gold was equal to 1150 of silver, 5 shekels or 1/10, mina. Other proposed derivations from the kat or pek are not satisfactory. In actual use this unit varied greatly at Naucratis (29) there are groups of it at 231, 223 and others down to 208, this is the earliest form in which we can study it and the corresponding values to these are 130 and 126, or the gold and trade varieties of the Babylonian, while the lower tail down to 208 corresponds to the shekel down to 118, which is just what is found. Hence the 224 unit seems to have been formed from the 129 after the main families or types of that had arisen. It is scarcer at Defenneh (29) and rare at Memphis (44) Under the Ptolemies however it became the great unit of Egypt and as very prominent in the iter literature in consequence (18, 35) The average of coins 21) of Ptolemy I. gives 219·6 and thence they gradually diminish to 270, the average (33) of the whole series of Ptolemies being 218. The “argenteus” (as Revillout transcribes a sign in the papyri) (35) was of 5 shekels, or 1090; it arose about 440 B.C. and became after 160 B.C. a weight unit for copper. In Syria, as early as the 15th century B.C., the tribute of the Ruteunu of Naharaina, Megiddo, Anaukasa &c. (34) is on a basis of 454–484 kats or 300 shekels (1/10 talent) of 226 grains. The commonest weight at Troy (44) is the shekel, averaging 224. In coinage it is one of the commonest units in early times; from Phoenicia, round the coast to Macedonia it is predominant (17); at a maximum of 230 (Ialysus) it is in Macedonia 224, but seldom exceeds 220 elsewhere, the earliest Lyduan of the 7th century being 219, and the general average of coins 218. The system was—

From the Phoenician coinage it was adopted for the Maccabean. It is needless to give the continual evidences of this being the later Jewish shekel, both from coins (max 223) and writers (2, 18, 33), the question of the early shekel we have noticed already under 129). In Phoemeta and Asia Minor the mina was specially made in the form with two breasts (44), 19 such weights averaging 5600 (＝224); and thence it passed into Greece more in a double value of 11,200 (＝224). From Phoenicia this naturally became the main Punic unit; a bronze weight from Iol (18), marked 100, gives a drachma of 56 or 57 (224–228); and a Punic inscription (18) names 28 drachmae ＝25 Attic, and ∴ 57 to 59 grains (228–236); while a probably later series of 8 marble disks from Carthage (44) show 208, but vary from 197 to 234. In Spain it was 236 to 216 in different series (17), and it is a question whether the Massiliote drachmae of 58-55 are not Phoenician rather than Phocaic. In Italy this miny became naturalized and formed the “Italie mina” of Hero, Priscian, &c.; also its double, the mina of 26 unciae or 10,800,＝50 shekels of 216; the average of 42 weights gives 5390 (＝215·6) and it was divided both into 100 drachmae and also in the Italic mode of 42 unciae and 288 scripulae (44) he tilent was of 120 minae of 5400 or 3000 shekel shown by the talent from Herculaneum ta, 660 000 and by the weight inscribed pondo cxxv i.e. 125 librae) talentum siclorvm. iii., i.e. talent of 3000 shekels (2) (the M being omitted; just as Epiphanius describes this talent as 125 librae, or θ (＝9) nomismata for 9000). This gives the same approximate ratio 96: 100 to the libra as the usual drachma reckoning. The Alexandrian talent of Festus, 12,000 denarii, is the same talent again. It is believed that this mina ÷ 12 unciae by the Romans 15 the origin of the Arabic raṭl of 12 ūkīvas, or 5500 gains (33) which 1s said to have been seat bs Haran al-Rashid to Charlemagne, and so to have originated the French monetary pound of 5666 grains. But, as this as probably the came a the English monetary pound, or tower pound of 5400 which was in use earlier (see Saxon coins), it seems more likely that this pound (which is common in Roman weights) was directly inherited from the Roman civilization.

80 grs
4000;
400,000.Another unit which has scarcely been recognized in metrology hitherto is promment in the weights from Egypt—some 50 weights from Nancratis and 15 from Defenneh plainly agreeing on this and on no other basis. Its value varies between 76·5 and 81·5—mean 79 at Naucratis (29) or 81 at Defenneh (29). It has been connected theoretically with a binary dimuon frie toshehelsor stone of the Assyrian systems (28), 1290÷16 being, 80·6, this is suggested by the most usual multiples being 40 and 80＝25 and 50 shchels of 129; it is thus akin to the mina of 50 shekels previously noticed. The tribute of the Asi, Rutennu, Khita Assaru &c. to Thothmes III. (34), though in uneven numbers of kats, comes out in round thousands of units when reduced to this standard. That this unit is quite distinct from the Perrin 86 grains is clear in the Egyptian weights which maintain a wide gap between the two systems. Next, in Syria three inscribed weights of Antioch and Berytus (18) show a mina of about, 16,400, or 200×82. Then at Abydus or more probably from Babylonia, there is the large bronze lion-weight, stated to have been originally 400,500 grains; this has been continually ÷60 by different writers, regardless of the fact (Rev. arch., 1862, 30) that it bears the numeral 100; this therefore is certainly a talent of 100 minae af 4005; and as the mina is generally 50 shekels in Greck systems tt points to a weight of 80 1 Farther west the same ut occurs in several Greek weights (44) which show a mina of 7800 to 8310, mean 8050÷100= 80·5. Turning to coinage, we find this often hut usually overlooked asa degraded form of the Persian 86 grains siglos. But the earliest coinage in Cilicia, before the general Persian coinage (17) about 380 B.C. is Tarsus, 163 grains, Soli, 169, 163, 158, Nagidus, 158 161-133 later, Issus, 366 Mallus 163-154—all of which can only by straining be classed as Persian, but they agree to this standard, which as we have seen was used in Syria in earlier times by the Khia, & The Milesanor native system of Asta Minor (18) 1s fised by Hulesch at 163 and 81·6 grains—the coins of Maletua (17) showing 160, 89 and 39 Coming down to literary evidence this is abundant Bockh decides that the “Alexandrian drachma” was 6/5 of the Solonic 67 or＝80·5, and shows that it was not Ptolemaic, or Rhodian or Accmetan, bemg distinguished from these in in scriptions (2). Then the “Alexandrian mina” of Dioscorides and Galen (2) is 20 uncia=8250; in the “Analecta” (2) it is 150 or 158 drachmae=8100. Then Attic: Euboic or Aeginetan::18:25 in the metrologists (2), aud the Euboic talent＝7000 “Alexandrian” drachmae; the drachma therefore is 80·0 The “Alexandrian” wood talent: Attic talent :: 6:5 (Hero, Didymus) and∴480,000, which is 60 minae of 8000. Pliny states the Egyptian talent at 80 librae＝396,000; evidently＝the Abydus lion talent, which is ÷ 100 and the mina is∴3960 or 50×79·2. The largest weight is the “wood” talent of Syria (18)＝6 Roman talents or 1,860,000, exidently 120 Antioch minac of 15,500 or 2×7750. This evidence is too distinct to he set aside, and exactly confirming as it does the Egyptian weights and coin weights, and agreeing with the early Asiatic tribute, it cannot be overlooked in future. The system was

drachm,	2＝stater,	50＝mina,	${\displaystyle \scriptstyle {\left\{{\begin{matrix}\ \\\ \end{matrix}}\right.}}$50＝talent.	60=Greek talent.
80 grs.	⁠160	⁠8000	⁠400,000	⁠ 480,000

207 grs. to 190
9650;
579,000.This system the Aeginetan, one of the most important to the Greek world, has been thought to be a degradation of the Phoenician (17, 21), supposing 220 grains to have been reduced in primitive Greek usage to 194. But we are now able to prove that It was an independent system—(1) by its not ranging s+ually aver 200 grains iu Egypt before st passed to Greece, (2) by its earliest example, perhar= before the 224 unit existed not bemg over 208 and (3) by there being no intermediate inking on of ths to the Phochiuan unit in the Lirze number of Egyptian weights not in the Ptolemaic coinage in which both standards are used. The first example (30) isone with the nunc of Amenhotep I (17th century B.C.) marked as “gold 5,” which is 5207×6. Two other marked weights are from Memphis (44) showing 201·8 and 196·4, and another Egyptian 191·4. The range of the G4) Naucratis weights 15 186 t0 199 divided m two groups averaging 190 and 196 equal to the Greek monetary and trade varieties. Ptolemy I. and II. also struck a series of coins (32) averaging 199 In Symi haematite weights are found (30) averaging 198·5 divided into 99·2, 49·6 and 24·8, and the same division 13 showa by gold mings from Egypt (38) of 249 In the medial Papyrus (38) a weight of 2/3 kat is used which is thought to be Syrian, how 2/3 kat＝92 to 101 grains or just this weight which we have found in Syria; and the weights of 3 and 4 kat are very rare in Egypt except at Defenneh (29), on the Syrian road, where they abound. So we have thus a weight of 207-191 in Egypt on marked weights, joining therefore completely with the Aeginetan unit an Egypt of 199 to 186, and coinage of 199 and strongly connected with Syria Where a double mura of Sidon (18) 19 10,460 or 50% 209·2. Probably before any Greek coinage we find this arong the haematite weights of Troy (44), ranging from 208 to 193·2 (or 104–96·6), i.e. just covering the range from the earliest Egyptian down to the early Aeginetan coinage. Turning now to the early coinage, we see the fuller weight kept up (17) at Samos (202), Miletus (204), Calymna (100, 50), Methymna and Scepsis (99, 49),^[1] Loria (197); while the coinage of Aegina, (17, 12) which by its wide diffusion made this unit best known, though a few of its earliest staters go up even to 207, yet is characteristically on the lower of the two groups which we recognize in Egypt, ana thus started what has been considered the standard value’ of 194, or usually 190, decreasing afterwards to 184. In later times ta Asta however, the fuller weight of higher Fryptian group which we have just noticed in the Courage, was hept up (17) mto the series of estophor (196-191), asin the Ptolemaic series of 199 AL Athens the old mina was fixed by Solo at 150 of his drachmac (18) or 9800 grains, according to the earliest drachmae showing a stater of 106 and this continued to be the trade mina tn Athens at least until 160 B.C. bnt ma reduced form in which it equalled only 138 Attic drachmae or 9200 Lhe Greek mina weights show (44) on an average of 37,9650 (=stater of 193). varying from 186 to 199. In the Hellenic coinage it varies (18) from a maximum of 200 at Pharae to 192, usual full weight, this unit occupied (17) all curtral Greece, Peloponnesus and most of the islands. The system was—