APPENDIX C. 



WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. 



As stated in the preface, the nomenclature to be adopted for weights and measures 

 has presented great difficulty. Agricola uses, throughout, the Roman and the Romanized 

 Greek scales, but in many cases he uses these terms merely as Ungual equivalents for the 

 German quantities of his day. Moreover the classic language sometimes failed him, where- 

 upon he coined new Latin terms adapted from the Roman scale, and thus added further 

 confusion. We can, perhaps, make the matter clearer by an illustration of a case in weights. 

 The Roman centumpondium, composed of loo librae, the old German centner of loo pfundt, 

 and the Enghsh hundredweight of 112 pounds can be called lingual equivalents. The first 

 weighs about 494,600 Troy grains, the second 721,900, and the third 784,000. While the 

 divisions of the centumpondium and the centner cltq the same, the libra is divided into 12 unciae 

 and the pfundt into 16 unizen, and in most places a summation of the units given proves that 

 the author had in mind the Roman ratios. However, on p. 509 he makes the direct statement 

 that the centumpondium weighs 146 librae, which would be about the correct weight if the 

 centumpondium referred to was a centner. If we take an example such as " each centum- 

 pondium of lead contains one uncia of silver", and reduce it according to purely lingual equiva- 

 lents, we should find that it runs 24.3 Troy ounces per short ton, on the basis of Roman 

 values, and i8'25 ounces per short ton, on the basis of old German. If we were to trans- 

 late these into English Ungual equivalents of one ounce per hundredweight, then the value 

 would be 17.9 ounces per short ton. 



Several possibilities were open in translation : first, to calculate the values accur- 

 ately in the English units ; second, to adopt the nearest Enghsh Ungual equivalent ; third, 

 to introduce the German scale of the period ; or, fourth, to leave the original Latin in the 

 text. The first would lead to an indefinite number of decimals and to constant doubt as to 

 whether the values, upon which calculations were to be based, were Roman or German. The 

 second, that is the substitution of lingual equivalents, is objectionable, not only because 

 it would indicate values not meant by the author, but also because we should have, Uke 

 Agricola, to coin new terms to accommodate the lapses in the scales, or again to use decimals. 

 In the third case, that is in the use of the old German scale, while it would be easier to adapt 

 than the English, it would be more unfamiliar to most readers than the Latin, and not so 

 expressive in print, and further, in some cases would present the same difficulties of cal- 

 culation as in using the English scale. Nor does the contemporary German translation of De 

 Re Metallica prove of help, for its translator adopted only lingual equivalents, and in conse- 

 quence the summation of his weights often gives incorrect results. From all these possibilities 

 we have chosen the fourth, that is simply to reproduce the Latin terms for both weights and 

 measures. We have introduced into the footnotes such reductions to the EngUsh scale as we 

 considered would interest readers. We have, however, digressed from the rule in two cases, 

 in the adoption of " foot " for the Latin pes, and " fathom " for passus. Apart from the fact 

 that these were not cases where accuracy is involved, Agricola himself explains (p. 77) 

 that he means the German values for these particular terms, which, fortunately, fairly closely 

 approximate to the EngUsh. Further, we have adopted the Anglicized words " digit ", 

 "palm", and "cubit", instead of their Latin forms. 



For purposes of reference, we reproduce the principal Roman and old German scales, 

 in so far as they are used by Agricola in this work, with their values in English. All students 

 of weights and measures will realize that these values are but approximate, and that this is 

 not an occasion to enter upon a discussion of the variations in different periods or by different 

 authorities. Agricola himself is the author of one of the standard works on Ancient Weights 

 and Measures (see Appendix A), and further gives fairly complete information on contem- 

 porary scales of weight and fineness for precious metals in Book vii. p. 262 etc., to which 

 we refer readers. 



ROMAN SCALES OF WEIGHTS. 



