CHAP. V.—MEASUEEMENTS AHD TABLES. 
53 
All tlie above weights are attributed to their 
respective standards solely by trial, as there are 
no distinguishing marks on any of them. The 
hat weights show that the standard at San in 
Ptolemaic times was neither the light kat of 140 
nor the heavy kat of 148 grains, but was about the 
mean value of 145. The barrel-shaped kat being 
light, 139, suggests that the lighter kat may be 
a Syrian variety. Unhappily, we know so little 
of the ages and localities of individual weights 
in general, that the history of varieties has yet to 
be worked out. Among the shekel weights, I 
rather doubt the granite of 50 and the bronze of 
.jj-, as such multiples are not regular; but yet I do 
not see to what other system these can be attri¬ 
buted. There is an unexpectedly large number of 
weights of the Assyrian and Persian silver standard, 
none of which can be otherwise attributed, and the 
repeated occurrence of which strongly support this 
series. The mean of these gives a siglos of 84-5 
with a mean variation of '9 ; and this is equivalent 
to a shekel of 126-7 with mean variation 1-4, 
exactly agreeing with, the Assyrian standard, but 
rather less than the Persian. The last two weights 
seem to be most probably of the Attic standard. 
otherwise they could only be the usual nomisma 
or solidus, and that was not common till Byzantine 
and Christian times (most of such weights having 
a cross, and the solidus not indeed being intro¬ 
duced until Constantine), whereas there is but little 
as late as that at San, the great bulk of remains 
being Ptolemaic and pre-Christian. It is promis¬ 
ing for the future study of weights to have obtained 
no less than nineteen in one season; this was the 
result of always giving the men what was, in their 
eyes, a large value for them, telling them what to 
look for, and encouraging their search. 
The distribution of worship of the different gods 
at San is of interest; and in the following table 
there is stated the number of occurrences of the 
name or figure of each deity in different ages, not 
counting the necessary figures in the cartouches 
of the kings. 
In this list the amulets are of all ages from 
perhaps the twenty-sixth dynasty to Eoman times, 
but those distinguished as Eoman are of the second 
century. These do not account for all the amu¬ 
lets found, but only for the better examples; the 
list, however, gives a fair representation of them. 
