Commentary

Page of 236

Text size:



	THEOPHRASTUS ON STONES

	names in ascending order the amounts that can be detected in a sample of alloy weighing a stater, he does not give any precise information about the relative values of these weights. It is possible, however, to deduce both their relative values and their actual values in terms of modern weight units. The name of the second weight was also used for a small bronze coin, and the names of the third and fourth were used for two small silver coins, the quarter-obol and the half-obol. Since the stater, which is taken as the standard, was also the name of a silver coin, it seems reasonable to conclude that these weights were the same as those of the coins bearing the same names. The Attic silver obol weighed about 0.72 of a gram,³²¹ so that the largest weight was equal to about 0.36 of a gram, and the second largest to about 0.18 of a gram. The smallest weight, the 1{rithe, literally the barleycorn, probably weighed about 0.06 of a gram, since in ancient systems of weights the smallest denomination was actually the average weight of certain seeds, and it can be shown by experiment that the barleycorn weighs on the average about 0.06 of a gram. The present English troy grain that weighs about 0.065 °t ^a gram appears to have been originally based on the weight of the barleycorn.³²² The relative value of the second weight named by Theophrastus and its equivalent in modern units cannot be deduced with equal certainty. According to some authorities³²³ on ancient weights and measures, the \ollybos was perhaps equal to 1/32 of an obol, but this valuation gives it a weight of only about 0.02 of a gram, which, in terms of silver at least, is below the weight of the smallest denomination, the \rithe. Since Theophrastus evidently lists the four weights in ascending order of magnitude, this weight seems inherently impossible for the \ollybos, unless, indeed, Theophrastus is using the word krithe in a purely figurative sense to denote an exceedingly minute quantity. This seems very unlikely, however, since all the other denominations are clearly to be taken as real weights. Furthermore, it is highly improbable that Theophrastus would have mentioned a weight equal ³²¹G. F. Hill, Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins (London, 1899), p. 64. ⁸²² Ridgeway, Numismatic Chronicle, Ser. 3, XV (1895), 104-109. ³²³ F. Hultsch, Griechische und romische Metrologie (Berlin, 1882), p. 228; Hill, Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins, p. 64; B. V. Head, Historia Numorum (Oxford, 1911), p. 390.

	' 154 '

Page of 236