William Matthew Flinders Petrie and Henry James Chaney

“ So far this later research appears to confirm the opinion of Bockh (2) that fundamental units of measure were at one time derived from weights and capacities. It is curious, however, to find that an ancient nation of the East, so wise in geometrical proportions, should have followed what by modern experience may be regarded as an inverse method, that of obtaining a unit of length by deducing it through weights and cubic measure, rather than by deriving cubic measure through the unit of length. ”

“ A constant difficulty in studying works on metrology is the need of distinguishing the absolute facts of the case from the web of theory into which each writer has woven them—often the names used, and sometimes the very existence of the units in question, being entirely an assumption of the writer. ”

“ The great spread of the Phoenician weight on the Mediterranean, of the Persian in Asia Minor and of the Assyrian in Egypt are evident cases; and that the decimal weights of the laws of Manu (43) are decidedly not Assyrian or Persian, but on exactly the Phoenician standard, is a curious evidence of trade by water and not overland. If, as seems probable, units of length may be traced in prehistoric remains, they are of great value; at Stonehenge, for instance, the earlier parts are laid out by the Phoenician foot, and the later by the Pelasgo-Roman foot (26) . ”

“ In all countries the national standards of weights and measures are in the custody of the state, or of some authority administering the government of the country. The standards of the British Empire, so far as the relate to the imperial and metric systems, are in the custody of the Board of Trade. Scientific research is not, of course, bound by official standards. ”

“ Again, each writer has his own leaning: A. Böckh, to the study of water-volumes and weights, even deriving linear measures therefrom, V. Queipo, to the connexion with Arabic and Spanish measures; J. Brandis, to the basis of Assyrian standards; Mommsen, to coin weights; and P. Bortolotti to Egyptian units; but F. Hultsch is more general, and appears to give a more equal representation of all sides than do other authors. In this article the tendency will be to trust far more to actual measures and weights than to the statements of ancient writers ”

“ The International Geodetic Committee have adopted the metre as their unit of measurement. In geodetic measurements the dimensions of the triangles vary with the temperature of the earth, but these variations in the same region of the earth are smaller than the variations of the temperature of the air, less than 10° C. Adopting as a co-efficient of dilatation of the earth’s crust 0·000002, the variations of the distances are smaller than the errors of measurement (see Geodesy) . ”

“ In determinations of volume which do not admit of a high degree of accuracy the cubic decimetre can be taken as equivalent to the litre; and in these determinations expressions of volumes based on the cube of the unit of linear measure can be substituted for expressions based on the litre as defined above.
(c) The kilogram is the unit of mass; it is equal to the mass of the international prototype of the kilogram. [1]
(d ) The term “weight” denotes a magnitude of the same nature as a force; the weight of a body is the product of the mass of the body by the acceleration of gravity ”

“ This metre (m.) is the only unit of metric—extension by which all other metric measures of extension—whether linear, superficial or solid—are ascertained.
The kilogram (kg.) is represented by an iridio-platinum standard weight, of cylindrical form, by which all other metric weights, and all measures having reference to metric weight, are ascertained in the United Kingdom.
From the above four units are derived all other heights and measures (W. and M.) of the two systems.
The gallon is the standard measure of capacity in the imperial system as well for liquids as for dry goods. ”

“ But we are now able to prove that It was an independent system— (1) by its not ranging usually over 200 grains in Egypt before it passed to Greece; (2) by its earliest example, perhaps before the 224 unit existed, not being over 208 and (3) by there being no intermediate linking on of this to the Phoenician unit in the large number of Egyptian weights, nor in the Ptolemaic coinage in which both standards are used. The first example (30) is one with the name of Amenhotep I. (17th century B.C.) marked as “gold 5,” which is 5×207·6. ”

“ There appears, however, to be some objection to the use of iridio-platinum for weights, as, owing to its great density (∆=21·57) , the slightest abrasion will make an appreciable difference in a weight, sometimes, therefore, quartz or rock-crystal is used; but to this also there is some objection, as owing to its low density (∆=2·65) there is a large exposed surface of the mass. For small standard weights platinum (∆=21·45) and aluminium (∆=2·67) are used, and also an alloy of palladium (60%) silver (40%) (∆=11·00) . ”

“ In the medical papyrus (38) a weight of 2/3 kat is used which is thought to be Syrian; now 2/3 kat=92 to 101 grains, or just this weight which we have found in Syria; and the weights of 2/3 and 1/3 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 mina of Sidon (18) is 10,460 or 50×209·2. ”

“ Syria, Palestine and Babylonia.—Here there are no monumental data known; and the literary information does not distinguish the closely connected, perhaps identical, units of these lands. Moreover, none of the writers are before the Roman period, and many relied on are medieval rabbis. A large number of their statements are rough (2, 18, 33) , being based on the working equivalence of the bath or epha with the Attic metretes, from which are sometimes drawn fractional statements which seem more accurate than they are. ”

“ Buildings at Persepolis, all of nearly the same age, vary in unit 1 in 450 (25) . Including a greater range of time and place, the Roman foot in Italy varied during two or three centuries on an average 1/400 from the mean. Covering a longer time, we find an average variation of 1/200 in the Attic foot (25) , 1/150 in the English foot (25) , 1/170 in the English itinerary foot (25) . Se we may say that an average variation of 1/400 by toleration, extending to double that by change of place and time is usual in ancient measures. In weights of the same place and age there is a far wider range ”

“ At Athens a low variety of the unit was adopted for the coinage, true to the object of Solon in depreciating debts; and the first coinage is of only 65·2, or scarcely within tliq range of the trade weights (28) ; this seems to have been felt, as, contrary to all other states, Athens slowly increased its coin weight up to 66·6, or but little under the trade average. It gradually supplanted the Aeginetan standard in Greece and Italy as the power of Athens rose ”

“ The “tola” (180 grains) is properly the Government unit of weight for currency; and 80 tolas make the “Government seer.”
7. Customary Weights and Measures.—In some districts of the United Kingdom, as well as in provincial districts of other countries, old local and customary denominations of weights and measures are still found to be in use, although their use may have been prohibited by law. So powerful is custom with the people. [23]
8. Legislation.—In everyday transactions with reference to weights and measures, the British legislature also exercises control in industrial pursuits. ”

“ Average variation may be said to range from 1/40 to 1/70 in different units, doubtless greatly due to defective balances.
2. Rate of Variation.—Though large differences may exist, the rate of general variation is but slow—excluding, of course, all monetary standards.
In Egypt the cubit lengthened 1/170 in some thousands of years (25, 44) The Italian mile has lengthened 1/100 since Roman times (2) ; the English mile lengthened about 1/300 in four centuries (31) . The English foot has not appreciably varied in several centuries (25) . ”

“ As our knowledge of the age and locality of weights increases these criteria in curves will prove of greater value; but even now no consideration of the connexion of different units should be made without a graphic representation to compare their relative extent and nature of variation. ”

“ In trade both the minae were divided in 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/3, and 1/6, regardless of the drachmae. This unit passed also into Italy, the libra of Picenum and the double of the Etrurian and Sicilian libra (17) ; it was there divided in unciae and scripulae (44) , the mean of 6 from Italy and Sicily being 6600; one weight (bought in Smyrna) has the name “Leitra” on it. In literature it is constantly referred to; but we may notice the “general mina” (Cleopatra) , in Egypt, 16 unciae=6600; the Ptolemaic talent, equal to the Attic in weight and divisions (Hero, Didymus) ”

“ Of weights there are scarce any dated, excepting coins, which nearly all decrease; the Attic tetradrachm, however, increased 1/50 in three centuries (28) , owing probably to its being below the average trade weight to begin with. Roughly dividing the Roman weights, there appears a decrease of 1/40 from imperial to Byzantine times (43) .
3. Tendency of Variation.—This is, in the above cases of lengths, to an increase in course of time. The Roman foot is also probably 1/300 larger than the earlier form of it, and the later form in Britain and Africa perhaps another 1/300 larger (25) . ”

“ Six disk weights from Carthage (44) show 126. It is usually the case that a unit lasts later in trade than in coinage: and the prominence of this standard in Italy may show how it is that this mina (18 unciae=7400) was known as the “Italic” in the days of Galen and Dioscorides.
126 grs.
6300. A variation on the main system was made by forming a mina of 50 shekels. This is one of the Persian series (gold) and the 1/4 of the Hebrew series noted above. But it is most striking when it is found in the mina form which distinguishes it. ”

“ 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 Rutennu, 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) ”

“ It is above all desirable to make allowances for the changes which weights have undergone; and, as this has only been done for the above Egyptian collections and that of the British Museum, conclusions as to the accurate values of different standards will here be drawn from these rather than continental sources. (3) Objects which have been made by measure or weight, and from which the unit of construction can be deduced. ”

“ At Athens the old mina was fixed by Solon at 150 of his drachmae (18) or 9800 grains, according to the earliest drachmae, showing a stater of 196; and this continued to be the trade mina in Athens, at least until 160 B.C., but in a reduced form, in which it equalled only 138 Attic drachmae, or 9200. The 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 central Greece, Peloponnesus and most of the islands. ”

“ The Ptolemaic copper coinage is on two bases—the uten, binarily divided, and the Ptolemaic five shekels (1050) , also binarily divided. (This result is from a larger number than other students have used, and study by diagrams.) The theory (3) of the derivation of the uten from 1/1500 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 1/1000 of the cubic cubit of 24 digits, or better of 6/7 of 20·63 ”

“ This bears strongly on the Phoenician origin of our prehistoric civilization. Again, the Belgic foot of the Tungri is the basis of the present English land measures, which we thus see are neither Roman nor British in origin, but Belgic. Generally a unit is transferred from a higher to a less civilized people ”

“ 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, evidently 120 Antioch minae of 15,500 or 2×7750. This evidence is too distinct to be 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. ”