The heaviest value of the Roman libra is given 327.24 ' b y the early aurei as 5050, uncia 421. The 27.27
421 nfluence of unification with other standards created many types of the libra, and it is instructive to see the groups at 393 (6 Attic coin drachma), 407 (6 Attic trade drach ma), 412 (Roman trade), 417 (Roman solidi), 421 (Roman aurei), 427 (octodrachm Ptolemaic) and 435 (2 Phoenician staters). The Attic trade value was adopted for the average pigs of lead, which are 25o librae of 4,900 grs. ; the Attic coinage value influenced the Celtic weights, Mayence 4767, Glamorgan 4770. The system was: In later times the gold solidus, or sextula, was called the nomisma. grains The Phoenician or Alexandrian unit is best grammes 220 termed the sela, which, though a later name, 14.26 serves to distinguish it from other shekels. It was a diffuse unit from the beginning, varying in the Old Kingdom from 214.7 to 227.0; it gradually diminished to as low as 210. The multiples are decimal up to 4,000, and fractions to -A. This is found as the unit of the Syro-Mesopotamian tribute under Tehutmes III., and later as one of the most usual coinage units, such as the Maccabaean shekel. It was carried by trade to Carthage and Spain, and formed the Italic mina. Gold bars from Abukir of Roman age are each 25 shekels of 21 • 7, 212.9, and 213.0. The series is: It extended widely into prehistoric Europe. At Knossos the great octopus weight shows a unit of 223.7, an ox-head from the Diktaian cave shows 227.2, a gold bar from Mykenai 233.1,
another from Enkomi 222.6. The Vapheio cups are 20 sela of 213, and 216.5. Electrum jewellery from the temple of Ephesos is on a unit of 219.0. In Babylon the maneh of the age of Entemenna (285o B.c.) is 5o of 210.1. The average of 19 ingots of bronze from Hagia Triada gives a talanton of 2,000 shekels of 226.o. Two double axes from the Rhine and four Ligurian ingots agree on 5o shekels of 225.4. The Irish gold has a large group agreeing with an average of 226.o. Thus there was a great spread of the unit, doubtless due to Phoenician trade.
Egypt 98 (1922) ; Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch. X., 464; R. S. Conway, Italic Dialects ii., 521; Anc. Eg. 119 (1925) ; Proc. S. Bib!. Arch. 302 (1893) ; Faure, Rev. Archeologique ii., 117 (1904) (listed figures are his multiples, not actual measures) ; Petrie, Hill figures of England; Kennedy, Trans. Victoria Inst. (1915) ; Anc. Eg. 33 (1923) ; Montelius, Prim. Civil. Sweden in Heathen Times, p. 128; Oster, Arch. Inst. x. 127; Proc. Soc. Ant. 584 (1905) ; Petrie, Qurneh xxix. ; Rev. Assyriologie, xviii. 359 ; Petrie, Tools and Weapons; University College, Proc. Soc. Ant. 186 (1894) ; Petrie, Weights and Measures. The 1887 edition gives more detail of the authorities, which is summarized here; and for the material evidence in general, reference should be made to Petrie, Ancient Weights and Measures and Glass Stamps and Weights (1926). (W. M, F. P.)