here it is common
(29), and It IS known from a papyrus (38) to be a Syrian weight. The uten IS found ^6 = 245. >n Upper Egypt (rare) (44). Another division (.n a papyrus) (38) is a silver wefght of, % kat=about 88perhaps the Babylonian siglus of 86. The uten was also binarily divided into 128 peks of gold in Ethiopia; this may refer to another standard (see 129) (33) The Ptolemaic copper coinage is on two
divided, and the l>toIemaic five shekels —ge— number than other students have used, and study by diagrams.) The theory ten from
^5^ cubic cubit of water
would fix It at 1472, which is accordant; but there seems no authority either in volumes or weights for taking 1500 utens. Another theory (3) derives the uten from tAd of the cubic cubit of 24 digits, or better f of 20-63:
that, however, will only fit the very lowest variety of the uten, while there is no evidence of the existence of such a cubit the haematite weights of Troy (44) are nine examples, average 144, but not of extreme vaneties.
129 grs.; 258 grs.
reat standard of Babylonia became the 7750; 15,500;
parent of
several other systems; and itself 465,000.
derivatives became more widely spread
than any other standard. It was known in two forms—one system (24) of
6-maneh,
«o=talent;
36gl5.
21s
12,
2,0
77SO
46s.oo<;
and the other system double of this in each stage except the talent Uiese two systems are distinctly named on the weights, anH are known now as the light and heavy Assyrian systems (19, 24) (It S.
^"^I,
t° avoid the name Babylonian, as it has other meanings also.)
There are no weights dated before the Assyrian bronze lion wreights (9, 17, 19. 38) of the nth to 8th centuries B.C . Thirteen of this class average 127-2 for the shekel; 9 haematite barrel-shaped weights (38) give 128-2; 16 stone duck-weights (38) i^6-s A
heavier value is shown by the precious metals— the gold plates Irom Khorsabad (18) giving 129, and the gold daric coinage (21 35) pi Persia 129-2. Nine weights from Syria (44) average 128-8 This IS the system of the " Babylonian " talent, by Herodotus = 70 minae Luboic, by Pollux = 70 minae Attic, by Aelian =72 minae Attic, and therefore, about 470,000 grains. In Egypt this is found largely at INaucratis (28, 29), and less commonly at Defenneh (29) In both places the distribution, a high type of 129 and a lower of 127 is like the monetary and trade varieties above noticed; while a smaller number of examples are found, fewer and fewer, down to 1 18 grains At ftlemphis (44) the shekel is scarcely known, and a ^ mina wcght was there converted into another standard (of 200). A few barrel weights are found at Ivarnak, and Aiveral egg-shaped shekel weights at Oebelen (44); also two cuboid weights from there (44) of i and 10 utens are marked as 6 and 60. which can hardly refer to any unit but the heavy shekel giving 245. Hultsch refers to Egyptian gold rings ol Dynasty WIII. of 125grains. That this unit penetrated far to the south in early tunes is shown by the tribute of P-Cush (34) in Dynasty XVUI; this IS of 801, 1443 and 23,741 kats, orl5and 27 manehs and 7 J talents when reduced to this system. And the later Ethiopic gold unit of the pek (7), orTisof the uten, was 10-8 or more, and may therefore be the ^ sikhir or obolos of 21-5 . But the fraction rh. or a contmued binary division repeated seven times, is such a likely mode of rude subdivision that little stress can be laid on this. In later
times in Egypt a class of large glass scarabs for funerary purposes seem to be adjusted to the shekel (30). Whether this system or the IKhoemcian of 224 grains was that of the Hebrews is uncertain 1 here IS no doubt but that in the Maccabean times and onward 218 was the shekel; but the use of the word darkemon by Ezra and Wehemiah, and the probabilities of their case, point to the daragmaneh ^ maneh or shekel of Assyria; and the mention of J shekel by Neheniiah as poll tax nearly proves that the 129 and not 218 grams is intended, as 218 is not divisible by 3. But the Maccabean use of 218 may have been a reversion to the older shekel; and this is strongly shown by the fraction i shekel (i Sam. ix. 8), the continual mention of large decimal numbers of shekels in the earlier books and the cenain fact of 100 shekels being = mina. This would all be against the 129 or 258 shekel, and for the 218 or 224. There is hoxvever, one good datum if it can be trusted: 300 talents of silver ^-i
"^^
"*""•
"'^ ^""^ ^°° talents on Sennacherib's cylinder (34) while the 30 talents of gold is the same in both accounts. Eight hundred talents on the Assyrian silver standard would be 267— or roundly 300— talents on the heavy trade or gold system, which is therefore probably the Hebrew. Probably the 129 and 224 systems coexisted in the country; but on the whole it seems more likely that 129 or rather 258 grains was the Hebrew shekel before the Ptolemaic times—especially as the 100 shekels to the mina is paralleled by the following Persian system (Hultsch) (ANCIENT HISTORICAL
shekd ^ 5°""'"^
- •
60 -talent of gold
(60- .
mina
6o=taIent of trade.
465,000
129 grs,
64S0 77SO
387,000
the Hebrew system being
gcrah.
20-shckeI,
ioo=nianch.
»o = taIent
iiggra.
258?
25.800
774,000
and, considering that the two Hebrew cubits are the Babylonian and Icrsian units, and the volumes are also Babylonian, it is the more ihJ^. K-
^^^ weights should have come with these. From the
east thus unit passed to Asia Minor: and six multiples of 2 To 20 ?^^ nir H-
^7) are found among the haematite w^eights of Troy (44), including the oldest of them. On the Aegean coast it often occurs in early coinage (17)-at Lampsacus 131-129, Phocaea 2^6^ 254, Cyzicus 252-247, Methymna 124-6 . &c. In later tirn^if„^^s a main unit of North Syria, and also on the Euxine, leaded we ght^ of Antioch (.3), Callatia and Tomis being known (38). The mean Q^ these eastern weights is 7700 for the mina, or 128. But the l^den ^eights of the w-est (44) from Corfu, &c., average 7580, or .26, th^" standard was kept up at Cyzicus in trade lon| ifter i° was Lt in coinage At Corinth the unit was evidently the Assyrian and not the Att.c . or 133. later) and being ^3, and not into 2 drachms. And this agrees with the mina being repeatedly found at Corcyra, and with the in dfvUW; Posing to the Italian coinage (17) similar in weight and Veli^ Svh
^ -"l" •'"^T,
=°'"^g^^ ('^) down to 400 B.C. (Terina l!l;, / Ti
r°^'d°"'a. Metapontum, Tarentum, &c.) being none Z SivH"" li'^ '^v, """? '"^"P were adjusted to the Attic and mse to Jt .u
"" y^'^Jghts from Carthage (44) show 126. It is usually the case that a unit lasts later in trade than in coinage: and the promin! Z%°J 'I'" '^'"'^^'i'^
" ^'y
T^y
^°^ ^°"' '« i^ that this mTna 18 Dloscoridi^i)""
"^^^"'"""'"'^'^^y^°fGalenand 126 grs.
- A. variation on the main system was made by forming a 6300.
"""^ °' 50 shekels. This is one of the Persian series (gold)
and the { of the Hebrew scries noted above. But it is most striking when it is found in the mina form which distinguishes t.
Eleven weights from Syria and Cnidus (^4) (of the curious fy?c, ^V
t^TM. l^reasts on a rectangular block) show a mina of 62^0 ifX^.,
l^
IS singular that this class is exactly like weights of the 224 system found with it but yet quite distinct in standlrd. 1 he same passed into Italy and Corfu (44), averaging 6000-divided Corfu ('T.-r?-'"
^
r^
^"iP"lae (rf,). and called litra Un Corfu/).
It IS known in the coinage of Hatria (18) as 6320. And f vVfv, ?"
^"-'"°? of. the shekel in 10 (probably therefore connected with this decimal mina) is shown by a series of bronze weights (44) niTM T
^"'^1'^ ', "^^! """d marked with circles (British Kluseum place unknown), which may be Romano-Gallic, averaging 12s -10 rhis whole class seems to cling to sites of Phoenician tra^e. and to keep clear of Greece and the noith-perhaps a Phoenician form of the 29 system, avoiding the sexagesimal multiples. If this unit have any connexion with the kat, it is that a kat of gold IS worth 15 shekels or J mina of silver; this agrees well with the range of both units, only it must be remembered that 120 was used as gold unit, and another silver unit deduced from it. More
and Babylonil*^
^^ """ ' originated independently in Egypt 86 grs.
^1°"}. '29 grains of gold was adopted an equal value 8600; °
^
Y?.j
72°' °" the proportion of 1: 13^ and this 516,000 .
w?s divided in 10=172— which was used either in this form, or its half, 86, best known as the siglus (17) buch a proportion IS indicated in Num. vii., where the gold spoon of 10 shekels IS equal in value to the bowl of 1 30 shekels, or double that of 70, t.c . the silver vessels were 200 and 100 sigli. The silver plates at Khorsabad (18) we find to be 80 sigli of S4-6 . The Persian silver coinage shows about 86-0; the danak was i of this or 28 7 Xenophon and others state it at about 84. As a monetary weight it seems to have spread, perhaps entirely, in consequence of the Persian dominion; It vanes from 174- downwards, usually 167, m Aradus CMCia and on to the Aegean coast, in Lydia and in Macedonia (17) I he silver bars found at Troy averaging 2744. or i mina of 8232, hax* been attributed to this unit (17); but no division of the mina in i is to be expected, and the average is rather low. Two haematite weights from Troy (44) show 86 and 87-2 . The mean from leaden weilhts of Chios, Tenedos (44), &c., is 8430. A duck-weight of Camirus probably early, gives 8480; the same passed on to Greece and Italy (17), averaging 8610; but in Italy it was divided, like all other units into unciae and scnpulae (44). It is perhaps found in Etrurian coinage as 1 75-' 72 (17). By the Romans it was used on the Danube (18) two weights of the first legion there showing 8610; and this is the mina of 20 unciae (8400) named by Roman writers. The system was
—
^
cbol.
6=siglus.
loo-mina.
60-talent.
Ujgra.
86
8600
516,000
A derivation from this was the J of 172. or 57-3 . the so-called fhocaean drachma, equal in silver value to the j'o of the gold 2s8 grains.
It was used at Phocaea as 58-5, and parsed to the colonics ot 1 osidoma and Velia as 59 or 1 18. The colony of Massilia brought It into Gaul as 5812-54-0 .
224 grs
Jhat this unit (commonly called Phoenician) is derived 11,200- "°^ the 129 system can hardly be doubted, both being so intimately associated in Syria and Asia Minor. The 672,000.
relation is 258: 229::9:8; but the exact form in which > ..aiiu.i 13 .cjo . .J .- 9;;y:o; dui tne exact lorm in which the descent took place is not settled: ^ or 129 of gold is worth 57 of silver or a drachm, J of 230 (or by trade weights 127 and 226); other^vise, deriving it from the silver weight of 86 already formed the drachm is } of the stater, 172. or double of the Persian danak of 28-7, and the sacred unit of Didyma in Ionia was this half-drachm. 27; or thirdly, what is indicate cf by the Lydian coinage (17). 86 of