably -believe that the Carthaginians employed some such form -of talent as we find in the Book of Exodus, 3000 shekels -(50 × 60 = 3000) going to the talent, though as yet no record has -revealed to us the actual existence of either <i>talent</i> or <i>mina</i>.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_293"></a>[293]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XI">CHAPTER XI.<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Lydian and Persian Systems.</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>“The Lydians,” says Herodotus, “were the first of all nations -we know who struck gold and silver coin<a id="FNanchor_350" href="#Footnote_350" class="fnanchor">[350]</a>,” a tradition -also attested by Xenophanes of Colophon, according to Julius -Pollux<a id="FNanchor_351" href="#Footnote_351" class="fnanchor">[351]</a>. These statements of the ancient writers are confirmed -by an examination of the earliest essays made in Asia -in the art of coining; from which the best numismatists have -been led to ascribe it to the seventh century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> and probably -to the reign of Gyges, who from being a shepherd, by means -of the “virtuous ring” became the founder of the great dynasty -of the Mermnadae, and of the new Lydian empire as distinguished -from the Lydia of a more remote antiquity. The -first issues of the Lydian mint were rudely executed coins -of electrum, being staters and smaller coins of the standards -usually known as the Babylonian and Phoenician, of which the -earliest staters weigh about 167 and 220 grs. respectively<a id="FNanchor_352" href="#Footnote_352" class="fnanchor">[352]</a>. It -is most likely that the Babylonian standard was intended for -commerce with the interior of Asia Minor, and the Phoenician -for transactions with the cities of the western seaboard, to -coincide with the silver standards in use in these respective -regions. The proportion of gold and silver in electrum is exceedingly<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_294"></a>[294]</span> -variable: according to Pliny<a id="FNanchor_353" href="#Footnote_353" class="fnanchor">[353]</a> any gold alloyed with -one-fifth of silver (and by implication any containing any -higher proportion of silver) was called electrum. We shall -soon find that the electrum staters of Cyzicus contained about -an equal amount of either metal; but the analysis of Lydian -electrum gives a proportion of 73 per cent. of gold to 27 per -cent. of silver, or practically 3 to 1. As gold in the central -parts of Asia Minor stood to silver as 13·3:1 in the reign -of Darius and probably long before, we may not unreasonably -assume that such also was the relation between them in the -reign of Gyges, at least in the interior. In this case electrum -would stand to silver as 10:1, a proportion exceedingly convenient -for exchange, as a single standard served for both metals, -one electrum ingot of 168 grs. being equal to 10 silver ingots of -like weight. We have already seen that one gold unit of 130 grs. -was equivalent to 10 silver units of 168 grs., therefore the gold -ox-unit was exactly represented in value by the electrum ingot of -168 grs., for, according to our statement of the composition of the -Lydian electrum, 168 grs. of that alloy would contain 126 grs. -of pure gold. If we were certain that on the coast of Asia -Minor the relation between gold and silver was 13·3:1, we -should be compelled to follow Brandis and the rest in making -the double gold shekel of 260 grs. equal to 15 silver shekels -of 220 grs. each; again, if we accept as universal the relation -of gold to electrum as 4:3, and accordingly make one piece -of electrum of 220 grs. equal to 10 silver pieces of the same -standard, we shall find it impossible to obtain any convenient -relation between the gold stater of 130 grs. and the electrum -stater of 220 grs. But from this difficulty it is not hard to -find an escape: 224 grs. of electrum = 168 grs. of gold; that is -exactly 1⅓ gold shekels (129 ÷ 3 = 43 × 4 = 172). The division into -thirds and sixths is of course a well-known feature in the -coinage of the Asiatic coast-towns. Thus there would be no -practical difficulty in the ordinary monetary transactions, for -three Phoenician drachms of electrum (= 168 grs.) would = 1 -gold shekel; and 4 gold Thirds (<i>Tritae</i>), or 8 gold Sixths -(<i>Hectae</i>), would equal one electrum stater of 224-220 grs.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_295"></a>[295]</span></p> - -<p>If on the other hand silver held a lower value in relation -to gold on the coasts of the Aegean, and the electrum employed -in that quarter was alloyed to a greater extent with -silver, two disturbing elements are introduced. The probabilities -are in favour of silver being cheaper in Cilicia and the -contiguous region, and most certainly at Cyzicus the electrum -was half silver, whilst the Phocaic electrum had a bad name -in antiquity, since according to Hesychius Phocaic gold was -synonymous with bad gold. Is it then possible that 220 grains -of electrum were equivalent to 130 grs. of pure gold? This -gives about 60 per cent. of gold. If gold was to silver as -13·3:1, the gold unit of 130 grs. is equal to 8 silver pieces -of 220 grs. (130 × 13·3 = 1765 ÷ 8 = 220·6). In our present -state of knowledge it is impossible to decide in favour of -either view, but it is at least evident that some such relation -and adjustment must have existed between the three -metals. In fact the problem which the Lydians tried to solve -was not merely that of <i>Bimetallism</i>, but of <i>Trimetallism</i>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 350px;" id="figure28"> -<img src="images/figure28.jpg" width="350" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 28.</span> Lydian electrum coin.</p> -</div> - -<p>These early electrum coins are simply bullet-shaped lumps -of metal, like the so-called <i>bean</i> money formerly employed by -the Japanese, having what is termed the obverse plain or -rather striated, as a series of lines in relief run across the -coin, whilst the reverse has three incuse depressions, that in -the centre oblong, the others square. The coin here figured -(from the British Museum specimen) is on the Babylonian silver -standard (166·8 grs.), but it is on the staters of Phoenician -standard that we first find any attempt at types or symbols. -The idea of engraving some symbol on the punches used for -stamping the incuse depressions was in truth the grand step<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_296"></a>[296]</span> -towards the creation of a real coin. Thus a stater of 219 grs. -which bears in the central incuse a running fox, in the upper -square a stag’s head, and the lower an X-like device, may be -regarded as the first complete coin as yet known. It would -seem from this, therefore, that it was on the coast-region, where -the Lydians came into contact with the artistic genius of the -Greeks, that the real start in the art of striking money took -place. Electrum was employed because it was found native -in great quantities in the whole district which lay around -Sardis, in the valleys of Tmolus, and the sands of Pactolus. -The ancients found considerable difficulty in freeing the gold -from the associated silver (<a href="#Page_97">p. 97</a>).</p> - -<p>Once known, Miletus and other important Ionian cities -were not long in improving on the Lydian invention. The -advantages of a metallic currency were so obvious that an -intelligent and progressive race hastened to avail themselves -of it. “Only those,” says Captain Gill (speaking of the borders -of Thibet and China), “who have gone through the weary process -of cutting up and weighing out lumps of silver, disputing -over the scale, and asserting the quality of the metal, can appreciate -our feelings of satisfaction at being once more able -to make payments in coin<a id="FNanchor_354" href="#Footnote_354" class="fnanchor">[354]</a>.” No sooner had the Ionians commenced -coining than they appear to have adorned the face of -the ingot with a symbol, probably both as a guarantee of weight -and purity, and perhaps as a preventive of fraudulent abrasion. -During this period it is not improbable that the arts of Ionia -had made their influence felt in Lydia, and hence “it is impossible -to distinguish with absolute certainty the Lydian -issues from those of the Greek towns, but there is one type -which seems to be especially characteristic of Lydia as it -occurs in a modified form on the coinage attributed to the -Sardian mint and to the reign of Croesus; this is the Lion -and the Bull. These coins have on the obverse the forefronts -of a lion and a bull turned away from one another and -joined by their necks<a id="FNanchor_355" href="#Footnote_355" class="fnanchor">[355]</a>,” whilst the reverse shows three incuse -depressions. This is Phoenician in weight (215·4 grs.). There<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_297"></a>[297]</span> -are other coins, often attributed to Miletus, which may be assigned -to Lydia; some with a recumbent lion on the obverse, -and a reverse exhibiting the fox, stag’s head, and X of the -coin already described. To these may be added a series of -coins bearing a lion’s head with open mouth, and with what -is commonly regarded as a star above it, but which is more -probably part of the lion’s hair, and on the reverse incuse -sinkings, in some cases containing an ornamental star<a id="FNanchor_356" href="#Footnote_356" class="fnanchor">[356]</a>. These -coins have now with great probability been assigned by the -eminent numismatist, Mr J. P. Six, to the Lydian king, -Alyattes, the father of Croesus.</p> - -<p>When Croesus ascended the throne in 568 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, one of his -earliest acts seems to have been an attempt to propitiate the -Greeks both of Asia and Hellas proper by sending offerings -of equal value to the two most famous shrines of Apollo, Delphi -and Branchidae. In the course of some fourteen years he -reduced under the sway of Lydia all the regions that lay between -the river Halys and the sea. “It seems probable (says -Mr Head) that the introduction of a double currency of pure -gold and silver, in place of the primitive electrum, may have -been due to the commercial genius of Croesus.” If this be so, -the monarch seems to have acted with thrift in his offerings, -for according to Herodotus his dedications at Delphi were -all of <i>white gold</i>, <i>i.e.</i> electrum. Perhaps then he got no more -than he deserved when, induced by the declaration of the -Delphic prophetess that he would destroy a mighty kingdom, -he made war upon Cyrus with disastrous issue. There however -can be no doubt that Croesus made some important monetary -change, for in after years there still remained a clear tradition -of Croesus’ stater (Κροίσειος στατήρ), just as the famous gold -stater of Philip of Macedon was known as the <i>Philippean</i> or -<i>Philippus</i><a id="FNanchor_357" href="#Footnote_357" class="fnanchor">[357]</a>. In his monetary reform Croesus seems to have had -regard to the weights of the two old electrum staters, each of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_298"></a>[298]</span> -which was now represented by an equal value, though not of -course by an equal weight, of pure gold.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure29"> -<img src="images/figure29.jpg" width="150" height="200" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 29.</span> Coin of Croesus.</p> -</div> - -<p>Thus the old Phoenician electrum stater of 220 grs. was -replaced by a pure gold coin of 168 grs., equivalent like its -predecessor in electrum to 10 silver staters of 220 grs. each, and -the old Babylonian electrum stater of 168 grs. was replaced by -a new pure gold stater of 126 grs., equal in value like it to 10 -silver staters of 168 grs. each, “as now for the first time coined.” -These gold coins bear as obverse the foreparts of a lion and -a bull facing each other, and on the reverse an oblong incuse -divided into two parts (<a href="#figure29">Fig. 29</a>). Of the Babylonian standard -we find:</p> - -<table summary="Divisions of the Babylonian standard (gold)"> - <tr> - <td>Stater</td> - <td class="tdr">168</td> - <td>grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Trite</td> - <td class="tdr">56</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Hecte</td> - <td class="tdr">28</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Hemihecton</td> - <td class="tdr">14</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>And of the light shekel:</p> - -<table summary="Divisions of the light shekel (gold)"> - <tr> - <td>Stater</td> - <td class="tdr">126</td> - <td>grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Trite</td> - <td class="tdr">42</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Hecte</td> - <td class="tdr">21</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Hemihecton</td> - <td class="tdr">11</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Of Babylonian standard <i>silver</i>:</p> - -<table summary="Divisions of the Babylonian standard (silver)"> - <tr> - <td>Stater</td> - <td class="tdr">168</td> - <td>grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>½ stater</td> - <td class="tdr">84</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>⅓ stater</td> - <td class="tdr">56</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>⅟₁₂ stater</td> - <td class="tdr">14</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_299"></a>[299]</span></p> - -<p>This double standard for gold is at first sight somewhat -strange until we observe that the two systems are in complete -harmony. For the gold piece of 168 grs. is nothing more than -1⅓ of the light shekel (168 ÷ ⁴⁄₃ = 126 grs.). The third of the -light shekel (42 grs.) is the fourth of the Babylonian of 168 grs. -There can be no doubt that the coins of 168 grs. were simply -an experiment suggested by the coincidence that the number -of grains (168) in the Babylonian silver shekel was exactly one-quarter -more than those in the <i>light</i> gold shekel, in the hope -doubtless of obtaining a single standard for gold electrum and -silver. The division of the silver stater into thirds would -facilitate the process of exchange, as 13 silver staters and one-third -would be equivalent to the gold piece of the same Babylonian -standard, whilst 10 silver staters would be equivalent to -one of the old electrum pieces of 168 grs. It is at all events -certain that the standard of 168 grs. was not a regular gold -unit, for it simply makes its appearance for a brief space, there -being no trace of it at any earlier period, nor does it afterwards -appear save in its own legitimate province of silver. A perfectly -analogous case is that of the gold pieces struck by the Ptolemaic -kings, who, starting with the gold stater of Philip and -Alexander and the Phoenician standard for silver (after the -founder of the dynasty had for a short time used the so-called -Rhodian standard), presently struck gold pieces on the same -standard as their silver. But the experiment of Croesus, if -such it was, did not succeed. For the eastern mind was still -too much impressed with the necessity of cleaving fast to the -original weight unit obtained from the ancient unit of barter. -For whether the attempt had failed before the reign of Croesus -was brought to a sudden end by the conquests of the great -Cyrus, or whether he continued up to the very hour of the -Persian conquest to coin, at least for one part of his dominions, -the gold pieces of the Babylonian silver standard, it matters -little. As we have no evidence on the point, we cannot say -whether there were two gold minae and two gold talents in -use, one being of course the ordinary gold talent (called -Euboic) of 3000 light shekels of 130 grs., the other containing -3000 shekels of 168 grs. each. The probability I think is that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_300"></a>[300]</span> -only the former existed. As 50 of the latter shekels made -1⅓ minae, there was no practical difficulty in making any calculations; -on the other hand, if there had been two separate minae, -and two separate talents, it would have led to great complications. -The fact that we hear nothing about any such second -gold system existing in Asia, and that when Darius fixed the -tribute from each region he did not make it the basis of his -payment, which he would probably have done as he would thus -have made a considerable gain, by causing the payments in -gold as well as those in silver to be made on the Babylonian -standard, seems to put beyond all doubt that the 168 grain gold -piece was not a real unit, but was simply regarded as 1⅓ shekels, -and was nothing more than a temporary effort to simplify the -trimetallic monetary system of Lydia.</p> - -<p>What system the Lydians employed for commercial purposes -we have no means of knowing, but we may conjecture plausibly -that the light royal mina of 60 shekels was the standard employed.</p> - -<h3><span class="smcap">The Persian Standard.</span></h3> - -<p>We may adopt the generally received belief that the Persians, -like the Medes and Babylonians, did not coin money -(although they were probably acquainted with the Lydian -stater) until after the conquest of Asia Minor and Egypt by -Cyrus and Cambyses, and the reorganization of the empire by -Darius the son of Hystaspes (522-485 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>). For although the -learned <i>savants</i> MM. Oppert and Révillout<a id="FNanchor_358" href="#Footnote_358" class="fnanchor">[358]</a> hold that Daric -(Δαρεικός) is unconnected with the name Darius (Δαρεῖος), -an opinion supported by Dr Hoffmann<a id="FNanchor_359" href="#Footnote_359" class="fnanchor">[359]</a>, and rather regard it as -derived from the Assyrian <i>darag mana</i>, “degree (i.e. ⅟₆₀) of a -mina,” and although Mr G. Bertin has read the word <i>dariku</i> on -a Babylonian contract, dated in the twelfth year of Nabonidas, -five years before the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus<a id="FNanchor_360" href="#Footnote_360" class="fnanchor">[360]</a>, it does -not at all follow that either <i>darag</i> or <i>dariku</i> refers to a<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_301"></a>[301]</span> -<i>coin</i>. That the unit was employed for gold ages before the -Persians ever descended from the mountains there can be little -doubt. But whether we adopt or reject the Greek tradition -that the Daric (Δαρεικός) was named from Darius, as the -Philippean and Croesean staters were called after the sovereigns -who first struck them, it is perfectly certain that Darius organized -the whole numbering system of the great empire to -which he had succeeded, and that he coined gold pieces of the -first quality: for Herodotus tells us that Darius, having refined -gold to the greatest extent possible, had coin struck<a id="FNanchor_361" href="#Footnote_361" class="fnanchor">[361]</a>. This -would be very analogous to the course pursued by Croesus and -Philip; gold in some form was current in the dominions of both -these princes before their reigns, but it was owing to certain -reforms introduced and to the issue of a gold coin of a certain -pattern, that the names of both became associated with particular -kinds of gold coins. By the time of Xerxes the son of -Darius vast quantities of these Darics were circulating through -Asia Minor, for Herodotus relates that the Lydian Pythius had -in his own possession as many as 3,993,000 of them, a sum -afterwards increased by Xerxes to 4,000,000. They became -the gold currency of all the Greek towns not only of Asia Minor, -but also of the islands, and made their way in considerable -quantities into the great cities of the mainland of Hellas, and -wrought as much harm in disuniting the various states of -Greece as did the gold staters of Philip at a period a little -later. Darics formed a regular part of the wealth of a well-to-do -Athenian at the time of the Peloponnesian war. Thus Lysias<a id="FNanchor_362" href="#Footnote_362" class="fnanchor">[362]</a> -relates that when his house was entered and plundered by the -minions of the Thirty, his money chest contained 100 Darics, -400 Cyzicenes, and 3 talents of silver. It is only necessary to -enumerate some of the passages in the Greek authors, where -mention is made of their coins, to show how wide an influence -they exercised in the eastern Mediterranean. Besides -Herodotus and Lysias already mentioned, Thucydides, Aristophanes,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_302"></a>[302]</span> -Xenophon, Demosthenes, Arrian, Diodorus and many -others all make mention of these famous coins<a id="FNanchor_363" href="#Footnote_363" class="fnanchor">[363]</a>. No classification -of them according to the reigns of the monarchs by -whom they were issued is possible, for this is precluded by the -absence of all inscriptions, and the great uniformity of style. -They bear on the obverse the king of Persia bearded crowned -and clad in a long robe; he kneels towards the right on one -knee; on his back is a quiver, in his right hand is a long spear, -and in his outstretched left a bow (from which came the familiar -Greek name of Archers for these pieces). The reverse is simply -marked by an oblong incuse.</p> - -<p>Their weight may be set at 130 grs., which of course is the -light shekel or ox-unit. We have no difficulty in fixing the -gold mina or talent. In fact we have already seen on p. 260 that -the Persian talent of gold was the same as the Euboic-Attic -talent. Hence</p> - -<table summary="The Persian gold standard"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>Daric</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>130 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>Darics</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 mina = 6,500 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3000</td> - <td>Darics</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>60 minas = 1 talent = 390,000 grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>For silver currency the Persians employed half of the Babylonian -silver stater of 168 grs., its usual weight being about -84 grs. This coin was in every way similar to the Daric and -in fact is sometimes called by the same name by writers of -a later age<a id="FNanchor_364" href="#Footnote_364" class="fnanchor">[364]</a>, but the more usual appellation in the classical -writers was the <i>Median</i> siglos (Μηδικός σίγλος) or simply <i>siglos</i>. -Twenty of these sigli were equivalent to one gold Daric, for -Xenophon appears to count 3000 Darics as equal to 10 talents -of silver, or in other words to 60,000 sigli (6000 × 10 = 60,000). -The siglos may therefore be regarded as the Persian drachm -or half-stater. As 130 grains of gold are thus made equal to -1680 grs. of silver (84 × 20), gold held to silver the old ratio -of 13:1.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_303"></a>[303]</span></p> - -<p>The Persian silver standard was formed thus:</p> - -<table summary="The Persian silver standard"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>siglos</td> - <td>=</td> - <td colspan="2">84 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - <td>sigli</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>staters</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>mina</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>8400 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">6000</td> - <td>sigli</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">3000</td> - <td>staters</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>minae</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 talent = 504,000 grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>As regards commercial weight we may fairly assume that -the old light and heavy <i>royal</i> systems continued in use in the -respective regions where they had been employed in early days.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_304"></a>[304]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="CHAPTER_XII">CHAPTER XII.<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Greek System.</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>We are now come to the most important portion of our -task, the development of the Greek and Italic systems. In -the Homeric Poems we found the Talanton (or value of a cow -in gold) the sole unit of weight, and that only employed for -gold. This Talanton has been shown to be the same in weight -as the light gold shekel of Asia Minor, which, under the form -of coin, we have just been discussing as the Croesean stater -and Persian Daric. It was therefore nothing else than the -Euboic or Attic stater of historical times, which at all periods -and at all places that fall within our knowledge formed the sole -unit for the weighing of gold.</p> - -<p>Besides the Talanton based on the ox, there was in all -probability another higher unit in occasional use in Greece -Proper. This was the threefold of the ox-unit. We have -already had occasion to notice the small gold talent, called -by some writers the Macedonian, which was equal to three -Attic staters. The same weight under the name of the -Sicilian talent was employed likewise for gold only in the -Greek colonies of Sicily and Southern Italy. The conservatism -of colonists is too well known to need illustration, and -we may with high probability infer that the Greek settlers in -Magna Graecia brought the small talent from their original -homes. What was the origin of this weight? We have seen -that everywhere all over our area the slave is the occasional -higher unit. Thus the Irish slave (<i>cumhal</i>) was a unit of -account equal to three cows. The slave in the Welsh Laws is -equal to 4 cows, whilst in Homer we found a slave woman<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_305"></a>[305]</span> -valued at 4 cows also. From the way in which this notice of -her price occurs, it is probable that Achilles did not give -a woman of the most ordinary kind as a prize, for had she -been the ordinary slave-woman of account, there would have -been no need to mention the price, as any one would have -known how many cows exactly she was worth. It is then not -improbable that three cows were commonly reckoned as the -value of a slave, and accordingly the small gold talent, which -is the multiple of the ox-unit, is simply the metallic representative -of the slave, just as the Homeric Talanton itself is -that of the cow.</p> - -<p>What the exact weight of this unit was on Greek soil we -are now enabled to ascertain by the aid of the treatise on the -Constitution of the Athenians known to the ancients as the -work of Aristotle, and the brilliant discovery and identification -of which by the officials of the British Museum reflects much -credit on British scholarship.</p> - -<p>We had previously known from Plutarch (who ascribed the -first coinage of Athens to Theseus<a id="FNanchor_365" href="#Footnote_365" class="fnanchor">[365]</a>) that amongst his other -reforms Solon caused drachms to be coined of lighter weight -than those previously in currency, so that 100 of the new ones -would be equal in value to 73 old ones. Some scholars have -inferred that this was an expedient for relieving debtors, who -would be allowed to pay in the new coin debts contracted in -the older currency. The newly discovered Constitution dispels -this assumption, and also affords us some most valuable additional -matter<a id="FNanchor_366" href="#Footnote_366" class="fnanchor">[366]</a>: “In his Laws then he appears to have made -these enactments in favour of the people, but before his -legislation he appears to have wrought the cancelling of -debts, and afterwards the augmentation of the measures and -weights, and the augmentation of the currency. For in his<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_306"></a>[306]</span> -day the measures likewise were made larger than those of -Pheidon, and the mina, which previously had almost seventy -drachms, was filled up by a hundred drachms<a id="FNanchor_367" href="#Footnote_367" class="fnanchor">[367]</a>. But the ancient -type was the didrachm<a id="FNanchor_368" href="#Footnote_368" class="fnanchor">[368]</a>, and he also made as a standard<a id="FNanchor_369" href="#Footnote_369" class="fnanchor">[369]</a> for -his coinage 63 minas weighing the talent, and the minae were -apportioned out by the stater, and the other weights.”</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure30"> -<img src="images/figure30.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 30.</span> Coin of Eretria.</p> -</div> - -<p>The first point to engage our attention is the formation of -a new standard for the <i>silver</i> coin (for no gold was coined for -nearly two centuries): sixty-three old minas were taken to -form a new talent, which of course was divided henceforward -into 60 new minas. As the weight of the Attic talent in post-Solonian -times is most accurately known, we can at once discover -the weight of the ancient mina by dividing the ordinary -weight of the talent (405,000 grs.) by 63: 405,000 ÷ 63 = 6428 -grs., that is 322 grs. less than the post-Solonian mina of 6750 -grs. As there are 50 staters in the mina, the ancient stater -weighed 128·56 grs., or just a grain lighter than the Daric -(129·6 grs.). The old mina of 6428 grs. had been equal to -70 drachms; each of these then must have weighed 92 grs. -nearly, that is, the ordinary weight of an Aeginetic drachm. -There can be no doubt that the coins of Aegina were used as -currency at Athens before Solon’s time, where they circulated -side by side in all probability with the coins of Euboea which -bore the bull’s head, whence arose the tradition of the earliest<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_307"></a>[307]</span> -coinage of Athens consisting of didrachms stamped with an ox. -The old mina (63 of which went to the new <i>silver</i> talent) -was of course the ancient standard used for weighing <i>gold</i> -and <i>silver</i> before coined money was employed. It was that -known as the Euboic, based on the ox-unit. The Aeginetic -standard was only used for <i>silver</i>, <i>gold</i> at all times being -weighed by the Euboic standard even where the Aeginetic -was in use for silver. This standard was of course in full use -for gold and evidently likewise for silver in prae-Solonian times, -even though the Aeginetic drachms passed as currency at -Athens. For if they had adopted the Aeginetic <i>standard</i>, 100 -Aeginetic drachms would have been reckoned to the mina, but -as only 70 drachms went to the mina it is evident that the old -ox-unit (so-called Euboic) standard of unit 130 grs. with its -corresponding mina was always the national Athenian standard.</p> - -<p>We showed at an earlier stage that in the age when the -art of coining was first introduced into Greece by Pheidon -of Argos, it was probable that gold stood to silver in the -proportion of 15:1. For convenience, then, in Peloponnesus -and in Central Greece a system was adopted by which 10 -pieces of silver were equivalent to one piece or ingot of gold. -This system, known as the Aeginetic, was thus obtained.</p> - -<p>Gold being to silver as 15:1,</p> - -<p>1 gold ingot (Talanton) of 130 grs. × 15 = 1950 grs. of silver, -1950 grs. ÷ 10 = 195 grs.</p> - -<p>Therefore 1 gold Talanton of 130 grs. = 10 pieces of silver -of 195 grs. each.</p> - -<p>It is possible that this method of making 10 silver pieces -equal to one gold unit was developed at the time of the introduction -of coined money, but it is more likely that it may have -been in use even before that time.</p> - -<p>Now it is worth observing that all through the classical -period of Greek history the term stater is generally confined -in use to gold pieces. Thus silver coins, unless they weighed -135 grs., are not described as silver <i>staters</i>, but are regularly -termed didrachms. So general evidently was this practice that -the adjective <i>chrysous</i> (χρυσοῦς) was regularly employed to -express the gold unit, the masculine gender showing that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_308"></a>[308]</span> -the noun understood is <i>stater</i> (στατήρ). Thus Pollux says: -“Some were termed staters of Darius, some Philippeans, other -Alexandrians, all being of gold, and if you say <i>gold piece</i>, -<i>stater</i> is understood: but if you should say <i>stater</i>, <i>gold</i> is not -absolutely to be understood<a id="FNanchor_370" href="#Footnote_370" class="fnanchor">[370]</a>.” From the fact that Pollux draws -attention to the exceptional use of <i>stater</i> to express a silver -coin, on the principle that <i>exceptio probat regulam</i>, it is evident -that stater regularly represents a gold piece of two Attic -drachms. The familiar practice in Attic Greek, when speaking -of a considerable sum of silver without employing either the -term mina or talent, is to say 1000 drachms, 2000 drachms -and the like, but not 1000 staters or 2000 staters, etc., whilst -on the other hand, under like conditions, the practice is to -enumerate gold not by drachms, but by <i>staters</i>. Thus in a -fragment from the <i>Demi</i> of Eupolis quoted by Pollux<a id="FNanchor_371" href="#Footnote_371" class="fnanchor">[371]</a> a man -is described as possessing 3000 <i>staters</i> of gold. We certainly -hear of an Aeginean stater and a Corinthian<a id="FNanchor_372" href="#Footnote_372" class="fnanchor">[372]</a> stater (both of -silver), but both are found in writers of comparatively late date, -when usage was getting less exact, and besides, as the Aeginetic -system had a separate individuality of its own, its unit -being perfectly different from the Euboic Attic, might with -justice be termed a stater. We are thus justified in considering -the gold stater the legitimate descendant of the -Homeric Talanton, the stater or <i>weigher</i> representing the -Talanton or <i>weight</i> of the older time. As long as no other -unit than the ox-unit or Talanton was employed, the Talanton -or weight <i>par excellence</i> was sufficient to describe it, but when -under Asiatic influences the higher unit of the <i>mina</i> (μνᾶ) -and <i>talent</i> were introduced, a term was substituted which indicates -clearly that the gold unit of 130 grs. was <i>the weigher</i> -or basis of the whole system. Starting then with our ox-unit, -we find already in Homer definite traces of a decimal, but -nothing to indicate the existence of a sexagesimal system. -<i>Ten</i> talents of gold are mentioned in several passages.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_309"></a>[309]</span></p> - -<p>Starting then with the ox-unit of 130 grs. we can thus arrive -at the fully elaborated Greek systems. The term mina (μνᾶ) -is beyond doubt a borrowing from the East. How far it was -ever much employed in the reckoning of gold it is hard to say, -but it is at least remarkable that, when we hear so frequently of -<i>minae</i> of silver in the Attic writers, no instance of a mina of -gold is quoted in our books of reference. From this one is -led to infer that it was for the purpose of measuring the less -precious metal, silver, that the term <i>mina</i> was brought into use -in Greece. In fact, as stater is essentially a term which clings -to gold, so <i>mina</i> is especially a term used of silver. With the -mina the Greeks borrowed likewise the highest Asiatic unit (the -<i>kikkar</i> of the Hebrews), which became the Talanton or talent -of historical Greece. But it is remarkable that the Greeks -did not borrow its Asiatic name along with the unit itself. -They simply gave it their own name <i>weight</i> (literally, ‘<i>that -which can be lifted</i>,’ cp. τλάω, <i>tollo</i>, etc.). This fact can be -explained readily if we suppose that the Greeks, like all those -other primitive peoples whom we have mentioned, had a rough -and ready unit for estimating bulky wares, the standard of <i>the -load</i>, or as much as a man could conveniently carry on his back. -Having already such a unit they would have no difficulty in -adopting the <i>load</i> or talent, which had been fixed according to -the Sexagesimal system, and which had permeated all Western -Asia. In fact their position towards the Asiatic <i>load</i>, which had -been accurately fixed by the mathematical skill of the Babylonians, -would be exactly analagous to that of the Malays of Java -and Sumatra towards the accurately adjusted Chinese <i>picul</i>. -Because the Malays themselves were accustomed to use <i>loads</i> of -various weights as their rough highest unit of bulk, they have -with all the more readiness received the form of the same -unit, which the clever Chinese have incorporated into their -commercial weight system by making it equal to 100 <i>chings</i> -(catties, or pounds). But it is doubtful if at any time in Greece -Proper the talent of gold was ever considered as a monetary -unit. We have found Eupolis speaking of “3000 staters of -gold” instead of simply saying a talent of gold, and when we -do find mention made of talents of gold, as in a famous passage<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_310"></a>[310]</span> -of Thucydides, where he describes the amount of gold employed -by Pheidias in the making of the world-renowned -chryselephantine statue of Athena for the Parthenon, whilst the -computations in silver are expressed simply by talents, the gold -is enumerated as talents <i>in weight</i>. We may assume that gold -was weighed throughout Greece in historical times on the -following system:</p> - -<table summary="Historic Greek system of weighing gold"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>stater</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">130</td> - <td>grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">50</td> - <td>staters</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>mina</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>6500 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3000</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>minae</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 talent = 390,000 grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>When silver came into use it was probably weighed all -through Hellas, as in Asia and Egypt, on the same standard as -gold. This continued always to be the practice amongst the -great trading communities of Euboea, Chalcis and Eretria, and -their colonies, and also with Corinth and her daughter states. -Hence the system was commonly known as the Euboic, sometimes -as the Corinthian, and in later times, for a reason to be -presently given, the <i>Attic</i>. But in this silver system it is no -longer the stater which represents the smaller unit, but rather -the <i>drachm</i> (δραχμή). Furthermore we find in most constant -use a subdivision of the <i>drachm</i> called the <i>obol</i> (ὀβολός <i>nail</i> or -<i>spike</i>), six of which made a drachm. There can be no doubt that -this silver obolos represented the value in silver of the ancient -copper unit from which it took its name, which itself was not -estimated by weight but probably, as we saw above, was simply -appraised by measure, as is done by all primitive peoples -in the estimation of copper and iron, nay even in the very -earliest stage of gold itself (<a href="#Page_43">p. 43</a>). As six of these <i>nails</i> or -<i>obols</i> made a handful (δραχμή) in the ancient copper system, -so when each of them was equated to a certain amount of -silver, the equivalence in silver was called an <i>obol</i>, and the six -silver <i>obols</i> obtained the old name of <i>handful</i> or <i>drachm</i>. -In the ordinary Greek system of reckoning silver it is 100 -drachms, not 50 staters, of silver which form the mina. But -of course at the earlier stages of the use of silver we may with -some boldness assume that silver was simply weighed by the -stater (or Homeric Talanton).</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_311"></a>[311]</span></p> - -<p>It is important then to note that among the smaller weight -denominations silver has virtually no term peculiarly its own: -for we have seen that <i>stater</i> belongs essentially to gold, whilst -<i>drachm</i> and <i>obol</i> have originated in the use of copper. This is -in complete harmony with what we know of the history of the -metals themselves, gold and copper being known and employed -long before men had learned to utilize silver; and so too, we -find the late-introduced term <i>mina</i> in especially close connection -with the latest employed of the three metals. This -Euboic-Attic <i>silver</i> system may be stated as follows:</p> - -<table summary="The Euboic-Attic silver system"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">6</td> - <td>obols</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 drachm</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">100</td> - <td>drachms</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 mina</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>minae</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 talent.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>The Corinthians, whilst making the <i>obol</i> of the same weight -as the Euboic, made a different division of the silver stater; for -as Corinth occupied the very portals of Peloponnesus where the -Aeginetic system was universal, she found it convenient for -purposes of exchange to divide her silver stater of 135 grs. into -<i>three</i> drachms of 45 grs. each, one of which was for practical -purposes identical with the Aeginetan <i>half drachm</i>. Thus two -Corinthian drachms of 45 grs. each were equal to one Aeginetan -drachm of 90 grs.</p> - -<h3><i>The Aeginetan Standard.</i></h3> - -<p>The desire to obtain 10 silver pieces equivalent in value to -the gold ox-unit induced the Aeginetans, who were famous -merchantmen, to make a silver system distinct from that of -gold. Gold being to silver as 15:1,</p> - -<table summary="The Aegenitan standard"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">130 × 15</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1950</td> - <td>grs. of silver.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1950 ÷ 10</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">195</td> - <td>grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>With the Aeginetans as with the Euboeans in their silver -system, the ancient copper units of the <i>nail</i> and <i>handful</i> played -an important part. The story of Pheidon<a id="FNanchor_373" href="#Footnote_373" class="fnanchor">[373]</a> having hung up in -the temple of Hera at Argos the ancient currency of nails of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_312"></a>[312]</span> -copper and iron as soon as he struck his first issue of silver -coins, if not absolutely true in all details, at least contains a -most probable statement of what did actually take place when -a real silver currency was first introduced. We have seen -how the Chinese, starting with a barter currency of real hoes -and knives, the objects of most general demand, gradually -replaced those larger and more cumbrous articles by hoes and -knives of a more diminutive size, until finally they became a -real currency when they had been so reduced in size as to be -utterly unfit for practical use. We saw likewise how that at -the present moment the real hoe is the lowest unit of barter -among the wild tribes of Annam, and that small bars of iron of -given size are used in Laos, and that plates of metal ready to -be made into hoes, and hoes themselves, are employed by the -negroes of Central Africa, whilst on the west coast axes of a size -too diminutive for actual use are employed as a real currency. -As the day came when the Chinese finally replaced the archaic -knife by the full developed copper coin called the cash, so the -Aeginetans and Argives of the days of Pheidon superseded by a -real coin ancient monetary-units consisting either of real implements -of iron and copper, or bars of those metals of certain -definite dimensions, or possibly mere Lilliputian representatives -of such, which had previously served them as a true currency. -On the whole however it is safest to assume from the names -<i>nail</i> (<i>Obol</i>) and <i>Handful</i> (drachme) that the form in which -copper or iron served as currency in Peloponnesus and the -mainland of Hellas in general was that of rods of a certain -length and thickness. We have cited already many analogous -forms from modern Asia and Africa, and from the ancient Kelts, -to which we shall presently add the ancient Italians. But just -as we found that in the Soudan, whilst the slave and ox -were universally the higher units of value, each particular -district had its own distinctive lower unit according to the -nature of its products and requirements, so it is most likely -that there were many different units of value (but all alike sub-multiples -of the cow) in use among the various Greek communities. -It is also probable that they must have exercised -a certain effect in the formation of the units of silver currency.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_313"></a>[313]</span> -Nor is evidence wanting for this. I have already maintained -(<a href="#Page_5">p. 5</a>) that the fact of the occurrence of the type of the cow, -or cow’s head, on early Greek coins is evidence that the original -monetary unit was the ox. Thus we find the forepart of an ox -on the early electrum staters of Samos of the Phoenician -standard (217 grs.), which was probably equivalent to a pure -gold ox-unit of 130 grs. The bull’s head also appears on -the electrum coins of Eretria and of other places in Euboea. -But it is with the silver currency that we are now especially -concerned. Whilst it was extremely likely that silver coins -might in process of time bear the impress of an ox, the -general unit of currency, it was still more natural that, as -pieces of silver supplanted as units not the ox but its sub-multiples, -that is the particular series of articles of barter in -use in any particular district, so these silver coins should bear -some traces in their types of the ancient units thus supplanted. -That eminent scholar Colonel Leake many years ago -remarked that the types of Greek coins generally related “to -the local mythology and fortunes of the place, with <i>symbols -referring to the principal productions</i> or to the protecting -numina.”</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure31"> -<img src="images/figure31.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 31.</span> Coin of Cyrene with Silphium plant.</p> -</div> - -<p>Modern scholars have more and more lost sight of the -doctrine contained in the words which I have italicized, and -directed all their efforts to giving a religious signification to -everything<a id="FNanchor_374" href="#Footnote_374" class="fnanchor">[374]</a>. The forepart of the Lion and the Bull on the -coins of Lydia become symbols of the Sun and Moon, the -Tortoise on the didrachm of Aegina is regarded as a symbol of -Aphrodite, the Ashtaroth of the Phoenicians, in her capacity of -patron divinity of traders; even the silphium plant of Cyrene,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_314"></a>[314]</span> -which yielded a salubrious but somewhat unpleasant medicine, -is regarded not as holding its place on the coins of Cyrene and -its sister towns because it formed the chief staple of trade, but -because forsooth it may have been the symbol of Aristaeus, -“the protector of the corn-field and the vine and all growing -crops, and bees and flocks and shepherds, and the averter of the -scorching blasts of the Sahara.” There is probably just as -much evidence for this as there is for believing that the beaver -on some Canadian coins and stamps is symbolical of St -Lawrence, after whom the great Canadian river is named, the -warm skin of the beaver indicating that the saint of the red-hot -gridiron is the averter of the cruel and biting blasts that -sweep down from the icy North. I do not for a moment mean -that mythological and religious subjects do not play their -proper part in Greek coin types. But it is just as wrong to -reduce all coin types to this category as it would be to regard -them all as merely symbolic of the natural and manufactured -products of the various states. If however we can show that -certain coins, even in historical times, were regarded as the -representations of the objects of barter of more primitive -times, we shall have established a firm basis from which to -make further advances.</p> - -<p>In those now famous Cretan inscriptions found at Gortyn<a id="FNanchor_375" href="#Footnote_375" class="fnanchor">[375]</a> -certain sums are counted by kettles (<i>lebetes</i>, λέβητες) and pots -(<i>tripods</i>, τρίποδες). Some have thought that these are the same -objects which are called staters in later forms of the same documents. -But recently M. Svoronos<a id="FNanchor_376" href="#Footnote_376" class="fnanchor">[376]</a> has advanced a very plausible -hypothesis that the <i>lebetes</i> and <i>tripods</i> of the inscriptions -really refer not to an actual currency in the kettles and pots of -the old Homeric times, but to certain Cretan coins which are -countermarked with a stamp, which he recognizes in many examples -as a <i>lebes</i>, and in at least one case as a <i>tripod</i>. Whether -the first hypothesis, that actual kettles and pots were indicated<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_315"></a>[315]</span> -in the earlier inscriptions and that they had been replaced afterwards -by coins, or the hypothesis of M. Svoronos, be true, is immaterial -for us. In either case there is evidence of a direct and -unbroken succession which connects the silver currency of Crete -with an earlier currency of manufactured articles. The very fact -that a lebes or a tripod stamped upon a coin gave it currency, -not merely in the town of issue but among neighbouring states, -indicates that in a previous age the common unit of currency -corresponding in value to the coin so marked was an actual -lebes or tripod. Such is the evidence preserved for us in this -remote corner of Hellas where life moved slowly, and where -the archaic style of writing known as <i>boustrophedon</i> (the lines -going from right to left and left to right alternately, as the -plough turns up and down the field) still lingered on long after -it had disappeared from every spot on the mainland of Greece. -If then amongst the symbols which appear on the earliest coins -of Greek communities, which began very early to strike money, -we can find some which have not been identified as religious, -and which we can show represent objects which actually did -or may well have formed a monetary unit in such places, we -shall have advanced a step further; and if we succeed in -making good this fresh position, we may in turn find a nonreligious -explanation for certain types, which at present are regarded -as mythological symbols.</p> - -<p>The types with which we shall deal must be those found on -the most archaic coins, and which therefore date from a time -when barter was just being replaced by a monetary currency. -Thus in the case of cities like Athens and Corinth, which began -to coin at a comparatively late period and which had been long -accustomed to use the issues of other states before they struck -money of their own, we should hardly expect to find any trace -of the old local barter-unit in their coin types, as such a unit -had long since been replaced by the foreign coins.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;" id="figure32"> -<img src="images/figure32.jpg" width="300" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 32.</span> Coin of Cyzicus with tunny fish.</p> -</div> - -<p>Let us first turn to the well-known type of the tunny fish -(πηλαμύς, θύννος), vast shoals of which were continually passing -through the sea of Marmora (Propontis) from the Black Sea to -the Mediterranean<a id="FNanchor_377" href="#Footnote_377" class="fnanchor">[377]</a>. This type appears invariably upon the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_316"></a>[316]</span> -electrum coins of Cyzicus, and a tunny’s head is found upon -some very archaic silver coins from the Santorin ‘find’ which -Mr Head places at the top of the whole Cyzicene series, but no -one has, as far as I am aware, yet hitherto attempted to -mythologize it<a id="FNanchor_378" href="#Footnote_378" class="fnanchor">[378]</a>, although the fecundity of this fish would -make it just as suitable an emblem for Aphrodite as the -“lascivious turtle,” and the traders of Cyzicus might quite as -well wear the badge of the goddess of the sea as the merchants -of Aegina, for there is just as much or just as little evidence for -Phoenician influences at Cyzicus as there is at Aegina. From -what we have learned in an earlier chapter we know that the -articles which form the staple commodities of a community in -the age of barter virtually form its money. In a city like Cyzicus -whose citizens depended for their wealth on their fisheries -and trade, rather than on flocks or herds and agriculture, the -tunny fish singly or in certain defined numbers, as by the score -or hundred and the like, would naturally form a chief monetary -unit, just as we found the stock fish employed in mediaeval -Iceland. Are we not then justified in considering the tunny -fish, which forms the invariable adjunct of the coins of Cyzicus, -as an indication that these coins superseded a primitive system -in which the tunny formed a monetary unit, just as the Kettle -and Pot counter-marks on the coins of Crete point back to the -days when real kettles formed the chief medium of exchange? -But far stronger evidence is at hand to show that the tunny -fish was used as a monetary unit in some parts of Hellas. We -have had occasion to refer to the city of Olbia which lay on -the north shore of the Black Sea. It was a Milesian colony,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_317"></a>[317]</span> -and was the chief Greek emporium in this region. There -are bronze coins of this city made in the shape of fishes, and -inscribed ΘΥ, which has been identified as the abbreviation -θύννος, <i>tunny</i>. Others are inscribed ΑΡΙΧΟ, which -Koehler read as τάριχος, salt fish, but which the distinguished -German numismatist Von Sallet<a id="FNanchor_379" href="#Footnote_379" class="fnanchor">[379]</a> regards as meaning a -basket (ἄρριχος). He holds those marked ΘΥ as the legal -price of a tunny fish, those marked ΑΡΙΧΟ as that of a basket -of fish<a id="FNanchor_380" href="#Footnote_380" class="fnanchor">[380]</a>. When we recall the Chinese bronze cowries, the -Burmese silver shells, the silver fish-hooks of the Indian Ocean, -the little hoes and knives of China, and the miniature axes -from Africa, we are constrained to believe that in those coins of -Olbia, shaped like a fish, we have a distinct proof of the influence -on the Greek mind of the same principle which has -impelled other peoples to imitate in metal the older object of -barter which a metal currency is replacing. The inhabitants of -Olbia were largely intermixed with the surrounding barbarians, -and may therefore have felt some difficulty in replacing their -barter unit by a round piece of metal bearing merely the -imprint of a fish, while the pure-blooded Greek of Cyzicus had -no hesitation in mentally bridging the gulf between a real -fish and a piece of metal merely stamped with a fish, and did -not require the intermediate step of first shaping his metal unit -into the form of a tunny. We shall find that this tendency to -shape metal into the form of the object which it supplants may -perhaps be traced in the coins of Aegina and Boeotia.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 550px;" id="figure33"> -<img src="images/figure33.jpg" width="550" height="100" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 33.</span> Coins of Olbia in the form of tunny fish.</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure34"> -<img src="images/figure34.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 34.</span> Coin of Tenedos with double-headed axe.</p> -</div> - -<p>In the same quarter of Hellas we find another instance of a -coin type which may be regarded as evidence that the silver -coin which bears it was the representative of an older barter<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_318"></a>[318]</span> -unit. The island of Tenedos, lying off the Troad, struck at a -very early date silver coins bearing for device a double-headed -axe (the Latin <i>bipennis</i>). This “Axe of Tenedos” (Τενέδιος -πέλεκυς) was explained by Aristotle<a id="FNanchor_381" href="#Footnote_381" class="fnanchor">[381]</a> as a reference to a decree -of a king of Tenedos which enacted that all who were convicted -of adultery should be put to death. This explanation is probably -a bit of mere aetiology to explain the existence of an -emblem, the true origin of which had been forgotten. However, -it yields one important result, for it shows that the emblem was -not religious. Had that been its nature, priestly conservatism -would have kept an unbroken tradition of its origin. But from -another source some light may be obtained: Pausanias<a id="FNanchor_382" href="#Footnote_382" class="fnanchor">[382]</a> in the -2nd century <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> saw at Delphi axes dedicated according to -tradition by Periclytus of Tenedos, and then proceeds to relate -the following tale: Tennes, an old King of Tenedos about the -time of the Trojan War, cut with an axe the ropes with -which his father Cycnus had moored his ship to the shore, -when he came to ask pardon of Tennes for having cast him -and his sister in a chest into the sea, in a fit of anger caused -by the false accusation of a stepmother. We may gather that -according to this form of the legend the Janiform head, male -and female, on the obverse of the coins of Tenedos alludes to -the brother and sister. But Pausanias makes no attempt to -connect Periclytus in any way with Tennes except as being -a native of Tenedos. This is hardly enough to account for -the dedication of the axes at Delphi. Two explanations suggest -themselves. It was the custom of kings or communities -to send offerings to Delphi of the best products of their land. -Thus Croesus sent vast quantities of his Lydian electrum, and,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_319"></a>[319]</span> -still more to the point, the people of Metapontum in South -Italy, whose land was famous for its wheat, after an especially -favourable harvest sent to Delphi a wheat-ear (υέρος) of gold. -Were the double axes in like fashion an especial product of -Tenedos? Or was this dedication analogous to that of Pheidon -when he hung up in the temple of the Argive Here the ancient -nails and bars? The first explanation is the more probable, -for there was no reason why the Tenedians should not have -dedicated their cast off currency of axes in some temple at -home. I have already mentioned the hoe currency of ancient -China, and the axes used as such in Africa. I shall now -show that such double-axes as those stamped on the coins of -Tenedos formed part of the earliest Greek system of currency. -I have already enumerated the various articles used in barter in -the Homeric poems. The prizes offered in the Funeral games of -Patroclus are of course merely the usual objects of barter and -currency, slavewomen, oxen, lebetes, tripods, talents of gold and -the like. “But he (Achilles) set for the archers dark iron, and -he set down ten axes (πελέκεας), and ten half-axes (ἡμιπέλεκκα)<a id="FNanchor_383" href="#Footnote_383" class="fnanchor">[383]</a>.” -The axe is undoubtedly of the same kind as that on -the coins of Tenedos, the name (<i>pelekys</i>) being the same in -each case, and the Homeric one beyond doubt is double-headed -like the Tenedian, since the half-axe (<i>hemi-pelekkon</i>) must -obviously mean a single-headed axe<a id="FNanchor_384" href="#Footnote_384" class="fnanchor">[384]</a>. The double-axes formed -the first prize, the ten half-axes the second, for “Meriones took -up all the ten axes, and Teucer bore the ten half-axes to the -hollow ships<a id="FNanchor_385" href="#Footnote_385" class="fnanchor">[385]</a>.” These axes and half-axes then seem to go in -groups of ten as units of value, the half-axes representing half<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_320"></a>[320]</span> -the value of the double-headed. If then the kettle and tripod -of Homeric times are found as symbols on the coins of Crete, -why may not the axe on those of Tenedos represent the local -unit of an earlier epoch? and that such axes were evidently an -important article in Tenedos is proved by the dedication at -Delphi.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;" id="figure35"> -<img src="images/figure35.jpg" width="200" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 35.</span> Coin of Phanes (earliest known inscribed coin).</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure36"> -<img src="images/figure36.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 36.</span> Archaic coin of Samos.</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure37"> -<img src="images/figure37.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 37.</span> Coin of Cnidus.</p> -</div> - -<p>But could we only find a contemporary description of the -type on one of the earliest coins of Asia Minor, the cradle of the -art of coining, we might get our ideas on the nature of the -coin types greatly cleared. Fortunately such an opportunity is -afforded to us by an unique coin in the British Museum, the -oldest as yet known which bears an inscription. It is an oblong -electrum coin (<a href="#figure35">Fig. 35</a>), the reverse having the usual incuse, -but on its obverse it bears a stag feeding, and over it runs -(retrograde) in archaic letters <span class="allsmcap">I AM THE MARK OF PHANES</span> (Φανος -εμι σεμα = Φάνους εἰμὶ σῆμα). There can be no doubt that -the <i>mark</i> of Phanes is the stag. If there was no inscription -it would have been at once asserted that the stag was the -symbol of the goddess Artemis, and who could deny it? -But as it stands it is plain that the stag is nothing more than -the particular badge adopted by the potentate Phanes, when -and where he may have reigned, as a guarantee of the weight -of the coin and perhaps the purity of the metal. The Daric -itself needs no inscription to tell us that its type is not religious. -The figure of the Great King with his spear and bow and quiver -can hardly be allegorized even by an Origen<a id="FNanchor_386" href="#Footnote_386" class="fnanchor">[386]</a>. Emboldened by -these instances we may even hold up our hands against the host -of Heaven, and raise doubts as to whether the foreparts of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_321"></a>[321]</span> -lion and bull upon the coins of Lydia represent the Sun-god -and the Moon-goddess. May not the lion simply be the royal -emblem? I have already suggested this explanation for the -lion weights of Assyria. Undoubtedly from the earliest times -the king of beasts (as in <i>Aesop’s Fables</i>) was regarded in the -East as the true badge of royalty. “The Lion of the tribe of -Judah” is familiar to us all, and it is more rational to regard -the lions which guarded the steps of Solomon’s throne as -emblems of kingship rather than as symbols of the Sun. Is -then the Lion on the coins of Lydia nothing more than the -kings badge, just as the stag is the badge of Phanes? But -what about the bull or cow? Shall I go too far if I regard it -as indicating that the coin is the ox-unit? When the Greeks -borrowed the art of coining from Lydia it is easy to understand -that they would likewise borrow the type either in a complete -or modified form, and hence it is that we find the lion or -lion’s head on the coins of Miletus<a id="FNanchor_387" href="#Footnote_387" class="fnanchor">[387]</a>, the lion’s scalp on those of -Samos (on which the cow’s head also is found), the lion’s head -on the coins of Cnidus, of Gortyn in Crete, at Rhodes, at Miletus, -and at the Phocaean towns of Velia in Lucania, and -Massalia in Gaul, and put by the Samian exiles on their coins -at Zancle. If the Greeks had been barbarians they would have<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_322"></a>[322]</span> -slavishly copied the lion coins of Lydia, just as the Gauls copied -the lion of Massalia, and at a later time the stater of Philip, and -as the Himyarites of South Arabia, the “owls” of Athens<a id="FNanchor_388" href="#Footnote_388" class="fnanchor">[388]</a>, and -as in mediaeval times the Danes of Dublin copied the coins of -the Saxon kings<a id="FNanchor_389" href="#Footnote_389" class="fnanchor">[389]</a>. But the artistic genius of the Greeks could -submit to no such trammels, and the lion type was varied and -diversified according to the fancy of each community. The same -holds good of the type of the cow and cow’s head. The Greek -genius gave us these beautiful types such as the cow suckling her -calf (Dyrrachium), the cow with the bird on her back (Eretria), -the cow scratching herself (Eretria), the two calves’ heads seen -on the coins of Mytilene, and the magnificent charging bull on -the coins of Thurii. The cow or bull’s head on the early gold and -electrum coins was the indication of the value. In later times -when the connection between ox and coin was only traditional, -the ox was put on coins simply as symbolical of money.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure38"> -<img src="images/figure38.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 38.</span> Coin of Thurii.</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure39"> -<img src="images/figure39.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 39.</span> Coin of Rhoda in Spain.</p> -</div> - -<p>Again Phocaea, one of the very earliest Greek towns to -issue coins, employed a symbol which cannot be termed religious. -Her coins bear a seal (<i>phoca</i>) a <i>type parlant</i> referring -to the name of the town. Many examples of the same kind -can be quoted, the rose (ῥόδον) on the coins of Rhodes (Ῥόδος) -and also on those of Rhoda in Spain, the bee (<i>melitta</i>) on those<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_323"></a>[323]</span> -of Melitaea, perhaps even the owl (χαλκίς) on coins ascribed to -Chalcis in Euboea. These considerations will serve to show -that we may expect many things on coins besides religious -symbols. Thasos was famous for its wine, and accordingly the -wine-cup is a regular adjunct of its coins, either standing alone, -or held in the hands of old Silenus, who quaffs therefrom a -“draught of vintage that hath been cooled a long age in the -deep-delved earth.” All who have read Horace remember the -fame of the wines of Chios, and accordingly the wine-jar is a -regular adjunct of the mintage of that island. Now there is -proof that the trade in wine was of extreme antiquity, if not -in the islands just mentioned, at least in Lemnos, and that -that trade was carried on by barter, for we read in Homer -how “many ships stood in from Lemnos bringing wine, which -Euneos the son of Jason had sent forward, whom Hypsipyle -had borne to Jason shepherd of the folk, but separately for the -sons of Atreus, Agamemnon and Menelaus, the son of Jason -gave wine to be fetched, a thousand measures. From thence -used the flowing-haired Achaeans to buy their wine, some with -copper, some with glittering iron, some with hides, others -with the kine themselves, others again with slaves<a id="FNanchor_390" href="#Footnote_390" class="fnanchor">[390]</a>.” From -what we have seen in an earlier chapter it is clear that a -measure of wine would have a known value in relation to the -various articles here enumerated. Thus in North America -where the beaver skin was the unit, a gallon of brandy = 6 -skins, a brass kettle = 1 skin, an ounce of vermilion = 1 skin -and so on<a id="FNanchor_391" href="#Footnote_391" class="fnanchor">[391]</a>. In other words, the ordinary currency with -which the Lemnians would purchase wares from other people -who had no wine of their own would be wine, the unit of -which was the <i>measure</i> (which elsewhere I have tried to -show was the cup δέπας, Smith’s <i>Dict. Antiq.</i> <i>s.v.</i> Mensura). -This measure would be the size of the vessel ordinarily employed -for wine, probably much the same as the two-handled -vase out of which Silenus is seen drinking on coins of Thasos.</p> - -<p>With the introduction of silver currency nothing is more -likely than that an effort would be made to equate the new<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_324"></a>[324]</span> -silver unit to that which had formed the principal unit of -barter. That the earliest types should indicate the object (or -its value) which the coin replaced is in complete accord with -the statement of Aristotle (quoted on an earlier page) that -“the stamp was put on the coin as an indication of value<a id="FNanchor_392" href="#Footnote_392" class="fnanchor">[392]</a>.” -As no numerals appear on the early Greek coins, it is evident -that Aristotle regarded the symbol, whether ox-head, or tunny, -or shield, as the index of the value. If it be said that the -putting of a cow, or axe, or tunny on a coin was simply a -picturesque way of indicating a single unit, we may reply that -it is far easier to understand why a certain people chose a particular -symbol, if in their minds the object symbolized was -identified with the value of the silver or gold coin. It is at all -events certain that Aristotle did not regard the type as -religious in origin. But we are not without actual evidence -that such an equating of the silver unit to the barter-unit -really took place in Greece. It is held by the best numismatists -that Solon was the first to coin money at Athens. It -is also well known that the highest class in his constitution, -called Pentacosiomedimni (<i>Five-hundred-measure-men</i>), were -rated at 500 drachms. Thus the Olympic victor received 500 -drachms to qualify him to be a Five-hundred-measure-man<a id="FNanchor_393" href="#Footnote_393" class="fnanchor">[393]</a>. -Furthermore Plutarch distinctly tells us that Solon reckoned a -drachm as equivalent to a measure<a id="FNanchor_394" href="#Footnote_394" class="fnanchor">[394]</a> or a sheep. It is hardly -possible to doubt that the first Attic coined silver drachm was -equated to the old barter unit of a measure (either of corn or -oil). The same may be said in reference to the olive sprig which -from the earliest issue is found on the coins of Athens. The -sacred olive-trees (μορίαι) which belonged to the state, and -for the care of which special officials were appointed, and -even the very stumps of which, and the spot on which they -had grown, were under a taboo<a id="FNanchor_395" href="#Footnote_395" class="fnanchor">[395]</a>, were a source of considerable<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_325"></a>[325]</span> -revenue to the state in the 6th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> The fact that -they were all supposed to be scions of the sacred olive-tree -on the Acropolis, which was itself supposed to be the gift of -Athena, and the religious care bestowed on them, puts it -beyond doubt that the olive at an early date formed one of -the most important products of Attica. The instances given -already of the employment of various kinds of food as money -are sufficient to show that there is nothing far-fetched in supposing -that olives and olive-oil may have been so employed at -Athens.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure40"> -<img src="images/figure40.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 40.</span> Tetradrachm of Athens.</p> -</div> - -<p>We have already spoken of the silphium or laserpitium plant -on the coins of Cyrene, Barca, Euesperides and Teuchira, and -mentioned the interpretation which makes it the symbol of -the hero Aristaeus. It seems however far more reasonable to -treat it on the same principle as the others just discussed. -The silphium formed the most important article produced in -that region, and it is perfectly in accordance with all analogy -that certain quantities of this plant and of the juice extracted -from it should be employed as money. We saw above that -at the present moment tea is so employed on the borders of -Tibet and China, and raw cotton in Darfur. But there is also -some positive evidence in favour of this assumption, for Strabo<a id="FNanchor_396" href="#Footnote_396" class="fnanchor">[396]</a> -tells us that a traffic was carried on at the port of Charax -between the Carthaginians and Cyrenaeans, the former bringing -wine wherewith to purchase the silphium of the latter. There -must have been a wine-unit, and also an unit for the silphium, -or otherwise the barter could not have been carried on; and -just as in Gaul<a id="FNanchor_397" href="#Footnote_397" class="fnanchor">[397]</a> a jar of wine purchased a boy fit to serve<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_326"></a>[326]</span> -as a cupbearer, a certain measure of wine being equated -to a slave-boy, so we may conclude that some such wine-unit -was equated to a packet or bale of silphium, the latter in -turn having a certain amount of silver equated to it, which -when coinage was introduced was stamped with the silphium -device. That the silphium was packed in bales of a fixed -weight is proved by a now famous vase-painting which represents -the weighing (on ship board?) of the bales of silphium -in the presence of Arcesilas the king of Cyrene<a id="FNanchor_398" href="#Footnote_398" class="fnanchor">[398]</a>. The figure -who points to the scales is marked <i>silphiomachos</i> (σλιφιομαχος)<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_327"></a>[327]</span> -which is taken to mean <i>silphium-weigher</i> (σλιφιο- being -either a mis-spelling of the artist, or the local form of the -word, whilst the latter part is connected with the Egyptian -<i>mach</i> = to <i>weigh</i>). Close to the silphium packets is the word -<span class="allsmcap">ΜΑΕΝ</span>, which has not been explained, but which may be simply -a form of the word <i>mina</i> (<i>manah</i>, <i>meneh</i>) and denotes that each -packet weighed that amount.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 600px;" id="figure41"> -<img src="images/figure41.jpg" width="600" height="600" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 41.</span> Vase from Cyrene, shewing the weighing of the Silphium.</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure42"> -<img src="images/figure42.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 42.</span> Coin of Metapontum.</p> -</div> - -<p>The ear of corn (wheat) on the coins of Metapontum<a id="FNanchor_399" href="#Footnote_399" class="fnanchor">[399]</a>, an old -Achaean colony in Magna Graecia, is explained by modern -writers as a symbol of Demeter: but the story told by Strabo -of how the early settlers dedicated a golden ear at Delphi -because they had amassed such great wealth from agriculture, -indicates a far simpler solution, that the chief product and -chief article of barter of Metapontum was naturally placed on -her coins. As the tunny adorns the coins of Cyzicus, so we find -the cuttle-fish on the coins of Croton and Eretria. As this -creature was devoured with great gusto by the ancients, as -it is at the present day at Naples and in Palestine, there is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_328"></a>[328]</span> -no necessity to regard it as a symbol of Poseidon, or of treating -it in any way different from the tunny.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure43"> -<img src="images/figure43.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 43.</span> Coin of Croton with cuttle fish.</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure44"> -<img src="images/figure44.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 44.</span> ‘Tortoise’ of Aegina.</p> -</div> - -<p>I now come to two most important types, the Tortoise of -Aegina, and the Shield of Boeotia. I have already mentioned the -symbolic interpretation given by E. Curtius to the former. That -various natural productions, such as gourds, cocoa-nuts, joints of -bamboo, served and still serve as vessels and measures of capacity -in various countries we have seen already, and we likewise found -that in the ancient Chinese monetary system of shells the shell -of the tortoise stood at the top as the unit of highest value, and -that down to a comparatively late epoch it was still highly -prized in Cochin China for making bowls of great beauty. In -both Greek and Latin there is abundant evidence to show that -the functions which in a later time were performed by pottery -were discharged by natural shells at an earlier period. Thus, -if we do not find any actual vessel called a <i>chelône</i> (tortoise) -in use amongst the Greeks, we at least find one called a Sea-urchin -(Echinus, ἐχῖνος): for not only was the shell of this -creature used as a vessel for containing medicines and the -like, but vessels of artificial construction of the same shape -and name were actually employed; thus the casket in which -were deposited and sealed up the documents produced at the -preliminary hearing of an Athenian lawsuit was called an <i>Echinus</i>. -There was likewise a small vessel called <i>conché</i> (κόγχη),<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_329"></a>[329]</span> -after the shell-fish of that name, the Latin <i>concha</i>, whilst a -cognate name, <i>conchylion</i>, was applied to the case placed over -the seals of wills.</p> - -<p>Nay, <i>ostrakon</i>, the common word for a potsherd, familiar -to us from its famous derivative Ostracism, or <i>Voting by Potsherds</i>, -so called because the people inscribed their votes on -pieces of pottery, meant originally nothing more than an oyster -shell. In Latin <i>testa</i>, the ordinary name for an earthenware -vessel, means nothing more than the covering of a shell-fish, -and from this word <i>testudo</i>, the Latin name for the tortoise, is -simply a derivative. Such instances could be multiplied if it -were necessary, but those mentioned are sufficient to show the -high probability of so valuable a shell as that of the tortoise -having been employed. Owing to its beauty it would probably -hold its place in Greece as the choicest kind of vessel for -centuries after the art of pottery was known, just as it did in -Cochin China. It would be only when the art of glazing and -embellishing pottery had made some progress that vessels of -baked clay could compete with the lustrous, many-hued shell. -Nor are we without some direct evidence for the use of tortoise -shell among the Greeks. The famous story of the invention -of the lyre by the god Hermes is not without significance. -According to the Hymn to Hermes, “the precocious -divinity on the very day of his birth sallied forth and found a -tortoise feeding on the luxuriant grass in front of the palace, -as it moved with straddling gait.” His eye was caught by the -dappled shell (αἰόλον ὄστρακον), and carrying home his spoil, -he made of it a lyre. The legend which thus explains why -the sounding-board of the lyre is so called points back to a -time when the best form of bowl or hollow vessel for making -a sounding board for a musical instrument was that afforded -by the shell which was probably one of the common articles -of everyday life.</p> - -<p>But, in addition to all this indirect evidence, we are able to -point to actual Greek vessels made of earthenware, fashioned in -the shape of a tortoise. In the second Vase Room of the British -Museum (case 48 and 49) there are two terra cotta vases from -the island of Melos, wrought in the shape of this creature, and<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_330"></a>[330]</span> -with these before us it is hardly possible to regard as other than -wooden bowls carved in the shape of the same animal <i>the wooden -tortoises</i> with which the Thessalian women pounded to death -Lais the famous courtezan, in the temple of Aphrodite, after she -had taken up her residence in their country<a id="FNanchor_400" href="#Footnote_400" class="fnanchor">[400]</a>. We can parallel -this development of artificial vessels of wood and earthenware -from the use of the actual shell in modern times. Lady Brassey -saw in the Museum at Honolulu, amongst the ancient native -weapons and swords, “tortoise-shell cups and spoons, calabashes -and bowls<a id="FNanchor_401" href="#Footnote_401" class="fnanchor">[401]</a>.” Now in the Cambridge Ethnological -Museum there is a very fine wooden bowl from the South -Seas, carved in the shape of a tortoise, and also earthenware -vessels in the shape of tortoises from Fiji, which shows that the -islanders of the Pacific not only used the real shells for vessels, -but likewise imitated them in wood<a id="FNanchor_402" href="#Footnote_402" class="fnanchor">[402]</a>.</p> - -<p>On an earlier page I quoted the statement of Ephorus that -the Aeginetans took to commerce on account of the barrenness -of their island. But they must have had something to give in -exchange to other people before they could have developed a -carrying trade, and as the island had been the resort of merchants -from very early days, it must have had something to -attract strangers as well as its position. Let us take the case -of an island with barren soil in modern days, and see what it -has to export. Thus Dhalac Island in the Red Sea is frequented -by the Banyan merchants for the sake of its pearls, -and at Massowah tortoise-shell forms an important article of -commerce. Just as the Banyans come to Dhalac<a id="FNanchor_403" href="#Footnote_403" class="fnanchor">[403]</a>, so the -Phoenicians probably came to Aegina, searching for the murex<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_331"></a>[331]</span> -(purple fish) and tortoise. No doubt tortoise-shell must have -been the chief article of export from Tortoise Island, described -by Strabo (773), as situated in the Arabian Gulf (Red Sea).</p> - -<p>The foregoing considerations make it not at all improbable -that the tortoise on the coins of Aegina simply indicates that -the old monetary unit of that island was the shell of the sea-tortoise -(ἡ θαλαττία χελώνη), which was considerably larger, -and therefore more valuable for making bowls, than that of the -land or “mountain” tortoise (ἡ ὀρεινὴ χελώνη). There was -a well-known headland on the Coast of Peloponnesus called -“Tortoise Head” (Chelonates), and this creature must have -been a peculiar feature of the shores of Aegina, or it would -not have been chosen as the type for her coins, whether it be -a religious symbol or not. At all events we know from the -story of Sciron the robber, slain by Theseus, that the sea-tortoise -was a familiar feature on the shores of the Saronic Gulf, as -the hapless travellers who were kicked over the rocks by the -caitiff were devoured by a large sea-tortoise which frequented -the strand below. This creature’s picture is handed down on -a well-known vase-painting which commemorates the exploits -of Theseus. Finally, it may well be supposed that had not its -connection with the invention of the lyre attracted to that -instrument the name of “Tortoise” both in Greek and Latin, -we should have found the name employed for some sort of -vessel, as is the case with the Echinus.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure45"> -<img src="images/figure45.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 45.</span> Coin of Boeotia with shield.</p> -</div> - -<p>Coming now to Central Greece, we find on the coins of all -the Boeotian towns (with the exception of Orchomenus in her -earliest issues) the well-known device of the Boeotian shield. -This has been confidently pronounced to be a sacred emblem, -symbolic of a common worship, conjectured to be that of Athena -Itonia, whose temple near Coronea was the meeting-place of the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_332"></a>[332]</span> -Boeotians<a id="FNanchor_404" href="#Footnote_404" class="fnanchor">[404]</a>, whilst at Coronea golden shields were preserved in -the Acropolis<a id="FNanchor_405" href="#Footnote_405" class="fnanchor">[405]</a>. This may be so, but it is equally possible that -the shield represented a common monetary unit in ancient -times. The shield of early Hellas was a simple ox-hide buckler, -described in Homeric language simply as an <i>ox-hide</i><a id="FNanchor_406" href="#Footnote_406" class="fnanchor">[406]</a>. Amongst -barbarous peoples, as we saw above, weapons form one of the -regular commodities commonly employed as currency; the -Achaeans bought wine with hides as well as with oxen from -the ships that came from Lemnos, and as there can be no -doubt that the hide was a regular sub-multiple of the cow, it is -very probable that the ox-hide shield stood in a similar relation -to the cow, the chief or most universal unit; and as we find -axes and half-axes among the prizes offered by Achilles as well -as kettles and caldrons, so we learn from a famous passage<a id="FNanchor_407" href="#Footnote_407" class="fnanchor">[407]</a> that -shields were amongst the most usual articles offered as prizes -and therefore were regular units of currency: “For they strove -neither for an ox to be sacrificed nor yet for an ox-hide shield -which are wont to be the prizes for the feet of men, but they -strove for the life of the horse-taming Hector.”</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure46"> -<img src="images/figure46.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 46.</span> Coin of Lycia.</p> -</div> - -<p>When silver money was struck, it was natural that the -barter-unit which came nearest in value to the silver didrachm -would be equated to it, and the piece of silver would -accordingly be termed <i>Shield</i> or <i>Tortoise</i>, just as the silver -equivalent for the old copper rod was called the Obol, and -in due course the corresponding device would be impressed on -the silver coinage. The same explanation may probably be -applied in other cases, such as that of the boar on the coins -of Lycia. On the coins of the Gaulish tribe Sequani who made<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_333"></a>[333]</span> -the best bacon and hams which came into the Roman market, -the swine is found<a id="FNanchor_408" href="#Footnote_408" class="fnanchor">[408]</a>. Doubtless this animal was their chief -source of wealth, and formed a unit of barter, but we have not -space for any more examples.</p> - -<p>It is worth noting that it is quite possible that the men -who issued the earliest coins of Boeotia and Aegina were -influenced in the shape they gave these coins by the actual -objects which they were replacing. The coins of Aegina with -their high round upper side and flat under side suggest the -general outline of a tortoise. As the people of Olbia, like -the Chinese, Burmese and Ceylonese, had to make coins -in the shape of a fish, so the Aeginetans acting under a -like instinct may have wished to give a conventional representation -of the tortoise. The earliest coins have the incuse -on the reverse divided into <i>eight</i> triangular compartments. Are -these the <i>eight</i> plates which form invariably the <i>plastron</i> or -under surface of all the tortoise family? Later on the -Aeginetan incuse is always in five compartments, but in -the two well-known triangular depressions we perhaps find -an echo of the tortoise-<i>plastron</i><a id="FNanchor_409" href="#Footnote_409" class="fnanchor">[409]</a>. The earliest coins seem -to represent a sea-tortoise, for the feet are real <i>flippers</i> quite -distinct in shape from the legs shown on the later coins. As -the plates of the <i>carapace</i> (upper surface) are not fully represented -in the archaic coins, this omission may not be merely -due to rudeness of work, but rather because in the case of the -sea-tortoise the <i>thirteen</i> plates of the <i>carapace</i> are not so -prominent as in the land-tortoise. On the later coins where -the feet are those of the land-tortoise the coins accurately -represent the <i>thirteen</i> plates.</p> - -<p>It has to be borne in mind that the shape of the incuse -depressions on the reverse of coins is very constant. Thus -on the Aeginetan coins we never find what is known as the -mill-sail incuse which is the peculiar feature of the reverse<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_334"></a>[334]</span> -of the early Boeotian coins, nor on the other hand do we -even find the eight-fold incuse on the coins of Boeotia. Some -influences must have determined the choice of form, such as I -have just suggested in the case of Aegina. Did the first -Boeotian Mintmaster shape his coins with the real buckler -in his mind’s eye? On the reverse of these coins we find -the incuse forming a rude X, which is bounded by a circle -of dots, whilst in the centre of the incuse is the initial letter of -the name of the issuing town, such as 𐌈 for Thebes, 𐌇 for -Haliartus. Does the X-shaped incuse represent conventionally -the cross-bars of the frame of the shield seen at the back, -the circle dots indicating the outline? The letters on these -coins are the earliest inscriptions on the coins of Greece Proper. -We can easily see how they came to be placed on the coins, as -soon as we remember that there was a Λ on the Lacedaemonian -shields, a Σ on the Sicyonian, a Μ on the Messenian<a id="FNanchor_410" href="#Footnote_410" class="fnanchor">[410]</a>. -Why do not we find the initial in the coins placed on the -front of the shield, where it must have stood on the real -buckler? If as is held by the best authorities the coins of -Boeotia formed a federal currency, we see a reason for the -practice. As the silver shield replaced the real buckler, the -old unit which had been universally employed through Boeotia, -no town would have been permitted to put its initial on the -shield engraved on the obverse. No doubt the old actual -shield of currency was plain, and each purchaser painted the -initial of his own country upon it. The Mintmasters accordingly -of each town regarding the whole coin as a shield placed -the letter of these several states on the reverse. Baumeister -(<i>Denkmäler</i>, <i>s.v.</i> Wappen) gives pictures of the back of two -shields. The frame of the shield consists of a circular rod, -with two cross bars. The idea of making the incuse represent -the other side of the object given in relief on the obverse -seems to be just the stage between a complete representation -of the object as in the tunny of Olbia, and that evinced by -the early coins of Magna Graecia, on which the reverse gives<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_335"></a>[335]</span> -in the incuse exactly the same form as that in relief on the -obverse.</p> - -<p>At first sight the result of this great variety of local units -apparently places impassable barriers to trade, but a knowledge -of the actual facts of barbarous communities and their -monetary systems as they exist in our time easily dispels this -impression. I quoted above (<a href="#Page_46">p. 46</a>) the words of Mohammed -Ibn-Omar, wherein he points out that every separate district -in the Soudan has its own lower unit or units, whilst everywhere -alike the ox and the slave are the higher units; these -local units are equated one to the other, so that there is no -difficulty in trading. The same holds true of ancient Greece; -the tortoise-shell of Aegina may have been reckoned equal to -a certain amount of Attic olive oil or to a jar of wine of certain -size, which formed the unit of commerce at Thasos and Chios, -whilst in its turn a jar of wine was reckoned as equivalent to -a package of silphion from Cyrene, a kettle from Crete, or an -axe, or certain number of axes, or half-axes from Tenedos, or -an ox-hide shield from Boeotia. All were sub-multiples of the -ox, and had a fixed value in gold, and later in silver, as weighed -against grains of corn. This supposition is in complete accord -with the system revealed to us in the Homeric Poems, and -is confirmed by the evidence drawn from barbarous races in -modern times. It is likewise to be borne in mind that the -tendency to place religious and mythological types on Greek -coins was one especially developed in the later but not in the -earliest period of coinage. No doubt aesthetic considerations -played a large part in the adoption of such types, which came -especially into prominence when Greek art was at its height. -On the early coins one simple type is the rule, whilst at a -later stage, besides the old national type, many adjuncts and -symbols are added. Contrast the early coins of Athens with -the later. The archaic issues have an olive spray and an owl, the -later have not merely the owl, but an amphora, and a symbol -in the field alluding to the legend of Triptolemus. Again, at -Argos the early coins have simply the wolf or half-wolf or -wolf’s head, with a large A on the reverse, but in the later -times the A is accompanied by symbols, such as a crescent<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_336"></a>[336]</span> -and letters. The hare appears on the coins of Rhegium -and Messana, having been chosen as a type, according to -Aristotle, by the tyrant Anaxilas in commemoration of the -introduction of that animal by him into Sicily; but it also -appears on a rare coin of Messana, not as a main type, but as -caressed by Pan. This does not prove that the hare was a -symbol of Pan, but that for artistic purposes the rustic god in -the act of caressing the hare is chosen instead of the more -commonplace type of the hare all alone. So at Thasos the -coins with old Silenus quaffing from a wine-cup do not signify -that Silenus was a principal object of worship, but he is simply -added for picturesque effect. We can at all events draw one -conclusion from the historical origin assigned to both this type -and that of the axe of Tenedos, that in the middle of the 4th -cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> the Greeks did not see any religious significance -in them, any more than they did in the representation of the -mule-car which had won at Olympia, placed on his coins by -Anaxilas. If, as has been so emphatically laid down by the -leading modern Greek numismatists, the types on Greek coins -are so essentially religious in origin, it is extremely difficult to -explain the extraordinary rapidity with which all such notions -as regards their origin must have vanished from the minds of -the most learned of the Greeks, at so early a date as the 4th -cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> (hardly more than two centuries after the introduction -of the art of coining). The Greeks regarded those types -from much the same point of view as we regard St George -and the Dragon on sovereigns and crowns, or the Lady Godiva -riding <i>in puris naturalibus</i> on the Coventry tokens. The effort<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_337"></a>[337]</span> -to turn agonistic into religious types by contending that, as -the Olympic festival was of religious origin, so the successful -chariot which had won at Olympia was a sacred symbol, can -only be regarded as an ingenious effort to attach by even the -most slender thread a simple commemorative type to a religious -origin.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 375px;" id="figure47"> -<img src="images/figure47.jpg" width="375" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 47.</span> Coin of Messana.</p> -</div> - -<p>There is not the slightest reason for treating with incredulity -the statement that Anaxilas introduced the hare into -Sicily. Pollux<a id="FNanchor_411" href="#Footnote_411" class="fnanchor">[411]</a> tells us that there were no hares in Ithaca, and -from the same source we learn that the islanders of Carpathus, -wishing to add the animal to the products of their isle, introduced -a single pair, the descendants of which became in a -short time so numerous that they ruined the crops, a story -which finds a singular parallel in the history of the introduction -of the rabbit into Australia in our own days. The -hare was to the old Greek sportsman (as we know from the -Tracts on Hunting of Xenophon and Arrian) what the stag -was to the mediaeval baron, and the fox to the modern English -squire. If William the Conqueror, as says the chronicler, -“loved the tall deer as though he were their father,” the -tyrant Anaxilas may well have prided himself upon the introduction -of the hare into Sicily in much the same manner -as modern sportsmen have brought the French partridge into -England. When once the type was started, the dislike of any -change in coin types is so strong that we need not be surprised -at the hare appearing for a long period on the coins of Messana -and Rhegium. Besides, the hare was considered by the Greek -gourmet as the choicest of viands: all readers of Aristophanes -are familiar with “jugged hare” as a proverbial expression for -“the best of cheer.”</p> - -<h3><i>Variation of Silver Standards.</i></h3> - -<p>The connection between the types on early silver coins of -Greece and the earlier local units of value being probably such -as I have indicated, we next approach the question of changes -in the weight of the silver coins at various places and at various<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_338"></a>[338]</span> -times. Besides the ordinary Euboic and Aeginetic standards we -find others such as the Rhodian, and the Ptolemaic, the former -so named because the island of Rhodes from the beginning of -the 4th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> ceased to strike tetradrachms of the full -Attic weight of 270 grs. and coined instead pieces which range in -weight from 240 to 230 grs., the latter getting its name from the -dynasty of the Lagidae, who quickly dropped the full weight -of the tetradrachm (270 grs.) as struck by Alexander, and reverted -to the Phoenician silver of 220 grs., which they used not -only for silver, but also for gold; it is to this last fact that the -name Ptolemaic as given to the standard is really due, for as a -standard for gold it was certainly new. But not merely shall -we find coins standing so far apart from the usual standards that -we are obliged to give them distinctive appellations, but we -likewise find various modifications of the Aeginetic in various -places, whilst in some parts of northern Greece and Thrace we -shall find the so-called Phoenician and Babylonian standards -in occupation. It is hardly possible that mere degradation of -weight will account for all the phenomena; accordingly the -object of this section will be to show that from first to last -<i>the Greek communities were engaged in an endless quest after -bimetallism</i>: we shall find, as we have already indicated, -that whilst the gold unit never varies in any part of Hellas -until a late epoch, the silver coins exhibit differences not merely -between one district and another, but even between one period -and another in the self-same city or state. There is incontrovertible -evidence to prove that the same trouble was caused by -the fluctuation in the relative value of gold and silver as arises -in modern times. Xenophon<a id="FNanchor_412" href="#Footnote_412" class="fnanchor">[412]</a> in his treatise <i>De Vectigalibus</i> -(speaking of the benefit likely to accrue to the state if the -silver mines of Laurium were better worked) makes the most -interesting remark that “if any one were to allege that gold -too is not less useful than silver, that I do not deny, yet -this I know that gold, whenever it turns up in quantity,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_339"></a>[339]</span> -becomes on the one hand cheaper itself, and on the other makes -silver dearer.” This passage alone is sufficient to show how -sensitive was the old Greek money market in the beginning -of the 4th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, and this statement is amply substantiated -on Italian soil by a passage quoted by Strabo<a id="FNanchor_413" href="#Footnote_413" class="fnanchor">[413]</a> from -Polybius, from which we learn that after the discovery of a -rich gold mine in the land of the Taurisci of Noricum, within -the space of two months “gold went down one third in value -throughout all Italy.” Such being the effect of a discovery of -gold, it is evident that either the silver currency must undergo -certain modifications in order that a definite round number -of silver units may be equal to the gold unit, or on the other -hand the gold unit must undergo modification. But as we -have shown that the gold unit remained unaltered throughout -all Hellas, Asia and Egypt down to the time of the Ptolemies, -it follows that whatever changes were necessary must have -taken place in the <i>silver</i> standards. Of this we have proof in -the case of Rhodes itself. Down to 408 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> the three ancient -cities of Ialysus, Camirus and Lindus issued each a separate -series of coins, Camirus on the Aeginetic standard, the other -two on the Phoenician. In 408 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> all these united in founding -the new city of Rhodes, and henceforward there is a single -coinage. At first the Attic standard seems to have been employed -for silver, as rare tetradrachms of 260 grs. are found, but -it must have very soon given place to the so-called Rhodian, -the tetradrachm of which ranges from 240 to 230 grs. About -the same time (400 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) the Rhodians began to issue gold -staters of the so-called Euboic standard, and for a century -this double issue of gold and silver continued unbroken. It is -plain, from the case of this famous island, that it is only the -silver standards which changed. There can be no doubt that -the unit by which gold in bullion was reckoned before that -metal was coined was the so-called Euboic or ox-unit, but during -the archaic period we find both the so-called Phoenician (220 -grs.) and Aeginetic (drachms of 92 grs.) being employed for -silver in the island, whilst after 408 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> gold is issued on the ox-unit,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_340"></a>[340]</span> -but silver, although at first on this standard, immediately -changes to the Rhodian of 240 grs. Evidently then the fixed -element is the gold, the fluctuating the silver. The coinage of -Rhodes likewise exemplifies the doctrine already indicated, that -the employment of religious and mythological symbols seems -to mark not the earlier but rather the later stages of Greek -coining. Thus Camirus employed the fig-leaf, Ialysus half a -winged boar, and Lindus the lions head with open jaws, but -after 408 Helios the Sun-god, from whom all Rhodians alike -claimed descent, and to whom the island was sacred<a id="FNanchor_414" href="#Footnote_414" class="fnanchor">[414]</a>, becomes -the regular type, with the <i>type parlant</i> of the Rose (<i>Rhodon</i>) on -the reverse.</p> - -<p>Next let us take the money of Macedonia, where there was -an abundant coinage of both gold and silver. The Pelasgian -tribe of Bisaltae, and the Thracian Edonians and Odomanti, had -during the half century which preceded the Persian wars all -struck silver on the so-called Phoenician standard. It is commonly -supposed that they obtained this standard from the -important town of Abdera, which at the same period employed -a like standard, and it is suggested that Abdera had borrowed -it from her mother Teos, who had borrowed it from Miletus -and the other great towns of the Ionian seaboard, among which -it was especially employed for electrum. But unfortunately, -whilst the types of Teos and Abdera are the same (a seated -Griffin), the staters of Teos weigh only 186 grs., which is the -Aeginetic, not the Phoenician (220 grs.) standard. Shortly -after the overthrow of the Persian host Alexander I. of Macedon -acquired the land of the Bisaltae along with the rich silver -mines, which were said to produce for him a talent daily, and -he adopted both the types and standard of the Bisaltian silver -coinage, only substituting his own name for that of the Bisaltae. -During the century which elapsed between Alexander I. and -the accession of the famous Philip II. the coinage of Macedon -and that of Abdera followed the same course in each case; -the Phoenician standard of 230 grs. gave way to the so-called -Babylonian or Persian of about 170 grs. Again, it has been -suggested that Abdera influenced the neighbouring communities<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_341"></a>[341]</span> -in this change. But when Philip came to the throne he returned -to the Phoenician standard for silver, and when for the first -time in Macedon he issued a bountiful coinage of gold staters, -they were struck on the ancient gold unit, the so-called -Euboic standard of 130 grs. But hardly had Philip slept with -his fathers, and Alexander reigned in his stead, when a need -was felt for a change in the silver standard. Accordingly the -latter in the early years of his reign began, and continued to -his death, to strike his silver on the same standard as his gold. -Let us now study the lessons to be learned from this history of -currency. There can be no reasonable doubt that the ox-unit -or <i>stater</i> was the unit by which gold was estimated from first to -last in that region. Unless it already existed Philip would not -have employed it for his gold coinage at a time when he was -making changes in his silver, but would have assimilated his gold -to his silver standard. But, as before remarked, just because -gold was not coined anywhere in Greece until the closing years -of the 5th century, and in all transactions it passed as bullion, so -much the stronger was the reason for keeping its weight-unit -unchanged. But was the standard of 220 grs. really an imported -Phoenician, or was it not rather one arrived at in that -region by the natives themselves owing to the relations then -existing between silver and gold? It is evident from the account -given of the Bisaltian silver mines that in the time preceding -and immediately posterior to the Persian invasion silver -was exceedingly abundant in all that region. It is then by no -means unlikely that it required ten silver pieces of 220 grs. -each to make the equivalent of one gold unit of 130 grs. With -the exhaustion of the silver mines, and perhaps a greater output -of gold, silver became dearer, and consequently 10 silver -pieces of 170 grs. each were now equal to a gold stater. Abdera -on the coast would come perfectly within the sphere of such -changed conditions, and her standard would consequently likewise -undergo modification. With Philip’s accession, fresh conquests -and a general development of resources may have temporarily -thrown more silver on the market, thus inducing him to -revert to the 220 grs. standard, but the exploiting of the famous -mines of Crenides increased the supply of gold to such an<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_342"></a>[342]</span> -extent that by the time Alexander mounted his fathers throne -gold stood to silver in the relation of 10:1, and it was found -extremely convenient to coin this on the same footing as gold, -10 silver pieces of 135 grs. being exactly equal to the gold stater -of like weight. A like explanation applies to the coinage of -Thrace. Amongst the Thracian tribes who dwelt near Mount -Pangaeum and worked the gold and silver mines of that region -the art of coining had been known from the 6th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> and -they issued silver coins of about 160 grs. This is regarded by -some as debased Babylonian or Persic standard. But it is far -more rational to suppose that in that region gold was more -plentiful in proportion to silver than it was at that time further -west in Macedonia, and accordingly a certain number of silver -didrachms of 160 grs. were found to represent the gold stater or -ox-unit. It seems most unlikely that a people long acquainted -with both gold and silver could not devise for themselves a -simple method of making some convenient number of silver -pieces be equivalent to one gold, and that, on the contrary, -having once obtained a certain standard fixed for silver in Asia -Minor, at a time when gold was to silver as 13:1, they would -blindly cleave to this standard, no matter how great a change -took place in the relation of the metals. In face of the statements -of Xenophon and Polybius already quoted and the fact -that Solon deliberately constructed a new silver standard, it -is simply impossible to believe such a doctrine.</p> - -<p>On the opposite shore from Thrace lay the flourishing -city of Cyzicus. This wealthy community commenced to issue -electrum staters and <i>hectae</i> in the 5th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, if not -earlier, the former being about 252 grs., the latter 41 grs. -These electrum staters have been shown by Professor Gardner -to have contained gold and silver in about equal proportions<a id="FNanchor_415" href="#Footnote_415" class="fnanchor">[415]</a>.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_343"></a>[343]</span> -This most important fact, taken in connection with the literary -evidence derived from Xenophon and Demosthenes, makes it -probable that the Cyzicene stater of 252 grs. was counted -equal to a Daric of 130 grs. of pure gold<a id="FNanchor_416" href="#Footnote_416" class="fnanchor">[416]</a>. “These coins of -Cyzicus,” says Mr Head, “together with the Persian Darics -formed the staple of the gold currency of the whole ancient -world, until such time as they were both superseded by the -gold staters of Philip and Alexander the Great<a id="FNanchor_417" href="#Footnote_417" class="fnanchor">[417]</a>.”</p> - -<p>Not only did they circulate side by side with the Darics, -but it is worthy of notice that when the Cyzicenes struck coins of -pure gold (<i>circa</i> 413 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) they were of Daric type and standard. -The earliest silver coins (430-412 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) were small pieces of -32 and 18 grs., whilst the larger coins which come later are -on the Phoenician silver standard of 212 grs. (412 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), whilst -from 400 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> to 330 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> the Rhodian standard of 235 grs. prevailed. -From the story of her coinage we learn clearly that -at Cyzicus the inferior metals bowed to the sway of gold. The -electrum stater of 252 grs. is made equal to the pure gold unit, -and whilst the silver standard changes from 212 grs. to 235 grs. -the gold and pale gold pieces in currency remain inviolate. -Once more, it is almost certain that some displacement in the -relative values of the metals had caused the raising of the -standard from 212 grs. to 235 grs. One thing certainly is -beyond doubt, and that is the utter improbability of the introduction -of the 235 grs. standard being in any way due to the -influence of Rhodes. This remark likewise applies to Chios, -where from a very early period (600-490 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) side by side -with electrum staters of 217 grs. we find didrachms of silver of -123-120 grs., “a weight peculiar to Chios,” says Mr Head, -“which was probably the Phoenician somewhat raised.” But why -was it raised? The real solution is that the relations between -gold, electrum and silver at Chios necessitated the striking of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_344"></a>[344]</span> -silver on a standard a few grains lighter than the gold unit -in use (the Persian Daric), and the electrum stater of 217 grs. -Space forbids our going through all the cities of the Ionian -coast in detail, but the principle which we have laid down and -illustrated from the currency systems of several leading states -is sufficient to indicate the method by which we would explain -the fluctuations in the silver standards employed at different times -in various states. The Daric is the universal gold unit of all -this region; by its side is the electrum stater usually of 217 grs. -and most probably the equivalent in value of the pure gold coin -of 130 grs.: along with them we find singular fluctuations in -the silver currency; towns that are close neighbours employing -different systems contemporaneously.</p> - -<p>There is, however, one state which cannot be passed over -without more particular reference. At an earlier page I spoke -of the gold mines of Thasos, which had attracted the attention -of the Phoenicians at a very early time. But, in addition to -the mineral wealth of their own island, the Thasians drew a -huge annual revenue from their mines on the mainland. Although -the first influence in the island was Phoenician, and -the Thasians themselves were Ionians from Paros, instead of -finding the Phoenician standard employed for its silver coins, -we see them striking their archaic coins on the so-called -Babylonian system. Under the supremacy of Athens this -standard fell so much that it eventually coincided with the -Attic (138 grs.) or even was lower. The Thasians, after revolting -from Athens in 411 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, struck gold coins for the first -time; these were on the Euboic or ox-unit standard (consisting -of half-staters and thirds). But about the same period -they began to coin silver on the so-called Phoenician of 220 -grs. It is indeed strange that in the early age, when the -Phoenician tradition was still strong, they did not employ -the 220 grs. standard, but only resorted to it after employing -for a long period the Babylonian and Attic standards. It is -evident that in Thasos, as elsewhere, there had existed the -same gold unit for untold generations, else at the very time -when they revolted from Athens and adopted a new standard -for their silver, they would not have struck gold on what is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_345"></a>[345]</span> -commonly called the Attic or Euboic standard. It is evident -that the changes in the silver standards were due to changes in -the relation of silver to gold, the fall in standard from 168 grs. -to 135 grs. indicating perhaps that silver, which at first was -to gold as 1:13, had gradually grown dearer.</p> - -<h3><i>Commercial Weight System.</i></h3> - -<p>We must now turn to the commercial weight system. As -elsewhere, one of the chief commodities to come under such a -system was copper, and the history of the weighing of this -metal, as far as it can be learned, will be of great importance -to us. Now we should naturally expect that at Athens, which -had in later days but one standard for gold and silver, copper -likewise would have been estimated on this unit. But, as a -matter of fact, there were two distinct standards in use at -Athens, as is proved by two weights preserved in the British -Museum, the inscription on one of which is <i>Mina of the -Market</i> (ΜΝΑ ΑΓΟΡ), that on the other is <i>Mina of the -State</i> (ΜΝΑ ΔΗΜΟ). This mina of the market is the same -as that called the <i>Commercial Mina</i> on an Attic inscription<a id="FNanchor_418" href="#Footnote_418" class="fnanchor">[418]</a>, -where its weight is given as that of 138 silver drachms, that -is, the weight of an Aeginetic mina of silver. Athens had not -coined any money of her own up to Solon’s time, but seems -to have employed the coins of Aegina. But this standard, -although no longer employed for silver, did not fall into desuetude. -As already pointed out, all peoples have felt the need -of a heavier standard for cheap articles than that which serves -for gold. Probably the Aeginetic mina had been used at -Athens for copper: accordingly, when Solon made his new -silver standard for the weighing of silver, the Aeginetic standard -was found convenient for less costly and more bulky wares, and -was therefore retained in use as the mercantile or market -standard, the name <span class="smcap">State</span> being given to the silver standard.</p> - -<p>We have learned already that in the early stages of society -copper and iron are not sold or appraised by weight, but rather -by measurement. We have also seen that there is every reason -to believe that the Greek obol originally was a spike or rod<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_346"></a>[346]</span> -of copper of a definite length and thickness. If we can believe -the statement of Ephorus given by Strabo that Phidon -of Argos established a weight as well as a measure system for -the Peloponnesians (although Herodotus is silent as regards -weights), it is not at all improbable that, taking this story -in conjunction with the dedication of the old bar money by -Phidon in the temple of Hera, we have here a genuine tradition -of the superseding of the bars of metal, the value of -which simply depended on their dimensions, by a system based -essentially on weight. It is plain that, as copper was weighed -both at Aegina and Athens by the Aeginetic silver standard, -copper most probably was never estimated by weight until -after the forming of the separate silver standard in the way -already described.</p> - -<p>We have previously noticed the fact that the two principal -terms applied to silver coins, <i>drachm</i> and <i>obol</i>, give clear indications -that they have been borrowed from an ancient system -of copper (just as we shall presently find that the <i>denarius</i>, the -special term employed for their silver currency by the Romans, -owes its origin to the ancient copper <i>as</i>). If further proof -were required, it is afforded by the name employed for the -subdivisions of the obol. The latter at Athens was divided -into 8 <i>chalci</i> or <i>coppers</i> (χαλκοῖ). The smallest silver coin at -Athens was the half-obol, but in some places names, <i>Trichalcum</i>, -<i>Tetrachalcum</i>, etc. were given to copper coins. Now, as -the Aeginetan obol weighed about 16½ grs. and the Attic -11¼, the former is one-third greater than the latter. But we -shall see shortly that as the Attic obol has 8 <i>chalci</i>, the Aeginetan -must have had 12, from which it follows that the ancient -copper obol or bar used in Aegina, throughout Peloponnesus, -and at Athens, and probably throughout Boeotia, was everywhere -the same.</p> - -<h3><i>The Sicilian System.</i></h3> - -<p>In dealing with the Sicilian and Italian systems we must -reverse the order of treatment of the metals, and as it is in the -copper that we shall find the closest link between the Greek -and those other systems, we shall therefore commence with -that metal.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_347"></a>[347]</span></p> - -<p>On the Italian Peninsula and in Sicily we find a series of -weight and monetary terms totally distinct from any found in -Greece Proper. From this alone we may infer that, even before -the settlement of any Greek Colonies in Magna Graecia and -Sicily, there existed a well defined system, if not of weight, at -least for the exchange of copper by fixed standards of measurement. -In various Sicilian cities we find small silver coins -called <i>litrae</i>; these beyond all question are simply the representatives -in silver of an ancient copper unit employed by the -Sicels, and which they had brought with them into the island. -These Sicels were a tribe of the great Italian stock (itself a -branch of the Aryan family) closely related to the Umbrians, -Latins, and Oscans, had probably formed the van of the Aryan -advance into the Peninsula, and had finally crossed the straits -and overcome the Sicanians, an Iberic race, who were the -earliest inhabitants of the island of whom any historical record -exists. The word <i>litra</i> is merely a dialectic form of the -same original <i>lidhra</i><a id="FNanchor_419" href="#Footnote_419" class="fnanchor">[419]</a>, from which the Latin <i>libra</i> itself is -sprung. But whilst we shall have little difficulty in finding -out the weight at which the Latin <i>libra</i> was fixed, we have just -as great difficulty in discovering that of the Sicilian <i>litra</i>, as we -have lately found in the case of the ancient Greek copper obol. -As copper was only coined at a late period, and the copper -coins are merely tokens, or money of account, we are unable to -arrive at any conclusion as to the original full weight of the -litra from any data afforded by the copper coins of the various -Sicilian states, although, from the circumstance that many of -these coins bear marks of value, at first sight it might seem -far otherwise. Thus at Agrigentum in the period preceding -415 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> the copper litra weighed about 750 grs., between -415 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> and 406 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 613 grs., and from 340 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> to 287 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -it was about 536 grs. only. At Himera between 472 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -and 415 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> it was about 990 grs., but within the same period -it fell to 200 grs., whilst at Camarina between 415 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> and -405 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> it was about 221 grs. Not only therefore is it futile to -attempt any statement of the reduction of the litra in Sicily in -general, but also to arrive at any sound approximation to its<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_348"></a>[348]</span> -full original weight, as far as the weight of the copper coins is -concerned. On the other hand, any calculation based on the -relative values of copper and silver has been up to the present -unsatisfactory, owing to the great uncertainty which still -prevails, Mommsen making the relation in the earlier period -stand as 288:1, whilst Mr Soutzo thinks it never can have -been higher than 120:1.</p> - -<p>The latter view I have already proved to be untenable when -we apply the test of the value of cattle, and it was made -probable that in the 5th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> silver was to copper -as 300:1. From this it will be possible to show that the -full weight of the copper litra was originally about 4900 grs.</p> - -<p>Any effort to determine the original weight of the copper -litra by a new method calls for a merciful consideration, even -though it too may fail. Whilst the original weight of the -litra is still a matter of doubt, we are fortunately completely -acquainted with the method of its subdivisions. The litra -was divided into 12 parts called Ungiae, Unciae or Onciae, -a name which is no other than the Latin <i>Uncia</i>. This at -once brings us face to face with the Roman copper system, -where the <i>as</i> was the higher unit, and was divided into -12 unciae (ounces). But there are other striking coincidences -of nomenclature. Thus ⅙ of the <i>as</i> was called <i>sextans</i>; one-sixth -of the litra is called <i>Hexâs</i> (ἑξᾶς), and the <i>Triens</i> -and <i>Quadrans</i> are paralleled by the <i>trias</i> (τριᾶς) and <i>tetras</i> -(τετρᾶς) although there is a difference in the application of -these terms. Then the five-twelfths of the <i>as</i> is <i>Quincunx</i>; the -same fraction of the litra is <i>Pentonkion</i> (πετόγκιον). We have -plainly therefore a common Italo-Sicilian copper system, the -terms of which were adopted and Graecised by the settlers in -Italy and Sicily.</p> - -<p>Now we have already adverted to the fact that the earliest -Sicilian towns which coined money, Naxos, Zancle and Himera, -although Chalcidian colonies, yet employed the Aeginetic -standard, whereas we might naturally expect them to follow -the Euboic. This would give the maximum of 16½ grs. for -the silver obol. Now according to Pollux, Aristotle in his lost -treatise on the constitution of Agrigentum says that the litra is<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_349"></a>[349]</span> -worth an Aeginetan obol, and Pollux goes on to say that “one -would find in him (Aristotle) in his Constitution of the Himeraeans -likewise other names of Sicilian coins, such as <i>ungia</i>, which -is equivalent to one <i>chalcus</i>, and <i>hexas</i>, which is equivalent to -two <i>chalci</i>, and <i>trias</i>, which is equivalent to three <i>chalci</i>, and -<i>hemilitron</i> (half litra), which is equivalent to six, and litra -which is equivalent to an obol<a id="FNanchor_420" href="#Footnote_420" class="fnanchor">[420]</a>.” It is plain from this that -Aristotle knew that the Aeginetic obol was divided into <i>twelve -chalci</i>. Thus the proposition laid down above, that the ancient -Greek copper obol was a rod or spike divided into 12 parts, is -thoroughly proved. The reason why the Attic obol had only -8 <i>chalci</i> is now plain; it was, as we saw, only two-thirds of the -Aeginetan and consequently only contained two-thirds of the -whole number of pieces of copper into which the ancient copper -unit was divided. Now, as we find the Chalcidian settlers of -Himera and other places not using their native Euboic standard -for coining, but employing the Aeginetic, and as the Aeginetic -obol was equal to the Sicilian litra, we are justified in the conclusion, -that when the Greek settlers reached Italy and Sicily -they found their Italic kinsfolk using a copper unit exactly the -same as that employed in Greece; and that finally, when they -began to coin, they found it more convenient to strike silver on -a standard which was both convenient in reference to exchange -with gold, as I have shown above, and had the further advantage -of corresponding accurately in value to the ancient copper unit -in use among the Sicels. If, as I indicated, silver was to copper -as 300:1, the Aeginetic silver obol of 16⅔ grs. would be worth -5000 grs. of copper (practically the same as the early Roman -<i>libra</i>). It follows then that if we could only discover the weight -of the Sicilian litra we should know that of the old Greek <i>copper</i> -obol. Is this possible? We have no reason to doubt that the -obol was a rod of copper of a certain size, which in the course of -time after the introduction of coined money shrank up until -the original rod was only represented by what had been its -equivalent in silver, or a small copper coin, whose name still -survives in the <i>ob</i> used in old account books as the symbol for<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_350"></a>[350]</span> -<i>half-penny</i><a id="FNanchor_421" href="#Footnote_421" class="fnanchor">[421]</a>. The Greek coinage has preserved for us but faint -traces of the various steps in the degradation of the copper obol, -but, as we have already seen, we find the Sicilian copper litra -in various stages of its decadence from 990 grs. down to 200 grs. -Again, whilst no trace has as yet been found of obols at all -in the archaic shape of rods, or anything approaching it, we -find in Sicily at Agrigentum <i>litrae</i> which are in form distinct -survivals of an earlier stage when the litra, like the obol, was a -rod or bar of copper. These are very strange looking lumps -of bronze made in the shape of a tooth with a flat base, having -on one side an eagle or eagle’s head and on the other a crab, -while on the base are marks of value ⸬, ⸪, : (<i>tetras</i>, <i>trias</i>, -<i>hexas</i>). The <i>uncia</i> is almond-shaped with an eagle’s head on -one side, and a crab’s claw on the other<a id="FNanchor_422" href="#Footnote_422" class="fnanchor">[422]</a>. As we found the -Chinese knife shrinking up into a shorter and thicker mass until -at last it only survives in the round <i>cash</i>, so in all probability -we here find the Sicilian litra in its mid course from its -original full size and shape to that of the ordinary round -copper coin of a later age. That the shape of the original -copper unit of the Italians was that of a rod or bar we shall -now proceed to demonstrate in the case of the Roman <i>as</i>.</p> - -<h3><i>The Italian System. Bronze.</i></h3> - -<p>As the cow formed the highest unit in the monetary -system of ancient Italy, so the lowest unit employed was a -certain amount of copper called an <i>as</i>. We have already -found the cow serving the same purpose in Sicily (as late as -the time of Dionysius forming the rateable unit at Syracuse). -The systems of Further Asia, where the buffalo stands at the -head of the scale and the hoe or a piece of raw metal of a -certain size stands at the bottom, form a perfect analogy in -modern times. As far as its value and divisional system go, -we have identified the Sicilian litra with the ancient Hellenic<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_351"></a>[351]</span> -obol or rod, and we have in turn discovered a very close -resemblance between the divisions of the litra and that of the -<i>as</i>. I now propose to examine into the original nature of this -denomination, and the form of the object to which it was -applied. This will have been effectually accomplished, if I -can succeed in establishing the proposition <i>that the as was -primarily a rod or bar of copper, one foot in length, divided into -12 parts, called inches (unciae), thus coinciding with the Greek -obol in form, as also in its duodecimal division</i>.</p> - -<p>We must, as a preliminary, note carefully several most -essential facts connected with the <i>as</i>: (1) The term <i>as</i> (as -used in respect of metals) is never employed for either gold -or silver, but is appropriated to <i>bronze</i> exclusively; (2) it is -not the Roman unit of weight, for that is expressed by the -general term <i>libra</i>, a word exactly corresponding to the Greek -<i>Talanton</i>, since it means both the <i>weight</i> and the <i>scales</i>; (3) the -<i>as</i> is not confined to weight, but is also employed as the unit -of linear measure equal to the foot, and also as the unit of -land measure equal to the <i>jugerum</i> or acre.</p> - -<p>The following table exhibits the subdivisions of the <i>as</i>:</p> - -<table summary="The subdivisions of the as"> - <tr> - <td colspan="3">As (Pes, Jugerum)</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Deunx</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>¹¹⁄₁₂</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Dextans</td> - <td></td> - <td>¹⁰⁄₁₂</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Dodrans</td> - <td></td> - <td>¾</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Bes</td> - <td></td> - <td>⅔</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Septunx</td> - <td></td> - <td>⁷⁄₁₂</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Semis</td> - <td></td> - <td>½</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Quincunx</td> - <td></td> - <td>⁵⁄₁₂</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Triens</td> - <td></td> - <td>⅓</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Quadrans</td> - <td></td> - <td>¼</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Sextans</td> - <td></td> - <td>⅙</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Uncia</td> - <td></td> - <td>⅟₁₂</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Semuncia</td> - <td></td> - <td>⅟₂₄</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Sicilicus</td> - <td></td> - <td>⅟₄₈</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Sextula</td> - <td></td> - <td>⅟₇₂</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>Scriptulum</td> - <td></td> - <td>⅟₂₈₈</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Now it has been hitherto assumed by all writers that the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_352"></a>[352]</span> -system of division employed in the <i>as</i> as a unit of <i>weight</i> has -been transferred to <i>measure</i>. This however is contrary to all -experience, for, as we have had occasion constantly before to -notice, weight units are derived from measures, e.g. the bushel -from the measure of that name, and so on. In the next place -as the <i>as</i> is not the unit of Roman weight, if even the measure -unit was borrowed from the weight, we ought to expect -the foot to be called a <i>libra</i> rather than an <i>as</i>. It is far more -likely that a unit originally employed for measure would in -time give its name to a weight-unit corresponding in mass to -the original measure-unit. There are besides certain pieces -of evidence afforded by the nomenclature of the submultiples -which point directly to the original as being a measure rather -than a weight-unit. The 24th part of the uncia is called the -<i>scriptulum</i>, <i>little scratch</i>, or <i>line</i> (<i>scribo</i>), which is exactly translated -by the Greeks as <i>gramme</i> (γραμμή, scratch or line)<a id="FNanchor_423" href="#Footnote_423" class="fnanchor">[423]</a>. Now -whilst 24 strokes make an excellent method of dividing the -uncia in its capacity of <i>inch</i>, they of course have no significance -as submultiples of uncia, meaning <i>ounce</i>. Moreover, the forms -of several of the best known divisions of the <i>as</i>, such as triens, -quadrans, sextans, which are not easy to explain on the hypothesis -that the terminology was primarily applied to weight, -on the other hand admit of a ready solution when we take the -<i>as</i> as originally a unit of measure. For sextans means not a -sixth, but that which makes a sixth, triens not a third, but that -which divides in three parts, and quadrans not a fourth, but -that which makes fourfold, i.e. divides into four, for <i>quadra</i> -means not a fourth part, but that which has four parts (hence -usually a square). If we regard these words as referring to -certain lines drawn across a bar of metal, their meaning is -obvious. Whilst <i>sextans uncia</i>, the ounce which makes a sixth, -is nonsense, <i>sextans linea</i>, the line which makes a sixth, gives -excellent sense, so likewise <i>triens linea</i> fits in admirably with -the required meaning, whilst <i>quadrans linea</i> seems to mean -<i>the line which divides the whole into four parts</i>.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_353"></a>[353]</span></p> - -<p>The etymology of the word <i>as</i> has long been a puzzle. -Scholars starting with the assumption that <i>as</i> was the Roman -abstract term for unity have accordingly searched for an appropriate -derivation. Some have identified it with the Greek -<i>heis</i> one (εἶς through a Tarentine ἇς), whilst the most recent -attempt connects it with the first syllable of <i>el</i>ementum. The -same principle has been carried out with regard to <i>uncia</i>, which -has been treated simply as meaning <i>unit</i> and connected with -<i>unus</i> and <i>unicus</i>.</p> - -<p>Now it is notorious that the Roman mind was essentially -concrete, and found great difficulty in arriving at abstract -ideas, and consequently at abstract terms. This alone would -make us hesitate to believe that <i>as</i> had originally begun -as an abstract term meaning unit, and rather incline us to -believe that it started in life as a name for some common -concrete object. But we have seen above that the numerals -in all languages seem originally to have meant certain actual -physical objects which served as counters, such as the fingers -and toes (<i>decem</i> δέκα, <i>digitus</i> δάκτυλος), seeds or pebbles. If -such has been the origin of the various names for <i>unit</i>, we -can hardly believe that any term for <i>unity</i> can have originated -independently of some concrete object. To add to the mists -which hang round the origin of the <i>as</i>, its division into 12 -parts is taken to indicate a Babylonian source. Now the -Roman foot was divided, not merely into 16 fingers like the -Greek, but also into 12 unciae or inches like our own. The -latter is most probably the true Italian system, as it is that -found among their cousins and neighbours the Kelts, as well -as amongst the Teutonic peoples. With ourselves still the -rustic measures inches by his thumb, just as he measures feet -by means of his own natural foot. The ancient Irish foot was -divided into 12 thumbs or inches (<i>ordlach</i>, Lat. <i>pollex</i>, the -initial <i>p</i> being lost in Irish)<a id="FNanchor_424" href="#Footnote_424" class="fnanchor">[424]</a>. The Romans too (as did likewise -the Teutonic peoples, <i>e.g.</i> Icelandic <i>tomme</i>, an inch) used the -thumb (<i>pollex</i>) as the ordinary measure in practical life<a id="FNanchor_425" href="#Footnote_425" class="fnanchor">[425]</a>. The -division then into 12 unciae is simply the result of the fact that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_354"></a>[354]</span> -a certain natural relation exists between the breadth of the -thumb and the length of the foot, and as the relation held -true just as much for the Kelt as the Chaldaean, there was no -need for the ancient Italians to borrow their duodecimal system -from the East. Now what are we to say as to the origin of -the word <i>uncia</i>? Does it mean anything more or less than -the breadth of the (thumb) <i>nail</i>? The use of <i>unguis</i>, a nail, -as a measure was common in Latin, as we know from the -phrases <i>transversum unguem</i> (the thickness of a nail) and <i>latum -unguem</i> (a nail’s breadth) side by side with <i>transversum digitum</i> -(a fingers thickness) in Plautus. <i>Uncia</i> may be simply a -derivative from <i>unguis</i>; there is no phonetic impossibility, -and even if there were any linguistic irregularity, false analogy -with <i>unicus</i> would amply account for it. The use of a word -meaning <i>nail</i> to express the divisions of the foot is completely -paralleled by the ancient Hindu system, where the <i>finger-breadth</i> -is termed <i>angala</i>, <i>i.e.</i> nail (cognate of <i>unguis</i> and ὄνυξ).</p> - -<p>Next we come to the word <i>as</i> itself, which appears in old -Latin as <i>assis</i>. It is masculine in gender, which of itself is -sufficient to throw doubts on its being a really abstract word. -Can it be that we have a close relative of it in <i>asser</i> a rod, bar, -pole, which is likewise masculine in gender? Whilst one form of -the name was specially confined to a small rod or bar of copper, -the other was employed in a wide and general way. These two -forms <i>assis</i> and <i>asser</i>,-<i>is</i> are completely analogous to <i>vomis</i> and -<i>vomer</i>,-<i>is</i>, a ploughshare. The meaning <i>rod</i> is in complete -harmony with what we have said about the Greek obol. All -that is now wanting to make our proof complete is some evidence -that the primitive Italian <i>as</i> was really in the form of a rod or -bar. The most archaic specimens of ancient Italian bronze -money as yet described are those found at the Ponte di Badia -near Vulci in 1828. These consisted (1) of quadrilaterals broken -in pieces, weighing from 2 to 3 pounds each, stamped with an -ox and trident, (2) cube-shaped pieces of copper without any -mark, weighing from an ounce to a pound, and (3) some -ellipse-shaped pieces for the most part weighing two ounces<a id="FNanchor_426" href="#Footnote_426" class="fnanchor">[426]</a>. -But in the British Museum are preserved a number of pieces of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_355"></a>[355]</span> -bronze which are roughly quadrilateral. A cursory examination -showed me that, whilst two parallel sides exhibit the marks -of a mould, the two remaining sides displayed unmistakable -signs of fracture. Several of them are end pieces, showing -the voluting of the mould on two sides and at one end, whilst -the other end shows marks of having been broken (<a href="#figure48">Fig. 48</a>).<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_356"></a>[356]</span> -Several of them bear stamps, or letters. There can be no -doubt that these are pieces of short bars of bronze, which were -afterwards cut up, as occasion demanded. The imprints on -them prove them to be of comparatively recent date. If therefore -the <i>asses</i> still retained their bar shape after the art of -stamping metal to serve as currency had come into use, <i>à -fortiori</i> the primitive <i>as</i> of Italy must certainly have been -nothing more than a plain rod or bar of copper, which passed -from hand to hand as the obols in Greece, and the bars -of iron and copper pass at the present among savages of -Africa and Asia<a id="FNanchor_427" href="#Footnote_427" class="fnanchor">[427]</a>. This was what was called by the ancient -writers <i>the raw copper</i> (<i>aes rude</i>), as distinguished from <i>the -stamped copper</i> (<i>aes signatum</i>) of a later date. The fact that -early specimens of <i>aes signatum</i>, such as the <i>decussis</i>, bearing -a cow on both obverse and reverse (<a href="#figure49">Fig. 49</a>), were still made -in the shape of a bar, is a further proof that such was the -original form.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 225px;" id="figure48"> -<img src="images/figure48.jpg" width="225" height="600" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 48.</span> Aes Rude.</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;" id="figure49"> -<img src="images/figure49.jpg" width="500" height="300" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 49.</span> Bronze Decussis.</p> -</div> - -<p>It will be observed that I can give no positive evidence for<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_357"></a>[357]</span> -the length or breadth of the <i>as</i>. The pieces in the Museum are -all fragments, and, even if there were any of them whole, they -would not by any means decide the original <i>length</i>, although -they would of course represent the <i>weight</i>. For as they are -late, they would probably have been made at a time when the -original rod was shrinking up into a more compact form, just -as the Chinese bronze knives get shorter and thicker. But -the fact remains that the <i>as</i> was identified completely with -the Roman <i>foot</i> measure, the divisions being the same in each. -We therefore may with great probability infer that the <i>as</i> was -originally a piece of copper a foot in length, and of a known -thickness. We have seen that copper and iron are not weighed -in the early stages of society, but are appraised by measurement. -Why should not the same hold true for Rome? It -may be asked, how came it that the <i>as</i> was taken as the typical -unit for weight and superficial measure, and to express -even an inheritance? The answer is not far to seek. To express -fractional parts has ever been a great difficulty with -primitive people. As the Malays cannot conceive abstract -numerals, but must append the concrete <i>padi</i> to each of their -numbers, so the old Italian found it necessary to employ some -concrete object, the subdivisions of which were familiar, to -express the fractional parts whether it be of an estate or anything -else. The most common unit in use was the rod of copper -divided into 12 thumbs. Accordingly, if a Roman wished to -say that Balbus was heir to one-twelfth of an estate he expressed -this by the homely formula that Balbus had come in -for <i>one inch</i>, the denominator 12 being mentally supplied, as -everyone knew that there were 12 inches in the copper bar. -The same principle of taking some familiar object, the ordinary -method of dividing which was known to all men, is seen in the -method of expressing one-tenth. The Roman <i>denarius</i> was -divided into 10 <i>libellae</i>; accordingly, when Cicero wishes to -say that a certain person had come in for a tenth part of an -estate he says that he has come in for a <i>libella</i> (<i>heres ex libella</i>). -From this the reader will at once see that we might just as -well declare that the word <i>denarius</i> is an abstract word meaning -<i>unity</i> as make the same assertion about the <i>as</i>. Again, when<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_358"></a>[358]</span> -the Roman land surveyors elaborated their system of mensuration, -they found that the simplest method of expressing the -fractional parts of the <i>jugerum</i> was to employ the old duodecimal -method of the <i>as</i>. Nor is this without a parallel elsewhere. -As the yard was the common English unit of linear measure, -it was applied to the most common unit of land, the quarter -of the hide, which was accordingly termed a yard of land, or a -virgate (<i>virga terrae</i>). The English analogy is even still more -complete, for as the <i>as</i> or foot-rod became the unit of weight, -so in Cambridge the yard of butter is identical with the pound -of butter<a id="FNanchor_428" href="#Footnote_428" class="fnanchor">[428]</a>.</p> - -<p>Our next step will be to trace the process by which -the <i>as</i> or rod became the general weight-unit, the pound -(<i>libra</i>). The term <i>libra</i> is not the oldest Latin name for <i>weight</i>, -for <i>pondus</i> or its cognate verb <i>pendeo</i>, which literally means -to <i>hang</i>, is the true claimant for that position. <i>Libra</i> seems -properly to mean the <i>balance</i>, as is seen from the legal formula -(employed in Mancipatio) <i>per aes et libram</i>, by means of copper -and the balance. From the fact that its chief use was to weigh -<i>asses</i> of copper, the mass of an <i>as</i> came to be termed the <i>weight -par excellence</i>, just as the most usual amount weighed in the -Greek <i>talanta</i> (scales) became the <i>talanton par excellence</i>. This -process can be illustrated by modern examples. Thus in the -south of Ireland potatoes are sold by the unit of 21 lbs., which -consequently is termed a <i>weight</i>, and instead of speaking of so -many stones or hundredweights, everyone speaks of a weight of -potatoes. But, as already remarked, it was only at a comparatively -late epoch that the bars of copper were weighed. It -would be only with the growth of greater exactitude in commercial -dealings that the art of weighing, which was employed -for all dealings in gold and silver, would be applied to copper. -Just as the Malays and Tibetans have been gradually taught -by the careful Chinese to employ weights commercially, so the -Italian tribes may have been led to do so under the influence -of the astute Greek traders from Magna Graecia and Sicily.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_359"></a>[359]</span> -The system in vogue for gold was that of our old friend the -ox-unit. This is proved from the fact that not only is the -oldest gold coinage of the Etruscans, the close neighbours of -Latium, based upon this standard, but that also in Sicily and -Southern Italy there was the small gold talent, the three-fold -of the ox-unit. This three-fold of the stater was also used -at Neapolis. Although the earliest Greek colonies in Sicily -employed at first the Aeginetic standard for silver, we soon -find them reverting to the gold or Euboic standard for that -metal, whilst the early silver coinage of the Etruscans (before -350 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) is also of the Euboic standard. We may with high -probability assume that when the Sicilians and Italians first -essayed to weigh their copper rods, they naturally employed -the standard already in use for gold and silver. The highest -unit of this was the small talent of 3 staters which weighed -about 405 grs. The bar was divided into 12 inches, and it -was found that an inch of copper rod closely approximated in -weight to the small gold talent. The weight of the bar, which -was the ancient unit for copper before weight had been employed, -now became the standard weight-unit for that metal. -It is to be observed that this ounce of 405 grs., though some -27 grs. less than the full Roman <i>uncia</i> of later times, is only -15 grs. lighter than the Roman ounce prior to 268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, for it is -an ascertained fact that the old Roman <i>uncia</i> did not exceed -420 grs.<a id="FNanchor_429" href="#Footnote_429" class="fnanchor">[429]</a> It must be remembered that the weight of the ounce -would depend on the standard foot by which the bar was -measured. Now, whilst the Roman foot measures 296 millim., -there was likewise in use in Campania, and probably in many -parts of Southern Italy, a foot of 276 millim. The relation of -bars of these lengths and of a given thickness to the Roman -libra is not without interest. If we take an ordinary engineer’s -table of materials we shall find that a copper rod a Roman foot -long, and half a Roman inch in diameter, weighs 5040 grs. -Now, as the Roman pound weighs 5184 grs. this approximation -seems almost too close to be a mere coincidence. If on the other -hand we take a rod of a foot of 276 millim. and with a diameter -of the corresponding half-inch, we shall get a pound of 4680<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_360"></a>[360]</span> -grs. and an ounce of 390 grs, which is certainly not far from the -weight of the small gold talent. It follows from this that we -may expect pounds of different weights in Italy, according as -the foot-unit varies in different districts.</p> - -<p>In later times, besides the pound of 12 unciae, there -were several commercial pounds on Italian soil, the pound of -16 ounces (from which our own avoirdupois is probably descended), -that of 18 unciae, and that of 24. The last two are -easy of explanation, since one is simply the double, the other -one and a half times the Roman pound. But perhaps a -different explanation must be sought for the 16 ounce pound. -The foot was divided by Greeks and also by Italians into 16 -fingers as well as into 12 thumbs. Was therefore the pound -of 16 ounces simply derived from the division of the foot bar -into 16 fingers, the weight of the finger being however equated -to that of the Roman thumb or inch of copper?</p> - -<p>The <i>as</i>, having been once subjected to weight, its hundredfold, -the <i>centumpondium</i> or “hundred weight,” became the -highest Roman weight-unit. Thus the <i>as</i> and the <i>centumpondium</i> -of the Italians correspond to the mina and talent of -the Greeks. But it will be observed that the Italians obtained -their higher unit by the old decimal system, whereas -the Greeks had borrowed the mina and its sixtyfold from -Asia. The <i>centumpondium</i> must be regarded as a true-born -Italian unit, not one borrowed from Greece or Asia, and of -this there is further proof. We saw by the ancient Roman -law that the cow was estimated at 100 <i>asses</i>, the sheep at -10 <i>asses</i>. No doubt from time out of mind 100 of the bars -of copper, which formed the chief lower unit of barter, made -one cow, just as in Annam 280 little hoes make one buffalo -(<a href="#Page_167">p. 167</a>). When copper came to be weighed, the amount of -copper which formed the equivalent of the highest unit of -barter, the cow, was taken as the highest weight-unit. From -what I have said above it is not improbable that the Roman -libra and the Sicilian litra of copper were almost equal in -weight. The fact that the Greek writers always employed -the Sicilian word litra (λίτρα), to translate the Latin <i>libra</i>, -likewise indicates that in the Greek mind there was a tradition<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_361"></a>[361]</span> -of their identity. And if the doctrine here put forward -of the original nature of the <i>as</i> be right, nothing can be more -likely than that the Italians who had crossed into Sicily and -their kinsfolk who had remained behind employed rods of -similar size, and that when they began to weigh the latter, -the “weight” (libra or litra), derived from the standard copper -rod, should be the same in each region, until certain modifications -occasioned by new monetary conditions according to the -needs of different communities had caused some divergency in -<i>coin</i> weights, although as a <i>commercial</i> weight the litra remained -unchanged. As Aristotle identified the Aeginetic obol -and <i>chalcus</i> with the Sicilian litra and <i>onkia</i>, we may with -some plausibility suggest that the ancient Greek copper obol -or spike and the Italian <i>as</i> or rod were identical in dimensions -and in origin.</p> - -<p>In Greece the copper obol rapidly fell in weight, for, when -once silver currency had been introduced, copper was thrust -aside, and it was not till the fourth century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> that copper -coins came into use. When the copper obol appears as a coin -it is but a small piece, being in fact a mere token.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;" id="figure50"> -<img src="images/figure50.jpg" width="300" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 50.</span> As (<i>Aes grave</i>). (Before 2nd Punic War.)</p> -</div> - -<p>The history of the degradation of copper was seen better in -Sicily, where we found the litra still weighing 990 grs., but it -rapidly sank to only 200 grs., evidently in this case also -being mere money of account. For as the silver litra was -about 13½ grs., unless the 200 grain copper litra was a mere -token, silver would have been to copper as 17:1, which is -obviously absurd. In the case of the Italian <i>as</i> the process<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_362"></a>[362]</span> -is still clearer, for we have every stage of the <i>as</i>, from the bars -which I have described through the <i>libral as</i> (<i>aes grave</i>), the -<i>sextantal as</i>, the uncial and half-uncial, down to the small coin -of the empire commonly called “a third brass.”</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;" id="figure51"> -<img src="images/figure51.jpg" width="300" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 51.</span> As (half uncial standard).</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 125px;" id="figure52"> -<img src="images/figure52.jpg" width="125" height="125" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 52.</span> As, 3rd Cent. <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> (“Third Brass”).</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure53"> -<img src="images/figure53.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 53.</span> Didrachm of Corinth.</p> -</div> - -<h3><i>Gold and Silver.</i></h3> - -<p>Whilst in the infancy of coining the Sicilian silver litra was -probably the same as the Aeginetic obol, that is about 16⅔ grs., -the Aeginetic didrachm being probably treated as a <i>decalitron</i> -(ten-litra piece), nevertheless after no long time the -common Euboic standard of 135 grs. was employed at Syracuse -and elsewhere, and we have the authority of Aristotle for -the statement that the <i>Corinthian stater</i> was called a <i>decalitron</i>. -Corinth, as we saw above, used the 135 grain unit for -her famous Pegasi, commonly known as “Colts” (πῶλοι), and -therefore the litra was by this time 13½ grs. Now, in Etruria -we find about 400-350 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> a silver currency struck on this -same 135 grs. standard. These coins bear marks of value, 𐌢 on -coins of 131 grs., 𐌡 on those of 65 grs., 𐌠𐌠' on those of 32 grs., -and 𐌠 on those of 14 and 13 grs. It is plain therefore that<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_363"></a>[363]</span> -the stater of 135 grs. was considered to consist of 10 units -of 13½ grs. each. In other words, whatever the Etruscans may -have called their stater, it was exactly the same in weight and -method of subdivision as the <i>decalitron</i> of Syracuse. At a -later period (350-268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) we find on coins of like weight the -symbols 𐌢𐌢 instead of 𐌢, 𐌢 instead of 𐌡, 𐌡 instead of 𐌠𐌠'. The -unit now is exactly half of what it was at an earlier stage, 6¾ -grs. instead of 13½ grs.</p> - -<p>Not till 268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, just on the eve of the First Punic War, -did Rome first coin silver. This coin, called <i>denarius</i>, as its -name implies, represented 10 <i>asses</i>. It was divided into four -parts, each of which was called a <i>sestertius</i> or 2½, and was -marked with the symbol 𐆘 representing that number.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 350px;" id="figure54"> -<img src="images/figure54.jpg" width="350" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 54.</span> Sesterce of first Roman silver coinage.</p> -</div> - -<p>It is very remarkable that the Etruscan coin of the second -series, marked 2½, is only very slightly heavier than the Roman -sesterce (<i>sestertius</i>) which bears a similar mark. Hence it has -been very reasonably inferred that when the Romans set about -the coinage of silver, they simply adopted with slight modification -the silver system employed by their neighbours across the -Tiber. This is all the more probable, as it is almost certain -that, though Rome did not strike silver she like Athens before -the time of Solon, and like Syracuse, used freely the coins of -other communities for a long time previously. The Etruscan -coins would therefore serve as silver currency at Rome. We -may then assume that the monetary system must have been -much the same on both sides of the river. Accordingly, -since in 268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> we find the Romans striking a coin in silver -representing 10 copper <i>asses</i>, which is almost the same in -weight as the Etruscan coin marked 𐌢, we may reasonably -infer that, if the Romans had commenced coining silver a -century earlier, their <i>denarius</i> or 10-<i>as</i> piece would have been -the same weight as the Etruscan.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_364"></a>[364]</span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure55"> -<img src="images/figure55.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 55.</span> Didrachm of Tarentum.</p> -</div> - -<p>Now besides the <i>litra</i>, which we found to be both a copper-unit -and a silver coin in Sicily, there is another term of great -interest, especially as it plays an important part in the history -of Roman money. The general Latin name for a coin is <i>numus</i>, -which in the later days of the Republic usually meant a -<i>denarius</i> when used in the more restricted sense, but in the -earlier period it was the term specially applied to the silver -sesterce (<i>sestertius</i>). This is almost certainly a loan-word, for -Pollux is most explicit in warning us that, although the word -seems Roman, it is in reality Greek and belongs to the Dorians -of Sicily and Italy<a id="FNanchor_430" href="#Footnote_430" class="fnanchor">[430]</a>. It is always a name of a coin of silver in -Sicily, being so used by Epicharmus. The coin meant by this -poet cannot have been one of great value, for he says: “Buy -me a fine heifer calf for ten <i>nomi</i>.” It was in all probability -the Aeginetan obol, for Apollodorus in his comments -on Sophron set it down at three half (Attic) obols, that is, -almost 17 grs. This is confirmed by the fact that an Homeric -scholiast makes the small talent weigh 24 <i>nomi</i>, which gives -nearly 17 grs. as the weight of that unit. Crossing into Italy, -we find that according to Aristotle<a id="FNanchor_431" href="#Footnote_431" class="fnanchor">[431]</a> there was a coin called a -<i>noummos</i> at Tarentum, on which was the device of Taras -riding on a dolphin. This is the familiar type of the Tarentine -didrachms which, from their first issue down to the invasion -of Pyrrhus (450-280 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), weigh normally 123-120 grs., -although one specimen weighs 128 grs. This coin Mommsen -recognized as the <i>noummos</i> of Aristotle. Professor Gardner -afterwards suggested that the diobol, on which occasionally the -same type is found, was rather the coin meant. Recently<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_365"></a>[365]</span> -Mr A. J. Evans has almost proved this hypothesis impossible -by showing that all the diobols yet known are probably later -than the time of Aristotle<a id="FNanchor_432" href="#Footnote_432" class="fnanchor">[432]</a>. As, however, this rests on negative -evidence, and is liable to be overthrown at any moment by the -discovery of an archaic diobol, it is advisable to cast about -for some more positive criterion. Heraclea of Lucania, the -daughter-city and close neighbor of Tarentum, as we know -from the famous Heraclean Tables (which scholars are agreed in -regarding as written about the end of the 4th cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), employed -as a unit of account a silver <i>nomos</i>. It is so probable -that the <i>nomos</i> employed at Heraclea (<i>circ.</i> 325 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) would be -the same in value as that employed at Tarentum in the time -of Aristotle (<i>ob.</i> 322 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), that if we can prove the <i>nomos</i> of -Heraclea to be a <i>didrachm</i> and not a <i>diobol</i>, we may henceforth -hold with certainty that the <i>nomos</i> of Tarentum was the larger -coin.</p> - -<p>On the Heraclean Tables it is enacted that those who held -certain public land should pay certain fines in case they had -failed to plant their holdings properly; four olive trees were to -be planted on each <i>schoenus</i> of land, and for each olive tree -not so planted a penalty of 10 <i>nomi</i> of silver was to be exacted, -and for each <i>schoenus</i> of land not planted with vines -the penalty was two <i>minae</i> of silver<a id="FNanchor_433" href="#Footnote_433" class="fnanchor">[433]</a>. The <i>schoenus</i> is identical -with the Roman <i>actus</i> (half a <i>jugerum</i>), being the square -of 120 feet. Four olive trees were the allowance for each -<i>schoenus</i>. Now if we can determine the number of vines -which were planted on a <i>schoenus</i>, we shall be able to get a -test of the value of a <i>nomos</i>. Two minae of silver contained -in round numbers 110 Tarentine didrachms of 123 grs. each, -or 675 diobols of about 20 grs. each. Olives were many times -more valuable than the vine, so that any result which will -make the vine about the same value as the obol will be -absurd.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_366"></a>[366]</span></p> - -<p>Now Mr A. J. Evans, when in Southern Italy, at my request -kindly ascertained that vines, when trained on poles on -vineyard slopes, are usually about 3 yards apart, whilst when -trained on pollard poplars (as is much more usual in Campagna), -they stand about 6 yards apart. In the case of the -former about 150 vines would go to a <i>schoenus</i> (1600 sq. yards), -whilst in the latter case barely 50. We cannot doubt that the -distance between the vines must have been much the same in -ancient as in modern times.</p> - -<p>If now we take the <i>nomos</i> to be a <i>diobol</i>, each vine is worth -4⅔ <i>nomi</i>, or 14 <i>nomi</i>, according as there are 50 or 150 vines to -the <i>schoenus</i>. Now, as the valuable and slow growing olive -is only worth 10 <i>nomi</i>, and it is impossible to believe that -the relative values of olive and vine could have ever been -such as those arrived at on the assumption that the <i>nomos</i> is -a diobol, we must turn to the alternative course and take the -<i>nomos</i> as a didrachm. The penalty for a <i>schoenus</i> of vines is -two minae or 110 didrachms. If 150 vines go to a <i>schoenus</i>, -each will be worth about ⅔ didrachm, 15 vines being equal to -one olive, or taking 50 vines to the <i>schoenus</i>, each vine will be -worth about two didrachms, 5 vines being worth one olive. This -result is so rational that we need hesitate no longer to regard -the well-known Tarentine didrachm as the <i>nomos</i> (<i>noummos</i>) of -Aristotle.</p> - -<p>There is such a difference between the <i>nomos</i> of Sicily, -identical with the Aeginetan obol, and that of Tarentum that -we are forced to conclude that the term <i>nomos</i> is not specially -applied to any particular coin unit. In Sicily we found the -native unit, the litra, identified in certain cases, at least in -earlier times, with the Aeginetan obol as well as with the -<i>nomos</i>. Why two names <i>nomos</i> and <i>litra</i> for the same unit? -Is one Sicilian and the other Greek? This at least gives a -reasonable explanation. The Dorians then in Sicily gave the -name to their earliest coins, <i>nomos</i>, with them indicating the -unit of currency established by law just as did <i>nomisma</i> among -other Greeks. As in Sicily the Aeginetic obol was the <i>legal -coin</i> (<i>nomos</i>) <i>par excellence</i>, so at Tarentum, where didrachms -were the first coins to be struck, the term (<i>nomos</i>) was applied<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_367"></a>[367]</span> -to that unit. We may therefore expect to find the term <i>nomos</i> -applied to various kinds of coins among the Italiotes and Italians, -according to the particular coin chosen by each state as its own -unit of account.</p> - -<p>Accordingly we find the term <i>nomos</i> applied to certain -bronze coins struck on the sextantal (two ounce) and uncial -standards, at Arpi and other towns, which are inscribed N II -(the double <i>nummus</i>), N I (<i>nummus</i>), ..... (<i>quincunx</i>), .... -(<i>triens</i>), ... (<i>quadrans</i>), .. (<i>sextans</i>), . S (<i>sescuncia</i>), . (<i>uncia</i>), and -Σ (<i>semuncia</i>). The divisions being those of the <i>as</i>, it is clear -that the <i>nomos</i>, or current coin in those places, was the reduced -<i>as</i>. Finally, when the Romans first use the term <i>nummus</i>, it -means the silver <i>sestertius</i> (2½ asses), the one-fourth of the -<i>denarius</i> or ten-<i>as</i> piece, which weighed a scruple (<i>i.e.</i> 18½ grs.) -at the time of the first Roman coinage of silver. Here -we have all our positive evidence for the <i>nomos</i>. As diobols -of 18 to 17 grs. are found in the coinages of various towns -in Magna Graecia, such as Arpi, Caelia, Canusium, Rubi, -and Teate, it has been plausibly held that such a diobol was -the <i>nomos par excellence</i> of these states, and that it was from -contact with them that the Romans learned both the use and -the name of such a monetary unit. But Rome may have been -influenced by her Etruscan neighbours, for, as we have seen, -the smallest denomination in the second silver series of -Etruscan coins (of which the coins weigh 129 grs., 32 grs. and -17 grs. respectively) is just the weight of the Roman sestertius, -and bears the symbol 𐌡𐌠𐌠 (2½), just as the latter bears 𐆘 (2½). -Taking into consideration these facts, it looks as if the Romans -and Etruscans grafted on to a native system the diobol, or -current silver coin of Southern Italy, the Romans (and for all -we can tell the Etruscans likewise) adopting at the same -time the name <i>nummus</i>. Finally, we observe that this <i>nummus</i> -is identical with the Sicilian <i>nomos</i>, which in turn was found -to be none other than the Aeginetic obol. The Roman <i>sestertius</i> -being a <i>scriptulum</i> (17⁷⁄₁₂ grs.) in weight, we thus find a -direct connection between the latter and the Aeginetic obol -(16⅔ grs.). This need not surprise us, for it is most natural that -in the welding of a weight system (partly foreign, and on<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_368"></a>[368]</span> -the native side only employed for gold and silver) and of a -system of measurement employed for bronze, certain features -derived from the special silver units in use would be introduced -into the new system, which afterwards became universal for -weighing all commodities. The term <i>Sicilicus</i><a id="FNanchor_434" href="#Footnote_434" class="fnanchor">[434]</a> employed for -the quarter-ounce is good evidence for this hypothesis. Its -name seems to mean simply <i>Sicilian</i>. In weight it was about -108 grs. Now, didrachms struck on such a foot are found in -the Greek cities of south-western Italy, at Velia, Neapolis and -at Tarentum, after the time of Pyrrhus. Did the Romans, who -must have carried on by weight all dealings in silver up to -268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, treat such coins as quarter-ounces, and ultimately take -the name of the coin (wrongly connecting it with Sicily) to -designate the quarter-ounce? In like fashion it was probably -discovered that the Aeginetic obol of the Greek colonists was -about equal in weight to the line (<i>scriptulum</i>) which is one-twenty-fourth -of the inch (<i>uncia</i>) of copper. Thus as there are -24 <i>nomi</i> in the Sicilian talent, so there are 24 <i>scriptula</i> in the -Roman <i>uncia</i>. These considerations help to explain the relations -which existed between the <i>nomos</i> (Aeginetic obol), -<i>sestertius</i>, and <i>scruple</i>.</p> - -<p>Mr Soutzo<a id="FNanchor_435" href="#Footnote_435" class="fnanchor">[435]</a> gives a very different account of the <i>nomos</i>. -Starting with the Egyptian hypothesis he makes all the -Italian weight systems of foreign origin. He thus makes the -Roman libra the ⅟₁₀₀ of a Roman <i>talent</i>, which he seems to -identify with a light Asiatic talent<a id="FNanchor_436" href="#Footnote_436" class="fnanchor">[436]</a>. Starting with the talent -he supposes that on Italian soil it was divided into 100 <i>librae</i> -instead of 60 heavy or 120 light minae, as in the East. -Each of these <i>librae</i> or <i>pounds</i> was divided into 12 <i>ounces</i>, -and each <i>ounce</i> into 24 fractions. He holds likewise that the -Italians adopted from the East the use of bronze “comme -matière première de leurs échanges,” at the same time as they -obtained the first germs of civilization and their first weight<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_369"></a>[369]</span> -standards. The <i>centumpondium</i> or 100 weight therefore he -takes as his prime unit. But besides the talent and the mina -and the <i>centumpondium</i> and <i>libra</i> or <i>as</i>, according to Mr Soutzo, -“all the Italian peoples availed themselves of an intermediate -weight unit: this was the <i>nomos</i> or <i>decussis</i><a id="FNanchor_437" href="#Footnote_437" class="fnanchor">[437]</a>. This unit was the -<i>libral nomos</i>, the twelfth of the heavy talent, being worth ten -<i>minae</i> or <i>librae</i>, and the <i>libral decussis</i>, the <i>tenth</i> of the <i>centumpondium</i>, -weighing 10 <i>librae</i>.” The monetary <i>nomos</i> and <i>decussis</i>, -he thinks, played an important part in the history of Italian -coinage. He admits however that no specimen of either <i>nomos</i> -or <i>decussis</i> of libral standard is known, the heaviest being a -<i>decussis</i> of the Roman triental (one-third) standard, whilst the -pieces from Venusia and Teanum Apulum marked N I and -N II (<i>nomos</i> and double <i>nomos</i>), representing 10 and 20 minas -respectively, belong to a still much more reduced standard. -The simple multiples of the <i>as</i> (libra) and litra, such as the -<i>tripondius</i> and <i>dupondius</i>, were just as rarely cast in the libral -epoch. The <i>mina</i> or the <i>as</i> with their fractions, on the -contrary, were the kinds most employed: originally the series -was ordinarily composed of the <i>as</i> (marked I or sometimes -............), the <i>semis</i> (S), the <i>triens</i> (....), the <i>quadrans</i> (...), -the <i>sextans</i> (..), the <i>uncia</i> (.) and <i>semuncia</i> (Σ). In some series -the <i>as</i> is rare and the <i>semis</i> is wanting, but in addition to the -other denominations here given the <i>quincunx</i> (:·:) and the -<i>dextans</i> (S...., 1 <i>semis</i> + 4 <i>unciae</i>) are found. The presence or -absence of these pieces characterizes certain Italian and Sicilian -monetary systems<a id="FNanchor_438" href="#Footnote_438" class="fnanchor">[438]</a>. All the evidence virtually which can be -produced by Soutzo for this hypothetical <i>nomos</i> is that at -Syracuse the Corinthian stater of 135 grs. was called a <i>decalitron</i>, -that the Tarentine didrachm of 128 grs. (max.) was -similarly divided into 10 <i>litras</i>, that the Romans employed the -tenfold of the <i>as</i> (<i>decussis</i>) and when they coined silver called -their silver unit a <i>denarius</i> as representing 10 copper <i>asses</i>, -and the fact that certain copper coins such as those of Arpi, -called <i>nomi</i>, were evidently regarded as containing 10 units, the -half being the <i>quincunx</i>. But, as we have already seen, the -real explanation of these coins seems to be that they represent<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_370"></a>[370]</span> -reduced <i>asses</i>. We must remember that the heaviest Roman -<i>as</i> yet known is only 11 ounces, whilst the great proportion of -the earliest specimens are only 10 <i>unciae</i> or (<i>dextantals</i>). When -the idea of a real copper currency for local purposes gained -ground, and it was found that it was not necessary to have the -<i>as</i> of account of full weight, and at the same time to enable the -state to make a profit of this copper currency which was solely -for home use (just as our Mint makes a large profit of our -silver coins), the first stage in reduction was to take off an -ounce, or much more frequently two full ounces. I have already -pointed out the vitality and universality of the <i>uncia</i> -as an unit, and have given the reasons for this. Hence arose -<i>asses</i> or <i>bars</i> of 10 ounces. The number 10 had of course great -advantages, and presently, when further reductions in the -copper currency took place, certain communities clave fast to -the decimal system and, instead of taking off some more whole -ounces, simply reduced the ounce itself, and retained the -denomination, continuing to place the marks of value as before. -In those Hellenized states of Apulia just referred to this -reduced copper <i>as</i> or <i>litra</i> was the <i>legal</i> unit, and therefore -denominated a <i>nomos</i>, especially as it probably corresponded -in value (at least as money of account) to the silver unit or -<i>nomos</i> in circulation in each district. But whilst Mr Soutzo -seems wrong in his view of the <i>nomos</i>, there can be no doubt -that there was a consensus among the Sicilians and Italians in -favour of making an intermediate unit between 1 and 100, the -tenfold of the <i>litra</i> and <i>as</i>, into a higher unit. The Syracusan -<i>decalitron</i> and the Roman <i>decussis</i> and <i>denarius</i> are incontrovertible -facts. For the latter at least a most interesting connection -with a unit of barter can be proved. We saw that by -the Lex Tarpeia (451 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) a cow was counted at one hundred -<i>asses</i> (<i>centussis</i>, <i>centumpondium</i>) whilst a sheep was estimated -at 10 <i>asses</i> (<i>decussis</i>). The reader will observe that, even if -the theory were true that the Roman <i>centumpondium</i> is the -starting-point of the Roman weight system, and that it was -borrowed from the East, the cow all the same plays a most -important part in the founding of the system. It would be -another instance to prove the impossibility of framing a weight<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_371"></a>[371]</span> -standard independent of the unit of barter, just as we have -already seen that the Irish, when borrowing a ready-made -weight system from Rome, found it absolutely necessary to -equate the cow to the ounce of silver, and as Charlemagne -had to adjust the <i>solidus</i> by the value of the same animal. If -again the <i>centumpondium</i> and <i>as</i> grew up independently as -<i>weight</i> units on Italian soil, and copper was weighed there -before gold, the cow is evidently the basis of the system; whilst -again, on my hypothesis that <i>copper</i> went by bulk in bars of -given dimensions, and was not weighed until long after the -scales had been employed for gold, the cow is directly connected -with that unit of weight (the gold ox-unit of 135 grs.) which -ultimately forms the basis of the uncia (as <i>weight</i>) and libra. -On every hypothesis alike the cow must be retained as the -chief factor in the origin of the Roman weight system. It -will be observed that Mr Soutzo offers no explanation why -the Romans, instead of retaining the sexagesimal division of -the talent which they are supposed to have imported, subdivided -it according to the decimal scale. It cannot be alleged -that they had any deep-rooted antipathy to the duodecimal -system, seeing that the <i>as</i> was divided into 12 <i>unciae</i>, and the -ounce into 24 scruples. The fact that the Romans resisted -in this respect the Greek influences, which were so potent a -factor in their civilization, is strong evidence that the employment -of the tenfold and hundredfold of the <i>as</i> was of -immemorial native origin, and most intimately connected with -the animal units, which must certainly be held to be autochthonous. -As we found in Further Asia and Africa hoes or bars of -metal as the lowest unit of currency, so many hoes being worth -a kettle, so many kettles a buffalo, so in ancient Italy 10 bars -(<i>asses</i>) of copper made a sheep, and 10 sheep made a cow. It is -exceedingly probable that the same system prevailed among -the Sicels and Sicilian Greeks, 10 litras going to the sheep, -10 sheep to the cow. For we saw on an earlier page that at -Syracuse down to the time of Dionysius the cow remained the -unit of assessment, just as at the present moment the buffalo -is the unit of assessment among the villages of Annam; and, -just as with the latter the buffalo is the unit of value, so we<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_372"></a>[372]</span> -may well infer that with the Sicilians the cow played the same -rôle. It may therefore be assumed with considerable probability -that the employment of the <i>decalitron</i> and <i>decussis</i> as -monetary units was originally due to their connection with the -value of the sheep.</p> - -<p>As Soutzo has observed, the degradation of the local copper -series moved on most unequal lines, and no doubt in some -places the <i>decussis</i> did not represent perhaps one half the value -of its archetype, the sheep, whilst at the same moment the -copper unit in another community stood at almost its original -weight and value. Where silver was coined the degradation of -copper went on all the quicker; there was a tendency more -and more to get rid of the old cumbrous copper coins, and -to employ those of a lighter and more portable size. Moreover -the inter-relations between copper and silver made the coinages -in these metals act and react upon each other. Thus the state -after reducing the copper would reduce likewise the silver, so -as to make the two series correspond. This was probably -facilitated in some cases at least by the change in the relative -value of these metals. Italy was not a silver-producing region, -whilst it was rich in copper. Naturally with the increase of -commerce and the development of silver mines in neighbouring -countries such as Spain, silver became more abundant and -the price of copper rose accordingly. We have had occasion -already to remark that the abundance or scarcity of gold or -silver is indicated by its being employed or not for coinage. -In the case of gold we know that it is only when the supply of -that metal is in excess of its demand for purposes of ornament -that it is or can be employed in the form of coined money. -The history of the coinage of Persia, Lydia, Macedonia, Rhodes -and elsewhere in ancient times, as well as the history of -mediaeval gold coining, make this evident, whilst modern -Hindustan teaches us the same lesson. Of course in times of -great financial straits under the pressure of war a gold coinage -was sometimes issued, as perhaps at Athens<a id="FNanchor_439" href="#Footnote_439" class="fnanchor">[439]</a> in 407 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> and as<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_373"></a>[373]</span> -at Rome during the second Punic war in 206 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> Backwardness -in the coinage of silver among certain peoples is probably -to be accounted for in the same way. The employment of iron -money at Sparta (and Byzantium) was probably due to the dearth -of precious metals rather than to any ordinance of Lycurgus -against the employment of the latter. If accordingly we find -that Rome did not coin silver until 268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> we are justified in -concluding that it was from want of silver she had been so long -in following the example of the Etruscans and the Greeks.</p> - -<p>It is certainly most significant that within four years after -the capture of Tarentum (272 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) and the subjugation of all -Southern Italy we find her issuing a well-matured silver -currency. Doubtless by her conquests she obtained a vast -supply of the precious metal, for we know from the records -of Livy and Pliny that great masses of foreign coins and bullion -flowed into the treasury after every fresh conquest. We may -therefore reasonably assume that previous to 272 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> silver had -been much dearer in relation to copper.</p> - -<p>But to return. We have seen that with the imprinting of -some device on the primitive bars of copper, the tendency to -reduce their weight would quickly evince itself. Accordingly -it was possible that in certain places when the coinage of silver -began, and there was still a desire to make the silver unit equal -to the copper, the latter having been already reduced, the silver -would be proportioned thereto. Thus when silver was first -coined in some towns in Sicily, the silver Aeginetic obol -of 16½ grs. was regarded as the equivalent of the copper litra, -but when Syracuse started a coinage of Corinthian staters, a -piece of silver of 13½ grs. was accounted as the litra.</p> - -<p>But in other parts of Italy the process was somewhat -different. For we find the silver unit when once fixed remaining -the same in weight, but simply having its denomination -altered to meet the requirements of certain changes in the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_374"></a>[374]</span> -bronze series. Thus the Etruscan silver staters of the period -prior to 350 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, which weigh 130 grs., are marked 𐌢, whilst -the coins of the same weight at a later epoch are marked 𐌢𐌢, -showing that the copper unit had undergone a change. This -Soutzo thinks was simply a reduction from the triental to the -sextantal foot, and in no wise due to any change in the relative -value of silver and copper. That however both influences may -have aided in the change will be made clear from the history of -the reduction of the Roman <i>denarius</i> and <i>as</i> in the second -Punic war. Finally when the Romans coined their first <i>denarii</i> -in 268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, the <i>libella</i> or tenth of the <i>denarius</i>, which represented -in silver the copper <i>libra</i>, was only 7 grs., an indubitable -proof that the <i>as</i> was but then a mere fraction of its former -self. Yet all the same it is clear that this silver <i>denarius</i>, which -represented a reduced <i>decussis</i> of bronze, had its ultimate -source in nothing else than the 10 libral <i>asses</i> which represented -the value of a sheep. Are we not then justified in -suggesting that the Etruscan stater of 135 grs. marked 𐌢 had -a like origin, that the 10 litra piece or <i>noummos</i> of Tarentum -of almost the same weight, and the Syracusan 10 litra piece -of 135 grs., had also a similar origin, whilst at an earlier period -10 Aeginetic obols (the <i>nomi</i> of the poems of Epicharmus and -Sophron) were the equivalent of the same animal? Ten <i>nomi</i> -were the price of a calf in the time of Epicharmus, and as we -have seen already the value of a sheep and a young calf is -always about the same, even down to the present day.</p> - -<h3><i>Roman System.</i></h3> - -<p>Although it is not our concern to go into the history of -Roman money, it is nevertheless necessary to give the reader a -short sketch of its principal features in order to make the -history of the Roman weight standards intelligible.</p> - -<p>First came oxen and sheep, which according to their age and -sex bore definite relations to each other, and by which all other -values were measured. From an early period (at least 1000 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) -copper was in use, not yet however weighed, but estimated<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_375"></a>[375]</span> -by the bulk, as I have already described. Side by side with it -ingots of gold and silver passed from hand to hand. Such ingots -are mentioned by Varro under the name of <i>bricks</i> (<i>lateres</i>)<a id="FNanchor_440" href="#Footnote_440" class="fnanchor">[440]</a>. -Though this mention refers to a later period, we can yet infer -from it with certainty that the practice of trafficking in small -ingots of gold and silver prevailed in Italy as elsewhere. With -gold came the art of weighing, which was also applied to silver. -We have given reasons for believing that the weight-unit -employed was the same as that which I have termed the ox-unit. -We found the Etruscans, the close neighbours of the Romans, -and who had access to the gold fields of Upper Italy, employing -this unit as their standard from the commencement of their -coinage in the 5th century for both gold and silver. Any of -the towns of Southern Italy which struck gold, such as Metapontum, -coined on the same standard, which was likewise -employed for silver, sometimes a little reduced, by many communities, -such as Tarentum. The standard ingot of gold would -bear a known relation to that of silver, to the bar of bronze, -the cow, and the sheep. We have given absolute proof of the -relation between cattle and bronze in the 5th cent. <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, and we -may well infer similar constant relations between cattle and -bronze, and the other metals. With greater exactness in commercial -dealings the bronze rod was next weighed by the standard -already in use for gold, and it was found that each of the -12 parts or unciae into which it was divided weighed just three -times the ox-unit, that is, the weight of the small talent which -we have found likewise in Macedon, Sicily, and Lower Italy, -and which may have itself represented originally the conventional -value of a slave, which was three cows among the -Celts, the close kinsfolk of the Italians, and probably about -the same among the early Greeks. As soon as the rods or -<i>asses</i> were exchanged by weighing, they would quickly lose -their original form, which was only required so long as it was -necessary that they should be of certain fixed dimensions. -Under the new system it mattered not whether an <i>as</i> was<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_376"></a>[376]</span> -·8 inches long, and three inches thick, provided only it was of -full weight when placed in the scale. These are the pieces -which are known as <i>aes rude</i>; as yet they are mere lumps of -metal, without any stamp or device. Gaius well describes this -stage: “For this reason bronze and the balance are employed -(in <i>mancipatio</i>) because formerly they only employed bronze -coins, and there were bars (<i>asses</i>), double bars (<i>dupondii</i>), half-bars -(<i>semisses</i>) and quarters (<i>quadrantes</i>), nor was there any -gold or silver coin in use, as we can learn from a law of the -Twelve Tables, and the force and power of these coins depended -not on their number but on weight. For as there were bars -(<i>asses</i>) of a pound weight, there were also two pound bars -(<i>dupondii</i>), whence even still the term <i>dupondius</i> is used, as if -two in weight<a id="FNanchor_441" href="#Footnote_441" class="fnanchor">[441]</a>. And the name is still retained in use.” The -half-bars likewise and quarters were no doubt proportionately -adjusted to weight. It will be observed that the omission of -all mention of the <i>decussis</i> as a standard seems to throw -additional doubt on Mr Soutzo’s hypothesis. The plain fact -is that a mass of bronze ten pounds in weight would have been -extremely cumbrous and unhandy for purposes of manufacture -into the implements of everyday life.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure56"> -<img src="images/figure56.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 56.</span> Romano-Campanian Coin.</p> -</div> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure57"> -<img src="images/figure57.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 57.</span> Victoriatus</p> -</div> - -<p>When and by whom a stamp was first placed on the bars, -it is of course impossible to say. Tradition however seems -unanimous in assigning it to the Regal period. Pliny’s account -of the Roman coinage is as follows<a id="FNanchor_442" href="#Footnote_442" class="fnanchor">[442]</a>: “King Servius first -stamped bronze. Timaeus hands down the tradition that aforetime -they employed it in a rough state at Rome. It was -stamped with the impressions of animals (<i>nota pecudum</i>), -whence it was termed <i>pecunia</i>. The highest rating in the -reign of that king (Servius) was 120,000 asses, and accordingly -this was the first class. Silver was struck <span class="allsmcap">A.U.C.</span> 485 (<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 268) -in the Consulship of Q. Ogulnius and C. Fabius, five years -before the first Punic war, and it was enacted that the <i>denarius</i><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_377"></a>[377]</span> -should pass for ten pounds of bronze, the <i>quinarius</i> for five, and -the <i>sestertius</i> for two and a half. Now the libral weight was -reduced in the First Punic war, as the state could not stand the -expenditure, and it was appointed that <i>asses</i> of the weight of a -<i>sextans</i> (2 <i>unciae</i>) should be struck. Thus there was a gain of -five-sixths, and the debt was cleared off. The type of that -bronze coin was on the one side a double Janus, on the -other a ship’s beak, whilst on the <i>triens</i> and <i>quadrans</i> there -was a ship. The <i>quadrans</i> was previously termed a <i>teruncius</i> -from <i>tres unciae</i> (three ounces). Afterwards under the pressure -of the Hannibalic wars in the dictatorship of Q. Fabius -Maximus, <i>asses</i> the weight of an ounce were coined, and it -was enacted that the <i>denarius</i> should be exchanged for sixteen -<i>asses</i>, the <i>quinarius</i> for eight, the <i>sestertius</i> for four; thus the -state gained one half. Nevertheless in the soldiers’ pay the -<i>denarius</i> was always given for ten <i>asses</i>. The types of the -silver were <i>bigae</i> and <i>quadrigae</i> (two-horse and four-horse -chariots), hence they were termed <i>bigati</i> and <i>quadrigati</i><a id="FNanchor_443" href="#Footnote_443" class="fnanchor">[443]</a>. By -and by in accordance with the Papirian law half-ounce <i>asses</i> -were struck. Livius Drusus when tribune of the Plebs alloyed -the silver with an eighth part of bronze. The <i>Victoriatus</i><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_378"></a>[378]</span> -was struck in accordance with a law of Clodius, for previously -this coin brought from Illyria was treated as merchandize. -It was stamped with a Victory and hence its name. The -gold piece was struck sixty-two years after the silver on such -a standard that a scruple was worth twenty sesterces, and -this on the scale of the then value of the sesterce made 900 -go to the pound. Afterwards it was enacted that 1040 should -be coined from gold pounds, and gradually the emperors reduced -the weight, most recently Nero reduced it to 45.”</p> - -<p>This statement of Pliny is supported in various details by -several disjointed passages of Varro and Festus. Thus the -former says that “the most ancient bronze which was cast was -marked with an animal (<i>pecore notatum</i>)<a id="FNanchor_444" href="#Footnote_444" class="fnanchor">[444]</a>, and elsewhere he says -that the ancient money has as its device either an ox, or a sheep, -or a swine<a id="FNanchor_445" href="#Footnote_445" class="fnanchor">[445]</a>,” a statement repeated by Plutarch and other later -writers. Festus (<i>s.v.</i> <i>grave aes</i>) says “<i>aes grave</i> was so called -from its weight because ten <i>asses</i>, each a pound in weight, made -a <i>denarius</i>, which was so named from the very number (i.e. <i>deni</i>). -But in the Punic war, the Roman people being burdened with -debt, made out of every <i>as</i> which weighed a pound (<i>ex singulis -assibus librariis</i>) six <i>asses</i>, which were to have the same value -as the former.” We have also a statement in the fragment of -Festus (4, p. 347, Müller) that afterwards the <i>asses</i> in the -<i>sestertius</i> were increased (<i>i.e.</i> to 4 from 2½), and that with the -ancients the <i>denarii</i> were of ten <i>asses</i>, and were worth a -<i>decussis</i>, and that the amount of bronze (in the <i>denarius</i>) was -reckoned at <span class="allsmcap">XVI</span> <i>asses</i> by the Lex Flaminia when the Roman -people were put to straits by Hannibal<a id="FNanchor_446" href="#Footnote_446" class="fnanchor">[446]</a>. Again, Festus says: -“<i>Asses</i> of the weight of a <i>sextans</i> (two ounces) began to be in -use from that time, when on account of the Second Punic war -which was waged with Hannibal, the Senate decreed that out -of the <i>asses</i> which were then libral (a pound in weight)<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_379"></a>[379]</span> -should be made those of a <i>sextans</i> in weight, by means of which -when payments began to be made, both the Roman people -would be freed from debt, and private persons, to whom a debt -had to be paid by the state, would not suffer much loss<a id="FNanchor_447" href="#Footnote_447" class="fnanchor">[447]</a>.” -Varro likewise is worth hearing: “In the case of silver the term -<i>nummi</i> is used: that is borrowed from the Sicilians. <i>Denarii</i> -(were so named) because they were worth ten (coins) of bronze -each, <i>quinarii</i> because they were worth five each, <i>sestertius</i>, because -a half was added to two (for the ancient <i>sestertius</i> was -a <i>dupondius</i> and a <i>semis</i>). The tenth part of a <i>denarius -nummus</i> is a <i>libella</i>, because it was worth a <i>libra</i> of bronze in -weight, and being made of silver was small. The <i>sembella</i> -is half the <i>libella</i>, just as the <i>semis</i> is of the <i>as</i>. <i>Teruncius</i> -is from <i>tres unciae</i>; as this is the fourth part of the -<i>libella</i> so the <i>quadrans</i> is the fourth part of the <i>as</i>.”</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure58"> -<img src="images/figure58.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 58.</span> Sextans (Aes Grave). -(The two globules mark the value.)</p> -</div> - -<p>As so much difficulty and controversy surround the various -questions connected with the beginnings of Roman currency, I -have thought it best to give at full length the scanty data afforded -by the ancient authorities. Let us now state the principal -facts revealed by those extracts. (1) The Romans in the Regal -epoch employed <i>aes rude</i>, but according to the testimony -of Timaeus (an Italian Greek historian who wrote about <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -300), they had already before the days of the Republic -stamped bronze with figures of cattle. (2) Silver was first -coined five years before the beginning of the First Punic war: -(3) Some time during that war the <i>as</i> was reduced from a -pound to two ounces; (4) In the Second Punic war under -like circumstances the <i>as</i> was reduced from two ounces to one -ounce; (5) The <i>denarius</i> when first struck represented ten<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_380"></a>[380]</span> -libral <i>asses</i>, or a <i>decussis</i>; (6) In the Second Punic war when -the <i>as</i> was reduced, the <i>denarius</i> was ordered to pass for 16 -instead of 10 <i>asses</i>; (7) In spite of this reduction, the <i>denarius</i> -continued to be regarded as containing only 10 <i>asses</i> when -employed in paying the soldiers.</p> - -<p>Considerable numbers of <i>asses</i> and the parts of <i>asses</i> have -come down to us, many of them bearing marks of value as before -described. There is undoubted evidence of a constant reduction -of the <i>as</i>. The question arises, did the reduction take place -<i>per saltum</i> or by a gradual process? Mommsen thinks that the -<i>as</i> continued to be of libral weight until shortly before 264 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -and that it was then without any intermediate steps reduced to -the triens (4 ounces). Mr Soutzo on the other hand maintains -with vigour that from 338 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, the date at which he fixes the -first coinage of <i>asses</i> at Rome, to 264 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, the degradation was a -gradual process, and he arraigns Mommsen on a charge of disregarding -the ancient authorities, who state, as we have seen, that -the change was from libral to sextantal <i>asses</i>. Mr Soutzo is thus -compelled to state that all the <i>asses</i> within that period (338-264 -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) although they have a range from almost full libral -weight to only 3 ounces were treated as libral <i>asses</i>. Now this of -course is a very reasonable hypothesis on the principle which I -have adopted that bronze money was in fact merely token currency, -used only for local circulation and not for extraneous trade. -But Mr Soutzo is precluded from adopting such a position unless -he gives up the basis of his whole work. He has laid down that -the bronze money was not a mere conventional currency, but -always was actual value for the amount which it represented. -On this assumption he obtains his relation of 1:120 between -copper and silver. Assuming that the sextantal reduction was -contemporaneous with the issue of the first <i>denarius</i> (which is -in direct defiance of the historians), he found that the <i>denarius</i> -of 70 grs. = 2 ounces (840 grs.) of bronze; therefore silver was -to bronze as 120:1. Again, when the financial crisis took place -during the Second Punic war and the <i>denarius</i> was reduced (as -we learn from the actual coin weights) to 62 grs., and it was made -to pass for 16 <i>asses</i> instead of 10 <i>asses</i>, he finds that since 62 grs. -of silver = 16 <i>asses</i> of 432 grs. (<i>unciae</i>) silver was to bronze as<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_381"></a>[381]</span> -112:1. But in the latter case he omits to explain why it was -that the <i>denarius</i> in paying the troops only counted for <i>ten asses</i>. -It is evident that if the relation between copper and silver was -really as 1:112, there could have been no need for making this -difference. But as the soldiers were serving outside Rome, and -Roman local token currency would not be taken in payment, it -was necessary to pay them according to the market value of -bronze. At Rome the <i>denarius</i> was made to pass for 16 <i>asses</i>, or -three-fifths more than its actual value. It appears therefore -that the data given us by Pliny are not sufficient to allow us to -come to any definite conclusion as regards the relative value of -silver and bronze at that time. Moreover there is no evidence -to show that the <i>denarius</i> was reduced from 70 grs. to 62 grs. -by the Lex Flaminia. It is on the whole more likely that this -reduction took place when the first gold coinage was issued (62 -years after the first silver) in 206 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, since there was every -inducement to make such a change in the silver as would admit -of a convenient relation between the gold <i>scruple</i> and 20 -<i>sestertii</i>. This again raises just doubts as regards the accuracy -of Mr Soutzo’s calculation. With reference to the reduction of -the <i>as</i> to the sextantal standard we have seen that the truth of -his deductions rests entirely on the assumption that the degradation -took place <i>before</i> the First Punic war at the same time as -the issue of the first silver coinage. This of course is directly -contradicted by the historians. But even granting that it was -correct, it is difficult to see why we should assume that the -Roman <i>as</i>, which according to Soutzo’s own principles had been -nothing more than a token, should suddenly have been treated -as though it really was of the actual value which it represented. -There was no reason why, even though the unit of account was -the sextantal <i>as</i>, the <i>as</i> should have been anything else than a -token in its relation to the silver currency: certainly it is -strange that, if the Romans after treating the <i>as</i> as a token down -to 268 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> then suddenly gave it its full monetary value, they -did not continue to carry out their new principle. For as a -matter of fact there are very great differences in the weight of the -sextantal <i>asses</i>, and after the reduction to the uncial standard, -the same process of degradation went on without ceasing, as<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_382"></a>[382]</span> -Soutzo himself has shown<a id="FNanchor_448" href="#Footnote_448" class="fnanchor">[448]</a>. All these facts point to the conclusion -that the bronze coinage at Rome was only a local -token currency, such as is our own silver and bronze series at -the present day.</p> - -<p>Let us now see if we can give a consistent explanation of the -statements of the ancient writers which I have quoted above. -<i>Aes rude</i> or bronze in an unstamped or unmanufactured state -was originally in use at Rome, according to Timaeus. This -period corresponds to that time when, as I have endeavoured to -show, <i>asses</i> or <i>bars</i> of given dimensions intended to be made -into articles for use or ornament passed from hand to hand, as -do the brass rods mentioned above at the present moment in -the Congo region of Africa. Then came the stamping of the -<i>asses</i> towards the close of the regal period (according to -Timaeus), when figures of animals were placed thereon. We -have seen above (<a href="#Page_354">p. 354</a>) that such figures are actually found on -certain rough quadrilateral pieces of bronze found in some parts -of central Italy. With the use of weight instead of measure -for appraising their value, the shape of the <i>asses</i> would become -modified, getting shorter and thicker. Finally, they assume -the round shape of ordinary coins, and bear certain well-defined -symbols on both sides, such as the Janus head and Rostrum on -the <i>as</i>, that of Mercury on the <i>sextans</i>. But as few of these -round <i>asses</i> are found to weigh more than 10 <i>unciae</i>, it would -seem that the process of degradation had already set in before -their issue. Gold and silver at the same epoch passed by -weight either after the ancient fashion in ingots, or as the -coined money of the Greek cities of the South or of the -Etruscans. The unit of account continues to be the <i>as</i> of -<i>full weight</i>. Thus all penalties due to the state would be paid -not in reduced <i>asses</i> of only 5 or 4 ounces, but in full libral -<i>asses</i> as weighed in the balance. On the other hand although -reduced <i>asses</i> were used by the state in paying debts to private -individuals, they were only received as tokens, and no doubt the -state was bound if called upon to pay a full pound of bronze for<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_383"></a>[383]</span> -every stamped reduced <i>as</i> presented to it, but in ordinary times -this made no practical difference, for the bronze currency was -purely local all over Italy and Sicily, as we have seen above. -It was far too cumbrous to be used as a medium of international -trade.</p> - -<p>When the Romans after defeating Pyrrhus and taking -Tarentum had reduced all Southern Italy and hence obtained -great quantities of silver, they proceeded five years before the -beginning of the First Punic war to issue silver <i>denarii</i> or -ten <i>as</i> pieces. Are these pieces real representatives of the as -of account, or do they rather simply represent the value of the -then normal <i>as</i> of currency, which was probably not more than -a <i>triens</i> or four ounces or perhaps not more than a <i>quadrans</i> or -three ounces? The latter is the more likely hypothesis. They -had been long accustomed to a bronze token currency, and it -was most likely that the new silver currency would be adapted -to it. It is then likely that the <i>denarius</i> equalled ten <i>asses</i> of -at least 3 ounces each, in which case silver was to bronze as -180:1. In transactions inside the state the balance would -be commonly, and in dealing with strangers invariably, -employed in all monetary transactions, ancient states being -very jealous of alien mintages. This is exemplified by Pliny’s -statement that the Victoriates brought from Illyria were treated -simply as merchandize. Then came the First Punic war, which -lasted for two-and-twenty weary years, during which the -resources of the Republic were almost drained dry. The state -became virtually a bankrupt and simply paid in modern -phraseology 3<i>s.</i> 4<i>d.</i> in the pound. It was effected thus: up -to the present the <i>as</i> of full weight was the unit of account, -although the coined <i>asses</i> had by this time come to be simply -tokens of about 2 ounces each. The state accordingly enacted -that the <i>as</i> of currency should become the unit of account, and -paid the state debt by these coins, and at the same time made -it legal for private individuals, who were bound under the old -order of things to pay their debts in libral <i>asses</i> to discharge -their obligations by sextantal <i>asses</i>. Thus Pliny is perfectly -right in saying that the state made a profit of five-sixths. The -influx of silver after the conquest of Southern Italy and the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_384"></a>[384]</span> -requirements of large quantities of bronze for the building -of fleet after fleet, and for military equipment, may have -very well tended to appreciate the value of bronze at this -period. As the reduction in the size of the <i>as</i> continued, -though the unit of account was two ounces, under the pressure -of the Second Punic war they repeated the same process. The <i>as</i> -was now not more than an ounce, so they decreed that the <i>as</i> -of currency should again be the <i>as</i> of account, and the state -thus gained a half, this time paying ten shillings in the pound.</p> - -<p>The <i>ounce</i> and <i>libra</i> had been long well defined at Rome -before the silver coinage first appeared, and whilst we saw that -the <i>sextula</i> or one-sixth of the <i>uncia</i> was the lowest weight -employed for bronze, the fourth part of this weight, the -<i>scriptulum</i>, had been regularly employed in weighing silver -and gold; as we have seen it owed its origin to the fact that -the Aeginetan silver obol was found to be about the weight of -the 24th part of an <i>uncia</i> or inch of bronze. The first <i>denarii</i> -were the weight of a <i>sextula</i> or 4 <i>scriptula</i> (70 grs.) of the older -weight. The <i>scriptulum</i> and <i>sestertius</i> were thus identical, -and hence in later days the unit of account was the <i>sestertius</i> -and not the <i>as</i>. Accordingly when the gold coinage of 206 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> -was issued, it was based on the <i>scruple</i>, and consisted of pieces -of 1, 2, and 3 scruples.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure59"> -<img src="images/figure59.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 59.</span> Gold Solidus of Julian II. (the Apostate).</p> -</div> - -<p>We have now traced the origin of Roman currency sufficiently -for the purposes of this work. After various fluctuations -in the weight of the gold pieces under Sulla, Pompey, Julius -Caesar and others, Constantine the Great finally fixed the -weight of the <i>aureus</i> or <i>solidus</i> at 4 scruples in 312 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>, and -so it remained until the final downfall of the Empire of the -East in 1453. From this famous coin the various mintages of<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_385"></a>[385]</span> -mediaeval and consequently of modern Europe may be said to -trace their pedigrees. The <i>solidus</i> was divided into <i>thirds</i> -or <i>tremisses</i>, for the scrupular system had been abandoned, the -<i>solidus</i> being regarded simply as a <i>sextula</i> or one-sixth of the -<i>uncia</i>, and not as a multiple of the <i>scruple</i>. The <i>tremissis</i> -therefore weighed 24 grs. Troy, or 32 wheat grains. When the -barbarian conquerors of the Roman Empire began to coin -silver they took as their model the gold <i>tremissis</i>. In the -earliest stage of the Anglo-Saxon mintage we find so-called -gold pennies of 24 grs. occasionally appearing. These are -nothing else than <i>tremisses</i>. But silver henceforward was to -form for centuries the staple currency of Western Europe, and -the silver penny of 24 grs. (whence comes our own penny-weight) -became virtually the unit of account. As its weight -shows, the penny was based on the gold <i>tremissis</i>.</p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 150px;" id="figure60"> -<img src="images/figure60.jpg" width="150" height="150" alt="" /> -<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig. 60.</span> Gold Tremissis of Leo I.</p> -</div> - -<p>The first regular coinage of gold in Western Europe began -with the famous gold pieces of Florence in the beginning of the -14th century. These weighed 48 grs. or 2 <i>tremisses</i>. From their -place of mintage the name <i>florin</i> (fiorino) became a generic term -for gold coins. Accordingly when Edward III. issued his first -gold coins of 108 grs. each, although differing so completely -in weight from their prototype, they too were called <i>florins</i>. -In reality however Edward’s coin was 1½ solidus (72 + 36). -The first attempt did not prove satisfactory, and with the issue -of the famous noble, first of 136½ grs., and afterwards of 129 grs., -the series of English gold coins may be said to begin, of which -the latest stage is the sovereign of 120¼ grs. Troy.</p> - -<p>I have already explained at an earlier stage the origin of -the Troy grain; before we end let me add a word on the origin -of the Troy ounce. The Troy pound like the Roman has -12 ounces, but whereas the Roman ounce had 432 grs. Troy or<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_386"></a>[386]</span> -576 grs. wheat, the Troy ounce has 480 grs. Troy or 640 grs. -wheat. How came this augmentation of the ounce?</p> - -<p>It is in Apothecaries’ weight that we find the key. This -standard runs thus</p> - -<table summary="The standard for apothecaries’ weight"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">20 grs.</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 scruple,</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3 scruples</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 drachm,</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">8 drachms</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 ounce,</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">12 ounces</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 pound.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Now note that there are 24 scruples in the ounce, and -288 scruples in the pound, exactly as in the Roman system. -But there is an element foreign to the old Roman system as -seen in the drachm of 60 grs. Now Galen and the medical -writers of the Empire used the post-Neronian <i>denarius</i> of 60 grs. -as a medicine weight. What more convenient weight unit -could be employed than the most common coin in circulation? -The <i>drachma</i> and <i>denarius</i> had long since been used synonymously -in common parlance. But as there were 18 grs. (Troy, -24 wheat grs.) in the old scruple, and there were 60 grs. in the -drachm or <i>denarius</i>, they were not commensurable, and accordingly -to obviate this difficulty the physicians for practical -purposes raised the scruple to 20 grs., in order that it might -be one-third of the drachm. The number of scruples in the -ounce remaining 24 as before, the ounce became augmented by -48 grs. (24 × 2) and accordingly rose to 480 grs. We saw -above that the Troy grain is the barley-corn. Why is the -latter so closely connected with ‘Troy weight’? When the -scruple was raised from 18 grs. Troy, 24 grs. of wheat, to -20 grs. Troy, it no longer contained an even number of wheat -grains, for the new <i>scruple</i> contained 26⅔ grs. wheat. As this -was inconvenient, and on the other hand the new scruple -weighed exactly 20 barley-corns, the latter henceforth became -the lowest unit of this system.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_387"></a>[387]</span></p> - -<h3><i>Conclusion.</i></h3> - -<p>It now simply remains to sum up the results of our enquiry. -Starting with the Homeric Poems we found that although -certain pieces of gold called <i>talents</i> were in circulation among -the early Greeks, yet all values were still expressed in terms of -cows. We then found that the gold <i>talent</i> was nothing else -than the equivalent of the cow, the older unit of barter, and we -found that the <i>talent</i> was the same unit as that known in -historical times under the names of Euboic stater or Attic -stater, and commonly described by metrologists as the light -Babylonian shekel. Our next stage was to enquire into the -systems of currency used by primitive peoples in both ancient -and modern times, and everywhere alike we found systems -closely analogous to that depicted in the Homeric Poems, and -we found that in the regions of Asia, Europe and Africa, where -the system of weight standards which has given birth to all -the systems of modern Europe had its origin, the cow was -universally the chief unit of barter. Furthermore gold was -distributed with great impartiality over the same area, and -known and employed for purposes of decoration from an early -period by the various races which inhabited it. We then -found that practically all over that area there was but one unit -for gold, and that unit was the same weight as the Homeric -Talanton. Next we proved that gold was the first object for -which mankind employed the art of weighing, and we then -found that over the area in question there was strong evidence -to show that everywhere from India to the shores of the Atlantic -the cow originally had the same value as the universally -distributed gold unit.</p> - -<p>From this we drew the conclusion that the gold unit, which -was certainly later in date than the employment of the cow as -a unit of value, was based on the latter; and finally we showed -that man everywhere made his earliest essays in weighing -by means of the seeds of plants, which nature had placed ready -to his hand as counters and as weights. Then we surveyed the -theories which derive all weight standards from the scientific<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_388"></a>[388]</span> -investigations of the Chaldeans or Egyptians, and having found -that they were directly in contradiction to the facts of both -ancient history and modern researches into the systems of -primitive peoples, we concluded that the theories of Boeckh -and his school must be abandoned.</p> - -<p>Next we proceeded to explain the development of the -various systems of antiquity from our ox-unit, taking in turn -the Egyptian, Assyrio-Babylonian, Hebrew, Lydian, Greek and -Italian. New explanations of the origin of the Talent and -Mina and also of the earlier types on Greek coins and of the -varieties of standard employed for silver by the Greeks were -offered, and finally in dealing with the systems of Sicily and -Italy arguments were advanced to show that the Roman <i>as</i> was -originally nothing more than a rod or bar of copper of definite -measurements, and was in weight and method of division the -same as the Sicilian Litra and the Greek Obol.</p> - -<p>In how far the propositions here put forward have been -proved, it must remain for others to decide.</p> - -<p class="titlepage larger gothic">Laus Deo, Pax Vibis,<br /> -Requies Mortuis.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_389"></a>[389]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="APPENDIX_A">APPENDIX A<br /> -<span class="smcap">The Homeric Trial Scene.</span></h2> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">Κεῖτο δ’ ἄρ’ ἐν μέσσοισι δύω χρυσοῖο τάλαντα,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Τῷ δόμεν, ὃς μετὰ τοῖσι δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴποι.</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse right"><i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XVIII.</span> 507-8.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<p>I would not return to so well-worn a theme, were it not that -editors like Dr Leaf (<i>ad loc.</i>) still state that there is nothing in the -<i>language</i> of the last line to hinder us from taking it either of the -litigant or of the judge.</p> - -<p>Scholars have fixed their attention so closely on the words δίκην -εἴποι that they have completely overlooked the qualifying ἰθύντατα. -In modern courts of law we do not expect to hear the <i>straightest</i> -statement of a case from advocates, but rather from the judge. -The ancient Greek would never dream of expecting a litigant to -give a <i>straight</i> statement of his case. The following passages will -show that ἰθύς, ἰθύνειν, εὐθύνειν, ὀρθός are always applied to a judge -(the converse σκολιός being used of unjust judges). The metaphor -is from the carpenter’s rule (cf. ἐπὶ στάθμην ἰθύνειν <i>Od.</i> <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 245).</p> - -<p>Pind. <i>Pyth.</i> <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 152 καὶ θρόνος, ᾦ ποτε ἐγκαθίζων Κρηθεΐδας ἱππόταις -<span class="gesperrt">εὔθυνε</span> λαοῖς δίκας.</p> - -<p>Solon 3. 36 <span class="gesperrt">εὐθύνων</span> σκολιὰς δίκας.</p> - -<p><i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XVI.</span> 387 οἳ βίῃ εἰν ἀγορῇ <span class="gesperrt">σκολιὰς</span> κρίνωσι θέμιστας.</p> - -<p>Hesiod <i>Opp.</i> 221 σκολιῇς δε δίκῃς κρίνωσι θέμιστας.</p> - -<p>Hes. <i>Opp.</i> 222</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">(Δίκη) κακὸν ἀνθρώποισι φέρουσα</div> - <div class="verse indent0">οἵ τέ μιν ἐξελάσωσι καὶ οὐκ <span class="gesperrt">ἰθεῖαν</span> ἔνειμαν.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Arist. <i>Rhet.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 1 οὐ γὰρ δεῖ τὸν δικαστὴν διαστρέφειν εἰς ὀργὴν -προάγοντας ἢ φθόνον ἢ ἔλεον· ὅμοιον γάρ κἂν εἴ τις, ᾧ μέλλει χρῆσθαι -<span class="gesperrt">κανόνι</span>, τοῦτον ποιήσειε <span class="gesperrt">στρεβλόν</span>.</p> - -<p>Pind. <i>Pyth.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XI.</span> 15 ὀρθοδίκαν γᾶς ὀμφαλόν.</p> - -<p>Aesch. <i>Persae</i> 764 <span class="gesperrt">εὐθυντήριον</span> σκῆπτρον.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_390"></a>[390]</span></p> - -<p>No one can then doubt that the words δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴποι can -only refer to the judge.</p> - -<p>The following account of a trial on the Gold Coast so well -illustrates the principle of payment having to be made to the judges -that I think it worth quoting. (<i>Eighteen years on the Gold Coast of -Africa</i>, by Brodie Crookshank, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 279, London, 1853.)</p> - -<p>“When the day arrived for the hearing of Quansah’s charge, a -large space was cleanly swept in the market-place for the accommodation -of the assembly; for this a charge of ten shillings was made -and paid. When the Pynins (elders) had taken their seats, surrounded -by their followers, who squatted upon the ground, a -consultation took place as to the amount which they ought to -charge for the occupation of their valuable time, and after duly -considering the plaintiff’s means, with the view of extracting from -him as much as they could, they valued their intended services -at £6. 15<i>s.</i>, which he was in like manner called upon to pay. -Another charge of £2. 5<i>s.</i> was made in the name of tribute to the -chief, and as an acknowledgment of gratitude for his presence upon -the occasion. £1. 10<i>s.</i> was then ordered to be paid to purchase rum -for the judges, £1 for the gratification of the followers, ten shillings -to the men who took the trouble to weigh out the different sums, -and five shillings for the court criers. Thus Quansah had to pay -£12. 15<i>s.</i> to bring his case before this august court, the members of -which during the trial carried on a pleasant course of rum and palm -wine.”</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_391"></a>[391]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="APPENDIX_B">APPENDIX B.<br /> -<span class="smcap">What was the Unit of Assessment in the Constitution -of Servius Tullius?</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>Th. Mommsen in his Roman History (<span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 95-96 English Trans.) -has laid down that land was the basis of assessment, on the -analogy of the Teutonic <i>hide</i>. He makes the members of the -First Class those who held a whole hide; and the remaining four -classes were made up of those who held proportionally smaller -freeholds. When Mommsen has once spoken, it is presumptuous -to raise doubts. If however it can be shown that the Italians -rather based their assessments on cattle, and that furthermore the -statements of the later historians point to an original rating which -harmonizes well with such an original condition, it may have -been worth while to start enquiry once again in a case where -the data are so scanty and obscure.</p> - -<p>Pliny <i>H. N.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXIII.</span> 3. 13. Maximus census <span class="allsmcap">CXX.</span> assium -fuit illo rege, ideo haec prima classis. This is confirmed by Festus -(<i>s.v.</i> <i>infra censum</i>, p. 113 Müller) infra classem significantur qui -minore summa quam centum et viginti millia aeris censi sunt.</p> - -<p>Livy <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 42 says the rating of the <i>prima classis</i> was Centum -millia aeris, of the <i>secunda classis</i> was infra centum assium ad -quinque et septuaginta millia. <i>Tertia classis</i> quinquaginta millia, -<i>Quarta classis</i>, quinque et viginti millia. <i>Quinta classis</i>, undecim -millia.</p> - -<p>Dionysius of Halicarnassus (<span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 16-17) puts the rating of the -1st class at 100 minae (of silver) or 10,000 drachms; of the 2nd at -75 minae, of the 3rd at 50 minae, of the 4th at 25 minae, and that -of the 5th at 12 minae.</p> - -<p>All are agreed that it is absolutely incredible that the original -rating of the first class was 120,000 <i>libral</i> asses of bronze. The<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_392"></a>[392]</span> -cow was worth 100 <i>libral</i> asses at Rome in 451 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> Therefore the -rating of 120,000 asses would have been equivalent to 1200 cows. -It is impossible to believe that there could have been a numerous -body of men in early Rome possessed of such vast capital. Boeckh’s -explanation is that with the reduction of the <i>as</i> from its original -weight of a <i>libra</i> to two ounces, and one ounce, there was a -corresponding raising of the amount of the rating of the several -classes.</p> - -<p>Mommsen on the other hand thinks that the rating was -originally on <i>land</i>, and that the change in the method of rating -from land to bronze took place at a time when land had greatly -risen in value, and that accordingly 120,000 <i>asses</i> of the First Class -are libral <i>asses</i>. Such a change as Mommsen supposes must have -taken place before 260-241 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, for the <i>as</i> was reduced to two -ounces during the first Punic War. Yet we cannot easily suggest -any period before that date when there was likely to have been so -great a rise in the value of land, as is necessary to account for -the large rating of 120,000 <i>asses</i>, which according to Mommsen’s -reckoning would be worth about 400 lbs. of silver (or according to -Soutzo 1000 lbs. of silver).</p> - -<p>Boeckh’s hypothesis seems to fit better the conditions of the -problem. Much of the importance of the rating of the various -classes passed away when Marius (104 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) changed the whole -military system and chose the troops from the <i>Capite censi</i>, as well -as from the five property classes.</p> - -<p>The <i>as</i> had been reduced to a single <i>uncia</i> in the 2nd Punic -War (cf. <a href="#Page_377">p. 377</a>). Thus 12 <i>asses</i> of the <i>uncial</i> standard were -required to make up the weight of the old <i>libral as</i>. Accordingly -120,000 <i>asses</i> of the 2nd century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> would be equal to 10,000 -<i>libral asses</i> of the earlier days. But as by the Lex Tarpeia 100 -<i>asses</i> is the value of a cow, 10,000 <i>libral asses</i> = 100 cows. This -would be by no means an unlikely number of cows, to form the -minimum of the wealthiest class of a pastoral community. There -is another curious piece of evidence which seems to confirm my -hypothesis. One of the provisions of the Licinian Rogations -(367 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) was that no one should hold more than 500 <i>jugera</i> of the -Public Land, or should be allowed to feed more than <i>one hundred</i> -large cattle or 500 small cattle on public pastures. μηδένα ἔχειν -τῆσδε τῆς γῆς πλέθρα πεντακοσίων πλείονα, μηδὲ προβατεύειν ἑκατὸν -πλείω τὰ μείζονα καὶ πεντακοσίων τὰ ἐλάσσονα. Appian, <i>Bell. Civ.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 8.<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_393"></a>[393]</span> -If 100 large cattle were the number which qualified a Roman for -the first class, there was every reason why Licinius and Sextus -should have taken 100 as the <i>maximum</i> number of cows which a -citizen could keep on the public pastures.</p> - -<p>Next I shall show that the method of rating by cattle and -not by land was that actually practised in Sicily. That island -stood in such close relations to the Italian Peninsula both geographically -and ethnologically that we may reasonably infer that -the method of rating in use there was also in use in Italy.</p> - -<p>Now we learn from Aristotle’s <i>Oeconomica</i> (<span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 21) that when -the tyrant Dionysius oppressed the Syracusans with excessive -exactions, they ceased to keep cattle:</p> - -<p>Τὼν δὲ πολιτῶν διὰ τὰς εἰσφορὰς οὐ τρεφόντων βοσκήματα, εἶπεν ὅτι -ἱκανὰ ἦν αὐτῷ πρὸς τοσοῦτον· τοὺς οὖν νῦν κτησαμένους ἀτελεῖς ἔσεσθαι, -πολλῶν δὲ ταχὺ κτησαμένων πολλὰ βοσκήματα, ὡς ἀτελῆ ἑξόντων, ἐπεὶ -ᾤετο καιρὸν εἶναι, τιμήσασθαι κελεύσας ἐπέβαλε τέλος, κ.τ.λ.</p> - -<p>If the citizens of Syracuse, a great Greek trading city, were still -rated in cattle in the time of Dionysius (405-367 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), <i>à fortiori</i> -we may expect the same primitive method of assessment to prevail -among the pastoral peoples of Central Italy in the 6th and 5th -centuries <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span></p> - -<p>Among the Kelts, the close kinsfolk of the Italians, the same -system probably prevailed. Thus in the ancient Irish laws, where -the various classes of freemen are described, there are a number of -them called <i>Bo-aires</i><a id="FNanchor_449" href="#Footnote_449" class="fnanchor">[449]</a>, cow-freemen.</p> - -<p>As modern research has shown that everywhere among the -Aryans land was originally held in common, and that separate -property in land sprung up only at a comparatively late period, we -may with some confidence infer that in Italy likewise in early days a -man’s wealth was reckoned in his cattle, and not in lands, such as I -have shown to have been the practice among the Greeks of the -‘Homeric times’ (‘The Homeric Land System,’ <i>Journal of Hellenic -Studies</i>, 1885).</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_394"></a>[394]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="APPENDIX_C">APPENDIX C.<br /> -<span class="smcap">Keltic and Scandinavian Weight Systems.</span></h2> - -</div> - -<p>It is always dangerous to deal with things Keltic. So much -difficulty is there in getting at any facts amidst masses of wild -assertions and loose conclusions, that a prudent man may well shrink -back. However, as it is worth while to give some <i>facts</i> respecting -the actual weights of gold rings and other ornaments, I have thought -it best to print the following pages.</p> - -<p>Attempts have long ago been made to find the standard of the -so-called ring money. Sir William Betham, followed by John Lindsay<a id="FNanchor_450" href="#Footnote_450" class="fnanchor">[450]</a>, -after weighing many examples, arrived at the conclusion that -they are based on the ounce Troy. Now as the ounce Troy is -entirely unknown to the Brehon Laws, and was only brought into -Ireland by the English settlers, it is needless to argue further -against that doctrine. Dr Petrie’s<a id="FNanchor_451" href="#Footnote_451" class="fnanchor">[451]</a> discussions about Irish coins are -similarly vitiated by his treating as Troy grains the grains of wheat -mentioned by the authorities.</p> - -<p>1. <i>Irish.</i> Let us work back from the known to the unknown.</p> - -<p>The system in the Brehon Laws is as follows:</p> - -<table summary="Weight system in the Brehon Laws"> - <tr> - <td>1 Cumhal (ancilla)</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>3 Cows.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 Cow</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 Unga (uncia of silver).</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 Unga</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>24 Screapalls.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 Screapall</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>3 Pinginns.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>1 Pinginn</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>8 grs. of wheat.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Unga = 576 grs. of wheat.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_395"></a>[395]</span></p> - -<p>The ounce seems to be the highest unit of weight, and just as in -the Brehon Laws an <i>unga</i> of silver is equated to a cow, so in early -times an <i>unga</i> of gold seems to have been the regular value of a -slave, the most valuable of living chattels. At least we may so infer -from a curious story of St Finnian of Clonard:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Life of St Finnian (of Clonard, Co. Meath).</span></p> - -<p class="center">(<span class="smcap">Book of Lismore</span>, fol. 24 b, c.)</p> - -<p>Tainic iar sin Finnen cu Cilldara co -Brighit, cu m-bui ic tiachtuin leiginn -ocus proicepta fri re. Ceilebrais iar sin -do Brigit ocus dobreth Brighit fainne -oir dho. Nir ’bho santach som imon -saegul: ni roghabh in fainne. “Ce no -optha,” ar Brigit, “roricfea a leas.” -Tainic Finnen iar sin cu Fotharta Airbrech. -Dorala uisce do. Roinnail a -lamha asin usci<a id="FNanchor_452" href="#Footnote_452" class="fnanchor">[452]</a>: tuc lais for a bhais -asan uisci in fáinne targaidh Brighit -dó.</p> - -<p>Táinic iar sin Caisin, mac Naemain, -co faelti moir fri Finden. Ocus coneadhbair -fein dó ocus roacain fris ró -Fotharta ic cuinghidh oir fair ar a -shaeire. “Cia mét,” ar Finnen, “conaidheas?” -“Noghebhudh uingi n-oir,” -ar Caisin. Rothomthuis sé iar sin in -fainne [ocus frith uingi oir<a id="FNanchor_453" href="#Footnote_453" class="fnanchor">[453]</a>] ann. -Dorat Caisin hi ar a shaeriri.</p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap">Translation.</span></p> - -<p>“After that came Finnian to Kildare -to Brigit and he was engaged in teaching -and preaching for a time. He -takes leave afterwards of Brigit and -Brigit gave a ring of gold to him. He -was not covetous regarding the world: -he accepted not the ring. “Though -thou refusest,” said Brigit, “thou wilt -require it.” Finnian came after that to -Fotharta Airbrech<a id="FNanchor_454" href="#Footnote_454" class="fnanchor">[454]</a>. [On his way] he -met water. He washed his hands with -the water [and] brought on his palm -from out the water the ring that Brigit -offered to him.</p> - -<p>“After that came Caisin, son of Naeman, -with great joy to [visit] Finnian. -And he offered himself to him and -complained to him that the king of -Fotharta was demanding gold from -him for his liberation. “How much,” -said Finnian, “asketh he?” “He -would accept an ounce of gold,” said -Caisin. He [Finnian] weighed after -that the ring (and there was found an -ounce of gold<a id="FNanchor_455" href="#Footnote_455" class="fnanchor">[455]</a>) in it. Caisin gave it -for his liberation.”</p> - -</div> - -<p>I am indebted for this valuable reference, which also enables us -to form an idea of the relative value of gold and silver in early Ireland, -to the Rev. B. Mac Carthy, D.D., of Youghal.</p> - -<p>But there is another weight called crosoch (crosóg or crosach), -found in the most ancient poems. For instance in Cuchulaind the<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_396"></a>[396]</span> -brooch of Queen Medbh, “My spear brooch of gold which weighs -thirty ungas, and thirty half ungas, and thirty crossachs and thirty -quarter [crossachs].” (O’Curry, <i>Manners and Customs</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> p. -102.) The weight of a crosoch we learn from a gloss quoted by -O’Donovan (Supplement to O’Reilly’s Dictionary) from <i>MS. R. I. A.</i>, -No. 35, 5. 49.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>da pinginn agas cetrime pinginne isin lacht caerach i, crosóg<a id="FNanchor_456" href="#Footnote_456" class="fnanchor">[456]</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<p>“Two pinginns and a fourth of a pinginn are a milk of a sheep, -i.e. a crosóg.” Since 1 pinginn = 8 grs. wheat therefore a crosóg = -18 grs. wheat or 13·5 grs. Troy.</p> - -<p>There are accordingly 32 crosochs in the unga of the Brehon -Laws.</p> - -<p>Inspection at once shows that the crosoch must have belonged to -a different system, on which either the system of ungas and screapalls -was grafted or <i>vice versa</i>. The expulsion of the crosoch from -the later Irish shows that the first alternative is the true one.</p> - -<p>Again, it is certain that the unga and screapall were borrowed -from the Roman system, probably before the time of Constantine, -as after his time the solidus became universal throughout the Empire, -and has left its impress everywhere.</p> - -<p>The crosoch therefore must be non-Roman, <i>i.e.</i> belong to the -native population.</p> - -<p>Above we saw that it was used along with ungas and half ungas -in describing Medbh’s Fibula. Here is historical evidence of its use -in the weighing of gold ornaments.</p> - -<p>There were certainly 32 crosochs in the ounce of the Brehon -Laws, but if we can show in another system of north-western -Europe a weight exactly the same as the crosoch, with an ounce -which is its thirty-fold, we may hesitate to lay down that the full -Roman ounce with its 432 grs. Troy (576 grs. wheat) was the -earliest form of Irish <i>unga</i>.</p> - -<p>There is no mention of screapalls in the weight of Medbh’s -brooch. It is quite possible that under ecclesiastical influences the -full Roman ounce and its division into screapalls may have been -introduced at a comparatively late period. The contact between -Kelts and Scandinavians in early times has of late excited much -interest.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_397"></a>[397]</span></p> - -<p>2. Let us now turn to the old Norse system. It is as follows:</p> - -<table summary="Weight system of the old Norse"> - <tr> - <td>1 pening</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>13·5 grs. Troy</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>10 penings</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 örtug = 136·7 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>3 örtugs</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 öre = 410 grs.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td>8 öres</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 mark = 3280 grs.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>Let us deal first with the mark. As its name signifies, it in all -probability was originally not a <i>weight</i>, but a <i>measure</i>. The use of -<i>mark</i> as a land measure is well known in the Teutonic languages. -It is also used as a measure of length. Thus a mark of cloth -consists of 448 <i>alen</i> or <i>ells</i>. After what we have learned about -the history of the Roman <i>as</i> (<a href="#Page_354">p. 354</a>) we need not be surprised -if a term originally used as a measure of some article which was -not as yet sold by weight, came in similar fashion to be incorporated -at a later period into the weight system as a higher -unit. If the mark was originally a given measure of bronze or iron, -we can readily see how it came later on to be used as a weight, -and ultimately to be the chief unit of account among our Anglo-Saxon -forefathers, until it was at last driven out by the <i>pound</i>.</p> - -<p>That silver was cast into bars which weighed a mark is rendered -highly probable by the fact that three of the silver bars found -at Cuerdale weigh respectively 3960, 3954, and 3950 grs. Troy; -that is, just the weight of 160 pennies of the reign of Alfred. -160 pennies are two-thirds of a pound of 240 pennies, or in other -words a <i>mark</i>.</p> - -<p>The practice of running silver into ingots of such a weight may -well have arisen from an earlier practice of employing bronze or -iron bars of such a weight. It is at all events certain that the -mark is native Teutonic and is not borrowed from Rome. That the -Kelts at least used bars of iron as money is made not unlikely by a -famous passage of Caesar which I shall quote later on. A various -reading states that the Britons used iron rods as money (<i>ferreis -taleis</i>). Even without this we may reasonably infer from what we -have learned of the practice of primitive peoples in dealing with -iron or copper, that the Teutons and Kelts must have used -these by measure. It is well known that the Swedes used ingots -of copper as currency down to comparatively recent times. It -is then most likely that the <i>öre</i> or ounce of 410 grs. was the -highest original weight unit, just as the <i>unga</i> is in the ancient -Irish system. The weight of this <i>öre</i> is of great interest. If -we found the Roman pound of 12 ounces in Scandinavia, we should<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_398"></a>[398]</span> -at once say that the <i>öre</i> of 410 grs. was the reduced Roman ounce -(432 grs.). But as the native mark evidently got its position -before the influence of Rome was felt in the North, we may well -consider the <i>öre</i> to be pre-Roman. The reader will remember that -I identified the ancient Roman <i>uncia</i> with the small talent of -Sicily and Macedonia. The latter weighed 3 ox-units or about -405 grs. I also suggested that it originally represented the value -of a <i>slave</i>, and was thus the original highest unit used for gold -or silver. I showed on an earlier page (<a href="#Page_141">141</a>) that the Norse <i>örtug</i>, -the one-third of the <i>öre</i>, was the price of a cow. If three cows -were the price of a slave in Scandinavia as they were in Ireland, -and probably in Homeric Greece, an <i>öre</i> of gold was the price -of a slave. The passage from the life of St Finnian given at once -shows that an ounce of gold was the regular price of a slave -in early Ireland, and probably a good Scandinavian scholar could -soon find similar evidence for the value of the old Norse slave.</p> - -<p>The meaning and derivation of the term <i>örtug</i> have been much -discussed. It occurs in the forms <i>örtog</i>, <i>örtug</i>, <i>ertog</i>, <i>œrtug</i>. -Cleasby’s Lexicon makes nothing out of the first part of the word, -but takes the second part (-tog -tug = tugr = 20), because <i>örtug</i> -had the value of 20 <i>penningar</i>, though <i>tugr</i> means 10. But as -a matter of fact there were, as we saw above, 240 <i>penningar</i> in -the mark, and therefore there were 10 <i>penningar</i> in the <i>örtug</i>. -Holmboe<a id="FNanchor_457" href="#Footnote_457" class="fnanchor">[457]</a> goes more deeply into the origin of <i>örtug</i>. He says, “As -<i>á</i>, pl. <i>œr</i>, signifies a <i>ewe</i>, and <i>tug-r</i> as a derivative of <i>ten</i> both by -itself and in compounds signifies <i>ten</i>, <i>ertug</i> seems originally to have -signified 10 <i>ewes</i>, just as the weight <i>ertug</i> betokens the weight of -10 <i>peningar</i>, and <i>peningr</i> itself also means a <i>sheep</i>. It may be -regarded as questionable to assume the plural <i>œr</i> to form the first -part of the compound, yet <i>œr</i> must at an early period have been -used in the formation of compounds, since both the folkspeech -of Norway has the form <i>œr-saud-ewe</i>, sheep, technically a <i>ewe-with-lamb</i>, -and the folkspeech of Denmark has <i>œr lam</i> in the sense of -<i>ewe-lamb</i><a id="FNanchor_458" href="#Footnote_458" class="fnanchor">[458]</a>.” Another suggestion is that <i>örtug</i> comes from <i>arta</i> = a -pea-<i>formed knob</i>, so that örtug = örtu-vog, the weight of a pea.</p> - -<p>The objection to this would be that the pea would weigh -13·5 grs. Troy, which seems far too much.</p> - -<p>In spite of the philological difficulty in making <i>örtug</i> = 10 ewes,<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_399"></a>[399]</span> -it is very remarkable that this value corresponds so accurately with -the value of a cow, which I independently found for it. I have -already pointed out that 10 sheep were the usual value of a cow. So -it was at Rome in 451 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> and so it is with the Modern Ossetes. -The ox fit for the yoke was probably worth 20 lambs or 5 sheep in -Lusitania<a id="FNanchor_459" href="#Footnote_459" class="fnanchor">[459]</a>, and as we saw that in the Welsh Laws the ox when fit for -the yoke was worth half a full-grown cow, the Lusitanian cow was -worth 10 sheep. So also at Athens, when Plutarch<a id="FNanchor_460" href="#Footnote_460" class="fnanchor">[460]</a> says an ox was -worth 5 sheep, he probably means an ox fit for the yoke, the cow being -worth 10 sheep. In the Brehon Laws 8 sheep go to the cow, but as -I have already pointed out the insulated position of Ireland would -tend to cause a variation in prices from those on the mainland of -Europe. Thus we see from the story of St Finnian that gold must -have been worth only three times its weight in silver in Ireland in -the early centuries of our era. For the price of a slave was -an ounce of gold, whilst in the Brehon Laws it is 3 ounces of silver. -It might be said that we cannot prove that this was the value of -a slave in gold and silver at any one time, and that silver may -have been much cheaper at an earlier date. When we recollect -that silver has never existed in any quantity in Ireland, and that -where it does exist it can only be obtained by systematic mining, a -thing impossible in the eternal turmoil of Ireland, and also bear in -mind that when Japan was opened to Europeans in this century -gold was exchanged for three times its weight in silver, we need not -think such a relation at all unlikely in ancient Ireland. The paucity -of silver ornaments in the Royal Irish Academy Museum confirms -this opinion. But the evidence from the Penitentials shows that -silver was scarce at a comparatively still early date in Ireland<a id="FNanchor_461" href="#Footnote_461" class="fnanchor">[461]</a>. -Thus XII altilia vel XIII sicli praetium unius cuiusque ancillae.</p> - -<p>I have already shown the universality of making gold ornaments -after a fixed weight. The passages given above show that a similar -practice existed among the ancient Irish.</p> - -<p>Let us turn to the numerous gold rings, commonly called Ring -Money, of which there are some 50 in the Museum of the Royal Irish -Academy of various weights and sizes. I give these weights. Let -us examine them, and see if we can find any indications gained -inductively of a weight standard.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_400"></a>[400]</span></p> - -<p>As by inspection we see that the smallest rings weigh 13 and -14 grs. Troy, and the next three 29, 31, 32 respectively, which look -like the double of the smaller, I shall group the rings according -as they approximate to the multiples of 15.</p> - -<table summary="Groupings of the rings" class="borders"> - <tr> - <th class="nobl">Multiples<br />of 15</th> - <th>Actual Ring Weights (Royal Irish Acad.)</th> - <th>Multiples<br />of 15</th> - <th>Actual</th> - <th>Rings</th> - <th class="nobr">Weights</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">15</td> - <td>13, 14</td> - <td>180</td> - <td>179</td> - <td>345</td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">30</td> - <td>29, 31, 32, 36</td> - <td>195</td> - <td>199, 203</td> - <td>360</td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">45</td> - <td>40, 46</td> - <td>210</td> - <td>206, 209</td> - <td>375</td> - <td class="nobr">372</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">60</td> - <td>54, 56, 58, 59, 61, 65, 65</td> - <td>225</td> - <td>220</td> - <td>370</td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">75</td> - <td>69, 73</td> - <td>240</td> - <td>247</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">90</td> - <td>84, 84, 88, 96</td> - <td>255</td> - <td>259</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">105</td> - <td>98, 104, 111</td> - <td>270</td> - <td></td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">120</td> - <td>121, 124</td> - <td>285</td> - <td>283, 283</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">135</td> - <td></td> - <td>300</td> - <td></td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">150</td> - <td>144, 144, 147, 147, 150, 151</td> - <td>315</td> - <td>322</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">165</td> - <td>171,172</td> - <td>330</td> - <td>332</td> - <td></td> - <td class="nobr"></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>A glance at the foregoing table shows that the most numerous -group of rings occurs at the fourfold (60), no less than seven specimens -ranging themselves at that point, next we find six specimens -at the tenfold (150), whilst next in order comes the sixfold with four -examples. There are three cases of the double (30). On the other -hand it is worth noticing the absence of the ninefold, whilst there -are three instances of the sevenfold, and the absence of the eighteenfold -(2 × 9) likewise, whilst we have the elevenfold, twelvefold, thirteenfold, -fourteenfold. However from the absence of the twentyfold -(2 × 10) we cannot lay great stress on this. The heaviest -specimen (372) closely approximates to the twenty-five fold (375).</p> - -<p>I add the weights of the ancient Irish gold rings preserved in the -British Museum.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p class="center"><i>Irish small plain ring money. Some are without localities but -may be assumed to be Irish. Marked thus *.</i></p> - -<p>*103, 563, *389, *121, *29½, 218, 224, 323, 295 injured, 218, 122, 90, -28, 56, 215 copper plated with gold (injured), 299, 148, 98, 366, 89 piece<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_401"></a>[401]</span> -cut from a larger bracelet?, 48½ hollow and open? plating of bronze ring? -(banded), 422, 410 (ounces), 288 (injured).</p> - -<p class="center"><i>Irish fluted ring money. * No precise locality, but presumably Irish.</i></p> - -<p>*106, *123 (worn), 30, 59, 90, 66, 59½.</p> - -<p>With disks, 249, 806 (2 oz.), 595, 283, 169, 665, 139, 119.</p> - -<p>Dots, no lines, 32.</p> - -</div> - -<p>The weights of these rings show many points of agreement with -those in the Irish Museum. Thus we get 28, 29½, 30, and 32 grs. -corresponding to 29, 31, and 32 grs. of the second group in the Irish -Table. Again, 56 and 59½ where we get 54, 56, 58, 59, 61 in the -Irish, and 66 corresponding to 65, 65; 98 to 96 and 98; and 89 -corresponding to 88 and 90; 119, 121, 122 and 123 to 121 and -124; 139 to 144, and 144 and 148 to 147 and 147; then 169 to -171 and 172. Then comes a break, and we get 215, 218, 218, 224 -corresponding to 220, and 249 to 247, and 283 to 283 and 283; -and 323 to 322, and 360 to 366. But the British Museum gives us -in the higher weights three very important specimens: for 410 grs. -is the ounce corresponding exactly to the old Norse <i>öre</i> of 410 grs., -and the ring of 422 grs. looks like the later ounce rising towards -the full weight of 432. The ring of 806 grs. is plainly 2 ounces of -the standard of 410 (806 ÷ 2 = 403).</p> - -<p>The occurrence of several specimens so constantly all of the same -weight, as for instance those about 220 grs., points beyond doubt to -the conclusion that when the rings were being made a given quantity -of gold was weighed out for the purpose. The story of St Finnian -proves that for any transaction in which rings were employed as -money, the scales were employed.</p> - -<p>There is a set of leaden weights in the Royal Irish Academy -Collection, found at Island Bridge, Dublin, in 1869, when Ancient -Irish and Scandinavian remains were found together. As they are -more or less corroded, it is not advisable to lay much stress on their -present weights.</p> - -<table summary="Table of the weights found at Island Bridge"> - <tr> - <th></th> - <th></th> - <th>grs.</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">1.</td> - <td>Semicircular weight</td> - <td class="tdr">1852</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">2.</td> - <td>Animal’s head</td> - <td class="tdr">1550</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">3.</td> - <td>Circular</td> - <td class="tdr">1221</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">4.</td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">958</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">5.</td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">634</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">6.</td> - <td>Oblong</td> - <td class="tdr">539</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">7.</td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">459</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">8.</td> - <td>Quadrangular</td> - <td class="tdr">414</td> - <td>(oz.)</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">9.</td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">395</td> - <td>(oz.)</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">10.</td> - <td></td> - <td class="tdr">220</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_402"></a>[402]</span></p> - -<p>There are certainly some interesting points of agreement between -the weights and the gold ornaments, <i>e.g.</i> the weights of 220, 390, -414, 630, have corresponding weights in gold. The largest weight -may be 4½ oz. of 410 grs.</p> - -<p class="tb">Let us now return to the Irish monetary system, and see if we -can determine more accurately its relation to that of Rome.</p> - -<table summary="The Irish monetary system"> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">8</td> - <td>grains of wheat</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>pinginn.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">24</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">3</td> - <td>pinginns</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">1</td> - <td>screapall.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdr">576</td> - <td><span class="ditto">”</span> <span class="ditto">”</span></td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">72</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td>=</td> - <td class="tdr">24</td> - <td>screapalls</td> - <td>=</td> - <td>1 unga.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>As regards <i>unga</i> and <i>screapall</i> we have spoken already. Of -their origin there is no doubt. The pinginn on the other hand is -not so easy. The name is certainly Teutonic, said to be ultimately -a loan word formed from <i>pecunia</i>. It seems to have been employed -as a general term for the smallest form of currency. Hence we -find the Saxon form (<i>pendinga</i>) applied to the 240th part of the lb., -and of about 32 grs. wheat, and the Norse <i>peningr</i> used for the -240th part of the <i>mark</i>, whilst in Ireland the cognate form is applied -to the 72nd part of the ounce, and is of the weight of 8 grains -<i>wheat</i>.</p> - -<p>The Irish employed the system of Uncia and Scripula. Shall -we say then that this system was in vogue in Britain likewise -before the time of Constantine and yielded slowly before the later -one?</p> - -<p>Since then it was common to the Kelts on both sides of the -Irish Sea, and we find that in Ireland it was grafted upon an earlier -system, of which the <i>crosoch</i> is a survival, we may reasonably infer -that the Kelts of Britain had likewise a native system analogous to -the <i>crosoch</i>. But further, of this we have strong evidence of two -kinds. Caesar <i>B. G.</i> v. 12, when describing the British Kelts and -their manners, says; pecorum magnus numerus. Utuntur aut aere -aut nummo aureo aut annulis ferreis ad certum pondus examinatis -pro nummo<a id="FNanchor_462" href="#Footnote_462" class="fnanchor">[462]</a>. The passage has been mutilated by Editors, but this -is the reading of the best MSS. Caesar thus tells us that they had<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_403"></a>[403]</span> -a system of weights of their own. Secondly the evidence of the -actual British Coins (cf. Evans, <i>Coins of Ancient Britons</i>) which are -of a standard not Roman.</p> - -<p>Now we have seen above that the Irish gold rings were weighed -on a standard of almost 13·5 grs. Troy. Let us now see if the -larger gold ornaments preserved in our Museums confirm or disprove -the evidence of the rings. I shall first give the weights of those -in the Royal Irish Academy<a id="FNanchor_463" href="#Footnote_463" class="fnanchor">[463]</a>:</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p><i>Crescent shaped ornaments</i>: 1539, 434 (ounce of Brehon Laws?), -733, 1008, 255, 2013, 489, 552, 660, 1081, 98, 432 (ounce of Brehon Laws), -339, 400 (early ounce = Norse <i>öre</i>?), 187, 390 (old ounce?), 797 (2 ounces, -2 × 398½).</p> - -<p>The following are not in Wilde’s Catalogue: 472, 505, 542, 540, 630, 647, -667, 687, 720, 722, 737, 1092, 4331.</p> - -<p><i>Torques</i>: 476, 1013, 1527, 3126, 3168, 4722, 5941, 6007, 10268.</p> - -<p>Not in Wilde: 154, 342, 1946, 2715, 4172, 5207, 5275, 6012, 6881.</p> - -<p><i>Armlets</i>: 144, 158, 182, 329, 401 (small pre-Roman ounce), 421 (ounce), -487, 510, 684, 757, 894, 989, 1037, 1369, 1630 (4 ounces of 407 grs.?), 1716 -(4 ounces of 426 grs.?), 2089 (5 oz. of 418 grs.?), 5635 (14 oz. of 402 grs.?), -6265 (15 oz. of 417 grs.).</p> - -<p>Not in Wilde: 130, 145 (⅓ of oz. of 432 grs.?), 178, 184, 187, -199, 208, 215 (half oz. of 432 grs.?), 241, 289, 301, 303 (¾ oz. of -405 grs.?), 345, 396 (oz.?), 487, 509 (1¼ oz.?), 547 (1⅓ of oz.), 606 -(1½ oz. of 405 grs.?), 630 (1⅓ oz. of 420 grs.?), 740, 753 (1¾ oz.), 1093 (2½ -oz.?), 1190, 1210 (3 oz. of 405 grs.), 1267 (3 oz. of 422 grs.?), 1322, 1641 -(4 oz. of 410 grs.), 1730 (4 oz. of 432 grs.?), 1836, 1836 (4½ oz. of 410 grs.?), -1940 (5 oz. of 388 grs.? or 4¾ oz. of 410 grs.?), 1980 (5 oz. of 396 grs. or 4¾ -oz. of 410 grs.?), 2201, 6144 (15 oz. of 410 grs.?), 13557 (33 oz. of 410 grs.?).</p> - -<p><i>Fibulae</i>: 56 (4 crosachs), 179, 180 (⅖ oz. of 400 grs.?), 415 (oz.), 600 (1½ -oz. of 400 grs.?), 1231 (3 oz. of 410 grs.), 1345 (3½ oz. of 432 grs.), 1596 -(4 oz. of 399 grs.?), 2301 (5¼ oz. of 400 grs.), 2536 (6 oz. of 422 grs.), 17200 -(43 oz. of 400 grs.?), 8092 (20 oz. of 404 grs.), 19440 (48 oz. of 405 grs.).</p> - -<p>Not in Wilde: 61, 106 (¼ oz.), 170, 170 (⅖ oz. of 425 gr.), 191, 196 (½ oz.?), -207, 209 (½ oz.), 248, 275 (⅔ oz. of 411 grs.), 315 (¾ oz.?), 379 (oz.), 542 -(1⅓ oz.?), 557 (1⅓ oz.?), 586 (1½ oz.?), 649 (1½ oz. of 432 grs.?), 1187 (3 oz. of -396 grs.?).</p> - -<p><i>Gorgets</i>: 1160 (3 oz. of 387 grs.?), 2020 (5 oz. of 404 grs.?), 3091 (8 oz. of -386 grs.?), 3444 (8 oz. of 430 grs.?).</p> - -</div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_404"></a>[404]</span></p> - -<p>The result of an examination of the foregoing weights is to -show that in all probability the vast majority of them were made -on a standard much lighter than the Roman ounce of 432 grs., -which was in full use in mediaeval Ireland. We saw that the -Roman ounce had been only 420 grs. down to the Second Punic war, -and I suggested that originally it was of the same weight as the -Sicilian talent 390-405 grs. Can we observe a similar increase in -the Irish ounce? The ounce of 400-410 seems to point to a time -when Kelt and Scandinavian had a common higher unit of similar -weight corresponding to the value of a slave<a id="FNanchor_464" href="#Footnote_464" class="fnanchor">[464]</a>, just as the Sicilian -and Macedonian talent of three ox units represented the same -slave unit.</p> - -<p>I shall now give the weights of the various ornaments of gold -found in England, Wales and Scotland which are preserved in the -British Museum. For these I am indebted to the great kindness of -Mr F. L. Griffith of the Anthropological department.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p class="center"><i>Torques with rings.</i></p> - -<p>Boxton, Suffolk, torque band twisted. 1·038 (2½ oz. of 415 grs.) with -double ring. Weight 24·8 grs.</p> - -<p>(A ring of 8 parallel sections, bronze plated with gold, injured, weighs -111 grs.; the locality is not known, but it seems connected with this class. -Probably Irish, one in Wilde’s catalogue of 7 sections.)</p> - -<p>Another double ring, Devonshire, weighs 563 grs. (1⅓ oz. of 420 grs.).</p> - -<p>Lincolnshire torques; 1454 grs. (3½ oz. of 415 grs.), coiled band 119½. -Quadruple ring, 93½ (¼ oz.?), another similar 93.</p> - -<p>Cambridgeshire torques (not in B. M.) 1944 (5 oz. of 387? or 4¾ oz. -of 410), rest in B. M. viz.:—bracelet 613 (1½ oz. of 412 grs.), two treble -rings linked together, combined weight 358, double ring, weight 132 -(⅓ oz.), another 131½, two others similar but smaller are each 68 (⅙ oz.).</p> - -<p>Wales. Two plain bracelets, near Beaumaris, Anglesea, 1028 (2½ oz. -of 410 grs.); 420 (1 oz.), crescent-shaped gorget, Caernarvon, 2861 (7 oz. -of 410 grs.).</p> - -<p>Scotland. Noard, near Elgin, torques formed of a plain twisted band, -207 (½ oz.): 215 (½ oz.): 192 (½ oz.): 119 grains.</p> - -</div> - -<p>The evidence points to an ounce of 420 grs. It is worth noting -that this is just 5 times the weight of the latest British coins, -84-82 grs.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_405"></a>[405]</span></p> - -<p>Whence then did the Britons obtain this pre-Roman standard? -Was it of native development or borrowed from some other people? -By Britons we must be careful to express not all the natives of -Britain. They fall most certainly into at least two groups. I. The -Kelts in the East and South East. II. The barbarous inhabitants -of the interior, who subsisted by hunting and fishing, and who were -probably of that Iberic race, which spread over all Western Europe -before the advance of the Aryans. It is only with the first -group that we are immediately concerned. They almost exclusively -possessed the art of coining, as is shown by the area over which -British coins are found. Furthermore Caesar tells us of the close -relationship of the first group to the Gauls, as is shown by their -tribal names, language and customs. In addition their coinage is -similar. Now there can be no doubt as regards the source from -whence the Gauls derived their coinage. As they got the art of -writing from the Phocaeans of Massilia (founded circ. 600 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), so -likewise did they gain the art of money-stamping from the same -famous town, as has been completely demonstrated long since. -People are inclined at once to assume that the Gauls and Britons -got their weight standards also from Marseilles. There is certainly -some evidence to support this belief. Thus the gold torque lately -found in Jersey weighs 11500 grs., which is exactly the mina of the -Phocaic system at a time when 57½ grs. went to the drachm. -Again we have seen that there were a considerable number of gold -ornaments in Ireland and Britain which weigh 224-216 grs. -This is the Phocaic (or Phoenician) stater. But the question is not -so simple as it might appear at first sight in relation to the weight -system, as will appear most readily by a short survey of the history -of the monetary system of Massilia.</p> - -<p>I. The earliest coinage consists of silver, small divisions of the -Phocaic drachm (58-54 grains Troy). These have various symbols -on the obverse, but have uniformly the incuse square on the reverse. -These may be placed after 500 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> “Notwithstanding their archaic -appearance, it does not seem that these little coins are much earlier -than the middle of the 5th century.”</p> - -<p>II. Next comes a series, chiefly obols for the most part with -head of Apollo on obverse, and a wheel on reverse, the latter -probably a development of the earlier incuse square. They are -mostly obols of 13-8 grains.</p> - -<p>III. About the middle of the 4th century the drachm first<span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_406"></a>[406]</span> -appears with the head of Artemis on obverse and a lion on the -reverse, weighing 58-55 grains.</p> - -<p>Now over all Gaul, and far into Northern Italy, and the valleys -of the Alps, as far as the Tyrol, the coinage of Massilia made its -way and was abundantly imitated. In fact these imitations formed -the entire medium of those regions until the Roman conquest. The -imitations of the little coins with Apollo and the wheel as reverse -are found right into the north of France, and in England.</p> - -<p>Did the Kelts borrow their 13½ grain unit from the 13 grain -obol of Massilia, or is it of far earlier growth? The Etruscans used -a unit of 13½ grs. in the 4th century <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, and we find the Massaliotes -having almost the same. Is the true answer this? All over Western -Europe the ox unit of 135 grs. of gold was subdivided into 10 parts -each of 13½ grs. These 10 parts corresponded to 10 sheep, the -regular value of a cow. There was also a higher unit from Greece -to Gaul and Britain corresponding to the slave. There were -fluctuations in their worth in various times and places, but on the -whole there was a tendency to raise the weight of the higher unit -(ounce). But it is natural that the Kelts may have taken over -into their system certain units from the Phocaic system which they -used as multiples of their own smaller units, just as the Teutonic -peoples took the Roman pound into their own system, and the -natives of West Africa made the Spanish dollar the multiple of -their own native weights, based on seeds. Some idea of the -relative ages of Keltic gold ornaments may perhaps be got from -applying the criterion of weight standard to them.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="footnotes"> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="FOOTNOTES">FOOTNOTES</h2> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> <i>Metrologische Untersuchungen über Gewichte, Münzfüsse und Masse des -Alterthums in ihrem Zusammenhange.</i> Berlin, 1838.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> χρύσεα χαλκείων, ἑκατόμβοι’ ἐννεαβοίων.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> <i>Iliad</i>, <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 750.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> Victor A. L. Morier, <i>Murray’s Magazine</i>, August, 1889, p. 181.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> <i>Trans-Caucasia</i>, p. 410 (Engl. trans. 1854).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> Pollux, <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 73, τὸ παλαιὸν δὲ τοῦτ’ ἦν Ἀθηναίοις νόμισμα καὶ ἐκαλεῖτο βοῦς, -ὅτι βοῦν εἶχεν ἐντετυπωμένον. εἰδέναι δ’ αὐτὸ καὶ Ὅμηρον νομίζουσιν εἰπόντα ἑκατόμβοι’ -ὲννεαβοίων.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> Cf. Aesch. <i>Agam.</i> 36; Theognis 815. Cp. τὰν ἀρετὰν καὶ τὰν σοφίαν νικᾶντι -χελῶναι, a proverb (given by Pollux <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 74) alluding to the <i>Tortoise</i> coins of -Aegina; and Menander (<i>Al.</i> 1), παχὺς γὰρ ὗς ἔκειτ’ ἐπὶ στόμα.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> ἡ γλαῦξ ἐπὶ χαράγματος ἢ τετραδράχμου, ὡς Φιλόχορος· ἐκλήθη δὲ τὸ νόμισμα -τὸ τετράδραχμον τότε [ἡ] γλαῦξ· ἦν γὰρ ἡ γλαῦξ ἐπίσημον καὶ πρόσωπον Ἀθηνᾶς, -τῶν προτέρων διδράχμων ὄντων, ἐπίσημον δὲ βοῦν ἐχόντων.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> Plutarch, <i>Solon</i>, c. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> Hultsch, <i>Reliquiae Scriptorum Metrologicorum</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 301, τὸ δὲ γαρ’ Ὁμήρῳ -τάλαντον ἴσον ἐδύνατο τῷ μετὰ ταῦτα Δαρεικῷ. ἄγει δ’ οὖν τὸ χρυσοῦν τάλαντον -Ἀττικὰς δραχμὰς β’, γράμματα ζ’, τετάρτας δηλαδὴ τεσσάρας.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> <i>Iliad</i>, <span class="allsmcap">XVIII.</span> 507, 8,</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">κεῖτο δ’ ἄρ’ ἐν μέσσοισι δύω χρυσοῖο τάλαντα,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">τῷ δόμεν, ὃς μετὰ τοῖσι δίκην ἰθύντατα εἴπῃ.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>See <a href="#APPENDIX_A">Appendix A</a> for a linguistic proof that the two talents were for the Judge.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> <i>Ancient Law</i>, p. 375.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a></p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">ἀνδρὶ δὲ νικηθέντι γυναῖκ’ ἐς μέσσον ἔθηκεν,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">πολλὰ δ’ ἐπίστατο ἔργα, τίον δέ ἑ τεσσαράβοιον.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> <i>Od.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 430.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> <i>Iliad</i>, <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 12 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 262 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> Of course amongst the lowest races of savages such as the aborigines -of Australia, even barter is almost unknown. Each man makes his own stone -implements from the greenstone which is everywhere in abundance, his -own clubs and boomerangs, whilst Nature supplies all his other wants.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> Whymper’s <i>Alaska</i>, p. 225.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> Morier, <i>Murray’s Magazine</i>, August, 1889, p. 181.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> Jevons, <i>Money</i>, p. 24.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> <i>Tribes of California</i>, p. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i>, p. 335.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> Clavigero, <i>Hist. of Mexico</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 386.</p> - -<p>They counted the Cacao nuts by 8000 and to save the trouble of counting -them they reckoned them by sacks, every sack being reckoned to contain 24,000. -Cf. Prescott, <i>Conquest of Mexico</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> G. M. Dawson, ‘Report on the Queen Charlotte Islands, 1878,’ p. 135 B -(<i>Geological Survey of Canada</i>), Montreal, 1880.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> F. Magnússon, <i>Nordiske Tidskrift for Oldkyndighed</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 112.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> <i>Wanderings in a Wild Country, or Three Years among the Cannibals of -New Britain</i> (London, 1883), p. 55.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> For shell money in the Caroline Islands cf. Kubary’s <i>Ethnographische -Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Karolinen Archipels</i> (Leipzig, 1889); in the Pelew -Islands cf. Karl Semper, <i>Die Pelau Inseln</i> (Leipzig, 1873), p. 60; and for shell -money in general cf. R. Stearn’s <i>Ethno-conchology</i> (Washington, 1889).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> Jevons, <i>Money</i>, 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> Terrien de la Couperie, <i>Coins and Medals</i>, p. 193.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> Terrien de la Couperie, <i>Coins and Medals</i>, p. 199.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> Yule’s Translation, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 70.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> Gill, <i>River of Golden Sand</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 77.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> Yule’s Translation, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> So the Irish <i>sed</i>, the most general name for <i>chattel</i>, originally meant -simply an <i>ox</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> <i>Cochin-Chine Française. Excursions et Reconnaissances</i>, <span class="allsmcap">XIII.</span> (1877), p. -296-8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> <i>Excursions et Reconnaissances</i>, <span class="allsmcap">XIII.</span> No. 30 (1887), p. 296-304.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a> M. Aymonier, <i>Cochin-Chine. Excursions et Reconnaissances</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> No. 24 -(1885), pp. 233 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 317.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> <i>Rig-Veda</i>, <i>Mandala</i>, <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 90. 6, <span class="allsmcap">VIII.</span> 67. 1-2, <span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 47, 23-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> <i>Vendidâd</i>, <i>Fasgard</i>, <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 41 (Darmesteter’s translation in Sacred Books of -the East).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> <i>Vendidâd</i>, <i>Fasgard</i>, <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 37.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> <i>Ibid.</i> <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> Hakluyt Society, 1857, p. 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> For <i>larins</i> cf. Prof. Rhys Davids, “On the Ancient Coins and Measures of -Ceylon” (<i>Numismata Orientalia</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 68-73). Mr Rhys Davids makes no -mention of the bronze fish-hooks, but there are a number of them in the British -Museum.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> I am indebted to the kindness of Mr A. Galetly of the Edinburgh Museum -of Science and Art for the drawing from which the figure here shown is -reproduced, as also for the drawing of the Calabar wire money and West African -axe money figured lower down. My friend Mr J. G. Frazer (one out of -countless kindnesses) called my attention to all three objects.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> Haxthausen, <i>Transkaukasia</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 30 (Engl. Trans. p. 409).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 485.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> <i>Oecon.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> <i>Annals of the Four Masters</i>, Anno 106 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span> (O’Donovan’s ed.).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_51" href="#FNanchor_51" class="label">[51]</a> <i>Ancient Laws of Wales</i>, p. 795.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_52" href="#FNanchor_52" class="label">[52]</a> O’Donovan’s Supplement to O’Reilly, s.v. <i>Lacht</i>: <i>Senchus Mor</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 287.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_53" href="#FNanchor_53" class="label">[53]</a> Thorpe, <i>Laws of the Anglo-Saxons</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 357. Cunningham, <i>History of -English Commerce</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 117.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_54" href="#FNanchor_54" class="label">[54]</a> Illud notandum est quales debent solidi esse Saxonum: id est, bovem -annoticum utriusque sexus, autumnali tempore, sicut in stabulum mittitur, pro -uno solido: similiter et vernum tempus, quando de stabulo exiit; et deinceps, -quantum aetatem auxerit, tantum in pretio crescat. De annona vero bortrinis -pro solido uno scapilos quadraginta donant et de sigule viginti. Septemtrionales -autem pro solidum scapilos triginta de avena et sigule quindecim. -Mel vero pro solido bortrensi, sigla una et medio donant. Septemtrionales -autem duos siclos de melle pro uno solido donent. Item ordeum mundum sicut -et sigule pro uno solido donent. In argento duodecim denarios solidum faciant. -Et in aliis speciebus ad istum pretium omnem aestimationem compositionis -sunt. <i>Capitulare Saxonicum</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> Migne, <span class="allsmcap">XCVII.</span> 202.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_55" href="#FNanchor_55" class="label">[55]</a> Schive and Holmboe, <i>Norges Mynter</i> (Christiania, 1865), pp. <span class="allsmcap">I.-III.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_56" href="#FNanchor_56" class="label">[56]</a> G. Hoffmann, <i>Zeitschrift für Assyriologie</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> (1887) p. 48.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_57" href="#FNanchor_57" class="label">[57]</a> Schliemann, <i>Mycenae</i>, and <i>Tiryns</i>, p. 354.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_58" href="#FNanchor_58" class="label">[58]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XVIII.</span> 401 πόρπας τε, γναμπτάς θ’ ἕλικας, κάλυκάς τε, καὶ ὅρμους.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_59" href="#FNanchor_59" class="label">[59]</a> <i>Homer. Epos</i>, 279-281 (2nd ed.).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_60" href="#FNanchor_60" class="label">[60]</a> Hesychius s.v. ἕλικες explains them as <i>earrings</i> (ἐνώτια), or <i>armlets</i>, <i>anklets</i> -(ψέλλια), or <i>rings</i> (δακτύλιοι). Eustathius on <i>Iliad</i> <span class="allsmcap">XVIII.</span> 400 explains them as -ἐνώτια ἢ ψέλλια παρὰ τὸ εἰς κύκλον ἑλίσσεσθαι, “earrings or armlets (anklets), -so called from being rolled up” (<i>helissesthai</i>). Cp. Ebeling, <i>Lexicon Homericum</i>, -s.v. ἕλιξ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_61" href="#FNanchor_61" class="label">[61]</a> Keary, <i>Catalogue of Anglo-Saxon Coins</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. vii. From <i>beag</i> Mr Max -Müller derives <i>buy</i> in spite of a phonetic difficulty.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_62" href="#FNanchor_62" class="label">[62]</a> Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 are in the collection of my friend Mr R. Day, F.S.A., of -Cork. The others are in my own possession.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_63" href="#FNanchor_63" class="label">[63]</a> <i>Journal of Hellenic Studies</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> Here is the description and weight -of the rings (which I have been enabled to figure by the kindness of Mr John -Murray):</p> - -<table summary="Description and weight of each ring" class="borders"> - <tr> - <th rowspan="2"><span class="smcap">Metal</span></th> - <th rowspan="2"><span class="smcap">Description</span></th> - <th colspan="2"><span class="smcap">Weight</span></th> - </tr> - <tr> - <th><span class="smcap">Grammes</span></th> - <th><span class="smcap">Grains Troy</span></th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="bl">Silver</td> - <td>Plain ring</td> - <td class="tdr">8·8</td> - <td class="tdr">137</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="bl">Gold</td> - <td>Spiral</td> - <td class="tdr">8·5</td> - <td class="tdr">132</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">9·9</td> - <td class="tdr">153</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">10·8</td> - <td class="tdr">167</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td>Plain ring</td> - <td class="tdr">15·9</td> - <td class="tdr">248</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">16·5</td> - <td class="tdr">257</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">19·0</td> - <td class="tdr">297</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">19·4</td> - <td class="tdr">303</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td>Spiral</td> - <td class="tdr">20·5</td> - <td class="tdr">320</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">21·5</td> - <td class="tdr">335</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td>Plain ring</td> - <td class="tdr">22·0</td> - <td class="tdr">340</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td>Spiral</td> - <td class="tdr">29·3</td> - <td class="tdr">452</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">39·0</td> - <td class="tdr">612</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">39·5</td> - <td class="tdr">617</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">41·5</td> - <td class="tdr">643</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">42·2</td> - <td class="tdr">654</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc">”</td> - <td class="tdr">42·3</td> - <td class="tdr">655</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class="tdc bb bl">”</td> - <td class="tdc bb">”</td> - <td class="tdr bb">42·8</td> - <td class="tdr bb">662</td> - </tr> -</table> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_64" href="#FNanchor_64" class="label">[64]</a> Cf. Keary’s <i>Catalogue of English Coins in the British Museum</i>, p. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_65" href="#FNanchor_65" class="label">[65]</a> Strabo iii. p. 155. ἀντὶ δὲ νομίσματος οἱ λίαν ἐν βάθει φορτίων ἀμοιβῇ χρώνται -ἢ τοῦ ἀργύρου ἐλάγματος ἀποτέμνοντες διδόασιν.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_66" href="#FNanchor_66" class="label">[66]</a> Gordon Lang, <i>Travels in Western Africa</i> (1825), Prefatory Note.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_67" href="#FNanchor_67" class="label">[67]</a> The specimen figured was brought home about 30 years ago and is now in -the Edinburgh Museum of Science and Art.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_68" href="#FNanchor_68" class="label">[68]</a> The specimens here figured are in the splendid collection of my friend -Mr R. Day, of Cork.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_69" href="#FNanchor_69" class="label">[69]</a> This information I owe to Lieut. Troup.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_70" href="#FNanchor_70" class="label">[70]</a> I am indebted to Messrs James Booth and Co. for this information.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_71" href="#FNanchor_71" class="label">[71]</a> Dapper <i>Description de l’Afrique</i> (Amsterdam, 1686) p. 367. “Le bois rouge -de Majumba et la <i>pao</i> de Hiengo de Benguela tiennent aussi le lieu de monnaie: -on en coupe des morceaux d’un pied de long; on leur met une certaine taxe -selon laquelle le prix des vivres se règle.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_72" href="#FNanchor_72" class="label">[72]</a> Peter Kolben, <i>Present state of the Cape of Good Hope</i>, p. 262.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_73" href="#FNanchor_73" class="label">[73]</a> R. W. Felkin, “Notes on the Madi or Moru Tribe of Central Africa,” -<i>Transactions of Royal Society of Edinburgh</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">XII.</span> p. 303 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_74" href="#FNanchor_74" class="label">[74]</a> <i>Voyage au Darfour</i>, Mohammed Ibn Omar el Tounsy (translated by -Perron), Paris, 1845, pp. 218, 315.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_75" href="#FNanchor_75" class="label">[75]</a> <i>Voyage au Darfour</i>, p. 316.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_76" href="#FNanchor_76" class="label">[76]</a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 319.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_77" href="#FNanchor_77" class="label">[77]</a> <i>Voyage au Darfour</i>, p. 321.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_78" href="#FNanchor_78" class="label">[78]</a> <i>Voyage au Ouadai</i>, Mohammed Ibn Omar el Tounsy (French translation by -Perron), p. 559.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_79" href="#FNanchor_79" class="label">[79]</a> Elliot’s <i>Alaska</i>, p. 8. This is an interesting parallel to the ancient -tradition that the Carthaginians employed leather money. (<i>Vide</i> Smith’s <i>Dict. -of Geogr.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 545.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_80" href="#FNanchor_80" class="label">[80]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 826.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_81" href="#FNanchor_81" class="label">[81]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXIV.</span> 230-2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_82" href="#FNanchor_82" class="label">[82]</a> Timaeus 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_83" href="#FNanchor_83" class="label">[83]</a> <i>B. G.</i> v. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_84" href="#FNanchor_84" class="label">[84]</a> 199.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_85" href="#FNanchor_85" class="label">[85]</a> Schrader. <i>Prehistoric Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples</i>, p. 260.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_86" href="#FNanchor_86" class="label">[86]</a> <i>Odyssey</i>, <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 198.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_87" href="#FNanchor_87" class="label">[87]</a> Cunningham, <i>Hist. of English Commerce</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 117.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_88" href="#FNanchor_88" class="label">[88]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXI.</span> 41.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_89" href="#FNanchor_89" class="label">[89]</a> <i>Od.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XV.</span> 460.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_90" href="#FNanchor_90" class="label">[90]</a> Prescott, <i>Mexico</i>, p. 234.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_91" href="#FNanchor_91" class="label">[91]</a> Schrader, p. 255.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_92" href="#FNanchor_92" class="label">[92]</a> Schrader, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 255.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_93" href="#FNanchor_93" class="label">[93]</a> Polybius II. 19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_94" href="#FNanchor_94" class="label">[94]</a> W. Deecke, <i>Etrusk. Forschungen</i>, p. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_95" href="#FNanchor_95" class="label">[95]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 49.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_96" href="#FNanchor_96" class="label">[96]</a> <i>Ausland</i>, 1873, No. 39.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_97" href="#FNanchor_97" class="label">[97]</a> Arist. Θαυμ. 833 b. 14, φασὶ δὲ ἐν τοῖς Βάκτροις τὸν Ὦξον ποταμὸν καταφέρειν -βωλία χρυσίου πλήθει πολλά.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_98" href="#FNanchor_98" class="label">[98]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_99" href="#FNanchor_99" class="label">[99]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 116, λέγεται δὲ ὑπὲκ τῶν γρυπῶν ἁρπάζειν Ἀριμάστους ἄνδρας -μουνοφθάλμους.</p> - -<p>For the gold-fields of India, cf. Dr Valentine Ball’s excellent chapter (<span class="allsmcap">IV.</span>) in -his <i>Geology of India</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_100" href="#FNanchor_100" class="label">[100]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_101" href="#FNanchor_101" class="label">[101]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 71, ἀργύρῳ δὲ οὐδὲν οὐδὲ χαλκῷ χρέωνται.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_102" href="#FNanchor_102" class="label">[102]</a> Strabo, <span class="allsmcap">XI.</span> p. 499, παρὰ τούτοις δὲ λέγεται καὶ χρυσὸν καταφέρειν τοὺς -χειμάρρους, ὑποδέχεσθαι δ’ αὐτὸν τοὺς βαρβάρους φάνταις κατατετρημέναις καὶ μαλλωταῖς -δοραῖς· ἀφ’ οὖ δὴ μεμυθεῦσθαι καὶ τὸ χρυσόμαλλον δέρος.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_103" href="#FNanchor_103" class="label">[103]</a> Strabo, <span class="allsmcap">XIV.</span> p. 680.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_104" href="#FNanchor_104" class="label">[104]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 93, πάρεξ τοῦ ἐκ τοῦ Τμώλου καταφερομένου ψήγματος.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_105" href="#FNanchor_105" class="label">[105]</a> <span class="allsmcap">XIII.</span> 625 <i>sq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_106" href="#FNanchor_106" class="label">[106]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 46 <i>sq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_107" href="#FNanchor_107" class="label">[107]</a> Strabo, 331.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_108" href="#FNanchor_108" class="label">[108]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 75.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_109" href="#FNanchor_109" class="label">[109]</a> Strabo, 618. 29. Didot.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_110" href="#FNanchor_110" class="label">[110]</a> Cf. Isaiah xlv. 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_111" href="#FNanchor_111" class="label">[111]</a> The Debae of Agatharchides and Artemidorus are held by almost all -scholars to be the people of Ptolemy’s Θῆβαι πόλις, i.e. Dhahabân, from <i>Dhahab</i>, -gold, with term.-ân.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_112" href="#FNanchor_112" class="label">[112]</a> Strabo, 661. 45. Didot.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_113" href="#FNanchor_113" class="label">[113]</a> Diodorus Sic. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 50. 1 <i>sq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_114" href="#FNanchor_114" class="label">[114]</a> This story about their connection with Boeotia doubtless arose from the -confusion between Δέβαι and Θῆβαι.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_115" href="#FNanchor_115" class="label">[115]</a> Diod. Sic. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 45. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_116" href="#FNanchor_116" class="label">[116]</a> His description of the size of the largest nuggets of gold varies slightly; -in his second reference he compares them to “royal nuts” (κάρυα βασιλικά), which -are generally admitted to be walnuts, though walnuts are sometimes also called -“Persian nuts” (κάρυα Περσικά), the latter name reminding us of the derivation -of <i>walnut</i> itself; in the first passage he likens them in size to chestnuts (κάρυα -κασταναικά) or κασταναῖα, the name being said to be derived from Castanaea, a -city of Pontus. It would seem from this then that Diodorus got his accounts -from two slightly different sources. Strabo has been so cautious as not to -give us any specific epithet for the large nut, which we may accordingly regard -as we please either as a chestnut or a walnut. There can be no doubt about -the fruit to which Strabo compares the medium-sized nuggets. The <i>mespilon</i>, -Latin <i>merpilum</i> (from which comes the French <i>nèfle</i>), is undoubtedly the -medlar, whilst perhaps the most likely meaning for the smallest of the three -fruits is <i>olive-stone</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_117" href="#FNanchor_117" class="label">[117]</a> Diodorus, <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 12-14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_118" href="#FNanchor_118" class="label">[118]</a> Mansfield Parkyns, <i>Life in Abyssinia</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 405 (London, 1853).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_119" href="#FNanchor_119" class="label">[119]</a> For similar ways of trading in Africa in modern times see Rawlinson’s -note <i>ad locum</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_120" href="#FNanchor_120" class="label">[120]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 49.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_121" href="#FNanchor_121" class="label">[121]</a> Strabo, 173. 34-49, Didot.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_122" href="#FNanchor_122" class="label">[122]</a> Ibid. 178 Didot.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_123" href="#FNanchor_123" class="label">[123]</a> Th. Mommsen (<i>Nordetruskische Alfabete</i>, p. 250, <i>seqq.</i>) gives an admirable -summary of the metallurgical history of this region.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_124" href="#FNanchor_124" class="label">[124]</a> Strabo, 218.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_125" href="#FNanchor_125" class="label">[125]</a> Pliny, <span class="allsmcap">XXXIII.</span> 4. § 78, extat lex censoria Victumularum aurifodinae, qua in -Vercellenai agro cavebatur, ne plus quinque M hominum in opere publicani -haberent.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_126" href="#FNanchor_126" class="label">[126]</a> Strabo, 205.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_127" href="#FNanchor_127" class="label">[127]</a> Th. Mommsen, <i>Die nordetruskischen Alfabete</i>, p. 223; Pauli, <i>Altitalische -Forschungen</i>, p. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_128" href="#FNanchor_128" class="label">[128]</a> Strabo, 191.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_129" href="#FNanchor_129" class="label">[129]</a> Hucher, <i>L’Art Gaulois</i>, 19.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_130" href="#FNanchor_130" class="label">[130]</a> We must then in all probability place the first striking of the Gaulish -imitations of the Philippas about 150 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, rather than as is usually stated -about 250 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_131" href="#FNanchor_131" class="label">[131]</a> Strabo, 187.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_132" href="#FNanchor_132" class="label">[132]</a> Strabo, 146.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_133" href="#FNanchor_133" class="label">[133]</a> Diodorus, v. 27.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_134" href="#FNanchor_134" class="label">[134]</a> Strabo, 190.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_135" href="#FNanchor_135" class="label">[135]</a> Both are from coins in my own possession; A found near Mildenhall -(Suffolk) in 1884, cf. Dr Evans, <i>Ancient British Coins</i>, Pl. <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 4; B at Potton -in Bedfordshire, 1888; cf. <i>op. cit.</i> Pl. B. 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_136" href="#FNanchor_136" class="label">[136]</a> Strabo, 191.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_137" href="#FNanchor_137" class="label">[137]</a> Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> <span class="allsmcap">V</span>. 12, pecorum magnus numerus. Utuntur aut aere aut -nummis aureis aut taleis ferreis ad certum pondus examinatis pro nummo. -Nascitur ibi plumbum album in mediterraneis regionibus, maritimis ferrum, -sed eius exigua est copia, aere utuntur importato.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_138" href="#FNanchor_138" class="label">[138]</a> Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II</span>. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_139" href="#FNanchor_139" class="label">[139]</a> W. Ridgeway, “The Greek Trade Routes to Britain” (<i>Folklore</i>, March -1880, p. 23).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_140" href="#FNanchor_140" class="label">[140]</a> Strabo, 199, leaves out tin here although he mentions it when quoting from -Posidonius. The reason is that after the tin-mines of Northern Spain had -been developed by Publius Crassus, Caesar’s lieutenant, the British tin trade -ceased.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_141" href="#FNanchor_141" class="label">[141]</a> Strabo, page 201.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_142" href="#FNanchor_142" class="label">[142]</a> <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 151.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_143" href="#FNanchor_143" class="label">[143]</a> Herodotus, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 163-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_144" href="#FNanchor_144" class="label">[144]</a> Strabo, 147.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_145" href="#FNanchor_145" class="label">[145]</a> Strabo, 146.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_146" href="#FNanchor_146" class="label">[146]</a> Strabo, 146 <i>sq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_147" href="#FNanchor_147" class="label">[147]</a> Diodorus, v. 35.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_148" href="#FNanchor_148" class="label">[148]</a> Marsden’s <i>History of Sumatra</i>, p. 172.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_149" href="#FNanchor_149" class="label">[149]</a> Pliny, <i>H. N.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXIII.</span> 4, 21 aurum arrugia quaesitum non coquitur sed -statim suum est; inueniuntur ita massae; necnon in puteis denas excedentes -libras; palacras Hispani, alii palacranas, iidem quod minutum est balucem -uocant.</p> - -<p>May the French <i>paille</i> (in the phrase <i>pailles d’or</i>), Ital. <i>paluola</i>, Span. -<i>palazuola</i>, all used technically of gold, be derived from <i>pala</i>, the old technical -term, rather than from <i>palea</i>, chaff?</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_150" href="#FNanchor_150" class="label">[150]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_151" href="#FNanchor_151" class="label">[151]</a> How trade was carried on in early days may be well illustrated from -Torres Straits of to-day. (Haddon, “The Western Tribe of Torres Straits,” -<i>Journal of Anthrop. Inst.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XIX.</span> p. 347.)</p> - -<p>Dance masks made of turtle shell (340) occasionally used as money.</p> - -<p>If a Muralug man wanted a canoe he would communicate with a friend at -Moa, who would speak to a friend of his at Badu; possibly the Muralug man -might himself go to Badu, or treat with a friend there. The Badu man would -cross to Mabuiag to make arrangements, and a Mabuiag man would proceed to -Saibai.</p> - -<p>If there was no canoe available at the latter place word would be sent on, -along the coast, that a canoe was to be cut out and sent down.</p> - -<p>The canoe would then retrace the course of the verbal order and ultimately -find its way to Muralug. The annual payment for a canoe was say three <i>dibi -dibi</i> or goods of about equal value. There were three annual instalments.</p> - -<p>There is no money in the Straits; but certain articles have acquired a generally -recognized exchange value, a value which is intrinsic, and not irrespective -of the rarity of the material or the workmanship put into it. These objects -cannot be regarded as money; they are the round shell ornaments (<i>dibi dibi</i>, -shell armlet, <i>wai wai</i>, dugong, harpoon, <i>wap</i>, and canoe). A good <i>wai wai</i> is -the most valuable possession; the exchange of a <i>wai wai</i> was a canoe, or -harpoon. Ten or twelve <i>dibi dibi</i> was considered of equal value to any of the -above. A wife was the highest unit of exchange, being valued at a canoe, or a -<i>wap</i> or <i>wai wai</i>. “The intermediaries (in the purchase of a canoe) are paid -for their services ‘by charging on,’ the amount depending on individual -cupidity, or they may be recompensed for their trouble by presents from the -purchaser” (p. 841).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_152" href="#FNanchor_152" class="label">[152]</a> [Aristotle,] <i>De Miris Auscult.</i> 104-5 (839ᵃ 34 <i>seqq.</i>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_153" href="#FNanchor_153" class="label">[153]</a> Pind. <i>Isth.</i> <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 22 <i>sq.</i> μυρίαι δ’ ἔργων καλῶν τέτμηνθ’ ἑκατόμπεδοι ἐν σχερῷ -κέλευθοι | καὶ πέραν Νείλοιο παγᾶν καὶ δι’ Ὑπερβορέους.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_154" href="#FNanchor_154" class="label">[154]</a> <i>Ol.</i> <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 31 <i>sq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_155" href="#FNanchor_155" class="label">[155]</a> <i>Ol.</i> <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 13 <i>sqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_156" href="#FNanchor_156" class="label">[156]</a> Pind. <i>Pyth.</i> <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> 29 <i>sqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_157" href="#FNanchor_157" class="label">[157]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_158" href="#FNanchor_158" class="label">[158]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_159" href="#FNanchor_159" class="label">[159]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_160" href="#FNanchor_160" class="label">[160]</a> Boeckh, <i>Corp. Inscr. Graec.</i> Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 807.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_161" href="#FNanchor_161" class="label">[161]</a> Cf. Sallust, <i>Jug.</i> 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_162" href="#FNanchor_162" class="label">[162]</a> They derived it from λύγξ and οὖρον. The difference in colour between -the Baltic and Ligurian amber found an easy explanation, the latter was regarded -as the solidified urine of the female lynx, the former of the male animal. Pliny, -<i>H. N.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXVII.</span> 2, § 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_163" href="#FNanchor_163" class="label">[163]</a> Cf. Boyd Dawkins, <i>Early Man in Britain</i>, 466. Von Sadowski, <i>Die -Handelstrassen der Griechen und Römer</i>, p. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_164" href="#FNanchor_164" class="label">[164]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 720 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_165" href="#FNanchor_165" class="label">[165]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 826 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_166" href="#FNanchor_166" class="label">[166]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XII.</span> 433-7,</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">ἀλλ’ ἔχον, ὤς τε τάλαντα γυνὴ χερνῆτις ἀληθής,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">ἤ τε σταθμὸν ἔχουσα καὶ εἴριον ἀμφὶς ἀνέλκει</div> - <div class="verse indent0">ἰσάζουσ’ ἴνα παισὶν ἀεικέα μισθὸν ἄρηται.</div> - <div class="verse indent0">ὦς μὲν τῶν ἐπὶ ἶσα μάχη τέταται πτόλεμός τε κ.τ.λ.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -<p>Dr Leaf, in his introduction to Book <span class="allsmcap">XII.</span>, when calling attention to various marks -of lateness in this book, says: “It has further been remarked with some truth -that the numerous similes, though beautiful in themselves, are often disproportionately -elaborated and lead up to points which are almost in the nature -of an anti-climax.” But the use of the word ἀληθής in an entirely un-Homeric -sense seems to make it almost certain that these lines are of late date.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_167" href="#FNanchor_167" class="label">[167]</a> Cf. Plautus, <i>Merc.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 3. 63. Virg. <i>Georg.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 390, carpentes pensa puellae.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_168" href="#FNanchor_168" class="label">[168]</a> Mr J. G. Frazer gives me the following interesting note:</p> - -<p>As to the cutting off a child’s hair and weighing it against gold or silver, -the facts are these.</p> - -<p>(1) Among the Harari in Eastern Africa when a child is a few months old, -its hair is cut off and weighed against silver or gold money; the money is then -divided among the female relations of the mother.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Paulitschke, <i>Beiträge zur Ethnographie und Anthropologie der -Somâl, Galla und Hararî</i> (Leipzig, 1886), p. 70.</p> - -</div> - -<p>(2) Mohammed’s daughter Fâtima gave in alms the weight of her child’s -hair in silver.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>W. Robertson Smith, <i>Kinship and Marriage in early Arabia</i>, -p. 153.</p> - -</div> - -<p>(3) Among the Mohammedans of the Punjaub a boy’s hair is shaved off on -the 7th or 3rd day after birth, or sometimes immediately after birth. Rich -people give alms of silver coins equal in weight to the hair.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p><i>Punjab Notes and Queries</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span>, No. 66.</p> - -</div> - -<p>(4) When the Hindus of Bombay dedicate a child to any god or purpose, -they shave its head and weigh the hair against gold or silver.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p><i>Id.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> No. 11.</p> - -</div> - -<p>(5) In the inland districts of Padang (Sumatra) three days after birth the -child’s hair is cut off and weighed. Double the weight of hair in money is -given to the priest.</p> - -<div class="blockquote"> - -<p>Pistorios. <i>Studien over de inlandsche Huisponding in de Padangsche -Bovenlanden</i>, p. 56; Van Hasselt, <i>Volksbeschrijving van -Midden-Sumatra</i>, p. 268.</p> - -</div> - -<p>(6) There is the Egyptian custom, for which we have the evidence of -Herodotus, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 65, and Diodorus, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_169" href="#FNanchor_169" class="label">[169]</a> F. L. Griffith, “Metrology of the Medical Papyrus Ebers,” <i>Proceed. of Soc. -Bibl. Arch.</i> June 1891.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_170" href="#FNanchor_170" class="label">[170]</a> Hultsch, <i>Metrol. Scrip.</i> 299, τὸ Μακεδονικὸν τάλαντον τρεῖς ἦσαν χρύσινοι.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_171" href="#FNanchor_171" class="label">[171]</a> <i>Catalogue of Greek Kings of Bactria</i>, p. lxix.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_172" href="#FNanchor_172" class="label">[172]</a> <i>Catalogue of Greek Kings of Bactria</i>, p. lxvii.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_173" href="#FNanchor_173" class="label">[173]</a> Lepsius, <i>Denkmäler</i>, 331.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_174" href="#FNanchor_174" class="label">[174]</a> Brugsch, <i>Op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 386.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_175" href="#FNanchor_175" class="label">[175]</a> <i>Münz- Mass- und Gewichtswesen in Vorderasien</i>, p. 80 seqq.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_176" href="#FNanchor_176" class="label">[176]</a> Lenormant, <i>La Monnaie dans l’Antiquité</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 103 seqq.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_177" href="#FNanchor_177" class="label">[177]</a> <i>Metrol.</i>², p. 375.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_178" href="#FNanchor_178" class="label">[178]</a> Horapollo, I. 11, Πάρ’ Αἰγυπτίοις μονάς ἐστιν αἱ δύο δραχμαί.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_179" href="#FNanchor_179" class="label">[179]</a> Deecke, <i>Etrusk. Forsch.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 1. Head, <i>Op. cit.</i> p. 12.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_180" href="#FNanchor_180" class="label">[180]</a> Head, <i>Op. cit.</i> p. 747.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_181" href="#FNanchor_181" class="label">[181]</a> Τὸ μέντοι Σικελικὸν τάλαντον ἐλάχιστον ἴσχυεν, τὸ μὲν ἀρχαῖον, ὡς Ἀριστοτέλης -λέγει τέτταρας καὶ εἴσκοσι τοὺς νούμμους τὸ δὲ ὕστερον δυοκαίδεκα, δύνασθαι δὲ τὸν -νοῦμμον τρία ἡμιωβόλια. (Hultsch, <i>Reliq. Metrol. Scrip.</i> 300.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_182" href="#FNanchor_182" class="label">[182]</a> Cf. Hucher, <i>L’Art Gaulois</i>, p. 19 and Pl. I.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_183" href="#FNanchor_183" class="label">[183]</a> <i>Histoire de la Monnaie Romaine</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 236.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_184" href="#FNanchor_184" class="label">[184]</a> <i>Étude des Monnaies de l’Italie antique.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_185" href="#FNanchor_185" class="label">[185]</a> <i>De Rep.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 35, 60.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_186" href="#FNanchor_186" class="label">[186]</a> <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> 50.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_187" href="#FNanchor_187" class="label">[187]</a> Aulus Gellius, <span class="allsmcap">XI.</span> 1. 2. 3; Plutarch, <i>Poplic.</i> 11, says a cow = 100 ὀβολοί, a -sheep 10 ὀβολοί.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_188" href="#FNanchor_188" class="label">[188]</a> Pollux, <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 80, εὐθὺς πρίω μοι δέκα νόμων μόσχον καλάν.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_189" href="#FNanchor_189" class="label">[189]</a> Theocr. <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 3, μόσχως βουσὶν ὑφέντες.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_190" href="#FNanchor_190" class="label">[190]</a> Mr Head (<i>Coinage of Syracuse</i>), <i>Numismat. Chronicle</i>, New Series, Vol. -<span class="allsmcap">XIV.</span>, thinks that under Dionysius the Elder (406-367 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) and his successors -gold was to silver as 15:1 at Syracuse, whilst in the time of Agathocles (317-289 -<span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>) it was as 12:1. We can however hardly take the evidence of the coin -weights as sufficient, when we consider the extraordinary devices to which -Dionysius resorted to raise money, causing coins of tin to pass as silver, making -the silver coins bear a double value etc. as is related by Aristotle, <i>Oeconomica</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_191" href="#FNanchor_191" class="label">[191]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i> 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_192" href="#FNanchor_192" class="label">[192]</a> Livy <span class="allsmcap">XXXIV.</span> 1. Valer. Max. 9. 1. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_193" href="#FNanchor_193" class="label">[193]</a> Head, <i>Op. cit.</i> 160.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_194" href="#FNanchor_194" class="label">[194]</a> Mommsen (Blacas), <i>Histoire de la Monnaie romaine</i>, <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 275.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_195" href="#FNanchor_195" class="label">[195]</a> Pertz, <i>Monumenta Historica Germaniae</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> Lex Alamannorum, <i>lib. -sec.</i> <span class="allsmcap">LXXX.</span> <i>summus bovis 5 tremisses valet cett</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_196" href="#FNanchor_196" class="label">[196]</a> Pertz, <i>Op. cit.</i> <i>Leges Burgundiorum</i>, p. 534: pro bove solidos 2 cett.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_197" href="#FNanchor_197" class="label">[197]</a> Schive and Holmboe, <i>Norges Mynter</i> (Christiania, 1865), pp. i-iv.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_198" href="#FNanchor_198" class="label">[198]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 57. See evidence of this collected by Stengel, Die griechische -Sakralaltertümer, pp. 29 <i>sq.</i> 81 <i>sq.</i> (Iwan Müller’s Handbach, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> pt. iii.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_199" href="#FNanchor_199" class="label">[199]</a> <i>Hist. Animal.</i> <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> 50, τά γε μὴν ἱερεῖα ἑκάστης ἀγέλης αὐτόματα φοιτᾷ καὶ τῷ -βωμῷ παρέστηκεν, ἄγει δὲ ἄρα αὐτὰ πρώτη μὲν ἡ θεός, εἶτα ἡ δύναμίς τε καὶ ἡ τοῦ -θύοντος βούλησις. εἰ γοῦν ἐθέλοις θῦσαι οἶν, ἰδού σοι τῷ βωμῷ παρέστηκεν οἶς, καὶ -δεῖ χέρνιβα κατάρξασθαι· εἰ δὲ εἴης τῶν ἁδροτέρων καὶ ἐθέλοις θῦσαι βοῦν θήλειαν ἢ -καὶ ἔτι πλείους, εἶτα ὑπὲρ τῆς τιμῆς οὔτε σὲ ὁ νομεὺς ἐπιτιμῶν ζημιώσει οὔτε σὺ -λυπήσεις ἐκεῖνον· τὸ γὰρ δίκαιον τῆς πράσεως ἡ θεὸς ἐφορᾷ. καὶ εὖ καταθεὶς ἵλεων -ἕξεις αὐτήν· εἰ δὲ ἐθέλοις τοῦ δέοντος πρίασθαι εὐτελέστερον, σὺ μὲν κατέθηκας τὸ -ἀργύριον ἄλλως, τὸ δὲ ζῷον ἀπέρχεται, καὶ θῦσαι οὐκ ἔχεις.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_200" href="#FNanchor_200" class="label">[200]</a> <i>Egypt under the Pharaohs</i> (2nd edit. Engl, transl.), Vol. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 199.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_201" href="#FNanchor_201" class="label">[201]</a> Sir Rutherford Alcock, <i>The Capital of the Tycoon</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 281.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_202" href="#FNanchor_202" class="label">[202]</a> Marco Polo, Yule’s Transl. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> pp. 62 and 70.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_203" href="#FNanchor_203" class="label">[203]</a> <i>Aegypten und ägyptisches Leben in Alterthum</i>, p. 611.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_204" href="#FNanchor_204" class="label">[204]</a> 1 Kings x. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_205" href="#FNanchor_205" class="label">[205]</a> 2 Chron. i. 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_206" href="#FNanchor_206" class="label">[206]</a> 2 Chron. i. 17.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_207" href="#FNanchor_207" class="label">[207]</a> <i>Sacred Books of the East</i>, Vols. <span class="allsmcap">V.</span>, <span class="allsmcap">XVIII.</span>, and <span class="allsmcap">XXIV.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_208" href="#FNanchor_208" class="label">[208]</a> <i>Report of the Royal Commission appointed to enquire into the recent changes -in the relative values of the precious metals.</i> 1st Report, p. 60 (1866).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_209" href="#FNanchor_209" class="label">[209]</a> This is almost exactly the weight of the <i>örtug</i>, into 3 of which the <i>ora</i> -(ounce) of 410 grs. was divided. The <i>örtug</i> of gold being 136·7 grs., and the -value of a cow being 128 grs. of gold, it is hard not to believe that there was a -connection between them. (See <a href="#APPENDIX_C">App. C</a>.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_210" href="#FNanchor_210" class="label">[210]</a> See above, <a href="#Page_24">p. 24</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_211" href="#FNanchor_211" class="label">[211]</a> J. Silvestre, “Notes pour servir à la recherche et au classement des monnaies -et des médailles de Annam et de la Cochin-Chine Française.” <i>Excursions -et Reconnaissances</i>, No. 15 (1883), p. 395.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_212" href="#FNanchor_212" class="label">[212]</a> H. C. Millies, <i>Recherches sur les monnaies des Indigènes de l’Archipel -Indien et de la péninsule Malaie</i> (La Haye, 1871).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_213" href="#FNanchor_213" class="label">[213]</a> Sir Thomas Wade’s <i>Colloquial Chinese Course</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I</span>. p. 213 (2nd ed.).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_214" href="#FNanchor_214" class="label">[214]</a> J. Silvestre, <i>Op. cit.</i> p. 308 seqq.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_215" href="#FNanchor_215" class="label">[215]</a> J. Mours, <i>Le Royaume du Cambodge</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 323 (Paris, 1883).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_216" href="#FNanchor_216" class="label">[216]</a> This coin bears on one side the sacred bird Hangsa, on the other a picture -of an ancient palace of the kings.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_217" href="#FNanchor_217" class="label">[217]</a> E. Aymonier, <i>Notes sur le Laos</i>. Saigon, 1885.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_218" href="#FNanchor_218" class="label">[218]</a> For an account of the various kinds of Siamese coins of the bullet shape -cf. Msg. Pallegoix, <i>Description du royaume Thai ou Siam</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 256 (Paris, 1854).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_219" href="#FNanchor_219" class="label">[219]</a> E. Aymonier, <i>Cochin-Chine Française. Excursions et Reconnaissances</i>, -Vol. <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> No. 24 (1885), p. 317.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_220" href="#FNanchor_220" class="label">[220]</a> Aymonier, <i>ibid.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_221" href="#FNanchor_221" class="label">[221]</a> This mode of estimating the age of the buffalo by the length of its horns -may throw some light on the young ox <i>suis cornibus intructus</i> of the Marseilles -inscription (<a href="#Page_143">p. 143</a>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_222" href="#FNanchor_222" class="label">[222]</a> <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 850 <i>sq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_223" href="#FNanchor_223" class="label">[223]</a> <span class="smcap">Od.</span> <span class="allsmcap">XXI.</span> 76.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_224" href="#FNanchor_224" class="label">[224]</a> E. Aymonier, <i>Notes sur le Laos</i>, p. 33.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_225" href="#FNanchor_225" class="label">[225]</a> <i>History of the Indian Archipelago</i> by John Crawfurd, F.R.S. Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span>, -p. 271.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_226" href="#FNanchor_226" class="label">[226]</a> P. 275.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_227" href="#FNanchor_227" class="label">[227]</a> <i>History of Sumatra</i> by William Marsden, F.R.S. (London, 1811), p. 171.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_228" href="#FNanchor_228" class="label">[228]</a> R. W. Felkin, ‘Notes on the Madi or Moon tribe of Central Africa.’ <i>Proceedings -of Royal Society of Edinburgh</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">XII.</span> pp. 303, <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_229" href="#FNanchor_229" class="label">[229]</a> H. T. Colebrooke, <i>On Indian Weights and Measures</i> (Miscellaneous Essays -edited by Prof. E. B. Cowell, 1873), Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 528-543.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_230" href="#FNanchor_230" class="label">[230]</a> <i>Numismatic Chronicle</i>, <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 131 (<span class="allsmcap">N. S.</span>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_231" href="#FNanchor_231" class="label">[231]</a> Thomas, <i>Initial Coinage of Bengal</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 6 (<i>Royal Asiatic Journal</i>, Vol. -<span class="allsmcap">VI.</span>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_232" href="#FNanchor_232" class="label">[232]</a> Algebra with Arithmetic and Mensuration translated from the Sanskrit of -Brahmegupta and Bhascara by H. T. Colebrooke (London, 1817).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_233" href="#FNanchor_233" class="label">[233]</a> Down almost to the present day a system of currency, similar to that -shown in the <i>Līlāvati</i> prevailed in Assam. “Gold continues to pass current -in small uncoined round balls, usually weighing one <i>Tola</i>,” there was a silver -coinage also, and cowries passed as money. W. Robinson, <i>Descriptive Account -of Assam</i>, pp. 249 and 267 (London, 1841).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_234" href="#FNanchor_234" class="label">[234]</a> Martini, <i>Metrologia</i>, p. 770. Formerly the <i>nashod</i> = 3 <i>habbi</i> of ·063 gram -which is just the weight of the barley grain, whereas ·047 the weight assigned to -the <i>gendum</i> is that of a grain of wheat.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_235" href="#FNanchor_235" class="label">[235]</a> Queipo, <i>Essai sur les Systèmes Métriques et Monétaires des anciens peuples</i> -<span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 360 (Paris, 1859).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_236" href="#FNanchor_236" class="label">[236]</a> <i>Ancient Laws of Ireland</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 335, (Book of Aicill), O’Donovan’s -Supplement, s.v. <i>pingiun</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_237" href="#FNanchor_237" class="label">[237]</a> Ruding, <i>Annals of the Coinage of Great Britain</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 58.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_238" href="#FNanchor_238" class="label">[238]</a> Ruding, <i>op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 369.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_239" href="#FNanchor_239" class="label">[239]</a> Marquardt, <i>Röm. Staatsverwaltung</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_240" href="#FNanchor_240" class="label">[240]</a> <i>Fragm.</i> ap. Hultsch, <i>Metrol. Script.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 248, ἡ δὲ δραχμὴ κέρατα ιη͵. ἄλλοι δὲ -λέγουσιν· ἔχει γραμμὰς τρεῖς ... τὸ γράμμα ὀβολοὺς β͵. ὁ δὲ ὀβολὸς κέρατα γ͵. τὸ δὲ -κερὰτιον ἔχει σιτάρια δ͵.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_241" href="#FNanchor_241" class="label">[241]</a> Hultsch, <i>Op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 128.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_242" href="#FNanchor_242" class="label">[242]</a> <i>Recueil de travaux relatifs à la Philologie et l’Archéologie Egyptienne et -Assyrienne</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> fasc. 4, p. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_243" href="#FNanchor_243" class="label">[243]</a> Bosman, <i>Guinea, Letter VI.</i> (<i>Pinkerton’s Voyages</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">XVI.</span> p. 374).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_244" href="#FNanchor_244" class="label">[244]</a> Although I have made many enquiries and Dr Thiselton Dyer of Kew has -taken much trouble in the matter, I am unable to give the reader the botanical -names of the Taku and Damba. Dr Dyer thinks the Damba is our old friend -the <i>Abrus precatorius</i>, the Indian <i>ratti</i>, confirming the opinion I had previously -formed from its weight. These seeds are commonly known as crabs’ eyes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_245" href="#FNanchor_245" class="label">[245]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i> 373. “The fetiches they cast in moulds made of a black and -heavy earth into what form they please.” (p. 367.)</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_246" href="#FNanchor_246" class="label">[246]</a> Ellis, <i>History of Madagascar</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 335.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_247" href="#FNanchor_247" class="label">[247]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_248" href="#FNanchor_248" class="label">[248]</a> Prescott, <i>Conquest of Mexico</i>, p. 44.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_249" href="#FNanchor_249" class="label">[249]</a> Prescott, <i>Peru</i>, p. 56.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_250" href="#FNanchor_250" class="label">[250]</a> Nissen, “Griechische und römische Metrologie” (Iwan Müller’s <i>Handbuch -der classischen Alterthumswissenschaft</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 663 <i>seq.</i> or separately, Nordlingen, -1886).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_251" href="#FNanchor_251" class="label">[251]</a> “<i>Das älteste Gewicht</i>,” 1889, pp. 1-9, 34-43.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_252" href="#FNanchor_252" class="label">[252]</a> The whole series of these ancient weights was some years ago subject to -a careful process of weighing in a balance of precision by an officer of the -Standard Department and the result was published by Mr W. H. Chisholme in -the <i>Ninth Annual Report of the Warden of the Standards</i> 1874-5, where a complete -list of all of them may be found.</p> - -<p>All the more important pieces had however been weighed many years before, -and it need only be stated that the results of the process of re-weighing under -more favourable conditions are in the main identical with those formerly -arrived at by Queipo and the late Dr Brandis.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_253" href="#FNanchor_253" class="label">[253]</a> <i>Metrologie</i>², p. 393.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_254" href="#FNanchor_254" class="label">[254]</a> <i>Étalons pondéraux primitifs et lingots monétaires</i> (Bucharest, 1884), p. 49.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_255" href="#FNanchor_255" class="label">[255]</a> Soph. <i>Antig.</i> 1038 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">κερδαίνετ’, ἐμπολᾶτε τόν πρὸς Σάρδεων</div> - <div class="verse indent0">ἤλεκτρον, εἰ βούλεσθε, καὶ τὸν Ἰνδικὸν</div> - <div class="verse indent0">χρυσόν.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_256" href="#FNanchor_256" class="label">[256]</a> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 94.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_257" href="#FNanchor_257" class="label">[257]</a> Pollux, <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 83.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_258" href="#FNanchor_258" class="label">[258]</a> <i>Histoire de la Monnaie Romaine</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 15.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_259" href="#FNanchor_259" class="label">[259]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 14.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_260" href="#FNanchor_260" class="label">[260]</a> Hultsch, <i>Metrol.</i>² 579.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_261" href="#FNanchor_261" class="label">[261]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXVI.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_262" href="#FNanchor_262" class="label">[262]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXVI.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_263" href="#FNanchor_263" class="label">[263]</a> Thuc. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_264" href="#FNanchor_264" class="label">[264]</a> <i>Ol.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 75: <i>Nem.</i> <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 46.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_265" href="#FNanchor_265" class="label">[265]</a> <span class="allsmcap">VIII.</span> 375, ὠνομάζετο δ’ Οἰνώνη πάλαι, ἐπῴκησαν δὲ αὐτὴν Ἀργεῖοι καὶ Κρῆτες -καὶ Ἐπιδαύριοι καὶ Δωριεῖς.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_266" href="#FNanchor_266" class="label">[266]</a> <span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 22. 2, Ὀλυμπιάδι μὲν τῇ ὀγδοῃ τὸν Ἀργεῖον ἐπήγαγον Φείδωνα τυράννων τῶν -ἐν Ἔλλησι μάλιστα ὑβρίσαντα κ.τ.λ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_267" href="#FNanchor_267" class="label">[267]</a> Φείδωνος δὲ τοῦ τὰ μέτρα ποιήσαντος τοῖς Πελοποννησίοισι καὶ ὑβρίσαντος κ.τ.λ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_268" href="#FNanchor_268" class="label">[268]</a> Ἔφορος δ’ ἐν Αἰγίνῃ ἄργυρον πρῶτον κοπῆναί φησι ὑπὸ Φείδωνος, ἐμπόριον γὰρ -γενέσθαι, διὰ τὴν λυπρότητα τῆς χώρας τῶν ἀνθρώπων θαλαττουργούντων ἐμπορικῶς, -ἀφ’ οὖ τὸν ῥῶπον Αἰγιναίαν ἐμπολὴν λέγεσθαι.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_269" href="#FNanchor_269" class="label">[269]</a> Strabo <span class="allsmcap">VIII.</span> 358, Φείδωνα δὲ τὸν Ἀργεῖον, δέκατον μὲν ὄντα ἀπὸ Τημένου, -δυνάμει δὲ ὑπερβεβλημένον τοὺς κατ’ αὐτόν, ἀφ’ ἧς τήν τε λῆξιν ὅλην ἀνέλαβε τὴν -Τημένου διεσπασμένην εἰς πλείω μέρη, καὶ μέτρα ἐξεῦρε τὰ Φειδώνια καλούμενα καὶ -σταθμοὺς κὰι νόμισμα κεχαραγμένον τό τε ἄλλο καὶ τὸ ἀργυρον.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_270" href="#FNanchor_270" class="label">[270]</a> Pollux <i>Onom.</i> <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> 179, εἴη δ’ ἂν καὶ Φείδων τι ἀγγεῖον ἐλαιηρόν, ἀπὸ τῶν Φειδωνίων -μέτρων ὠνομασμέον, ὑπὲρ ὧν ἐν Ἀργείων πολιτείᾳ Ἀριστοτέλης λέγει.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_271" href="#FNanchor_271" class="label">[271]</a> This enables us to understand why it was that in the truce at Pylus it was -stipulated (probably by the Spartans) that they should be allowed to send in 2 -<i>Attic</i> (not Peloponnesian) <i>choenikes</i> of barley meal for each of their men daily. -By this arrangement the beleaguered men got a larger ration.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_272" href="#FNanchor_272" class="label">[272]</a> πάντων δὲ πρῶτος Φείδων Ἀργεῖος νόμισμα ἕκοψεν ἐν Αἰγίνῃ· καὶ δοὺς τὸ -νόμισμα καὶ ἀναλαβὼν τοὺς ὀβελίσκους, ἀνέθηκε τῇ ἐν Ἄργει Ἥρα, ἐπειδὴ δὲ τότε οἰ -ὀβελίσκοι τὴν χεῖρα ἐπλήρουν, τουτέστι, τὴν δράκα, ἡμεῖς, καίπερ μὴ πληροῦντες -τὴν δράκα τοῖς ἓξ ὀβόλους δραχμὴν αὐτὴν λέγομεν παρὰ τὸ δράξασθαι.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_273" href="#FNanchor_273" class="label">[273]</a> Φείδων ὁ Ἀργεῖος ἐδήμευσε τὰ μέτρα ... καὶ ἀνεσκεύασε καὶ νόμισμα ἀργυροῦν ἐν -Αἰγίνῃ ἐποίησεν (l. 30).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_274" href="#FNanchor_274" class="label">[274]</a> Head <i>op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXVIII.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_275" href="#FNanchor_275" class="label">[275]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i> 153.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_276" href="#FNanchor_276" class="label">[276]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXVIII.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_277" href="#FNanchor_277" class="label">[277]</a> Of course it is quite possible that the Persians issued coins in Egypt after -their conquest, but these coins cannot be regarded as really Egyptian.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_278" href="#FNanchor_278" class="label">[278]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 62.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_279" href="#FNanchor_279" class="label">[279]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> p. <span class="allsmcap">XL.</span> Professor Percy Gardner (<i>Types of Greek Coins</i>, -p. 2), regards the Euboic standard as 130, which he thinks was raised to -135 grs. by Solon when the latter introduced (as he supposes) the Euboic system -at Athens.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_280" href="#FNanchor_280" class="label">[280]</a> Head, <i>Coinage of Syracuse</i>, p. 71.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_281" href="#FNanchor_281" class="label">[281]</a> Arist. <i>Oeconomica</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_282" href="#FNanchor_282" class="label">[282]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 26.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_283" href="#FNanchor_283" class="label">[283]</a> Chautard, <i>Imitations des monnaies au type esterling</i> (Nancy, 1871).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_284" href="#FNanchor_284" class="label">[284]</a> Mr D. B. Monro, <i>Historical Review</i>, January, 1886.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_285" href="#FNanchor_285" class="label">[285]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 867.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_286" href="#FNanchor_286" class="label">[286]</a> <i>Od.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XV.</span> 460.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_287" href="#FNanchor_287" class="label">[287]</a> <i>Od.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XV.</span> 470.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_288" href="#FNanchor_288" class="label">[288]</a> It is more probable however that <i>Chalkos</i> copper got its name from the -place (Chalcis) where it was first found in Greece. The name Chalcis may -itself be connected with χαλκίς, an <i>owl</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_289" href="#FNanchor_289" class="label">[289]</a> Tylor, <i>Primitive Culture</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 219.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_290" href="#FNanchor_290" class="label">[290]</a> Schliemann, <i>Tiryns</i>, pl. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> Helbig, <i>Das homerisches Epos</i>², p. 79.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_291" href="#FNanchor_291" class="label">[291]</a> <i>Report of the British Association</i>, 1883, p. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_292" href="#FNanchor_292" class="label">[292]</a> Νάφε καὶ μέμνασ’ ἀπιστεῖν, ἄρθρα ταῦτα τῶν φρενῶν, Epicharmus.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_293" href="#FNanchor_293" class="label">[293]</a> Boeckh, <i>Metrol. Untersuch.</i> p. 32.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_294" href="#FNanchor_294" class="label">[294]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXVIII.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_295" href="#FNanchor_295" class="label">[295]</a> “Griech. und röm. Metrologie” (in Iwan Müller’s <i>Handbuch der klass. -Altertumswissenschaft</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 684).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_296" href="#FNanchor_296" class="label">[296]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXIX.</span> Madden’s <i>Jewish Coinage</i>, p. 277.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_297" href="#FNanchor_297" class="label">[297]</a> Horapollo <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 11, παρ’ Αἰγυπτίοις μονάς ἐστιν αἱ δύο δραχμαί. μονὰς δὲ παντὸς -ἀριθμοῦ γένεσις. εὐλογῶς οὖν τὰς δύο δραχμὰς βουλόμενοι δηλῶσαι γύπα γράφουσι, -ἐπεὶ μήτηρ δοκεῖ καὶ γένεσις εἶναι, καθάπερ καὶ ἡ μονὰς.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_298" href="#FNanchor_298" class="label">[298]</a> W. M. Flinders Petrie, <i>Naukratis</i>, p. 75. It is with extreme reluctance -that I must refuse to follow Mr Petrie, who for careful accuracy and scientific -method stands at the head not only of metrologists but of archaeologists in -general. But it seems to me that in his method of arriving at his weight-units -from the weighing of weight-pieces he has overlooked one very important factor. -False weights and balances have prevailed in all ages and countries, and we -can hardly wrong the ancient Egyptians if we suppose that a certain number -of their nation were not as honest as they might have been in their dealings. -The variations in the weights of his specimens given by Mr Petrie may very well -be due to false weights. And it must be carefully noted that frauds were not -only perpetrated by means of light but also by means of too heavy weights. -Whether the Jews learned to cheat when they sojourned in the land of Goshen -or not, we cannot say, but that they used too heavy as well as too light weights -is plain from the denunciations of the prophets: thus Amos (viii. 5), “When -will the new moon be gone that we may sell corn? and the sabbath that we may -set forth wheat, making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying -the balances by deceit?” See also Ezekiel xlv. 10. But the practice of cheating -with too heavy as well as with too light weights is best seen in Deuteronomy -xxv. 13; “Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights, a great and a small; -thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a small. Thou -shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou -have.” It seems hardly likely that of the 516 weights found by Mr Petrie at -Naukratis all were “perfect and just” weights. It is thus quite possible that -the variations from what there is evidence to suppose is the normal standard, -whether they be those of excess or deficiency, may be accounted for, at least in -part, by this consideration. Mr Petrie’s method, if applied to natural products -such as certain kinds of seeds, will of course give the truest possible result, but -when the factor of human knavery enters, his method is at once open to serious -drawbacks.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_299" href="#FNanchor_299" class="label">[299]</a> Erman, <i>Aegypten und Aegypt. Leben</i>, p. 611.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_300" href="#FNanchor_300" class="label">[300]</a> We also find mention of a weight called the <i>pek</i>, which weighed ·71 -grammes (11 grains), and was the ⅟₁₂₈ part of the uten. Hultsch, <i>Metrol.</i>² p. 37, -regards it as a provincial Ethiopian weight. Its awkward relation to the kat -and uten seem to show that it did not form part of the genuine Egyptian -system.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_301" href="#FNanchor_301" class="label">[301]</a> The large copper coins of the Ptolemies of 1450-1350 grs. Troy (the <i>flans</i> -of which were turned in a lathe) were almost certainly struck on the native uten.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_302" href="#FNanchor_302" class="label">[302]</a> This weight (in my own possession) said to have come from India, and -almost perfect, weighed 4·29 grammes.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_303" href="#FNanchor_303" class="label">[303]</a> <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 89, τοῖσι μὲν αὐτῶν ἀργύριον ἀπαγινέουσι εἴρητο Βαβυλώνιον σταθμὸν -τάλαντον ἀπαγινέειν, τοῖσι δὲ χρυσίον ἀπαγινέουσι Εὐβοϊκόν· τὸ δὲ Βαβυλώνιον -τάλαντον δύναται Εὐβοΐδας ἑβδομήκοντα μνέας.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_304" href="#FNanchor_304" class="label">[304]</a> If, as is held by some of the best critics, this is a late passage, there is an -<i>a fortiori</i> argument against the early use of the <i>mina</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_305" href="#FNanchor_305" class="label">[305]</a> Is it possible that the so-called <i>Ducks</i> are only degraded forms of bull-head -weights? The ears and horns were dropped as being inconvenient (see bull-head -weight, <a href="#figure27">p. 283</a>), and at a later time when the tradition of their origin had -been lost, the shapeless lump was adorned with a bird’s head to serve as a -handle. All the large weights from Nineveh are without any head; and it is -but very rarely even on the small haematite weights that the duck’s head is -found fully formed.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_306" href="#FNanchor_306" class="label">[306]</a> As no better selection of these weights could be made than that of Mr Head, -I have followed his description. Cf. R. S. Poole, in Madden’s <i>Jewish Coinage</i>, -p. 261 seqq., and the Report of the Warden of the Standards, 1874-5, for a full -account of these weights.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_307" href="#FNanchor_307" class="label">[307]</a> The <i>Manah</i> is of course the <i>Meneh</i> so familiar from Belshazzar’s vision, -<i>mene, mene tekel upharsin</i> (Daniel v. 25), which the best scholars follow -M. Clermont-Ganneau (<i>Journal Asiatique</i>, 1886) in interpreting as <i>a mina, -a mina, a shekel, and the parts of a shekel</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_308" href="#FNanchor_308" class="label">[308]</a> Prof. Sayce (<i>Academy</i>, Dec. 19th, 1891) publishes a weight from Babylonia -inscribed “One maneh standard weight, the property of Merodach-sar-ilani, -a duplicate of the weight which Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, the son of -Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, made in exact accordance with the weight -[prescribed] by the deified Dungi, a former king.” This confirms my contention -that the <i>mina</i> is prior in <i>date</i> to the talent.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_309" href="#FNanchor_309" class="label">[309]</a> Cf. Plautus, <i>Persa</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_310" href="#FNanchor_310" class="label">[310]</a> Brandis, 20-38.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_311" href="#FNanchor_311" class="label">[311]</a> Head, <span class="allsmcap">XXIX.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_312" href="#FNanchor_312" class="label">[312]</a> Berosus. Synkellos 30, 6 (Eusebii chronic, ed. Alfr. Schoene vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> col. 8): -ἀλλ’ ὁ μὲν Βηρωσσὸς διὰ σάρων καὶ νήρων καὶ σώσσων ἀνεγράψατο· ὦν ὁ μὲν σάρος -τρισχιλίων καὶ ἑξακοσίων ἐτῶν χρόνον σημαίνει, ὁ δὲ νῆρος ἐτῶν ἑξακοσίων, ὁ δὲ -σῶσσος ἑξήκοντα. <i>Fragm. Script. Hist. Graec.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_313" href="#FNanchor_313" class="label">[313]</a> Hultsch, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 407.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_314" href="#FNanchor_314" class="label">[314]</a> <i>Recueil des travaux relatifs à la Philologie et l’Archéologie Egyptiennes et -Assyriennes</i>, Vol. x. fasc. 4, p. 157.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_315" href="#FNanchor_315" class="label">[315]</a> Kaeji in Fleckeisen’s <i>Jahrbücher</i>, 1880, first calls attention to this word.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_316" href="#FNanchor_316" class="label">[316]</a> Hultsch, <i>Metrol.</i>², p. 131.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_317" href="#FNanchor_317" class="label">[317]</a> Rig Veda, <i>Mandala</i>, <span class="allsmcap">VI.</span> 47, 23-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_318" href="#FNanchor_318" class="label">[318]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 96.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_319" href="#FNanchor_319" class="label">[319]</a> For 20 pieces of <i>gold</i> (εἴκοσι χρυσῶν) LXX.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_320" href="#FNanchor_320" class="label">[320]</a> Gen. xx. 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_321" href="#FNanchor_321" class="label">[321]</a> Judges xvi. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_322" href="#FNanchor_322" class="label">[322]</a> Judges ix. 4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_323" href="#FNanchor_323" class="label">[323]</a> Judges xvii. 2-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_324" href="#FNanchor_324" class="label">[324]</a> Joshua vii. 21.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_325" href="#FNanchor_325" class="label">[325]</a> Cf. Buxtorf and Gesenius <i>sub voce</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_326" href="#FNanchor_326" class="label">[326]</a> <i>A</i> is from Beirut, in the Greville Chester Collection in the Ashmolean -Museum, of white and yellow crystalline stone; wt. 32·160 gram. (a very slight -chip from the base); on the base is engraved a rude ibex and another figure. <i>B</i> -is from Persia, slightly chipped on side of head, yellowish white stone, veined with -red, like jasper; wt. 22·450 gram.; on the base are two ibexes. I am indebted -for this information to Mr A. J. Evans, Keeper of the Ashmolean Museum, by -whose kindness I am likewise enabled to give representations of the weights.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_327" href="#FNanchor_327" class="label">[327]</a> Madden’s <i>Jewish Coinage</i>, p. 7.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_328" href="#FNanchor_328" class="label">[328]</a> Exod. xxx. 13. Levit. v. 15, etc.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_329" href="#FNanchor_329" class="label">[329]</a> The question of the date at which certain documents were written or took -their final shape is of course important. But it does not at all follow that a -document written at a later period cannot contain traditions of real historical -value. Thus here we find Chronicles, placed quite late by the critics, gives the -weight in <i>shekels</i>, whilst Kings, supposed to be far earlier, gives it in <i>minas</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_330" href="#FNanchor_330" class="label">[330]</a> The mere question as to whether the 200 shekels is far more than the -average crop of hair can weigh, does not concern us. If the writer wished to -exaggerate the amount of Absalom’s hair he would naturally make the shekel -as heavy as possible, and say that the weight was in the <i>heavy</i> or <i>royal</i> shekels, -employed for merchandize.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_331" href="#FNanchor_331" class="label">[331]</a> Exod. <span class="allsmcap">XXX.</span> 23-4.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_332" href="#FNanchor_332" class="label">[332]</a> <i>Antiq.</i> <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 8, 10.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_333" href="#FNanchor_333" class="label">[333]</a> Pollux, <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 59, observes that when χρυσοῦς stands alone, στατήρ is always to -be understood.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_334" href="#FNanchor_334" class="label">[334]</a> Exod. <span class="allsmcap">XXX.</span> 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_335" href="#FNanchor_335" class="label">[335]</a> <i>Hist.</i> <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_336" href="#FNanchor_336" class="label">[336]</a> Hultsch, <i>Metr. Scrip.</i> <i>s.v.</i> Lupinus.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_337" href="#FNanchor_337" class="label">[337]</a> In Gesenius’ <i>Lexicon</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 88; <span class="allsmcap">II</span>. 144, it is suggested that the <i>gerah</i> is the -lupin.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_338" href="#FNanchor_338" class="label">[338]</a> <i>Antiq.</i> <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 6, § 7, λυχνία ἐκ χρυσοῦ ... σταθμὸν ἔχουσα μνᾶς ἑκατὸν, ἂς Ἑβραῖοι -μὲν καλοῦσι κίγχαρες, εἰς δὲ τὴν Ἑλληνικὴν μεταβαλλόμενον γλῶσσαν σημναίνει -τάλαντον.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_339" href="#FNanchor_339" class="label">[339]</a> Even granting that the parts of Exodus (the priestly Code) took their -present form in post-Exile times it is perfectly possible that the metrological -data contained therein are based on a genuine old tradition, just as Homer, -although in its present shape differing much in linguistic forms from what -must have been its original, gives us an archaic talent quite different from those -in use when it took its final shape.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_340" href="#FNanchor_340" class="label">[340]</a> 2 Kings v. 5.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_341" href="#FNanchor_341" class="label">[341]</a> LXX. τρίτον τοῦ διδράχμου.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_342" href="#FNanchor_342" class="label">[342]</a> We are unfortunately unable to gain any definite knowledge from Ezekiel -xlv., as <i>v.</i> 12, which gives the weight system, is confused, and there is a great -discrepancy between the Hebrew and Greek texts. Though it is a prophetic -passage, there is no reason for supposing that the prophet did not clearly -understand the standard weight system of his time (600 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>), for his account -of the metric system is singularly clear. It is best to give the whole passage -as it appears in the Revised Version: “Thus saith the Lord God: Let it -suffice you, O princes of Israel: remove violence and spoil, and execute judgment -and justice; take away your exactions from my people, saith the Lord -God. Ye shall have just balances, and a just ephah, and a just bath. The -ephah and the bath shall be of one measure, that the bath may contain the -tenth part of an homer, and the ephah the tenth part of an homer: the -measure thereof shall be after the homer. And the shekel shall be twenty -gerahs; twenty shekels, five and twenty shekels, fifteen shekels shall be your -maneh.” (vv. 9-12.) One thing is clear at least, and that is that the passage -is a protest against over-exaction, and we may infer that the weight system -here mentioned is for precious metals, seeing that there is no mention made -of the talent. The shekel is to be 20 gerahs, that is, the shekel of the -Sanctuary. If the princes had sought to exact payment in <i>royal</i> shekels instead -of the old shekel, and also to make the maneh of silver contain 60 shekels -instead of 50, we can see every reason for the cry of the oppressed being loud.</p> - -<p>The confusion in the Hebrew text may be due to the fact that there were -two manehs in use, that of 50 shekels for gold and silver, and that of 60 shekels -for other commodities. The Septuagint version is perfectly capable of explanation -on the principles which I have indicated. The LXX. runs thus: καὶ τὰ -στάθμια εἴκοσι ὀβολοί, πέντε σίκλοι, πέντε καὶ σίκλοι, δέκα καὶ πεντήκοντα σίκλοι ἡ -μνᾶ ἔσται ὑμῖν. So Tischendorf.</p> - -<p>There is a <span class="allsmcap">MS.</span> (Cod. Al.) reading οἱ πέντε σίκλοι, καὶ πέντε καὶ οἱ δέκα σίκλοι. -Tischendorf’s text can hardly be right, πέντε καὶ σίκλοι, δέκα καὶ πεντήκοντα contain -two most unnatural collocations. δέκα καὶ πεντήκοντα is absolutely absurd as -a way of expressing 60. εἶς καὶ πεντήκοντα up to ἐννεα καὶ πεντήκοντα to express -51 to 59 are reasonable and found universally, but to add on 10 to one of the -main multiples of 10 in the decimal system is a method unknown, and is just -as absurd in Greek as it would be if in English we were to say 10 and 50, -meaning thereby 60. Again in the previous clause, the words πέντε καὶ point to -some other numeral such as 10, or 20, as necessarily following. This is obtained -by taking the <span class="allsmcap">MS.</span> reading πέντε καὶ δέκα σίκλοι, καὶ πεντήκοντα, κ.τ.λ. -Now the LXX. gives the plural στάθμια for “<i>shekel</i>”: στάθμια means the actual -weights employed in weighing the amounts of gold or silver so weighed. -Ezekiel is describing the various weight-units to be employed: “And the -weights are 20 gerahs (lupins), <i>the</i> five shekel weight, <i>the</i> fifteen shekel weight, -and fifty shekels shall be your maneh.” The article οἱ is very rightly used -before πέντε, for it refers to the well known multiple of the shekel, of which -we spoke above when dealing with the Bull’s-head weight. The same explanation -may probably be given of <i>the</i> fifteen shekel weight. The maneh of 50 -shekels of 20 gerahs each is the old maneh of the Sanctuary (Period II.), not -the royal maneh which contained 100 light shekels.</p> - -<p>Now turning to the Hebrew version we find “twenty shekels, five and twenty -shekels and fifteen shekels,”the sum of which makes a maneh of 60 shekels, -or the royal Assyrian and Hebrew <i>commercial</i> maneh. It is also to be observed -that the position of <i>fifteen</i> is unnatural; it ought to come in the series before -“twenty” and “five and twenty.” Fifty stands in the corresponding place in -LXX. Has the Hebrew text altered 50 into 15 so as to obtain a total of 60? -But there is another question; Why do we find “five” and “fifteen” stand -first in LXX., and “twenty” and “twenty five” in Hebrew? On the theory, -that of the Septuagint translators, that the prophet is describing a series of -weight-pieces, it is quite simple. Combine the numbers of both versions, and -place them in order thus: 1 shekel, 5 shekels, 15 shekels, 20 shekels, 25 shekels -(½ maneh), 50 shekels (maneh). This gives a rational explanation of how the -discrepancy arose. The LXX. translated from a text which probably ran thus, -5 shekels, 10 shekels, 15 shekels, and went no further with the series. For it -is not at all improbable that the reading οἱ δέκα is due to the fact that after οἱ -πέντε σίκλοι stood οἱ δέκα, which was followed by οἱ πεντεκάιδεκα σίκλοι. The -Jews of a later date, knowing only of the commercial mina of 60 shekels, left -out some of the numerals, and altered 50 into 15 to make up 60 shekels.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_343" href="#FNanchor_343" class="label">[343]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 89, <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_344" href="#FNanchor_344" class="label">[344]</a> <i>Metrol.</i>², p. 420.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_345" href="#FNanchor_345" class="label">[345]</a> <i>Metrol.</i>², p. 153.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_346" href="#FNanchor_346" class="label">[346]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 789.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_347" href="#FNanchor_347" class="label">[347]</a> The amount of gold in electrum varies greatly. Pliny, <i>H. N.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXIII.</span> 4. 23, -ubicumque quinta argenti portio est, et electrum uocatur. The Carthaginian -electrum probably came from Spain (cp. <a href="#Page_94">p. 94</a>).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_348" href="#FNanchor_348" class="label">[348]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 2.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_349" href="#FNanchor_349" class="label">[349]</a> Pliny, <i>H. N.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXIV.</span></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_350" href="#FNanchor_350" class="label">[350]</a> Herod. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 94, πρῶτοι δὲ ἀνθρώπων, τῶν ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν, νόμισμα χρυσοῦ καὶ ἀργύρου -κοψάμενοι ἐχρήσαντο.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_351" href="#FNanchor_351" class="label">[351]</a> Julius Pollux, <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 83.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_352" href="#FNanchor_352" class="label">[352]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 544.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_353" href="#FNanchor_353" class="label">[353]</a> <i>H. N.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXXIII.</span> 4. 23, ubicumque quinta argenti portio est, et electrum uocatur.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_354" href="#FNanchor_354" class="label">[354]</a> <i>River of Golden Sand</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> p. 78.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_355" href="#FNanchor_355" class="label">[355]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 545.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_356" href="#FNanchor_356" class="label">[356]</a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 503.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_357" href="#FNanchor_357" class="label">[357]</a> Pollux, <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 87, εὐδόκιμος δὲ καὶ ὁ Γυγάδας χρυσὸς καὶ οἱ Κροίσειοι στατήρες: -ix. 84 <i>sq.</i>, ἴσως δὲ ὀνομάτων καταλόγῳ προσήκουσιν οἱ Κροίσειοι στατῆρες καὶ Φιλίππειοι, -καὶ Δαρεικοὶ, καὶ τὸ Βερενικεῖον νόμισμα καὶ Ἀλεξανδρεῖον, καὶ Πτολεμαικὸν -καὶ Δημαρετεῖον, κ.τ.λ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_358" href="#FNanchor_358" class="label">[358]</a> <i>Annuaire de Numismatique</i>, 1884, p. 119.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_359" href="#FNanchor_359" class="label">[359]</a> <i>Zeitschr. für Assyriologie.</i> Vol. <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 48 (1887).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_360" href="#FNanchor_360" class="label">[360]</a> <i>Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology</i>, 1883-4, p. 87.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_361" href="#FNanchor_361" class="label">[361]</a> <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 166, Δαρεῖος μὲν γὰρ χρυσίον καθαρώτατον ἀπεψήσας ἐς τὸ δυνατώτατον -νόμισμα ἐκόψατο.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_362" href="#FNanchor_362" class="label">[362]</a> <i>Or.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XII.</span> 70 τρία τάλαντα ἀργυρίου καὶ τετρακοσίους κυζικηνοὺς καὶ ἑκατὸν -δαρεικοὺς καὶ φιάλας ἀργυρίου τέσσαρας.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_363" href="#FNanchor_363" class="label">[363]</a> Thuc. <span class="allsmcap">VIII.</span> 28; Xen. <i>An.</i> <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 1. 9; <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 3. 21; <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 7. 18; <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 6. 18; <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 6. 1; -<i>Cyrop.</i> <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 27; Dem. <span class="allsmcap">XXIV</span>. 129; Aristoph. <i>Eccl.</i> 602; Arrian <i>Anab.</i> <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 18. 7; -Diod. <span class="allsmcap">XVII.</span> 66, etc.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_364" href="#FNanchor_364" class="label">[364]</a> Plutarch, <i>Cimon</i>, <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> 11, φιάλας δύο, τὴν μὲν ἀργυρείων ἐμπλησάμενον Δαρεικῶν, -τὴν δὲ χρυσῶν.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_365" href="#FNanchor_365" class="label">[365]</a> <i>Thes.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXV.</span>, ἔκοψε δε νόμισμα βοῦν ἐγχαράξας.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_366" href="#FNanchor_366" class="label">[366]</a> p. 27 (ch. 10) (Kenyon’s ed.), ἐν μὲν οὖν τοῖς νόμοις ταῦτα δοκεῖ θεῖναι δημοτικά, -πρὸ δὲ τῆς νομοθεσίας ποιησάσθαι τὴν χριῶν ἀποκοπήν, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα τήν τε τῶν -μέτρων καὶ τῶν σταθμῶν καὶ τὴν τοῦ νομίσματος αὔξησιν. ἐπ’ ἐκείνου γὰρ ἐγένετο -καὶ τὰ μέτρα μείζω τῶν Φειδωνείων, καὶ ἡ μνᾶ πρότερον ἔχουσα παραπλήσιον ἐβδομήκοντα -δραχμὰς ἀνεπληρώθη ταῖς ἑκατόν. ἦν δ’ ὁ ἀρχαῖος χαρακτὴρ δίδραχμον. -ἐποίησε δὲ καὶ σταθμὸν πρὸς τὸ νόμισμα τρεῖς καὶ ἑξήκοντα μνᾶς τὸ τάλαντον ἀγούσας, -καὶ ἐπιδιενεμήθησαν αἱ μναῖ τῷ στατῆρι καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις σταθμοῖς.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_367" href="#FNanchor_367" class="label">[367]</a> I have translated the παρὰ [μικρὸν] of Kaibel and Wilamowitz instead -of Kenyon’s παραπλήσιον. According to Plutarch (Solon. 15) the old (silver) -mina contained 73 drachms. The apparent discrepancy is easily explained. -In the prae-Solonian mina there were 70 drachms of 92 grs. each. Plutarch -writing at a later time took the number of drachms of 92 grs. in the post-Solonian -mina of 6750, which is just 73. The information supplied by the -<i>Polity</i> is evidently older and better.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_368" href="#FNanchor_368" class="label">[368]</a> The. Reinsch needlessly regards ἦν δὲ ὁ ἀρχαῖος κ.τ.λ. as an interpolation.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_369" href="#FNanchor_369" class="label">[369]</a> Kaibel and Wilamowitz read σταθμὰ instead of σταθμὸν.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_370" href="#FNanchor_370" class="label">[370]</a> Pollux <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 59.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_371" href="#FNanchor_371" class="label">[371]</a> Pollux <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 58 ἔχων στατῆρας χρυσίου τρισχιλίους.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_372" href="#FNanchor_372" class="label">[372]</a> Thuc. (<span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 27) speaks of Corinthian drachms not <i>staters</i>; and (<span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 47) of -Aeginetic <i>drachms</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_373" href="#FNanchor_373" class="label">[373]</a> Cp. <a href="#Page_214">p. 214</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_374" href="#FNanchor_374" class="label">[374]</a> P. Gardner, <i>Types of Greek Coins</i>, <i>passim</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_375" href="#FNanchor_375" class="label">[375]</a> Comparetti, <i>Leggi antiche della città di Gortyna in Creta</i>, 1885; <i>Museo -Italiano</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 195, no. 39: <i>ibid</i>, <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 222. Roberts, <i>Greek Epigraphy</i>, p. 53.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_376" href="#FNanchor_376" class="label">[376]</a> <i>Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique</i>, 1888, p. 405 seqq. (where he gives -an engraving of a stater so countermarked). Mr B. V. Head (<i>Numism. Chron.</i> -3rd ser. <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 242) in a notice of this paper lends his great authority to the support -of Svoronos’ view.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_377" href="#FNanchor_377" class="label">[377]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> 450, who quotes Marquardt’s <i>Cyzicus</i>, p. 45.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_378" href="#FNanchor_378" class="label">[378]</a> Fishermen offered to Poseidon the first tunny they caught (Athen. p. 346), -but this was simply an offering of first fruits and not because the tunny -was sacred.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_379" href="#FNanchor_379" class="label">[379]</a> <i>Zeitschrift f. Numismatik</i>, <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> 144 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_380" href="#FNanchor_380" class="label">[380]</a> The tunny is a very large fish, usually four feet long, and is hardly likely -to have been sold by the basketful.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_381" href="#FNanchor_381" class="label">[381]</a> <i>Apud Stephanum Byzant.</i> s.v. Τένεδος.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_382" href="#FNanchor_382" class="label">[382]</a> <span class="allsmcap">X.</span> 14. 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_383" href="#FNanchor_383" class="label">[383]</a> <i>Iliad</i>, <span class="allsmcap">XXIII.</span> 850-1,</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">Αὐτὰρ ὁ τοχευτῇσι τίθει ἰόεντα σίδηρον,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">κὰδ δ’ ἐτίθει δέκα μὲν πελέκεας, δέκα δ’ ἡμιπέλεκκα.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_384" href="#FNanchor_384" class="label">[384]</a> No doubt the axe was often used as a religious emblem; double-headed -axes borne in procession are seen on Hittite sculptures (Perrot et Chipiez, <i>Histoire -de l’Art dans l’antiquité</i>, <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> p. 637). It was also the symbol of Dionysus -at Pagasae. So amongst the Polynesians we find processional axes as well as -real ones like our sword of state as contrasted with real swords.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_385" href="#FNanchor_385" class="label">[385]</a> <i>Ib.</i> 882-3,</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">ἀν δ’ ἄρα Μηριόνης πελέκεας δέκα πάντας ἄειρεν,</div> - <div class="verse indent0">Τεῦκρος δ’ ἡμιπέλεκκα φέρεν κοίλας ἐπὶ νῆας.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_386" href="#FNanchor_386" class="label">[386]</a> Although Mr Frazer (<i>Golden Bough</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 8) has given abundant evidence to -show that kings were in some places worshipped as gods, no one can maintain -that the Persians, who were Zoroastrians, would have treated their king as -a god.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_387" href="#FNanchor_387" class="label">[387]</a> The electrum coins with the lion’s head with open jaws formerly ascribed -to Miletus are now assigned to the Lydian king Alyattes by M. J. P. Six, <i>Num. -Chron.</i> N. S. Vol. x. 185 <i>seqq.</i> (1890).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_388" href="#FNanchor_388" class="label">[388]</a> Head, <i>Op. cit.</i> 6. 88.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_389" href="#FNanchor_389" class="label">[389]</a> Lindsay, <i>Survey of the Coinage of Ireland</i>, p. 6 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_390" href="#FNanchor_390" class="label">[390]</a> <i>Il.</i> <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 468 <i>seqq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_391" href="#FNanchor_391" class="label">[391]</a> A. Dobbs, <i>Account of Hudson’s Bay</i> (1744).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_392" href="#FNanchor_392" class="label">[392]</a> <i>Politics</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 1257 <span class="allsmcap">B</span> ὁ γὰρ χαρακτὴρ ἐτέθη τοῦ πὸσου σημεῖον.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_393" href="#FNanchor_393" class="label">[393]</a> Plutarch, <i>Solon</i> 18.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_394" href="#FNanchor_394" class="label">[394]</a> <i>Ibid.</i> 23 Εἰς μὲν γε τὰ τιμήματα τῶν θυσιῶν λογίζεται πρόβατον καὶ δραχμὴν -ἀντὶ μεδίμνου· τῷ δ’ Ἴσθμια νικήσαντι δραχμὰς ἔταξεν ἑκατὸν δίδοσθαι, τῷ δ’ Ὀλύμπια -πεντακοσίας· λύκον δὲ τῷ κομίσαντι πέντε δραχμὰς ἔδωκε, λυκιδέα δὲ μίαν, ὧν φησιν -ὁ Φαληρεὺς Δημήτριος τὸ μὲν βοὸς εἶναι, τὸ δὲ προβάτου τιμήν.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_395" href="#FNanchor_395" class="label">[395]</a> Lysias, <i>de Sacra oliva</i>, 6.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_396" href="#FNanchor_396" class="label">[396]</a> Strabo, <span class="allsmcap">XVII.</span> 836.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_397" href="#FNanchor_397" class="label">[397]</a> Diodorus Siculus <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 26. 2 διδόντες γὰρ τοῦ οἴνου κεράμιον ἀντιλαμβάνουσι -παῖδα κτλ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_398" href="#FNanchor_398" class="label">[398]</a> Baumeister, <i>Denkmäler</i>, s.v. Silphium. Studicyna, <i>Kyrene</i>, p. 22. Birch, -<i>Ancient Pottery</i> (frontispiece). The vase is in the Paris Bibliothèque.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_399" href="#FNanchor_399" class="label">[399]</a> The only evidence to show that Demeter was worshipped at Metapontum -is that a female head on certain of her coins is accompanied by the legend -Σωτηρία. It has been inferred that this is an epithet of Demeter, but this is -most unlikely, for in that case we should expect Σὼτειρα, as on the coins of -Hipponium, Syracuse, Agrigentum, Corcyra, Cyzicus, and Apamea, not Σωτηρία, -as the adjective. Thus we always find Ζεὺς Σωτήρ, not Σωτήριος: cf. Σώτειρα -Εὐνομία, Pind. <i>Ol.</i> <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 16, Σώτειρα Τύχα, <i>Ol.</i> <span class="allsmcap">XII.</span> 2, Σώτειρα Θέμις, <i>Ol.</i> <span class="allsmcap">VIII.</span> 21. -Σωτηρία is rather <i>Safety</i> (Lat. <i>Salus</i>), who, as my friend Mr J. G. Frazer points -out to me, was worshipped at Patrae and Aegeum, two of the chief towns of -Achaea (Pausan. <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 21. 7; <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 24. 3). We also find such names of divinities -as Ὑγιεία, Ὁμόνοια and Νίκα on the coins of Metapontum. As Metapontum was -an Achaean colony, it is likely that <i>Salus</i> was worshipped there also. Besides -it was to Apollo, and not to Demeter, that they dedicated their golden ear as a -harvest thank-offering. Θέρος is the ear cut from the stalk after the ancient way -of reaping, cf. θέρη σταχύων, Plut.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_400" href="#FNanchor_400" class="label">[400]</a> Athenaeus <span class="allsmcap">XIII.</span> p. 589 ab; Schol. on Aristophanes, <i>Plutus</i>, 179; Suidas, -<i>s.v.</i> χελώνη.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_401" href="#FNanchor_401" class="label">[401]</a> <i>Voyage of the Sunbeam</i>, p. 276 (London, 1880). [L.M.R.]</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_402" href="#FNanchor_402" class="label">[402]</a> We learn from Strabo, 773, that the Greeks were familiar with the employment -of tortoise shells, for a tribe called Tortoise-eaters on the north coast -of Africa used the shells of these animals, which were of large size, for roofing -purposes. Pausanias (<span class="allsmcap">VIII.</span> 23. 9) tells us that there were large tortoises well -suited for making lyres in Arcadia, but the people would not touch them as they -were under the protection of Pan. As Pan was lord of the forest and mountain, -the tortoise being especially large would naturally be regarded as his special -property.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_403" href="#FNanchor_403" class="label">[403]</a> Mansfield Parkyn, <i>Abyssinia</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 407.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_404" href="#FNanchor_404" class="label">[404]</a> Pausan. <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 34.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_405" href="#FNanchor_405" class="label">[405]</a> Pausan. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 25.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_406" href="#FNanchor_406" class="label">[406]</a> <i>Iliad</i> <span class="allsmcap">XVII.</span> 381.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_407" href="#FNanchor_407" class="label">[407]</a> <i>Iliad</i> <span class="allsmcap">XXII.</span> 158.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_408" href="#FNanchor_408" class="label">[408]</a> Strabo 192, ὅθεν οἱ ἄρισται ταριχεῖαι τῶν ὑείων κρεῶν εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην κατακομίζονται. -Hucher, <i>Art Gaulois</i>, Pl. 78. The swine is also found on coins of -Bellovaci, Pictones and Armorican Gauls.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_409" href="#FNanchor_409" class="label">[409]</a> On the plastron of the sea-tortoise eight triangular patches are made very -conspicuous by pigmentation.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_410" href="#FNanchor_410" class="label">[410]</a> Photius <i>Lex.</i> <i>s.v.</i> Λάμβδα. Eustathius on Homer p. 293. 39 seqq. -Xenophon <i>Hell.</i> <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 4. 10 (which shows that the letter was on the front, cf. -Pausan. <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 28. 5).</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_411" href="#FNanchor_411" class="label">[411]</a> Pollux, <span class="allsmcap">V</span>. 66.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_412" href="#FNanchor_412" class="label">[412]</a> Xenoph. <i>De Vectigalibus</i>, iv. 10, εἰ δὲ τις φήσειε καὶ χρυσίον μηδὲν ἧττον -χρήσιμον εἶναι ἢ ἀργύριον, τοῦτο μὲν οὐκ ἀντιλέγω, ἐκεῖνο μέντοι οἶδα ὅτι καὶ χρυσίον -ὅταν πολὺ παραφανῇ, αὐτὸ μὲν ἀτιμότερον γίγνεται, τὸ δὲ ἀργύριον τιμιώτερον -ποιεῖ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_413" href="#FNanchor_413" class="label">[413]</a> Strabo, <span class="allsmcap">IV.</span> 208, συνεργασαμένων δὲ σὺν βαρβάροις τῶν Ἱταλιωτῶν ἐν διμήνῳ, -παραχρῆμα τὸ χρυσίον εὐωνότερον γενέσθαι τῷ τρίτῳ μέρει καθ’ ὅλην τὴν Ἰταλίαν.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_414" href="#FNanchor_414" class="label">[414]</a> Pindar, <i>Olymp.</i> <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 58 <i>sq.</i></p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_415" href="#FNanchor_415" class="label">[415]</a> <i>Numismatic Chron.</i> <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 185. That the Cyzicene staters were at some time -and at some places (Cyzicus itself?) less in value than a Daric is made possible -from the new-found Mimiambi of Herondas (<span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 96 <i>seqq.</i>); where 4 Darics -seem worth more than 5 staters:</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent0">ταύτηι δὲ δώσεισ κε[ῖ]νο τὸ ἕτερον ζεῦγοσ</div> - <div class="verse indent0">κόσου; πάλιν πρήμηνον ἀξίαν φωνὴν</div> - <div class="verse indent0">σεω<υ>τοῦ.</div> - </div> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse indent8">Κ. στατήρασ πέντε ναὶ μὰ θεοὺσ φο[ι]τᾶι</div> - <div class="verse indent0">ἡ ψάλτρι’ <Εὐ>έτηρισ ἡμέρην πᾶσαν</div> - <div class="verse indent0">λαβεῖν ἀνώγουσ’· ἀλλ’ ἐγώ μιν [ἐχθα]ίρω</div> - <div class="verse indent0">κἢν τέσσαράσ μοι δαρεικοὺσ ὑπόσχηται</div> - <div class="verse indent0">ὁτεύνεκέν μευ τὴν γυναῖκα τωθάζει</div> - <div class="verse indent0">κακοῖσι δέ[ν]νοισ. ει ... χρείη.</div> - </div> -</div> -</div> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_416" href="#FNanchor_416" class="label">[416]</a> Xen. <i>Anab.</i> <span class="allsmcap">V</span>. 6. 23; <span class="allsmcap">VII.</span> 3. 10. Dem. <i>Phorm.</i> p. 914.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_417" href="#FNanchor_417" class="label">[417]</a> <i>Op. cit.</i> p. 449.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_418" href="#FNanchor_418" class="label">[418]</a> <i>Corp. Inscr. Graec.</i> 125, ἀγέτω ἡ μνᾶ ἡ ἐμπορικὴ Στεφανηφόρου δραχμὰς -ἑκατὸν τριάκοντα καὶ ὀκτὼ πρὸς τὰ σταθμία τὰ ἐν τῷ ἀργυροκοπείῳ.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_419" href="#FNanchor_419" class="label">[419]</a> Cf. Wharton, <i>Etyma Latina</i>, s.v. <i>litra</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_420" href="#FNanchor_420" class="label">[420]</a> Pollux, <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 80.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_421" href="#FNanchor_421" class="label">[421]</a> Cf. Shakespeare, <i>I. Henry IV.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 4, 590, in Falstaff’s tavern bill: “Item, -Anchovies and sack, 6<i>d.</i> Item, bread, Ob. O monstrous! But one halfpenny -worth of bread to such an intolerable deal of sack!”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_422" href="#FNanchor_422" class="label">[422]</a> Head, <i>op. cit.</i> p. 105.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_423" href="#FNanchor_423" class="label">[423]</a> The forms <i>scripulum</i>, <i>scrupulum</i>, <i>scrupulus</i> are all due to its simply being -regarded in later times as a <i>weight</i>, and thus falsely identified with <i>scrupulus</i>, a -small pebble.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_424" href="#FNanchor_424" class="label">[424]</a> Book of Aicill, p. 335.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_425" href="#FNanchor_425" class="label">[425]</a> Caesar, <i>B. G.</i> <span class="allsmcap">III.</span> 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_426" href="#FNanchor_426" class="label">[426]</a> <i>Blacas</i>, Mommsen, <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 177.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_427" href="#FNanchor_427" class="label">[427]</a> It is worth noticing that Plutarch (<i>Poplicola</i> 11) translates the <i>libral asses</i> -of early Rome by the Greek <i>obolos</i>; ἦν δὲ τιμὴ προβάτου μὲν ὀβολοὶ δέκα, βοὸς δὲ -ἑκατόν· οὔπω νομίσματι χρωμένων πολλῷ τότε τῶν Ῥωμαίων, ἀλλὰ προβατείαις καὶ -κτηνοτροφίαις εὐθηνούντων. It is quite possible that Plutarch embodies a genuine -tradition that the original <i>as</i> and <i>obol</i> were the same. Otherwise like -Dionysius of Halicarnassus he would have represented the asses by the value in -Greek money of his own time. For he can hardly have supposed that at -any time an ox was worth only 100 of the obols of his own time.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_428" href="#FNanchor_428" class="label">[428]</a> So the word <i>mark</i> means not only a weight but is also used as a linear -measure = 48 <i>alen</i>, and also as a measure of <i>area</i>, as in the term <i>arable mark</i> -etc. See <a href="#APPENDIX_A">Appendix</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_429" href="#FNanchor_429" class="label">[429]</a> Many of the Roman unciae in the British Museum are under 410 grs.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_430" href="#FNanchor_430" class="label">[430]</a> ὁ δὲ νοῦμμος δοκεῖ μὲν εἶναι Ῥωμαίων τοὔνομα τοῦ νομίσματος, ἔστι δὲ Ἑλληνικὸν -καὶ τῶν ἐν Ἰταλίᾳ καὶ ἐν Σικελίᾳ Δωριέων.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_431" href="#FNanchor_431" class="label">[431]</a> Pollux <span class="allsmcap">IX.</span> 84.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_432" href="#FNanchor_432" class="label">[432]</a> Evans, <i>Horsemen of Tarentum</i>, pp. 9-11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_433" href="#FNanchor_433" class="label">[433]</a> <i>Tabulae Heracleenses</i> (Boeckh <i>Corp. Inscrip. Graec.</i> 5774-5; Cauer, -<i>Delectus</i> 40, 41) <span class="allsmcap">I</span>, 122. αἱ δέ κα μὴ πεφυτεύκωντι κατὰ γεγραμμένα, κατεδικέσθεν -πὰρ μὲν τὰν ἐλαίαν δέκα νόμως ἀργυρίω πὰρ τὸ φυτὸν ἕκαστον, πὰρ δὲ τὰς ἀμπέλως -δύο μνᾶς ἀργυρίω πὰρ τὰν σχοῖνον ἑκάσταν.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_434" href="#FNanchor_434" class="label">[434]</a> Boeckh, <i>Metrol. Unters.</i> 160, takes the <i>Sicilicus</i> as originally the Silician -<i>quadrans</i> in the Roman silver reckoning. Cf. Mommsen, <i>Blacas</i>, <span class="allsmcap">I</span>, 243. -Hultsch, <i>Metrol.</i> p. 145.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_435" href="#FNanchor_435" class="label">[435]</a> <i>Étude des monnaies de l’Italie antique.</i> Première partie, pp. 8 and 16.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_436" href="#FNanchor_436" class="label">[436]</a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 29.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_437" href="#FNanchor_437" class="label">[437]</a> <i>Ibid.</i> p. 30.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_438" href="#FNanchor_438" class="label">[438]</a> Soutzo, <i>ibid.</i> p. 31.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_439" href="#FNanchor_439" class="label">[439]</a> If we take the καινὸν κόμμα of Aristophanes (<i>Ranae</i> 720) to refer, as the -scholiast <i>ad loc.</i> asserts on the authority of Hellanicus and Philochorus, to a -gold issue in <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span> 407, which was much alloyed. As Mr Head says it is quite -possible that Aristophanes alludes to the new bronze coinage issued the year -before the Frogs was acted (<i>Hist. Num.</i> 314). No such base gold coins of -Athens are known, and as her gold coins are of excellent quality, it is better -to refer them with Head to 394 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, the period of her restored prosperity, when -Conon and Pharnabazus brought aid from the great king.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_440" href="#FNanchor_440" class="label">[440]</a> Varro ap. Non. p. 356 nam lateres argentei atque aurei primum conflati -atque in aerarium conditi. <i>Lateres</i> is used in this sense by Tacitus, <i>Annals</i>, -<span class="allsmcap">XVI.</span> 1.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_441" href="#FNanchor_441" class="label">[441]</a> Gaius <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> 122. This passage is unhappily corrupt. The Verona MS. runs -asses librales erant et dupondii——unde etiam dupondius. As <i>dupondius</i> is -really a masculine adjective used as a noun, a masculine noun must be understood, -this can only be <i>as</i>. Dupondius then is simply a two-pound bar.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_442" href="#FNanchor_442" class="label">[442]</a> <span class="allsmcap">XXXIII.</span> 3. 13.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_443" href="#FNanchor_443" class="label">[443]</a> Before striking silver at Rome the Romans had struck silver coins with -type of quadriga and ROMA in Campania. Hence it is that Pliny regarded -these the <i>quadrigati</i> and <i>bigati</i> as the oldest issue instead of the coins with the -Dioscuri (<a href="#figure54">Fig. 54</a>). The <i>biga</i> came next, after it the genuine Roman <i>quadriga</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_444" href="#FNanchor_444" class="label">[444]</a> Varro, <i>R. R.</i> <span class="allsmcap">II.</span> 1, 9.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_445" href="#FNanchor_445" class="label">[445]</a> Varro ap. Non. p. 189 <i>aut bovem aut ovem aut vervecem habet signum</i>. Probably -<i>uerrem</i>, not <i>ueruecem</i>, is the true reading, since Plutarch says that the coins -were marked with an ox, a sheep or a <i>swine</i> (βοῦν ἐπεχάραττον ἢ πρόβατον ἢ ὗν). -<i>Popl.</i> 11.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_446" href="#FNanchor_446" class="label">[446]</a> Festus fragm. p. 347 Müller <i>s.v.</i> <i>Sextantari asses</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_447" href="#FNanchor_447" class="label">[447]</a> <span class="allsmcap">V.</span> 173 Müller.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_448" href="#FNanchor_448" class="label">[448]</a> Deux. Partie p. 41. “Le poids normal de l’as oncial est de 27 gr. 25, mais -il alla en s’affaiblissant progressivement du commencement à la fin de la -periode.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_449" href="#FNanchor_449" class="label">[449]</a> <i>Ancient Laws of Ireland</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> p. 61. O’Curry, <i>Manners and Customs of -the Ancient Irish</i>, Vol. <span class="allsmcap">I.</span> pp. 100 seq.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_450" href="#FNanchor_450" class="label">[450]</a> <i>Survey of the Coinage of Ireland</i>, p. 3.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_451" href="#FNanchor_451" class="label">[451]</a> <i>Ecclesiastical Architecture of Ireland</i>, p. 213 seqq.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_452" href="#FNanchor_452" class="label">[452]</a> Folio 24 c.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_453" href="#FNanchor_453" class="label">[453]</a> The bracketed words are interlined in a -recent hand; but the final word shows that -they were a portion of the text.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_454" href="#FNanchor_454" class="label">[454]</a> Near Croghan Hill, in the north of King’s Co.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_455" href="#FNanchor_455" class="label">[455]</a> See <a href="#Footnote_453">note on Irish text</a>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_456" href="#FNanchor_456" class="label">[456]</a> O’Donovan has omitted <i>caerach</i> of the MS.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_457" href="#FNanchor_457" class="label">[457]</a> <i>Norges Mynter</i>, <span class="allsmcap">IV-V</span>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_458" href="#FNanchor_458" class="label">[458]</a> I am indebted to Mr E. Magnússon for the translation of Holmboe.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_459" href="#FNanchor_459" class="label">[459]</a> Polybius <span class="allsmcap">XXXIV.</span> 8.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_460" href="#FNanchor_460" class="label">[460]</a> <i>Solon</i> 23, see <a href="#Page_324">p. 324</a> <i>supra</i>.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_461" href="#FNanchor_461" class="label">[461]</a> Wasserschleben, <i>Die Bussordnungen d. Abendländisch. Kirchen</i> (De disputatione -Hibernensis Sinodi et Gregori Nasaseni sermo), p. 137.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_462" href="#FNanchor_462" class="label">[462]</a> Beside the difficulty about <i>numo aureo</i> there is a further variant between -<i>anulis ferreis</i> and <i>taleis ferreis</i> (bars of iron). Can Caesar have in reality -written both? May the original reading have been: utuntur aut aere aut numo -aureo, aut aureis anulis, aut taleis ferreis etc.? Caesar speaks of the Britons -having iron of their own, and it is highly probable that they employed ingots -or bars of it as money, as the wild tribes of Annam and Africa do at present. -They probably used their gold or bronze rings and armlets as money also.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_463" href="#FNanchor_463" class="label">[463]</a> These are taken from Sir W. Wilde’s Catalogue, but for the weights of -articles acquired since 1862 I am indebted to the kindness of the Curator, -Major Macenery.</p> - -</div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a id="Footnote_464" href="#FNanchor_464" class="label">[464]</a> My friend Mr F. Seebohm has shown me that as a <i>weight</i> the Swedish -<i>Jungfrau</i> is equal to the Irish <i>Cumhal</i>.</p> - -</div> - -</div> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_407"></a>[407]</span></p> - -<h2 class="nobreak" id="INDEX">INDEX.</h2> - -</div> - -<ul> - -<li class="ifrst">Abdera, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Abraham, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Abrus, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Absalom’s hair, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Abyssinian gold in beads, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Actus, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aegina, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aeginetan measures, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ obol, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ its origin, <a href="#Page_217">217</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ used for copper, <a href="#Page_345">345</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, <a href="#Page_307">307</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aelian, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aes, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aes grave, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aes rude, <a href="#Page_355">355</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Agariste, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Agathocles, <a href="#Page_138">138</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Agerept, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Agonistic types, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Agrigentum, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aicill, Book of, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Airgid, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alalia, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alamanni, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alaska, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alexander, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alexandrine talent, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alfred’s penny, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Al-li-ko-chik, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alphabet, the, <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alps, gold of, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Altun (= gold), <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Alyattes, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Amber, <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ beads, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ golden, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>; red, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Anaxilas, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Angala, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Annals of Four Masters, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Annam, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ barter system of, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ant coins, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ants, gold-digging, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Apis, worship of, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Apollo, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Apulia, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aquileia, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Arab weights, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Arabia, gold of, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Archimedes, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Argippaei, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Argos, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Arimaspians, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aristaeus, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aristeas, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aristotle, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Polity of Athenians, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Armlets, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Arpi, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Arrows, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Arrugia, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Artabri, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Arverni, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> - -<li class="indx">As, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ derivation of, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ divisions, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ land measure, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ linear measure, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of empire, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ reduction of, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ sextantal, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ symbol of, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ used only of bronze, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> - -<li class="indx">As libralis, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Assam coinage, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Asser, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Asses, sacrifice of, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Assis, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Assurbanipal, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Assyrian weights, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_249">249</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Astronomy, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Asturia, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Astyra, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aternian law, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Athene, statue of, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Athenian coinage, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Athens, Polity of, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_305">305</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Attic choenix, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ didrachm, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aulus Gellius, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_408"></a>[408]</span>Aura (old Norse), <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aurès, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aurum, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ausum (aurum), <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Axe, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Axes, Tenedos, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ West African, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aymonier, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aztec money, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ numerals, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Aztecs, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Babylonian metric system, <a href="#Page_251">251</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_387">387</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bactria, coins of, <a href="#Page_126">126</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Baetis, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bag of rice, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bahnars, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ball, V., <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Balux, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bamboo-joint, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bar, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ (Assyrian), <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of silver, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Barley, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Barleycorn, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ = Troy grain, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Barrel, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bars, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Barter, age of, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bassak, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Baug-brotha, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Baugr, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Beaver, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ skin, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Beag, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bear skins, <a href="#Page_16">16</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bee, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bekah, <a href="#Page_277">277</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Belgic tribes, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bells, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bereniceum, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bermion, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bes, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Betzer, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bhascara, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bigae, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bigati, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bimetallism, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bisaltae, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Blanket currency, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bo, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Boar, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Boeckh, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Boeotia, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Boeotian shield, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bonny River, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Boroimhe, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bortolotti, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bosman, <a href="#Page_185">185</a></li> - -<li class="indx">βοῦς ἐπὶ γλώσσῃ, <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Boyd Dawkins, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bracelets, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Brahmegupta, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Brandis, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Brandy, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Brass rods, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Brassey, Lady, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Britain, gold coins, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> - -<li class="indx">‘Britons’’ money-system, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bronze in Italy, <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Northern Europe, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Brugsch, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Buffalo, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ value of, <a href="#Page_154">154</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ worth a stick of gold, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Buffaloes, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bull, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on coins, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bull’s-head weight, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Burgundians, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Bushel, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ how fixed, <a href="#Page_191">191</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Cacao seeds, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cadmus, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Caesar, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Calculus, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Caldron, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Caldrons, Irish, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Caldwell, W. H., <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Calf, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Calves’ heads, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Camarina, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cambodia, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cambridge, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Camirus, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Campania, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Candarin, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cappadocae, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Carchemish, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Carmania, gold in, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Carob, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Carthage, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Carthaginian coinage, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ gold unit, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ trade in gold with West Coast of Africa, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cartload, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cash, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cat’s eyes, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cattle at Rome, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ chief wealth of Britons, Gauls, Italians, etc., <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Avesta, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Catty, origin of, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cauer, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cayley, Prof., <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Centupondium, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Centussis, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_409"></a>[409]</span>Ceramus, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chabas, M., <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chabinus, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chalci, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chalcis, <a href="#Page_227">227</a>, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Χαλκός, <a href="#Page_86">86</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chariot of Hera, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chariots in Veda, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Charlemagne, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Charutz, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chautard, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chauter, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chinese coinage, <a href="#Page_10">10</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ shell-money, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weight-system, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chios, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_343">343</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chisholme, <a href="#Page_199">199</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Χρυσός, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Chrysûs, <a href="#Page_277">277</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cicero, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cilicia, silver of, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cloth, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ silken, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cnidus, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cocoanut, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Coinage, invention of, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of gold, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of silver at Rome, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Coins, early Lydian, <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ normal weight of, <a href="#Page_218">218</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Coin-standards, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Colaeus, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Colchis, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Colebrooke, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Colpach, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Commercial weights, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Comparetti, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Compensation for wounds, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Concha, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Conchylion, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Constantine, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Constantine’s solidus, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Conti, Nicolo, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Convention, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Coomb, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Copper coins in Greece, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ in Britain, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Greece, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Meroe, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in relation to gold, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ native, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of Haidas, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ rings, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standards, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ wire, Calabar, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Corcyraean wine jars, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Corinthian standard, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Corn sold by measure, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cotton as money, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Counters, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Coventry tokens, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cow, <a href="#Page_2">2 seqq.</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ among Ossetes, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ at Delos, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ at Syracuse, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ equal centumpondium, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Hebrew, value of, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Avesta, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Rig Veda, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Scandinavia, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Welsh Laws, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ names for, Sanskrit, Zend, etc., <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on coins of Eretria, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ suckling calf, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ unit of assessment at Rome and Syracuse, <a href="#Page_393">393</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ value of, in Gaul and Germany, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ in Greece, Italy, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ at Rome, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ in Scandinavia, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ in Sicily, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ Persian, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ Phoenician, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ (Table), <a href="#Page_153">153</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ the same over wide area, <a href="#Page_52">52</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cowell, Prof., <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cowries, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ as counters, <a href="#Page_229">229</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cows among Madis, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Darfour, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Crab’s claw, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Crab’s eyes, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Crawfurd, John, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Crenides, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Croesus, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Crosoch, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>; crosóg, <a href="#Page_396">396</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Croton, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cubit, royal, <a href="#Page_265">265</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cucurbita, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cumhal, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cunningham, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Curtius, E., <a href="#Page_201">201</a>, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cuttle-fish, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cyathus, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cyrene, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cyzicene staters, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cyzicenes, <a href="#Page_301">301</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Cyzicus, <a href="#Page_316">316</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Damba, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Damleg, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Danes, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Danube, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ flows into Adriatic, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ source of, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dapper, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Darfour, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Daric, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ as talent, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ derivation of, <a href="#Page_300">300</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_410"></a>[410]</span>⸺ = Homeric talent, <a href="#Page_7">7</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Datum, gold mines, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Debae, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Decalitron, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Decimal system, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ in Homer, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Decussis, <a href="#Page_356">356</a>, <a href="#Page_369">369</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Deecke, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Degradation, <a href="#Page_226">226</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of coin weights, <a href="#Page_223">223</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of weight, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Delian priests, <a href="#Page_108">108</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Delphium, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Delos, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Demareteion, <a href="#Page_297">297</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Demeter, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Denarius, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Deunx, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dewarra, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dextans, symbol of, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dhalac, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Digitus, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dinar, <a href="#Page_63">63</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Diodorus, <a href="#Page_81">81</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dionysius, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of Halicarnassus, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of Syracuse, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dioscuri, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dirham, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dodona, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dodrans, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dogs, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dollar, Maria Theresa, in Soudan, <a href="#Page_56">56</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Mexican, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>; Spanish, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Double Unit, <a href="#Page_267">267</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Doukha, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Drachm at Athens, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Corinthian, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ origin of, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Draco, <a href="#Page_5">5</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dragon’s eye, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dublin, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Duck weight, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ suggested origin, <a href="#Page_247">247</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Duck weights, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dungi, <a href="#Page_248">248</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Duodecimal system, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dupondius, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dyer, Dr Thiselton, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Dyrrachium, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Earring, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ebusus, coinage of, <a href="#Page_290">290</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Echinus, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Egypt, coinage of, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ gold in, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Egyptian gold-mines, described by Diodorus, <a href="#Page_79">79</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ measures, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Monad, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ records, <a href="#Page_236">236</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weights, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Egyptian weight system, <a href="#Page_237">237</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Electrum, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_290">290</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ at Carthage, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Lydian, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_294">294</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ why coined, <a href="#Page_207">207</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Elephant, price of, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Elephant’s tusk, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ellis, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Emporiae, <a href="#Page_290">290</a></li> - -<li class="indx">English coinage, <a href="#Page_224">224</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Imperial weights and measures, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ penny, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weights, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ephorus, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Epicharmus, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Eretria, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Erman, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Erythia, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Eryx, <a href="#Page_144">144</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Esterlings, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Etruria, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Etruscan gold coins, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ gold unit, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ silver, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_130">130</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Etruscans, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Etymology, danger of, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Euboic-Attic system, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Euboic standard, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ origin of, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Eustathius, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Evans, A. J., <a href="#Page_271">271</a>, <a href="#Page_365">365</a>, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Dr J., <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Exagion, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ezekiel, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_282">282</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Falgo, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fanam, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fee, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Felkin, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fen Ditton, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fertyt tribe, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Festus, <a href="#Page_134">134</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fetiches, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fibulae, <a href="#Page_41">41</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fifteen-stater standard, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fiji, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fines, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fiorino, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fish-hooks, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Florin, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Foot, Roman, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Foucart, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fractions, <a href="#Page_357">357</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Frankincense, <a href="#Page_6">6</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Frazer, J. G., <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> - -<li class="indx">French metric system, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Fuel sold by bulk, <a href="#Page_115">115</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_411"></a>[411]</span>Gades, coinage of, <a href="#Page_290">290</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gaius, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Galetly, A., <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gallaecia, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gardner, Dr, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ P., <a href="#Page_222">222</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gaul, <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gaulish gold unit, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gauls, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Italy, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ value of cow with, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gaus, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gelon, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gerah, <a href="#Page_277">277</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Germans, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Geryon, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gill, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gold, <a href="#Page_57">57 seqq.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ alone weighed in Homer, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ among Salassi, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ at Vercellae, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ bat, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Coast, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coinage, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coinage, Athens, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>; Macedon, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>; Thasos, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>; Cyzicus, <a href="#Page_125">125</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coinage, Roman, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coins, Athens, <a href="#Page_372">372</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ distribution of, <a href="#Page_65">65</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ equal distribution of, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ first coinage at Rome, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ first of all articles weighed, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ from India, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Bactria, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in California, <a href="#Page_58">58</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in China, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Gaul, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Meroe, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Noricum, <a href="#Page_87">87</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in quills, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Rig Veda, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in rings from Sennaar, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Swiss lake-dwellings, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Thibet, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Wales, <a href="#Page_94">94</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ measured, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ measured by quills, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ mining, methods of, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ not weighed, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ nuggets of, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of Tolosa, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ornaments of Gauls, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Irish, <a href="#Page_402">402</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ placer, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ poured into jars, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ relation of, to silver in Etruria, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ relation of, to silver and copper in Italy, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ relative value, and silver, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ scarce in Greece, <a href="#Page_221">221</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Talent of, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ unit, the same everywhere, <a href="#Page_133">133</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ unit of Attopoeu, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ units, table of, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Ural-Altai, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ wedge of, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weighed in Veda, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weighing, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ white, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Golden Bough, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺Fleece, legend of, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Goliath, <a href="#Page_120">120</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gortyn, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gourds, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Greek (old) standard, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard (table), <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weights, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Griffins, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Guadalquivir, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gunjá, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gygadas, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gyges, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_201">201</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Hachâchah, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Haddon, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hair weighed, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hakon the Good, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Haliartus, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hamilcar, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Handfuls of rice, <a href="#Page_170">170</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hanno, voyage of, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hare, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ hunting of, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hares at Carpathus, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hare-skin, <a href="#Page_13">13</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Harich, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Harpoon, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Harris papyrus, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hasdrubal, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Haxthausen, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Head, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hebrew system, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, tables, <a href="#Page_283">283</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hectae, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hectare, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Helbig, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Helix, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Helvetii, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Heraclea, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Herakles, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ road of, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hercynian forests, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Herodotus, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Herondas, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hexâs, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hide (of land), <a href="#Page_391">391</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hides, <a href="#Page_51">51</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ as money, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_412"></a>[412]</span>Hierapolis, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Himera, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hindu weights, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hiranya-pindas, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hissarlik, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hittites, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hoe money, China, Annam, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hoes, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a>, <a href="#Page_371">371</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hoffmann, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Homeric Greeks, analogy of, to modern barbarians, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Poems, <a href="#Page_2">2</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Trial Scene, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_389">389</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Honey, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Horapollo, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Horse, value of, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hottentots, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hucher, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hultsch, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hyksos, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hyperborean maidens, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hyperboreans, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Hyperoché, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Ialysus, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Iceland, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Icelandic proclamation, <a href="#Page_18">18</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Illyria, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Incas, weight, <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Incuse on coins of Magna Graecia, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ square, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> - -<li class="indx">India, mediaeval, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Indian weight standards, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ireland, gold in, <a href="#Page_95">95</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Irish currency, early, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weights, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Iron in Homer, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ingots, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ money, <a href="#Page_373">373</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ needles of, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ plates, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ rings, <a href="#Page_40">40</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Issedones, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Istir, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Istropolis, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Italian system, <a href="#Page_350">350</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ivory tusks, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Jade, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Janiform head, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Japanese Bean money, <a href="#Page_295">295</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Jars in Annam, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Jersey torque, <a href="#Page_405">405</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Job, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Jol, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Jones, Quayle, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Jordan, <a href="#Page_112">112</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Josephus, <a href="#Page_277">277</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Jugerum, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Juno Moneta, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Kaibel, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Karnak, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kat, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Keller, Dr, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kelts, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ their early knowledge of gold, <a href="#Page_104">104</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kenrick, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kenyon, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Keseph, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kesitah, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kettle, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kettles, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kid, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kikkar, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> - -<li class="indx">King’s weight, <a href="#Page_275">275</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Klaproth, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Knife money, <a href="#Page_156">156</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Knives, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Koehler, <a href="#Page_219">219</a>, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Kolben, <a href="#Page_43">43</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Lacedaemonian shield, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lachish, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lady Godiva, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lais, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lake dwellings, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lamb, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Laodicé, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Laos, weight system of, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Larins, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lassen, <a href="#Page_66">66</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lateres, <a href="#Page_375">375</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Latham, R. G., <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Laurium, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ mines of, <a href="#Page_59">59</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Layard, Sir A. H., <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Leake, Col., <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lebetes, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lehmann, <a href="#Page_195">195</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Leinster, king of, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lelantum, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lemnos, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lenormant, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Leocedes, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lex Flaminia, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Tarpeia, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Libella, <a href="#Page_357">357</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Libra, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lindus, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Linguistic Palaeontology, <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lingurium, Greek derivation of, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lion and Bull, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on coins, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weights, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Litra, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ its subdivisions, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ silver, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ translation of libra, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Litre, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> - -<li class="indx">L. M. R., <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Load, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_413"></a>[413]</span>⸺ as unit, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Greek, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lupinus, <a href="#Page_278">278</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lusitania, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lycia, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lydia, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lydian coinage, <a href="#Page_299">299</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coins, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ electrum, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lynx, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lyre, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Lysias, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Macedonian standard, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ talent, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Machpelah, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Madagascar, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Madden, <a href="#Page_240">240</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Madi tribe, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_263">263</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Maine, Sir H. S., <a href="#Page_8">8</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Maize, grain of, <a href="#Page_166">166</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Makrizi, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Malay weights, <a href="#Page_171">171</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Malays, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Manā of gold, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mancipatio, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mancus (of silver), <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Maneh, its origin, <a href="#Page_256">256</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mansous, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Manu, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Maris, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mark, <a href="#Page_358">358</a>, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Marquardt, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Marsden, W., <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Marseilles, inscription at, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Massilia, <a href="#Page_62">62</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ court of, <a href="#Page_111">111</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mathematical hangmen, <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Measure of corn or oil, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Medbh, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Medimnus, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Melitaea, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Melkarth, <a href="#Page_227">227</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Men, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin, <a href="#Page_247">247</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Meinnan, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mentores, <a href="#Page_106">106</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mermnadae, <a href="#Page_205">205</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Meroe, gold, copper, iron in, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mesha, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mesopotamia, cattle in, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Messana, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Metals, first objects to be weighed, <a href="#Page_114">114</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ relations of, in Greece, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ their discovery, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Metapontum, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Metre, <a href="#Page_1">1</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Metric systems, <a href="#Page_198">198</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Midas, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Miletus, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_226">226</a>, <a href="#Page_296">296</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Milk of cow, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of goat, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of sheep, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Millies, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mill-sail incuse, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mina, Greek, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Hebrew, <a href="#Page_274">274</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Ezekiel, <a href="#Page_284">284</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ origin of, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ use of, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mines of Spain, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mithkal, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Moda, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Modius, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Moeun, <a href="#Page_162">162</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mohurs, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Moïs, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mommsen, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, <a href="#Page_364">364</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Money, development of, <a href="#Page_48">48</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Monro, D. B., <a href="#Page_226">226</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Moriae, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Moschos, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Moura, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Movers, <a href="#Page_143">143</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Muk, in Annam, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Murex, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mycenae, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ rings at, <a href="#Page_77">77</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Mytilene, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Naaman, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nails, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Naucratis, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Naxos, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nehemiah, <a href="#Page_280">280</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nejd, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nero, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> - -<li class="indx">New Britain, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li class="indx">New Carthage, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ mines of, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Niebuhr, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nile, source of, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ water, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nineveh, <a href="#Page_85">85</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nissen, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_239">239</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nomads, <a href="#Page_75">75</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nomisma, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nomos, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ bronze, <a href="#Page_367">367</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of Heraclea, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sicilian, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Noummos of Tarentum, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nub (gold), <a href="#Page_60">60</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ its derivation, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nubia, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Numerals on coins, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_363">363</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Nummus, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Numus, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Oats, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ob, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Obol, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Attic, Aeginetic, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_414"></a>[414]</span>⸺ copper coin, <a href="#Page_361">361</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ its subdivisions, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ origin of, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Oenone, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Olbia, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Olive trees, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Olives, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Olympic victor, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Oncia, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Onesicritus, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Onions, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Oppert, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Oppian Law, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Or (gold in Irish), <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Orang Glaï, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Orchomenus, <a href="#Page_72">72</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ordlach, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Öre, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ornan’s threshing-floor, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Örtug, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ossetes, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ostiaks, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ostracism, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ostrakon, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Owls, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ox, fore part of, on coins of Samos, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in <i>Capitulare Saxonicum</i>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ name of coin, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on coins of Eretria, <a href="#Page_313">313</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ value of, in Egypt, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Oxus, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Pactolus, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Padi, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Paeonia, gold mines of, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pahlavi texts, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Paille, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Palacrae, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Palae, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Palestine, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pallegoix, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pangaeum, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Panormus, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Parkyns, Mansfield, <a href="#Page_82">82</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Parthenon, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pauli, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pausanias, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pea, scarlet, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Peach, <a href="#Page_78">78</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pecunia, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pegasus, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pendeo, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pening, <a href="#Page_397">397</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Penny, its cognates, derivation, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>; weight, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pentacosiomedimni, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pentonkion, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pericles, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Perseus, <a href="#Page_107">107</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Persian Gulf, <a href="#Page_27">27</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ silver standard, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_300">300</a>, <a href="#Page_303">303</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ tribute, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ wars, <a href="#Page_220">220</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weights, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Persians coin money in Egypt, <a href="#Page_219">219</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pertz, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Peru, <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Petrie, W. M. F., <a href="#Page_216">216</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_241">241</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Phanes, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pharaoh, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pheidias, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pheidon, <a href="#Page_211">211</a>, <a href="#Page_311">311</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pheidonian weights, <a href="#Page_213">213</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Philip II., <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_341">341</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Philippi, <a href="#Page_74">74</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Philippus stater, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="indx">φλjορι, <a href="#Page_61">61</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Phocaea, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Phocaean standard, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Phocaeans, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Phoenicia, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Phoenician inscription of Marseilles, <a href="#Page_142">142</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ origin of, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, <a href="#Page_285">285</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weights, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ from Jol, <a href="#Page_288">288</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Phoenicians, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Phtheirophagoi, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Picul, <a href="#Page_263">263</a>, <a href="#Page_309">309</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ origin of, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pig, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pindar, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pinginn, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pipilika, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Plutarch, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Po, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pollex, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Polo, Marco, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Polybius, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Polygamy, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pondus, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Poole, R. S., <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Posidonius, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pottery, in shape of gourds, <a href="#Page_258">258</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pound, English, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of 16 ounces, 18 ounces, 24 ounces, <a href="#Page_360">360</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of silk, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Powell, <a href="#Page_20">20</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Priam, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Propontis, <a href="#Page_210">210</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ptolemaic coinage, <a href="#Page_299">299</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ stater, <a href="#Page_279">279</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pump, Egyptian, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pylus, <a href="#Page_214">214</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pyrenees, <a href="#Page_99">99</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Pytheas, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ his voyage, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Qesitah, <a href="#Page_270">270</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_415"></a>[415]</span>Quadrans, <a href="#Page_348">348</a>, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Quadrigae, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Queen Charlotte Islands, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Queensland blacks, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Queipo, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Quills of gold, <a href="#Page_17">17</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Quincunx, symbol of, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Rakat, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rameses II., <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ratti, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Red Sea, <a href="#Page_76">76</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Regenbogenschüsseln, <a href="#Page_140">140</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Reindeer, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Relation of gold to silver, to copper, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rhegium, <a href="#Page_336">336</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rhinoceros, horn of, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rhoda, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rhodes, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rhodian standard, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rhys Davids, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rice, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ bag of, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ grains, <a href="#Page_187">187</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rig Veda, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_257">257</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ring money, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_394">394</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rings, Egyptian, <a href="#Page_242">242</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ gold, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ of Egypt, <a href="#Page_129">129</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Homer, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Mycenaean, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of tin, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Road, sacred, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Robes, in Homer, <a href="#Page_49">49</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Roman coins of Campania, <a href="#Page_216">216</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ foot, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ (later) weights, <a href="#Page_181">181</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ pound, <a href="#Page_234">234</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Romans, use of weights by, <a href="#Page_121">121</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rose, <a href="#Page_320">320</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rotl, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Royal standards, <a href="#Page_250">250</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rubat, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ruding, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rupee, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ purchasing power of, <a href="#Page_152">152</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rye, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Saggio, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Salamis, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Salassi, <a href="#Page_89">89</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sallet (von), <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sallust, <a href="#Page_110">110</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Salt, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Samhaisc, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Samos, <a href="#Page_222">222</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Samoyedes, <a href="#Page_3">3</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sapec, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sarah, <a href="#Page_113">113</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sardes, <a href="#Page_206">206</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sassanide kings, <a href="#Page_151">151</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Saxon coins, <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sayce, <a href="#Page_202">202</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scales of silver, <a href="#Page_193">193</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ used, <a href="#Page_226">226</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scandinavian currency, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scapte Hyle, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Schliemann, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Schoenus, <a href="#Page_365">365</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Schrader, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scillinga, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sciron, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Screapall, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scriptulum, <a href="#Page_351">351</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scripulum, <a href="#Page_135">135</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scrupulus, <a href="#Page_352">352</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Scythians, <a href="#Page_67">67</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ use gold, but not copper, <a href="#Page_69">69</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Seal, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sedâcy, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Seebohm, F., <a href="#Page_404">404</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sembella, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Semis, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sequani, <a href="#Page_332">332</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Servius, <a href="#Page_376">376</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sestertius, <a href="#Page_363">363</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sexagesimal system, <a href="#Page_198">198</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sextantal as, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sextans, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sextula, <a href="#Page_351">351</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Shakespeare, <a href="#Page_349">349</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Shayast, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sheep, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_370">370</a>, <a href="#Page_374">374</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ as coin type, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ as unit, <a href="#Page_272">272</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weights, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Shekel, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ as unit of Hebrew system, <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ earlier than mina, <a href="#Page_246">246</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ heavy, <a href="#Page_259">259</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ light, heavy, <a href="#Page_201">201</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of Sanctuary, <a href="#Page_273">273</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Shekels, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Shell money, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Shells of silver, <a href="#Page_22">22</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Shield, <a href="#Page_331">331</a>, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Homer, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Shilling, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Siamese bullet-money, <a href="#Page_28">28</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coins, <a href="#Page_161">161</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sicanians, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sicels, <a href="#Page_347">347</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sicilian gold unit, <a href="#Page_131">131</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ silver coinage, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ system, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ talent, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a>, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sicilicus, <a href="#Page_368">368</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sicily, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Siculo-Punic coins, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sicyonian shield, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sidonians, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sierra Leone, <a href="#Page_39">39</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_416"></a>[416]</span>Siglos, <a href="#Page_261">261</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Silenus, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Siliqua, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Silphiomachos, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Silphium, <a href="#Page_314">314</a>, <a href="#Page_325">325</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ on coins of Cyrene, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Silver, <a href="#Page_57">57</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ at Rome, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_373">373</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coinage, Roman, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coins, origin of Greek, <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ discovery of, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ found in Cilicia, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ furnaces for, <a href="#Page_98">98</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Cilicia, <a href="#Page_286">286</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Gaul, <a href="#Page_93">93</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Greece, <a href="#Page_310">310</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Palestine, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ not weighed in Homer, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ relation to bronze, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ scarce in Egypt, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_260">260</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standards, table, <a href="#Page_209">209</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ variation of, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ value of, <a href="#Page_146">146</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Silverlings, <a href="#Page_269">269</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Silvestre, <a href="#Page_157">157</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sipylus, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Six, M., <a href="#Page_321">321</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sjögren, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Slave-boy, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Slave, foreign, more valuable, <a href="#Page_55">55</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Hebrew, value of, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Homer, <a href="#Page_30">30</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Slaves, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ constancy of price, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Congo, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Darfour, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in Wales, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ male, female, <a href="#Page_54">54</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Soanes, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Solidus, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_384">384</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Solomon, <a href="#Page_147">147</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Solon’s coinage, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ standard, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sophocles, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sophron, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sophytes, <a href="#Page_127">127</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Soteria, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Soudan, <a href="#Page_312">312</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Soul, weighing of, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Soumyt, <a href="#Page_46">46</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Soutzo, M., <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>, <a href="#Page_368">368</a>, <a href="#Page_380">380</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ view of relation between the metals, <a href="#Page_136">136</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Spain, mines of, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Spata, <a href="#Page_84">84</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Spear-brooch, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Spices weighed, <a href="#Page_276">276</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Spirals, <a href="#Page_36">36</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Keltic, <a href="#Page_38">38</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Scandinavian, <a href="#Page_37">37</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Squirrel skin as unit, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Stater, use of, <a href="#Page_308">308</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sterlings, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Stiver, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Stockfish, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_316">316</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Strabo, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">String of cash, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sumatra, <a href="#Page_172">172</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Sun’s diameter, <a href="#Page_203">203</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Suvarṇa, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Svoronos, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Swine, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ with Gauls, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Symbol as mark of worth, <a href="#Page_324">324</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Syracusan standard, <a href="#Page_362">362</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Syracuse, coinage of, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Szins, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Taberdier, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tacoe, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tael, <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Taku, <a href="#Page_186">186</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Talanton, <a href="#Page_228">228</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Talent, <a href="#Page_244">244</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Homeric, <a href="#Page_2">2 seqq.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Macedonian, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ origin of, <a href="#Page_262">262</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Sicilian, <a href="#Page_304">304</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tantalus, <a href="#Page_71">71</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tapaks, <a href="#Page_167">167</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Taras, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tarbelli, <a href="#Page_92">92</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tarentum, <a href="#Page_364">364</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tarneih, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tarshish, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tartessus, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Taurisci, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tax, hut, <a href="#Page_25">25</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tea as money, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Teanum, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tectosages, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Temples as banks, <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tenedos, <a href="#Page_318">318</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Teos, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Testudo, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tetl, <a href="#Page_192">192</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tetras, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Teutonic peoples, <a href="#Page_34">34</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thasos, <a href="#Page_220">220</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>, <a href="#Page_344">344</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ mines of, <a href="#Page_73">73</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thebes, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Theocritus, <a href="#Page_137">137</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Theseus, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thomas, <a href="#Page_176">176</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thothmes III., <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thracian coinage, <a href="#Page_342">342</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thracians, <a href="#Page_340">340</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thucydides, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_211">211</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thumb, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Thurii, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tibetan currency, <a href="#Page_23">23</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tical, <a href="#Page_29">29</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Timaeus, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_379">379</a></li> - -<li class="indx"><span class="pagenum"><a id="Page_417"></a>[417]</span>Time, measurement of, <a href="#Page_198">198</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Timoleon, <a href="#Page_225">225</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tin, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Cornish, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ discovery of, in Sumatra, <a href="#Page_100">100</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ coins, <a href="#Page_225">225</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ rings of, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tiryns, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tjams, <a href="#Page_24">24</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tmolus, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tobacco, <a href="#Page_45">45</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tola, <a href="#Page_177">177</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tolosa, <a href="#Page_90">90</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tomme, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Torres Straits, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tortoise, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Island, <a href="#Page_331">331</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ (sea), <a href="#Page_215">215</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ shell, <a href="#Page_328">328</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ currency, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ masks, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tortoises of terra cotta, <a href="#Page_329">329</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of wood, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ and earthenware, <a href="#Page_330">330</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Toukkiyeh, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Trade routes, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tremissis, <a href="#Page_385">385</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Trias, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Trichalcum, <a href="#Page_346">346</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Triens, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tripods, <a href="#Page_314">314</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Troy grain, origin of, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>; of ounce, <a href="#Page_386">386</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tschudi, <a href="#Page_70">70</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tunny coins of Olbia, <a href="#Page_317">317</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ fish, <a href="#Page_315">315</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ Cyzicus, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ Olbia, <a href="#Page_50">50</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Turdetani, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Turkey rhubarb, <a href="#Page_83">83</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Turti, <a href="#Page_97">97</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Types parlants, <a href="#Page_322">322</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tyre, <a href="#Page_200">200</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ fall of, <a href="#Page_141">141</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Tylor, <a href="#Page_229">229</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Umbrians, <a href="#Page_64">64</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Uncia, derivation of, <a href="#Page_353">353</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ Roman, <a href="#Page_359">359</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Unga, <a href="#Page_33">33</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Unguis, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ur, <a href="#Page_197">197</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Ural-Altaic range, <a href="#Page_204">204</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ region, <a href="#Page_68">68</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Uten, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_238">238</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Varro, <a href="#Page_375">375</a>, <a href="#Page_378">378</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Venusia, <a href="#Page_369">369</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Victoriatus, <a href="#Page_377">377</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Victumulae, mines of, <a href="#Page_88">88</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Vieh, <a href="#Page_4">4</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Vines, distance apart, <a href="#Page_366">366</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Vomis, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Vulci, <a href="#Page_354">354</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Wadai, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wade, Sir T., <a href="#Page_158">158</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wai wai, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wales, <a href="#Page_31">31</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wall paintings, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Walrus hide, <a href="#Page_47">47</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wampum, <a href="#Page_14">14</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Weapons, <a href="#Page_35">35</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Weighing of the soul, <a href="#Page_150">150</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Weight, its origin, <a href="#Page_12">12</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of potatoes, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ unit, how fixed, <a href="#Page_168">168</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Weights, false, <a href="#Page_241">241</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in connection with currency, <a href="#Page_271">271</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in form of animals, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_401">401</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ⸺ oxen, <a href="#Page_128">128</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ in shape of cows, <a href="#Page_243">243</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Weissenborn, <a href="#Page_212">212</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Welsh currency, <a href="#Page_32">32</a></li> - -<li class="indx">West, E. W., <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Whale’s teeth, <a href="#Page_21">21</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wheat, <a href="#Page_122">122</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ corn, <a href="#Page_179">179</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ corn in Assyria, <a href="#Page_183">183</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ corns, <a href="#Page_180">180</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ ear, <a href="#Page_327">327</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ grain, <a href="#Page_182">182</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wheaten straw, <a href="#Page_109">109</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wicklow, gold in, <a href="#Page_334">334</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wife, payment for, <a href="#Page_44">44</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ price of, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wilamowitz, <a href="#Page_306">306</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wine, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ cup, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ jar, <a href="#Page_323">323</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ trade, of Carthage, of Gauls, <a href="#Page_326">326</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wolf, <a href="#Page_335">335</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wood as currency, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Woodpeckers’ scalps, <a href="#Page_15">15</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Wool merchants, <a href="#Page_117">117</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weighed in Homer, <a href="#Page_118">118</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ weighing of, <a href="#Page_116">116</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Xenophanes, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_293">293</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Xenophon, <a href="#Page_337">337</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ <i>De Vectigalibus</i>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Yard, English imperial, <a href="#Page_266">266</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of butter, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ of land, <a href="#Page_358">358</a></li> - -<li class="ifrst">Zancle, <a href="#Page_348">348</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Zechariah, <a href="#Page_148">148</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Zend Avesta, <a href="#Page_149">149</a></li> - -<li class="indx">⸺ physicians’ fees, <a href="#Page_26">26</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Zulus, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a></li> - -</ul> - -<p class="titlepage smaller"><span class="gothic">Cambridge:</span><br /> -PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS,<br /> -AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.</p> - -<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" /> - -<p class="center larger"><span class="smaller">SOME PUBLICATIONS OF</span><br /> -<span class="gothic">The Cambridge University Press.</span></p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>The Types of Greek Coins.</b> By <span class="smcap">Percy Gardner</span>, Litt. D., -F.S.A. With 16 Autotype plates, containing photographs of Coins -of all parts of the Greek World. Impl. 4to. Cloth extra, £1. 11<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i>; -Roxburgh (Morocco back), £2. 2<i>s.</i></p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>The Engraved Gems of Classical Times</b>, with a Catalogue -of the Gems in the Fitzwilliam Museum, by <span class="smcap">J. Henry Middleton</span>, -M.A., Slade Professor of Fine Art. Royal 8vo. Buckram, 12<i>s.</i> 6<i>d.</i></p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>Illuminated Manuscripts in Classical and Mediaeval</b> -TIMES, their Art and their Technique. By <span class="smcap">J. H. Middleton</span>, M.A. -With Illustrations. Royal 8vo.</p> - -<p class="right">[<i>Nearly ready.</i></p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy.</b></p> - -<p class="center">Part I. The Archaic Inscriptions and the Greek Alphabet.</p> - -<p class="there-is-always-one">By <span class="smcap">E. S. Roberts</span>, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Gonville and Caius -College. Demy 8vo. With Illustrations. 18<i>s.</i></p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>A Catalogue of Ancient Marbles in Great Britain</b>, by -Prof. <span class="smcap">Adolf Michaelis</span>. Translated by <span class="smcap">C. A. M. Fennell</span>, Litt. D., -late Fellow of Jesus College. Royal 8vo. Roxburgh (Morocco back), -£2. 2<i>s.</i></p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>Essays on the Art of Pheidias.</b> By <span class="smcap">C. Waldstein</span>, Litt. D., -Ph.D., Reader in Classical Archaeology in the University of Cambridge. -Royal 8vo. 16 Plates. Buckram, 30<i>s.</i></p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>The Literary Remains of Albrecht Dürer</b>, by <span class="smcap">W. M. -Conway</span>. With Transcripts from the British Museum MSS., and -Notes by <span class="smcap">Lina Eckenstein</span>. Royal 8vo. 21<i>s.</i> (<i>The Edition is -limited to 500 copies.</i>)</p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>The Growth of English Industry and Commerce during</b> -THE EARLY AND MIDDLE AGES. By <span class="smcap">W. Cunningham</span>, D.D., -Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Demy 8vo. 16<i>s.</i></p> - -<p class="hanging"><b>The Growth of English Industry and Commerce in</b> -MODERN TIMES. By the same Author. Demy 8vo.</p> - -<p class="right">[<i>Nearly ready.</i></p> - -<p class="center"><span class="gothic">London:</span> <span class="smcap">C. J. CLAY and SONS</span>,<br /> -CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE,<br /> -AVE MARIA LANE.</p> - -<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ORIGIN OF METALLIC CURRENCY AND WEIGHT STANDARDS ***</div> -<div style='text-align:left'> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will -be renamed. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. -</div> - -<div style='margin:0.83em 0; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE<br /> -<span style='font-size:smaller'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br /> -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</span> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person -or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the -Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when -you share it without charge with others. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work -on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the -phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: -</div> - -<blockquote> - <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most - other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions - whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms - of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online - at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this eBook. - </div> -</blockquote> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project -Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg™ License. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format -other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain -Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -provided that: -</div> - -<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'> - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation.” - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ - works. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - </div> - - <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'> - • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works. - </div> -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right -of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™ -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread -public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state -visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate -</div> - -<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'> -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. -</div> - -<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'> -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. -</div> - -</div> - -</body> -</html> diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/c-u-p.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/c-u-p.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index a31e312..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/c-u-p.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/cover-illus.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/cover-illus.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b6fa23e..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/cover-illus.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 11043ef..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure1.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure1.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 1b86741..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure1.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure10.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure10.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3b80e74..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure10.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure11.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure11.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 43d034c..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure11.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure12.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure12.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e08bfc2..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure12.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure13.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure13.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3663da0..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure13.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure14.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure14.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 77f7ad4..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure14.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure15.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure15.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e008b35..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure15.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure16.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure16.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index bec628c..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure16.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure17.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure17.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 9056093..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure17.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure18.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure18.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index cf0135c..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure18.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure19.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure19.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c26392e..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure19.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure2.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure2.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4d20aef..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure2.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure20.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure20.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 442dd13..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure20.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure21.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure21.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 08ea2e5..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure21.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure22.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure22.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e1923fb..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure22.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure23.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure23.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index b7d31dc..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure23.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure24.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure24.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 6825ccb..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure24.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure25.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure25.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 48b6cad..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure25.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure26.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure26.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c9b2eaa..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure26.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure27.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure27.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5ebdd4e..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure27.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure28.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure28.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c458baa..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure28.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure29.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure29.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 42eb280..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure29.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure3.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure3.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 71cd2db..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure3.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure30.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure30.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index e5b86ff..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure30.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure31.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure31.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 50b3481..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure31.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure32.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure32.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c5d0d24..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure32.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure33.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure33.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 10ddec9..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure33.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure34.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure34.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index ca26a66..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure34.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure35.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure35.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 821b9ee..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure35.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure36.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure36.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index ec82a84..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure36.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure37.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure37.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 9c3fef9..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure37.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure38.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure38.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 8a76008..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure38.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure39.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure39.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 8c25589..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure39.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure4.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure4.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index ed20e9c..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure4.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure40.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure40.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 9f029b1..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure40.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure41.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure41.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3f41794..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure41.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure42.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure42.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index a8ab824..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure42.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure43.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure43.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 7c4f227..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure43.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure44.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure44.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 6c0fd6f..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure44.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure45.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure45.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index ffe23b6..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure45.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure46.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure46.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4a8f607..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure46.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure47.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure47.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 71f78f5..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure47.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure48.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure48.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4489317..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure48.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure49.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure49.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 7079a77..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure49.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure5.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure5.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index f987030..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure5.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure50.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure50.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c69a868..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure50.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure51.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure51.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 0f8d894..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure51.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure52.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure52.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5462a9d..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure52.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure53.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure53.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c632121..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure53.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure54.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure54.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3a68250..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure54.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure55.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure55.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 05789f1..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure55.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure56.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure56.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 072a431..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure56.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure57.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure57.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5a0e406..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure57.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure58.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure58.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c77949d..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure58.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure59.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure59.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4596cb3..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure59.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure6.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure6.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 3d6dbc8..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure6.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure60.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure60.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 0d72474..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure60.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure7.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure7.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5a64d85..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure7.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure8.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure8.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c0f2444..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure8.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/66160-h/images/figure9.jpg b/old/66160-h/images/figure9.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 94cb5d0..0000000 --- a/old/66160-h/images/figure9.jpg +++ /dev/null |
