A DISCOURSE OF THE ROMAN FOOT, AND DENARIUS: From whence, as from two principles, THE MEASURES, AND WEIGHTS, used by the Ancients, may be deduced. By JOHN GREAVES, Professor of Astronomy in the University of Oxford.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
LONDON, Printed by M. F. for William Lee, and are to be sold at his shop at the sign of the Turks head in Fleetstreet. 1647.   
una fides, pondus, mensura, moneta sit una, Et status illaesus totius Orbis erit. Budelius de monetis.  

To his truly noble, & learned friend, John Selden Esquire, Burgess of the University of Oxford in the Honourable House of Commons.  
SIR,  
THat I should present You, who have so honourably deserved of Antiquity, and of Your Country, and, if I may add my own obligations, in particular of me, with so small a retribution, as a Roman foot, & Denarius, may seem more proportionable to my abilities, then to the eminency of Your place, and worth. But You who, to the honour of Your profession, have joined the wisdom of the Ancients, and justly have merited this elegy, — Anglorum gloria gentis Seldenus ,An elegy long since given You by a man, who is deservedly esteemed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the learned Hugo Grotius, You are best able to judge of what importance these two are, in the discovery of the weights, and measures, used by the Ancients.  
And first, for measures, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or cubit of the Sanctuary, in the Scriptures, Josephus, and the Rabbins: the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Herodotus (the former equal to that of Samos: the later mis-rendred by Pliny, & Solinus, Pes Babylonius): The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Herodotus, containing XXX. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Strabo, sometimes LX. sometimes XL. and sometimes XXX. (but in Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in Abulfeda three miles: with whom, and with the Persians' to this day it is called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 farsach): 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Herodotus, Artemidorus, and Strabo: the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hero: the pes Ptolemaicus, and Drusianus, in Hyginus: besides infinite others depending upon the proportions of some of these: I say, these cannot after the destruction of those ancient Monarchies, and Republics, any other way be restored, then from such monuments, as, by divine providence, have escaped the hands of rvine, and continued to these later ages. For were it not that the pes Romanus, 
The farsach, with the Ancients, and Modern, contains three miles.  or Mon●talis, as Hyginus terms it, were still extant in Rome, on the monuments of Cossutius, and of Tit. Statilius Vol. Aper (for those two columns, the one with the inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. mentioned by Marlianus, 
Abulf. Geogr. MS▪  and Philander: the other with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. seen by the same Philander, are both lost) we might utterly despair of knowing the measures of the Hebrews, Babylonians, Persians', Egyptians, Grecians, Romans, and of all others, described in Classical Authors: who could not transmit to posterity the individual measures themselves, but only the proportions they respectively had to one another: which proportions being pure habitudes, cannot, as Mathematicians observe, be reduced to the measures of these times, unless, either some of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 themselves were existent: or else exact copies taken from the Originals were derived to us.  
In like manner it is for weights, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Hebrews, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Chaldeans, which Aruck renders by four 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zuzim, that is, four denarii (from whence, though Persian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Xenophon, and Hesychius, may have received its denomination): the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; containing seven thousand Attic drachmas, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ten thousand, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a thousand five hundred, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 six thousand, all mentioned by Julius Pollux; the Talentum Aegyptium in Varro, containing eighty pondo, or pounds; the talentum Euboicum in Festus, four thousand denarii: these, with infinite others, both mensurae, and pondera, wither considered as Medica, or Georgica, or Veterinaria, cannot in our times be restored, but only by such weights of the Ancients as are still extant; that is, either by the denarius of the Romans, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Grecians, or by the congius of Vespasian, or by the librae, and unciae Romanae, and the like, that have been preserved by Antiquaries.  
Seeing therefore the denarius is of as great moment for the discovery of weights, as the Roman foot for the knowledge of measures, I have taken these two, as two irrefragable principles, from whence the rest used by the Ancients may be deduced. And because the denarius may be considered in a double respect, either as nummus, or as pondus: the first acception conducing to the valuation of coins, the second to the certainty of weights: it was therefore necessary that both the weight, and valuation of the denarius, should be exactly known. To which purpose, in Italy I examined with a balance (the scale of which the eightieth part of a grain would sensibly turn) many hundred fair denarii, both Consulares, and Caesarei, as also quinarii, or victoriati in silver: several aurei of the former, and later Emperors: besides the original standard of the congius, placed by Vespasian in the Capitol: and many unciae, and librae, in brass. From whence I collected the weight of the denarius Consularis, and Caesareus: that to be the seventh part of the Roman ounce, as Celsus, Scribonius Largus, and Pliny rightly describe: and this to be sometimes the eighth part, and sometimes the seventh, but most frequently in a middle proportion betwixt eight, and seven, till Severus ', and Gordianus ' times: under whom, and the succeeding Emperors, it recovered the weight of the denarius Consularis; but lost much of its fineness, by the mixture of allay.  
With these denarii, for the greater certainty, I compared such Graecian coins (especially Athenian) as I had either seen in choice cabinets, or bought of my own; and those were the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolutely taken, which, as Julius Pollux, and Hesychius, out of Polemarchus testify, weighed two drachmas: the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, four drachmas: the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or as Pollux names them, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with several others.  
By which comparison I first discovered, that howsoever the Romans, as Pliny, and A. Gellius expressly; Valerius, and Suetonius, by way of consequence, equal the denarius to the drachma: and though the Greeks, as Strabo, Cleopatra, Plutarch, Galen▪ Dio, and many more, equal the drachma to the denarius, speaking in a popular estimation, and as they vulgarly passed in way of commerce; yet if we shall put on the resolution of him in the Comedy, Oculatae nostrae sunt manus, credunt quod vident :we may evidently discern in the scale, the drachma Attica to be heavier then the denarius. And therefore all such writers of the Ancients, as equal them, if we speak strictly of weight, and not of estimation, have been deceived: and consequently, all modern writers, following their traditions, in discourses de ponderibus, & de re nummariâ, have erred.  
But because it is not probable, that the Ancients, both Greeks, and Romans, should be deceived in their own coins, and in their own times: it occasioned me by observing the practice abroad of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in exchanges, with whom the same specifical coins, in different States, pass with different estimations, to think of some means how I might reconcile the traditions of the Greeks, and Romans, concerning the weight, and valuation of the drachma Attica, and denarius; notwithstanding the difference in the balance, of such as are now found at Athens, and at Rome.  
And this drew from me that discourse, which I have inserted at the end of this book, Of some directions to be observed in comparing the valuations of coins: which may serve, not only to reconcile the Greek, and Roman writers, but especially, the traditions of Philo, Josephus, Epiphanius, Saint Hierome, and Hesychius: who make the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shekel, equal to the Attic tetradrachme: whereas in the scale, which is the best judge of this controversy, I found them manifestly unequal: the Hebrew, or Samaritane shekel, being much less then the Attic tetradrachme.  
But it may be questioned, why after the labours of Portius, Budaeus, Alciatus, Agricola, Montanus, Mariana, Budelius, Alcazar, Villalpandus, Jo: Scaliger, Capellus, Snellius, and of many other eminent men, who have writ, either deditâ operâ, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, de ponderibus, & mensuris, I should undertake any thing of this nature. My answer is, that observing in them so great a variety, and contradiction of opinions, I was willing to use my own judgement, how mean soever, in giving myself private satisfaction. And though I intended this work, as a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to other employments; yet having, by the advantage of travailing in foreign parts, ●erused in Italy, Greece, and Egypt, more Antiquities, then I think any of them above named single, I thought it would not be unacceptable, if I did, as it is the manner of Travellers, publish at home, such observations, and discoveries, as I made abroad. The which I humbly dedicated to You, as out of a desire to express my gratitude for many noble favours: so out of an assurance, that if they receive Your approbation, I need not to fear the censure of others.  
Your most obliged friend, and humble servant, John Greaves.   

OF THE ROMAN FOOT.  
THat the foot was the most received, and usual measure among the Romans, as the cubit among the Jews, is a thing not controverted by any. For 
a Polyb. lively 6.  Polybius describing their Scutum, makes it in breadth over the abend two [Roman] feet and an half, and in length four feet: or, if it be of a greater sort, a palm more is to be added to this measure. And not long after expressing the manner of their castrametation, or encamping, he 
* Polyb. ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc.  writes; that as of●en as a place is designed for the camp, the Praetori●um (or General's lodging) takes up that part, which is fittest for prospect, and direction. Set●ing therefore up the Standard where they intent to ●ix the Praetorium, they so measure out a square about the Standard, that each side may be distant from it ●n hundred feet, and the whole area contain four ●ugera. In like manner 
b Caes: Comm. lib. 4.  Caesar, in the description of his bridge over the Rhine, makes the binders, or transversary beams, to be bipedales. 
c Cicero l. 2. Academic. quaest.  Tully also judges the quantity of the apparent diameter of the Sun to be pedalis. And not to produce more Authorities, 
d Suetonius in Augusto.  Suetonius relates, that Augustus presented before the people of Rome so the sestertius pes was two feet and an half. 
* Vol. Maet: de assis distrib.  Volusius Maetianus, Sestertius duos asses & semissem, quasi semis tertius; Graeca figura 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Nam sex talenta & semitalentum eo verbo significantur. Lex etiam XII. Tabularum argumento est, in qua duo pedes & semissis sestertius pes vocatur .But to return to Frontinus, who farther discoursing of the Roman foot, gives a distinction of three sorts of feet: and those were first, pes porrectus, next, pes constratus, or as 
h Agricola de mensuris quibus intervalla metimur.  Agricola reads it, contractus, and lastly, pes quadratus. The first was the measure of longitudes, the other two of superficies. There were, writes 
* Frontinus de limitibus agrorum.  Frontinus, In pede porrecto semipedes duo, in pede constrato semipedes quatuor, in pede quadrato semipedes octo. Which words of his are to be thus explicated; the pes porrectus, was the Roman foot extended in length, and therefore there were in it semipedes duo: The pes constratus, was the square of the semipes, and therefore the perimeter of it contained semipedes quatuor, or, which is all one, two entire Roman feet: The pes quadratus, was the square of the Roman foot; wherhfore of necessity there must be four feet in the perimeter, or in Frontinus 'expression, eight semipedes. The same 
i Frontinus de aquaeductibus.  Author likewise in his book de aquaeductibus, describing the digit, & uncia of this, (Est autem digitus, (says he) ut convenit, sexta decima pars pedis, uncia duodecima) useth a distinction of digits, as he did of feet before, not mentioned by any other Author: Quemadmodum autem inter unciam, & digitum diversitas, ita & ipsius digiti simplex observatio non est. nam alius vocatur quadratus, alius rotundus. Quadratus tribus quartis decimis suis rotundo major: rotundus tribus undecimis suis quadrato minor est. The proportions here assigned by him to the digitus quadratus, and rotundus, are the same, which 
l Archim. de circ: dimen. prop. 2.  Archimedes long before used: and those are, that a circle hath the same proportion to the square of the diameter, that XI. hath to FOURTEEN. Hero also, discoursing of several sorts of measures, informs us thus concerning the foot: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the digit is the lest measure, the palm consists of IV. digits, and is called dactylodochme, and palaiste, and doron. The lichas is ten digits, the orthodoron eleven: The span XII. The foot hath IV. palms, or XVI. digits the pygme XVIII. digits. The pygon XX. The cubit XXIV. or VI palms the orgyia IV. cubits, or VI feet. Most of which measures the Romans borrowed from the Greeks; as on the contrary the Greeks borrowed the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from the Roman jugerum, and milliare. The same Hero describes another sort of foot used in Italy. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Italian foot contains thirteen digits, and one third. Whence 
m Salmas●i Ex●rcit: Plinianae. p. 〈◊〉. 4.  Salmasius concludes, that the Romans used one sort of foot in Rome, consisting of XVI. digits, and in some parts of Italy another being but XIII. digits, and one third. Which might be granted, did not 
n Hyginus de limit: constit:  Hyginus, who is much ancienter, in his tract de limitibus constituendis, contradict it. His words are these: Item dicitur in Germaniâ in Tungris pes Drusianus, qui habet monetalem, & sescunciam, ita ut ubicunque extra fines, legésque Romanorum, id est, ut solicitiùs proferam, ubicunque extra Italiam aliquid agitatur inquirendum; & de hâc ipsâ conditione diligenter praemoneo, ne quid sit, quod praeteriisse videamur. Where speaking immediately before of the pes Romanus, or as he also calls it, the pes monetalis, by which he measures and defines the limits, he gives us this caution, that out of Italy (for in Italy he supposes one measure to be generally received) we are to observe the quantity of the foot, or measure of the Country. And for this reason, to avoid ambiguity, he assigns the proportions of the pes Drusianus, at Tongeren in Germany, to be a sescuncia more then the pes monetalis used at Rome, and in Italy. And so in another part about Cyrene, which Ptolemy gave to the Romans. 
c Hyginus ibid.  Pes corum qui Ptolemaicus appellatur habet monetalem pedem, & semunciam. But to omit the pes Ptolemaicus (For our inquiry is only of the Roman foot.) I cannot but wonder at the mistake of 
* Ios: Scaliger de re nummariâ  Joseph Scaliger, concerning the pes Drusianus, and Romanus, who thus writes. Pes igitur ille Drusianus major est Romano sescunciâ. fuit enim XXII. digitorum, quantorum XVI. est pes Romanus. If it were but a sescuncia, greater then the Roman foot, as Hyginus, and he also make it, how can it possibly be XXII. digitorum? or how can he excuse his words, which immediately follow? Ex quo colligimus pedem Drusianum omnino esse eum, qui hodie in Galliâ, & Belgio in usu est, qui profectò major est VI digitis, quantorum XVI. est pes, qui Romae in hortis Angeli Colotii sculptus in saxon visitur. Eum enim nos cum pede Gallicano comparantes, id verissimum esse deprehendimus. Neither is the error of some others much less, in making the pes monetalis, or Romanus, and pes Regius Philetaerius, to be equal, Because the Roman foot consisted of XVI. digits, as Frontinus writes, and the pes Philetaerius of as many, as 
p Heroine Isagoge.  Hero shows: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. therefore both these are equal. The error is in supposing all digits to be alike; and therefore the same number of digits being in both, that both are equal. By the same argument we may conclude the Roman foot, and Arabian foot, and the derah, or cubit of these, to be equal to the cubit, or sesquipes of the Romans: seeing 
q Abulsedae Geogr. Arab. MS.  Abulfeda, an Arabian Geographer, defines the derah to consist of XXIV. digits, and so many also did the Roman sesquipes contain. But the observation of 
r Rhemnii Fannii fragmentum.  Rhemnius Fannius in this particular is much better; which he applies to weights, and we may by analogy assign to measures.  
Semina sex alii siliquis latitantia curvis  
Attribuunt scripulo, lentes veraciter octo,  
Aut totidem speltas, numerant, tristésve lupinos  
Bis duo; sed si par generatim his pondus inesset,  
Servarent eadem diversae pondera gentes:  
Nunc variant. Etenim cuncta non foedere certo  
Naturae, sed lege valent, hominúmque repertis.  
But to return to the Roman foot. Lastly, we may allege 
s Isid. Hispal. l. 15. c. 15.  Isidorus Hispalensis. Palmus autem, quatuor habet digitos, pes XVI. digitos, Passus pedes quinque, Pertica p●●ssus duos, id est decem pedes. And this is that which I found delivered by such of the Ancients, as are extant. Out of which bore, and naked descriptions, it is as impossible to recover the Roman foot, as it is for Mathematicians, to take either the distance, or altitude of places, by the proportions of triangles alone, or by Tables of Sines, and Tangents, without having some certain and positive measure given, which must be the foundation of their inquiry. All that can be collected by these descriptions, is this, that we may know into how many parts the Romans usually divided their feet; and all these divisions I have seen in some ancient ones. But suppose there were no Roman foot extant; how by XVI. digits, or by IV. palms, or by XII. unciae, (which is the most uncertain of all; seeing whatsoever hath quantity, how great or small soever it is, may be divided in XII. uncias) could it be precisely restored? For if that of 
* Protagoras apud 〈◊〉. l. 1●. cap. 5. Mctaphys. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Protagoras be true, as well in measures, as in intellectual notions, that man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Whence 
u Nec minus m●●surarum rationes, quae in omnibus videntur necessariae esse, ex corpo● is membris collegerunt: uti digitum, palmum, pedem, cubitum. Vitruu. l 3 c. 1.  Vitruvius observes, that the Latins denominated most of their measures, as their digit, palm, foot, and cubit, from the parts and members of a man: who shall be that perfect and square man, from whom we may take a pattern of these measures? or if there be any such, how shall we know him? or how shall we be certain the Ancients ever made choice of any such? Unless, as some fancy, that the cubit of the Sanctuary, was taken from the cubit of Adam, he being created in an excellent state of perfection: So we shall imagine these digits, and palms, to have been taken from some particular man of completer lineaments then others. On the other side, if this foot may be restored by the digits, and palms of any man at pleasure, since there is such a difference in the proportions of men, that it is as difficult to found two of the same dimensions, as two that have the same likeness of faces, how will it be possible, out of such a diversity, to produce a certain and positive measure, consisting in an indivisibility, not as a point doth in respect of parts, but in an indivisibility of application, as all originals, and standards should do? The Arabians, to avoid this difficulty, show us a more certain way, as they suppose, how to make this commensurall digit, and consequently the foot: and that is by the breadth of six barley corns laid one contiguous to another. For thus 
x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 MS.  Muhammed Ibn Mesoud in his book, entitled in Persian gehandanish, relates; that in the time of Almamon (the learned Calife of Babylon) by the elevation of the pole of the aequator, they measured the quantity of a degree upon the globe of the earth, and found it to be fifty six miles, and two thirds of a mile: every mile containing four thousand cubits, and each cubit twenty four digits, and every digit six barley corns. The same proportions are assigned in the Geographia Nubiensis, printed in Arabic at Rome: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The cubit is twenty four digits, and every digit is six barley corns. But this is as uncertain as the former, and is built upon a supposition, that all such are of the same dimension. Whereas those of one Country differ much from those of another; and those of the same Country (as I have made trial in Egypt, more out of curiosity, then as hoping this way to given myself satisfaction) are not all of the same bigness: and not only so, but in the self same ear, there is a sensible difference, as experience doth show. And yet Snellius, a man much to be commended for his abilities in the Mathematics, and to be blamed for his supine negligence, both in his measure of the magnitude of the earth, and in his dimensions of the Roman foot, upon these sleight & weak principles, deduces the Arabian foot, 
z S●ellius in Eratosth. Batav. lib. 2. cap. 2.  this containing ninety six grains, such as his Roman foot (for noon besides himself will own it) contains ninety. Wherhfore some other Arabians to mend the matter, limit the breadth of one of them, 
a Aly Kushgy, who assisted Vlug Beg in compiling his Astronomical Tables in Persian (Tables the most exact of any in the East) limits their breadth by VI hairs of an horse. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Every digit is six barley corns laid ●●venly together, and the breadth of every barley corn is six hairs of an horses tail. Instit: Astron: Aly Cushgy. MS.  by six hairs of a camel, evenly joined one by another: by which invention their derah being almost answerable to the Roman sesquipes, or cubit, shall consist of twenty four digits, and every digit of six barley corns, and every barley corn of six hairs of a camel. So that in conclusion the hair of a camel, shall be the minimum in respect of measures. But this invention however at the first it may seem somewhat subtle (for we are come now almost as low as atoms) is lest of all to be approved. For though the supposition were true that all hairs are of a like bigness in all camels, whereas they are different in one and the same; yet this objection is unanswerable, that seeing hairs are not perfectly round, though the the sense judges them so, but angular, and that with some inequality, as magnifying glasses plainly demonstrate, it will be very difficult so to size them together, that they shall always take up the same breadth: and if they do not, little errors committed in such small bodies, though at the first insensible, will infinitely increase, and multiply, in the measuring of great distances, to which these are supposed the foundation. And therefore I cannot but approve the counsel of 
b Villalpandus de apparatu Vrbis ac Templi par. 2. l. 3. c. 25. Atque in universum illud unum monitos velim eos omnes, qui mensurarum ac ponderum cognoscendorum desiderio tenentur, ne à minimis incipiant examinare majora: nom vel minimus quisque error saepius multiplicatus in magnum ●dducit errorum cumulum.  Villalpandus, who adviseth such as will examine measures and weights, to begin with the greater, and not with the lesser. And that there is reason for his assertion, may be made evident, especially in weights, to such as shall make an experiment. For admit there were a Standard of ten thousand grains, and another of one grain, it will be easy, by a continued subdivision of the former, with a good balance, to produce a weight equal to the standard of one grain: yea, though at the beginning, some little error had been committed, which after many divisions will vanish, and become imperceptible. Whereas on the contrary, the most curious man alive, with the exactest scale that the industry of the most skilful artisan can invent, shall never be able out of the standard of one grain, to produce a weight equal to the weight of ten thousand grains, but that there shall be a sensible, and apparent difference; yea, though he had that excellent scale mentioned by 
c Capellus de pond. & nummis lib. 1.  Capellus at Sedan, which would sensibly be turned with the IV. hundreth part of a grain. The like difference as we found in weights, we may conceive by analogy to be in measures, when they shall be made out of such little parts, as hairs, barley corns, digits, and the like. And therefore I cannot but disapprove the ordinary course of most Geographers, wither Greeks, Latins, or Arabians, that from such nice beginnings, measure out a degree upon earth, and consequently the magnitude of this globe. On the contrary the enterprise of 
d Snell: in Eratosth: Bat. lib. 2.  Snellius in his Eratosthenes Batavus, and of our Countryman 
e Wright, of the errors of Navigation.  M. Wright, hath been more commendable: who by the space of a degree on earth, (or which were better of many degrees) have endeavoured to fix measures, with more exactness, and certainty for posterity. But of this argument I shall have occasion to speak hereafter. And therefore to return to the business in hand.  
Since the Roman foot cannot be recovered by hairs, grains, digits, palms, and such like physical bodies, which being of a various, and indeterminate magnitude, cannot given, unless by accident, the commensuration of that which aught to be precisely limited, and determined: some relinquishing the former way as erroneous, have endeavoured, with much ingeniousness, by weights, to found out the Roman foot. For there is the same analogy between measures and weights, as between continued, and discrete quantities: And as Mathematicians by numbers demonstrate, or rather illustrate the affections of lines, superficies, and Geometrical bodies: so by weights, measuring some physical bodies, especially such as are liquid, in cubicall vessels, (which are easiest commensurable) we may tender the exact quantity of the Roman foot, and by consequence of all their other measures. And therefore 
f Luc. Paetus lively 3. de mensur. & pond: Rom.  Lucas Paetus, and 
g Villalpandus de appar. Vrbis ac Templi. par: 2. l. 3. cap. 25.  Villalpandus, have attempted with probable reasons to discover the Roman foot, the one by the Sextarius, the other by the Roman Congius. For the Sexta●ius being the sixth part of the Congius, and the Congius containing X. librae, or pounds, as it is manifest by that exquisite standard in Rome, with this inscription.  
IMP. CAESARE VESPAS. VI T. CAES. AUG. F. IIII COS MENSURAE EXACTAE IN CAPITOLIO  
PX 
PX signifies Pondo decem.   
Again the Congius being the eighth part of the amphorae, or quadrantal, filled with water or wine, as by the testimonies of 
h Fragmenta Dioscoridis.  Dioscorides, 
i Sext. Pomp: Festus de Verb: signif.  Sex: Pompeius, and of an ancient Anonymus Greek Author translated by Alciat, it doth appear: if therefore a Vessel be made of a cubicall figure, which may receive VIII. congii, or XLVIII. sextarii, or LXXX● pounds of water or of wine, out of the sides of this cube, by 
k Rhemn: Fannio: fragment.  Rhemnius Fannius his description, or rather by Sextus Pompeius, who is ancienter, will the Roman foot be deduced. For both these writ (neither is it as yet contradicted by any man) that the longitude of one of the sides of the amphora (being a cube) is answerable to the Roman foot. And here our inquiry would be at an end (supposing the Authorities of Festus, and Fannius to be unquestionable) were there not farther some objections, which cannot easily be removed. And those are first, a supposition that we have the true Roman libra (for by this we are to found the Congius, admitting there were noon extant, as by the Congius, the amphora, or quadrantal:) a thing of as great difficulty as the foot itself. And besides, if this were obtained, yet we cannot have an absolute certainty, that water, or wine, shall in all places alike ponderate; by reason of the different gravity, which is observed in natural bodies, though they be homogeneous, and of a like substance. Wherhfore laying aside all such speculations, as being fare from that accurateness, which is required, there is no other possible means left for this discovery, but to have recourse to such monuments of Antiquity, as have escaped the injury, and calamity of time, which is our next, and second inquiry.  
And here it will not be amiss to see what learned men, who not long preceded our age, have observed out of ancient monuments, concerning the Roman foot: and then to relate what course I took to given myself private satisfaction, which, I hope, will be also satisfactory to others. Philander in his Commentaries upon Vitruvius, being one of the first that had seen, and diligently perused many ancient measures in Rome (whereas Portius, Agricola, Glareanus, and some others, received them upon trust) gives us so much the more certain information. His words are these: 
l Philander in lively 3. cap. 3. Vitruvii.  Veruntamen quoniam non statim ex cujuscunque pollicibus, aut digitis, quis fuerit apud antiquos Romanus pes sciri potest, facturum me studiosis rem gratam putavi, si ad marginem libri semipedem apponerem, dimensum ex antiquo pede, in marmore, quod est in hortis Angeli Colotii Romae sculpto, cujus etiam, nisi me fallit memoria, meminit Leonardus Porcius lib. de Sestertio. Eum enim pedem, nos caeteris qui circumferuntur, praetulimus, quòd conveniret cum eo, quem sculptum invenimus in alio marmoreo epitaphio T. Statilii Vol. Apri mensoris aedificiorum, quod operâ Jacobi Meleghini summin Pont. Architecti ex Janiculo non ita pridem refossum, in Vaticanum hortum translatum est. Quamvis jacentem in Basilicâ Apostolorum columnam ex porphyrite, cum his Graecis in calce literis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ☉ id est pedum novem, nos cum dimensi essemus, deprehenderimus non respondere nostro eum, quo usus fuerat ejus columnae artifex, sed nostro esse majorem duobus scrupulis & besse, id est unciae parte nonâ. ut argumentum aliquod esse possit pedis Graeci fuisse modulo scapum columnae factum; quod facilius conjicere potuissem, si integra esset alia ex eodem lapide columna, quam in viâ latâ est conspicere jacentem, his in calce literis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 insignitam. Verùm quando stadium Herodoto l. 2. Heroni, Suidae, caeteris Graecis sit sexcentorum pedum; Plinio, Columellae, caeteris Latinis sexcentorum viginti quinque nostrorum, necesse est Romanum à Graeco semunciâ superari. Thus far Philander. Not long after him Lucas Paetus, having examined the foot on T. Statilius' tomb, and that other of Cossutius, together with several ancient ones in brass, found among the rudera at Rome, concludes: that the 
m Luc. Paetus l. 1. de antiq. Rom. & Graec. interval. mensuris.  true Roman foot dictis duobus marmoreis comparatus, septimâ unciae parte, sive unciae scripulis tribus, & duabus scripuli sextulis, & sextulae semisse brevior est. Much about the same time I found in Ciaconius out of Latinus Latinius, another experiment to have been made, by many eminent men together at Rome. Superioribus autem annis (saith 
n Ciaconius è Lat. Latinii observationibus de pede Rom.  he) Ant: Augustinus, qui postmodum fuit Archiepiscopus Tarraconensis, Io: Baptista Sighicellus Episcopus Faventinus, P. Octavius Pacatus, Achilles Maffaeus, Achilles Statius, Benedictus Aegius, Fulvius Vrsinus, Latinus Latinius, cùm veram pedis Rom. quantitatem statu●re vellent, plures ejusd. pedis mensuras simul contulerunt, & earum octo cum antiquissimâ dicti pedis formâ, quae in basi quâdam in hortis Vaticanis extat, adamussim convenire videntes, ex hoc pede quadrato vas confecerunt, quod etiam nunc octoginta aquae, vel vini libras, quibus publicè signatis civitas utitur, omnino capere invenerunt, & cum octo congiis antiquis ita congruere, ut reque minus quidquam, neque amplius inter utraque esset. Quo experimento evidentissimè cognoverunt; & libras nostri temporis cum antiquis Romanis esse easdem, cùm congii antiqui vas sub Vespasiano Imp: signatum decem libras contineret, quot etiam nostri temporis libras capit; & hunc esse justum pedem Romanum, cùm ex ejus modulo perfectum Quadrantal octoginta libras contineat, quae cum congii antiqui libris ad momentum respondent. Notwithstanding these observations, Villalpandus, knowing how necessary it was to have the true dimensions of the Roman foot, to found out the proportions of the Hebrew cubit, made new experiments: and after examination of the measures, and weights at Rome, he thus concludes. 
o Villalpandi apparatus Vrbis ●c. Templi. par. 2. l. 3. c. 25.  Sed iis omnibus tam variis, aliisque multis sententiis praetermissis, in hâc unâ conquiescimus, ut arbitremur unum Farnesianum Congium posse omnes antiquas Romanorum, atque aliarum gentium mensuras, omniáque pondera pristinae integritati restituere. And in another place. Quapropter aliis omnibus conjecturis, argumentationibus, aereis pedibus, marmoreis dimensionibus, aut sculpturis, quasi maris fluctibus praetermissis, in hâc unâ pedis longitudine, quasi in portu conquiescere jam tendem decrevimus. Yet Snellius in his Eratosthenes Batavus, could not rest satisfied with this foot of Villalpandus, how exquisite soever he imagines it. For he had a mind to discover it nearer home: making the Rhinland foot equal to the Roman. The proof of his assertion is taken from an ancicient Roman armamentarium, or Fort, near the sea, not far from Leiden, which by the Natives is called het huys te Briten: And is supposed by Ortelius to have been built by Claudius Caesar, in his intended voyage for Britanne, of which 
* Suetonius in Claudio Dio hist. Rom. lib. ●0.  Suetonius, and Dio, make mention: sive in commodiorem legionum, cohortiumque transvectionem, sive quo milites hibernarent (saith Ortelius). Arcis ipsius fundamenta, (according to 
q Snell. in Eratosth. Bat. l. 2. cap. 2.  Snellius) quadratâ sunt formâ, & quaquaversum ducentis quadraginta Rhinlandicis pedibus patent. ut vel hinc Romanae mensurae vestigia quàm planissimè agnoscas. Nam ipsius podismus duorum Romanorum jugerum magnitudinem complectitur. Jugeri enim mensuram ducentos & quadraginta longitudinis pedes esse, non est ferè quisquam qui ignoret, inquit Quintilianus l. 1. cap. 10. Varro de re rustica libro 1. cap. 10. jugerum quod quadratos duos actus habet. Actus quadratus, qui & latus est pedes 120. & longus totidem. Is modius, ac mina Latina appellatur▪ ut mihi planè dubium non videatur, eos hic Romanae mensurae modum secutos, hujus structurae podismum ita comprehendisse secundum jugeri mensuram, ut duo jugera, vel actui quatuor contineret. Frontinus de limitibus. Hi duo fundi juncti jugerum definiunt, deinde haec duo jugera juncta in unum quadratum agrum efficiunt, quòd sint omnes actus bini: ut singula ideò latera ducentos & quadraginta pedes in longum patêre necesse sit. Atqui totidem pedibus Rhinlandicis singula latera exporrigi Geodaetarum experientia confirmat. Vnde efficitur Romanum antiquum peden nostro Rhinlandico planè aequari.  
After these experiments of so many able, and learned men, and those too taken from ancient Monuments, it may seem s●●ange, that we should not be able as yet to define the true quantity of the Roman foot. For this I can assign no other reasons then these. First, that those which have described it, have either not exactly, and with such diligence, as was requisite, performed it; or else, if they have been circumspect in this kind, they have omitted to compare it with the Standards for measures of other Nations. On the contrary, those which have compared it with the present Standards, never took it from the ancient Monuments, and Originals, which are at Rome, but only from some draughts, or schemes, delineated in books. Now how uncertain a way this is, doth appear by 
r Villalpand. de apparatu Vrbi● ac Templi par. 2. l. 3. c. 25.  Villalpandus, who thus writes. Ego dum haec scriberem, hunc Colotianum pedem circino expendi, & in annotationibus Guile Philandri solertissimi viri, & apud Georgium Agricolam, & apud Lucam Paetum, & Stanistaum Grsepsium, & nallum potui reperire ●lteri aequalem, imo verò neque ejusdem pedis assignatas similes partes. The same have I observed in those Roman feet described by Portius, Agricola, Philander, Paetus, Ciaconius, and Villalpandus himself, that they differ one from another: and not only so, but those of the ●ame Author, in the same impression, are likewise different. Which last must arise, either by the divers extension of the paper in the press, when it is moist, or by the inequal contraction of it, when it grows dry, or by some other accident, in the beating, and binding. So that though it were granted, that so many learned men had found out, what we inquire after, the Roman foot; yet it is impossible out of those schemes, and draughts, delivered in their books, for the reasons before specified, to attain an absolute certainty. But 
f Pars sexagesima typorum & sormarum loagitudini excusis decedit, quemadmodum à diligentibus & peritis typographis sciscitando edoctus sum. Snell. in Eratosth. Batavo. l. 2. cap. 1.  Snellius shows us a remedy of this difficulty, which in my opinion is as vain as his Roman foot, (seeing by his supposition all paper must shrink alike, be it thick or thin) and that is, to allow one part in sixty for the shrinking of the paper. For so much, saith he, do Typographers observe, that letters contract themselves, when they are taken of wet from the types.  
Wherhfore having received small satisfaction from the writings of the Ancients, and not much better from the imperfect designations of the Roman foot by modern Authors, I proposed to myself in my travails abroad, these ways, which no reasonable man but must approve of. And those were first, to examine as many ancient measures, and monuments, in Italy, and other parts, as it was possible. And secondly, to compare these with as many Standards, and Originals, as I could procure the sight of. And last of all, to transmit both these, and them, to posterity, I exactly measured some of the most lasting monuments of the Ancients. To this purpose, in the year 1639 I went into Italy, to view, as the other Antiquities o● the Romans, so especially those of weights, and measures; and to take them with as much exact●nesse, as it was possible, I carried instrument● with me made by the best Artisans.  
Where my first inquiry was after that monumen of T. Statilius Vol. Aper, in the Vatican gardens, from whence 
t Philander in l. 3. c. 3. Vitruvii.  Philander took the dimensions of the Roman foot, as others have since borrowed it from him. In the copying out of this upon an English foot in brass, divided into 2000 parts, I spent at the lest two hours (which I mention to show with what diligence I proceeded in this, and the rest) so often comparing the several divisions, and digits of it respectively one with another, that I think more circumspection could not have been used; by which I plainly discovered the rudeness, and insufficiency of that foot. For besides that the length of it is somewhat too much, (whatsoever 
u Ciaconius è Latino Latinio.  Latinius out of an observation made by Ant. Augustinus, Sighicellus, Pacatus, Maffaeus, Statius, Aegius, and Fulvius Vrsinus, pretends to the contrary) there is never a digit, that is precisely answerable to one another. Howsoever it contains 1944. such parts, as the English foot contains 2000  
My next search was for the foot on the monument of Cossutius, in hortis Colotianis, from whence ●t hath since received its denomination (though ●t be now removed) being termed by Writers pes Colotianus. This foot I took with great care, as it did well deserve, being very ●air, and perfect: afterwards collating it with ●hat Roman foot, which Lucas Paetus caused ●o be engraven in the Capitol, in a white mar●le stone, I found them exactly to agreed; and ●herefore I did wonder, why he should con●emne this with his pen (for he makes some 
x Luc Paetus l. 1 de antiq. Rom. & Graec. interval mensuris.  objections against it) which notwithstanding he hath erected with his hands (as appears by the inscription in the Capitol, CURANTE LU: PAETO). It may be upon second thoughts, he afterwards privately retracted his error, which he was not willing to publish to the world. Now this of Cossutius is 1934. such parts, as the English foot contains 2000  
Next I sought after that Porphyry Column mentioned by 
* Marlianus de antiquit. Vrbis  Marlianus, as also by 
y Philander in lib. 3. c. 3. Vitruvii.  Philander, and others, with this iuscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For if the length of that Column were assigned according to the proportion of the Greek foot, then would the Roman foot be thence deduced: this (as I shall elsewhere show) containing 24. such parts, as that contained 25: Or if it were made according to the Roman foot, as the Grecians after their subjection to the Roman Empire, often used the same measures that the Romans did, then had I my desire. But the Column being defaced, or lost, my labour was in vain: And it seems 
z Luc Paetus l. 1 de antiq Rom. & Graec. interval. mensuris.  Paetus about LXX. years before, made the same inquiry, with as little satisfaction.  
I should be too tedious in describing the several feet, which I have perused in brass, found among the rudera at Rome, and carefully preserved by Antiquaries: of most of which Peircskius hath given a good character, in some letters of his, which I have seen in the hands of Bucharaus, a learned man, not yet printed. 
a Ex Epistolis Peircskii MSS.  Who thus writes: I cannot sufficiently wonder at the inequality which I have found in the divisions by digits, and inches, of the ancient Roman feet; which seem to me to have been made for fashion sake, & dicis causâ (as lamps that are found in tombs incapable of oil) more to express the mystery, and profession of those that were to use them, then for to regulate the measure of any thing besides them.  
Besides these, I examined the ancient structures of the Romans, hoping by collating one with another, to deduce the dimension of their foot. For I presumed that those excellent Architects, before they began their work, must necessarily propose some models to themselves, according to the proportions of which, they meant to raise their fabrics: which proportions could not be assigned, but in the parts of some common, and received quantity; and this in probability was the Roman foot; being a measure generally used, and by public authority prescribed. Upon which grounds, I measured the stones in the foundation of the Capitol, Domitian's ', or rather Vespasian's ' amphitheatre, the triumphal arcs of Titus, and Severus, together with that of Constantine the great, and above all that exquisite temple of the Pantheon, built by Agrippa, I know not wither with more cost, or art: concerning which 
b Sebast: Ser●: delle Antichita.  Sebastianus Serlius is of opinion, that if all rules of Architecture were lost, they might be revived out of this monument alone. And in truth, this place gave me more satisfaction then any other. For most of the white marble stones on the pavement, contained exactly three of those Roman feet on Cossutius monument, and the lesser stones in Prophyry contained one and an half.  
But yet I thought this not sufficient, unless I went to Tarracina, which is the ancient Anxur, and LIII miles distant from Rome: having read in 
c Andr: Schott: i●ine●ar.  Andreas Schottus, out of Pighius 'Hercules Prodicius, that near the sea by the via Appia, in the height of a white rock, whence that of 
d Horat l. 1. Serm Sat. 5.  Horace, Impositum saxis latè candentibus Anxur ,there are described the Roman decempedae. And indeed the place is very memorable, for the whiteness, altitude, and hardness of the rock, which notwithstanding is cut away perpendicularly, on the side towards the Tyrrhene sea, above an hundred and twenty feet in depth, to make passage for the Appian way; and at the space of every decempeda, these characters X XX XXX etc. (being almost cubitales) are fairly engraven in a continued order descending to CXX. Measuring below the distance between CXX and CX, it amounted to IX.. English feet, and 1314/2●00of a foot computing it from the 
* See at the end of this book the figure of these characters as they are cut in the rock at Anxur, with lines encompassing them.  line engraven above CXX to the line next under CX. The rest I examined with my eyes, by often comparing the distance between CXX and CX wither it were equal to that between CX and C, and this again (ascending upwards) to that between C and XC. which manner though it be uncertain, and conjectural, and fare from that exactness, I used in all others, yet it was the best means I could then put in practice; and I am confident that whosoever shall measure those spaces, shall found a manifest inequality. To which opinion I am the rather induced, because measuring there, in several places, the breadth of the Appian way, cut out of the same rock, I found a difference sometimes of one, or two inches, or more. It being in one place XIII. English feet, and 1620/●●●●of a foot, in another, XIII. feet and 18●0/●●●●in a third XIII. and 1975/●●●●. Whereby I concluded, that the Ancients in making that way, had not respect to a Mathematical point (as it was not necessary) but only that if any difference were, it should not be sensible. And such differences have 〈◊〉 observed in the white Corinthian pillars, in the Pantheon before mentioned, of above an inch, or two, in the circuit of the scapus, near the torus: which inequality, seeing no eye could discover, the masters of that exquisite work did justly contemn. Whereas the Prophyry stones, and those of white marble, on the pavement, are sized so even, and so exactly to the proportions of the Roman foot, that nothing can be more accurate. And this the nature of the work required. For the temple being round (which hath occasioned the Italians vulgarly to call it the Rotundo) the circle within, could not so tightly have been filled up, if there had not been a special care taken in observing the true dimensions, in every particular stone. But to return to the rock at Anxur; the spaces between those characters, to an eye, that shall be intentively fixed upon them, will be apparently different. So that I concur in opinion with 
* Schot●i itiner.  Schottus, that those figures were placed there, to given notice to posterity, how much of the rock had been removed, to make passage for the Appian way; and not for any memorial of the Roman measures.  
Having measured those places in the Appian way at Tarracina, I made trial of at lest XX. others between Tarracina, and Naples, without any great satisfaction; and therefore partly the incertainty that I found there, and partly the danger of thiefs, discouraged me from measuring the Roman milliare; a work conceived to be of great use, for the discovery of the Roman foot. Seeing the milliare containing mille passus, as the very name imports, and every passus consisting of five feet, as 
c Columella de Re Rust. l. 5.  Columella, and 
f Isiderus l. 15. c 15. Origin.  Isidorus, expressly tell us, here therefore would be 5000 feet to help us to one, could there be but found out a perfect Roman mile. And this I imagined might probably be discovered among those many vestigia of Roman ways, which to this day are frequently seen in Italy. Wherhfore conferring with Gasparo Berti, a man curious, and judicious (as appears by his ichnography of Roma Subterranea in Bosius) as also with Lucas Holstenius, a learned companion of Cluverius, in those honourable travails of his, for the restauration of the ancient Geography: they both informed me, that there are still in the Appian way, where it passes over the Pomptinae paludes, several columnae, or lapides milliarii, standing; whereby the Romans divided, and distinguished their miles; and which occasioned those phrases, ad primium, ad quartum, ad centesimum lapidem, and the like. And these, it may be, at the first were ordinary stones, till C. Gracchus caused columns to be erected in their places: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He measured out, saith 
g Plutarch in Gracchis.  Plutarch, by miles all the ways, the mile containing little less then eight stadia, and placed columns of stone to design the measure. The thing was of that ornament, and use, as that it was afterwards taken up, and continued by the Roman Emperors; as appears by these inscriptions, which are fairly engrave ●on the first column, found among the ruins in the Appian way, and from thence lately removed into the Capitol, by order of the 
* S. P. Q. R COLUMNAM. MILIARIAM PRIMI. AB. VRBE LAPIDIS. INDICEM AB. IMPP. VESPASIANO. ET. NERVA RESTITUTAM DF. RVINIS. SVBVR●ANIS. VIAE. APPIAE IN. CAPITOLIUM. TRANSTULIT  Senate, and people of Rome.  
I  
IMP. CAESAR VESPASIANUS. AUG PONTIF. MAXIM TRIB. POTESTAT. VII IMP. XVII P. P. CENSOR COS. VII DESIGN. VIII  
Below this, on the end of the Scapus.  
IMP. NERVA. CAESAR AUGUSTUS. PONTIFEX MAXIMUS. TRIBUNICIA POTESTATE. COS. III PATER PATRIAE. REFECIT  
Below this, on the Basis of the same pillar.  
IMP. CAESARI. DIVI TRAIANI. PARTHICI. F DIVI. NOR VAE. NEPOTI TRAIANO. HADRIANO AUG. PONTIF. MAXIM TRIB. POTEST. TWO COS. TWO VIA TORES. QVI. IPSI. ET. COS. ET PR. CETERISQVE. MAGISTRATIB APPARENT. ET. H. V  
To these I shall also add the inscription of another columna milliaria, not extant in Gruterus, or any other, that I know, which I have seen at Tarracina; the column being exactly of the same magnitude with the former, but wanting by the injury of time, a basis below, & a globe, of nigh three feet diameter on the top, serving in stead of a capitel, both which the former hath.  
X  
IMP. CAESAR DIVI. NERVAE FILIUS. NERVA TRAIANUS. AUG GERMANICUS DACICUS PONTIF. MAX TRIB. POT. XIIII IMP. VI COS. FIVE P. P XVIIII SILICE. SVA. PECUNIA STRAVIT  
LIII  
Appii forum Ad medias IX.. Tarracina X.  
The figure LIII below, signifies the distance of Tarracina from Rome: Which distance may be farther proved out of Appian, in his third book of the Civil wars, speaking of Augustus: 
* The figure X signifies the distance of Tarracina from the next City, or Town, in the way to Rome: And that was, Ad medias: a place so called, either because it was, ad medias paludes, or else because it was in the midway almost between Tarracina, and Appii forum. For it was X. miles from Tarracina, and IX.. from Appii forum; as appears by the Itinerarium Hierosolymitanum in Bertius.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Being about Tarracina, which is distant CCCC. stadia from Rome. These stadia reduced to miles, if we allow VII. Greek stadia, and an half, to a Roman mile, as Suidas doth, will make up LIII. miles, and one third part of a mile; that is, two stadia, and an half over and above. Which fraction Appian neglects; and therefore uses the round number CCCC. stadia for LIII. miles.  
The figure XVIIII signifies the Decennovium, or way passing over the fens, between Appii forum, and Tarracina: so denominated, because it contained nineteen miles in length: which may also be proved out of Procopius, where he speaks of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This way was paved by Trajan, as the inscription shows, and I think first of all by him. Long after it was repaired by Theodoricus, according to another inscription, that I have seen at Tarracina, of which Gruterus, and Cluverius, also make mention; where, omitting the titles of Theodoricus, in the marble we found these words engraven.  DECENNOVII. VIAE. APPIAE. ID. EST. A. TRIP VSQVE. TERRACENAM. ITER. ET. LOCA. QVAE CONFLVENTIBUS. AB. VTRAQVE. PARTE. PALUDUM PER. OMNES. RETRO. PRINCIPUM. INUNDAVERANT VSVI. PUBLICO. ET. SECURITATI. VIANTIUM RESTITVIT .... PER PLURIMOS. QVI. ANTE NON. ERANT. ALBEOS ... DEDUCTA. IN. MARE. AQVA. 
By this number XVIIII. signifying the decennovium, and by the Itinerarium Hierosolymitanum, we may safely correct the Itinerarium Antonini, in which Tarracina is placed but XVIII. mile's distant from Appii forum. And from hence likewise we may certainly know how fare the Christians went to meet Saint Paul, and that was XXXIV. miles. For so much was Appii forum distant from Rome, if we subduct XVIIII. out of LIII. whereas the Itineraries of Bertius Edition make it more.  
If therefore two such columns were found entire, (as I am informed there are four, or five, in the Decennovium, standing in a continued order) the distance between two such being exactly measured, would much conduce to the discovery of the Roman foot. Upon which supposition, I had almost resolved to have go thither, as I did to other places, with no other intention, but only to have been a spectator of those Columns, and to have trusted to my own hands, in taking their distances. But upon a more deliberate examination of the business, I perceived that this inquiry did depend upon a very nice supposition. For if the Decempedatores, or Curatores viarum, proceeded not with extreme caution, and aimed almost at a Mathematical point, in designing the just space of each particular mile (which in a work of that length is not probable; where the inequality of many feet could not be discerned by the eye, and might be admitted without any blemish. For in 
* Varrode L. L. lib. 5.  Varro's judgement, Sensus nullus quod abest mille passus sentire potest) it could not be, but the same differences, or somewhat like, must have crept in with them, which have been observed among us, in our measured, and statute miles; out of which it would be a vain attempt exactly to demonstrate the English foot. The neglect of which circumspection, among some other reasons, that may be assigned, I take to be one, of the diversity, which Astronomers found in that memorable observation, made in the planes of Singiar, or Sinar, by the command of Almamon, the renowned Calife of Babylon, about eight hundred years since, in proportioning the magnitude of a degree upon earth. For having taken the altitude of the pole at two several stations, differing a degree in the heavens, they measured the distance between these stations on earth, going on in the same Meridian; where 
h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  some of them, says Abulfeda, found it to be fifty six miles, and two thirds, others fifty six, without any fraction. If therefore the Roman decempedatores, or geodaetae, used not more circumspection, then the Babylonian Astronomers (which is not likely), there can be no trust given to their miles, and less trust to the foot, ●hat shall be deduced from thence.  
Wherhfore to come to a conclusion; having made inquiry more ways, 
Abulf Geogr: Arab: MS.  then it may be any ●an hath done, and I think with as much cau●ion, and exactness, as any, it will be necessary after all to show among so many feet, as are taken to be Roman, which I conceive to be the most genuine, and true. And though in such an incertainty, and scarcity of ancient monuments, and in such a diversity of opinions, among modern Writers, it may seem too great presumption, positively to define the magnitude of the Roman foot; yet having had the opportunity, to have perused in this kind, more antiquities, then any that have preceded, I may with the more confidence conclude, that the Pes Colotianus, in my judgement, is the true Roman foot; and that for these reasons.  
For first, it most exactly agrees with some very ancient, and perfect Roman feet in brass, found long since among the rudera at Rome: especially with that excellent one (as I remember) of F. Vrsinus, a learned Antiquary. Though I cannot deny but that I have seen two ancient feet in brass, different from this; the one of Gualdus, a very fair one, wanting two parts and an half, of such as this contains a 1000 a small, and inconsiderable difference. The second of Gottifridus, a Gentleman of honourable quality, (to whom I stand obliged for the free donation of several antiquities) which exceeds it by eight parts; but this last hath been made by a very rude, and unskilful hand.  
Next, the proportions of almost all the white marble stones, as also of those lesser in porphyry, in the pavement of that admirable temple of the Pantheon, are either completely three of these feet, or one and an half; which, it is not probable, in a structure of so much art, should have been the work of chance. Add to this the dimensions of several stones, in the foundation of the Capitol, in Titus, and Severus, triumphal arc's, corresponding either to the whole foot, or conjointly to the whole, and some unciae, or digits of it.  
Thirdly, the inscription on the same monument, where this foot is found, of the circinus, the libella, the norma, and the like, plainly show that these were intended to express Cossutius 'profession, (whom 
i Luc. Paetu● lib. 1 de antiq. Rom. & Graec. interval. mensuris.  Paetus imagines to have been a sculptor) and this being intended, I see no reason why the Roman foot should have been cut in so fair a relevy, either too short, or too long; when the same hand, and the same pains, might have made it exact. It is true, that the foot upon Statilius 'tomb, is 1944. such parts, as this is but 1934. whereof the English foot taken by me from the iron yard, or standard of three feet in Guildhall in London, contains 2000: but how rudely in respect of digits, that foot of Statilius is described, I have be●ore discovered. And therefore I wonder that 
k Philander in lively 3. c. 3. Vitruvii.  Philander in his Commentaries upon Vitruvius, should in a matter of such high concernment in Architecture, proceed with so much inadvertency, affirming that between this of Statilius, & that of Cossutius, there is no difference. And ●f he a Mathematician, hath thus erred, (though commonly men versed in those sciences take not ●p things at too cheap a rate, without due examination) what opinion may we conceive of another observation, made at the same monument, by 
l Ciaconius è Latini Latinii observ. de pede Rom.  Ant. Augustinus, Jo: Baptista Sighicellus, P. Octavius Pacatus, Achilles Maffaeus, Achilles Statius, Benedictus Aegius, Fulvius Vrsinus, Latinus Latinius, with as many ancient feet, as there were men present? I shrewdly suspect they slubbered over their observation, as not regarding in nineteen hundred parts, and better, the small excess, or defect, of ten parts: or not rightly apprehending what might be the consequences of such an error, how little soever, in measuring the vast magnitude of the terrestrial globe, or of the celestial bodies.  
Lastly, besides the authorities of Portius Vicentinus, Georgius Agricola, Glareanus, Ghetaldus, Donatus, and of many other learned, and judicious men, who approve of this Pes Colotianus, (though bore authority is the worst, because the weakest kind of argument) that excellent Congius of Vespasian, now extant in Rome, so highly and so justly magnified by 
m Villalpandus l. 2 disp. 2. c. 11 de apparatu Vrbis ac Templi.  Villalpandus, may likewise serve to confirm, if not totally my assertion, yet thus far, that I have not exceeded in assigning the true longitude. For by the clear evidences of 
n Fragmenta Dioscoridis.  Dioscorides, and of an anonymus Author before cited, eight Congii are the just measure of the Roman amphora, or quadrantal and again by as many testimonies of 
o Sext. Pomp. Festus de Verb. signif.  Sextu● Pompeius, and 
P Rhemn Fann. carm. fragm:  Rhemnius Fannius, each of th● sides of the amphora is equal in longitude to th● Roman foot. Wherhfore having procured by special favour the congius of Vespasian, I too● the measure of it with 
* It had been better to have made my experiment with water, and then to have weighed it with an exact balance: but because no balances are found in Rome so exact as with us, I was feign to measure it with milium.  milium (being next to water, very proper for such a work) carefully prepared, and cleansed, which being done, with much diligence. I caused a cube to be made answerable to the true dimension of the Pes Colotianus; filling up the capacity of which, and often reiterating the same experiment, I found continually the excess of about half a congius to remain, and that an amphorae made by the Pes Colotianus, would contain but VII. congii, and about an half. And therefore▪ I cannot sufficiently wonder at the observation 
r Ciaconius è Latini Latinii observationibus de pede Rom. Cum veram pedis Rom. quantitatem statuere vellent ejusd. pedis mensuras simul contulerunt, & earum octo cum antiquissima dicti pedis forma, quae in basi quadam in hortis Vaticanis exstat, adamussim convenire videntes, ex hoc pede quadrato vas confecerunt etc. Vide supra.  of Ant. Augustinus, Pacatus, Maffaeus, Statius, Vrsinus, and others, with a cube of that foot, which is described on Statilius 'monument: who affirm the quadrantal of this exactly to contain eight of these congii of Vespasian. Whereas upon due examination I confidently affirm, that they have erred. And therefore 
s Villalp. de apparatu Vrbis ac Templi par. 2. lib. 3. c. 25.  Villalpandus in this particular, with more judgement, and ingenuity, hath published his observation, concerning the measure, and precife weight, of Vespasian's 'congius, then any other whatsoever. Although I cannot be induced to assent to that deduction, which he infers of the Roman foot, (from the side of a quadrantal containing eight of these congii) relying upon the authorities of Festus, and Fannius, against so many evidences, produced to the contrary. Wherhfore as he is singular in his opinion (for there is not one author of credit, which follows his assertion) so is his foot as singular, there being not one, of at lest ten ancient ones, in the hands of several Antiquaries (besides those inscribed on two Monuments in Rome) which arrive to the proportions of his, by XXVII. parts in 2000 As for those other fancies of his (for they are no better) of describing also the Roman foot, by the altitude of Vespasian's ' congius, and assigning the 
t Vides etiam latus cubicum modii, semicongii, sextarii, heminae etc. Vil● lalp. ibidem.  latus cubicum, of the modius, the semicongius, the sextarius, and hemina, from certain parallel circles circumscribed about it, (which certainly, as the scheme of the congius itself, drawn by me to the full proportion, shows, were delineated without any farther intention then for ornament) I do not think them worth the confutation.  
And therefore it will be much better to given some solution to those authorities of Sextus Pompeius, and Rhemnius Fannius, alleged by him. For the objection which may be raised thence is very material: How the Pes Colotianus can be the true Roman foot, since it is confessed by me, that it doth not precisely answer to the sides of a quadrantal, or cube, containing eight of those congii of Vespasian, or XLVIII. sextarii? Whereas on the contrary, Festus expressly writes, that the quadrantal was the square (he means the cube) of the Roman foot 
u Sext. Pomp. Festus de Verb. signif.  Quadrantal vocabant Antiqui, quam ex Graec●● amphoram dicunt, quod vas pedis quadrati, octo & quadraginta capit sextarios. And 
x Rhemn. Fannii carmina de pond. & mensuris.  Fannius confirms the same. 
Pes longo spatio, latóque notetur in anglo,  
Angulus ut par sit, quem claudit linea triplex  
Quattuor ex quadris medium cingatur inane▪  
Amphora fit cubus: quam ne violare liceret,  
Sacrauére jovi Tarpèio in monte Quirites.  We might elevate their authorities by saying, these are only the testimonies of two Grammarians, better versed in disputes of words, then critical in measures, which more properly are the speculation of Mathematicians: and therefore if Vitruvius had affirmed it, much more credit might have been given. But we shall rather say, they wrote what was vulgarly, and commonly, upon tradition believed, that the length of one of the sides of the amphora was equal to the Roman foot: not that it was precisely, and exactly equal, but that of any known measure whatsoever then extant, this come the nearest to it, as indeed it doth; yea, so near, that if at this day the amphora, and Roman foot, were in use among us, many a writer that had never been so curious, as diligently to compare them, would not be scrupulous to affirm as much. Which may appear by the practice of Ant. Augustinus, Pacatus, Maffaeus, Statius, Vrsinus, and of several other learned men, not long before our times: Who though they purposely made it their inquiry, to discover the true Roman weights, and measures, and therefore made special use of this Congius of Vespasian, yet have no less erred, as we shown before, in the dimension of the amphora, then both Festus, and Fannius have done. Neither will this answer seem improbable concerning measures, if we shall examine a place, or two, concerning coins, in which the ancients, and those too of the better sort of Authors, have in the very same manner erred. For Livy writing that Marcellus gave to L. Ban●ius (or Bandius) D. bigati, 
y Livius l. 23.  that is denarii (so called because the biga was ordinarily stamped upon the reverse of the Denarius): 
z Plutarch in marcel.  Plutarch describing the same gift, renders it by so many drachmae, the Graecian manner of computation; not that the drachma in the exact, and intrinsical valuation, was equal then to the Denarius, or the Denarius to the drachma (as we shall show in the ensuing discourse) but that in the vulgar, and popular estimation, the one passed for the other, being both not much different in their weight, as well as valuation. 
a Dio lib. 45. in Caesare Octau.  Likewise Dio informs us, that Octavius promised the Veterane soldiers D. drachmae a man: whereas 
b Cicero lib. 16. 5. ep. ad A●icum.  Cicero expressing the same thing to Atticus terms them D. denarii. And Suetonius writes that Caesar by Testament gave to each of the common people sestertia trecenta, that is, LXXV. denarios, which 
c Plut. in Bruto. Idem in Antonio.  Plutarch both in the life of Brutus, and of Antonius, renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seventy five drachmas. In like manner we may say, that Festus, and Fannius, have described the amphora by the Roman foot; not as if this were the exact measure of it, but as being the most known, and nearest proportion, in which, without falling into fractions, it might eevenly, and roundly be expressed.  
And thus have we finished our inquiry after the Roman foot: our next labour should b● to compare it with the present Standards, and Originals, for measures of divers Nations. For which I must refer the Reader to this ensuing Table.  

The Roman foot compared with the measures of divers Nations.  
Such parts as the Roman foot, or that on the monument of Cossutius in Rome, contains 1000  
The foot on the monument of Statilius in Rome, contains 1005 17/100 
The foot of Villalpandus, deduced from the Congius of Vespasian, contains 1019 65/100 
The ancient Greek foot, being in proportion to the ancient Roman foot, as XXV to XXIV, contains 1041 67/100 
The English foot 1034 13/100 
The Paris foot 110● 45/100 
The Venetian foot 1201 65/100 
The Rhinland foot, or that of Snellius 106● 25/100 
The Derah, or cubit, at Cairo in Egypt 1886 25/100 
The Persian arish 3306 1●/100 
The greater Turkish pike at Constantinople 2275 ●●/100 
The lesser Turkish pike at Constantinople, is in proportion to the greater, as 3● to 32  
The braccio at Florence 19●8 25/100 
The braccio for woollen at Sienna 12●4 31/100 
The braccio for linen at Sienna 2041 37/100 
The braccio at Naples 2171 6●/100 
The canna at Naples 7114 7●/100 
The vara at Almaria and at Gibraltar in Spain 2854 19/100 
Il palmo di Architetti at Rome, whereof X make the canna di Architetti ●56 51/100 
Il palmo del braccio di Mercaniia, & di Te●●ito di Tela at Rome; this and the former are both engraven in a white marble stone in the Capitol with this inscription. Curante Lu. Paeto 719 21/100 
The Genoa palm 842 ●●/100 
The Anwerp ell 2360 ●●/100 
The Amsterdam ell ●345 4●/100 
The Leyden ell 2337 13/100  

The English foot taken from the iron Standard at Guildhall in London, and compared with the Standards for measures of divers Nations.  
SUch parts as the English foot contains 1000  
The Roman foot, or that on the monument of Cossutius in Rome, contains 967  
The foot on the monument of Statilius in Rome, contains 972  
The foot of Villalpandus, deduced from the Congius of Vespasian, contains 986  
The Greek foot 1007 29/100 
The Paris foot 1068  
The Venetian foot 1162  
The Rhinland foot, or that of Snellius 1033  
The Derah, or cubit, at Cairo in Egypt 1824  
The Persian arish 3197  
The greater Turkish pike at Constantinople 2200  
The lesser Turkish pike at Constantinople is in proportion to the gre●ter, as 31 to 32  
The braccio at Florence 1913  
The braccio for woollen at Sienna 1242  
The braccio for linen at Sienna 1974  
The braccio at Naples 2100  
The canna at Naples 6880  
The vara at Almaria & at Gibraltar in Spain 2760  
Il palmo di Architetti at Rome, whereof X make the canna di Architeti 732  
Il palmo del braccio di Mercantia, & di Tessito di Tela at Rome: this and the former are both engraven in a white marble stone in the Capitol with this inscription Curante Lu. Paeto 6951/2 
The Genoa palm 815  
The Anwerp ell 2283  
The Amsterdam ell 2268  
The Leyden ell 2260   
This Table I made by the Standards, the former by proportion.   

OF THE DENARIUS.  
AS I have made for measures the Roman foot, the foundation of my inquiry, and therefore have handled it in the precedent Treatise: so for finding out of weights, I shall take the denarius as an undeniable principle, from whence those of the ancients by a necessary consequence may be inferred. For as the unity is in respect of numbers, or the sestertius in discourses de re nummariâ: so is the denarius for weights, a fit rise, or beginning, from whence the rest may be deduced. Not but that it were better (as I gave the caution before) if we absolutely consider the exactest ways of discovering weights, to begin with the greater, and by them to found out the less, then by the less, to produce the greater; but if we look upon the condition of times, and consider the means that are left after so many revolutions, and changes of the Roman Empire, it will be safer to altar our method. For to this day there are many thousand denarii left, and among these some so perfect, and entire, as if they had been but newly brought from the mint, whereas of the Roman librae, and ounces, there are but few extant, if compared with these. Lipsius, and Gruterus in their inscriptions mention some, and Paetus some others, besides such as I have seen in the hands of Antiquaries, and many of my own: most of which differ from one another, either as having been consumed by rust, and time, or it may be also by the men that then lived, for their advantage lessened: a thing too often practised among us. Wherhfore I think it more convenient by the denarius to deduce the proof, and evidence of these, then by the diversity, and uncertainty of these to conclude the denarius: And yet if some of the best, and fairest of them, shall agreed with this, I shall think myself so much the more assured.  
Now seeing the denarius may be considered in a double respect, either as nummus, or as pondus: in the first acception, the valuation of it in civil affairs is remarkable, in the later, the gravity, and ponderousness: I shall speak not farther of the former, then as it may conduce in some sort to illustrate the later. The denarius was a silver coin in use among the Romans, passing at the first institution for dena aera, or ten asses. And so 
a Vitruu. l. 3. c. 1.  Vitruvius expressly writes, Nostri autem primò decem fecerunt antiquum numerum, & in denario denos aereos asses constitúerunt. The same thing is attested by 
b Vol. Metianus de assis distributione.  Volusius Metianus. Denarius primò asses decem valebat, unde & nomen traxit. 
c Plinius l. 33. c. 3.  Pliny, besides a confirmation of the same valuation, assigns also the time, in which it was first stamped. Argentum signatum est anno Vrbis 
* Budaeus l. v de ass, corrects thése numbers by Livy (l. thirty) and reads them 478  quingentesimo octogesimo quinto, Q. Fabio consule, quinque annis ante primum bellum Punicum, & placuit denarius pro decem libris aeris: that is, for ten asses. For the asses both then, and under the first Consuls were librales. Dionysius Halicarnasseus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The assis was a brass coin, weighing a pound. Where by the way it is worth the observation, the strange, and in my opinion, the unadvised proportion, betwixt the brass, and silver moneys, of those times: that x.. pounds of brass should be but answerable to the 84th part (for so much, or near it, was the denarius) of a pound of silver; or to speak more clearly, that one pound in silver should be equal in valuation to 840 pounds in brass. Neither can there be any excuse of that error, unless this, that there then was an infinite plenty of the one, and as great a scarcity of the other. However it were, the same proportion is testified by Varro, who farther adds; that the Romans took the first use, and invention of the denarius, from the Sicilians. 
d Varr● l. 4. ●e Ling. Lat.  In argento nummi, id à Siculis, denarii quòd denos aeris valebant. And according to this valuation the denarius had an impress upon it of the figure X, denoting the decussis, or number of the asses, as Valerius Probus witnesses, and sometimes this character 𐆖; both which I have seen, and can show, in several ancient ones. This later by the ignorance of Scribes formerly in MSS. and of our Printers of late in the edition of Celsus, and of Scribonius Largus, is represented by an asterisc *; and by a worse error in the same authors, the figure X expressing the denarius, as a pondus, is confounded with the figure X expressing a number. From this figure on the denarius, or decussis, 
e Vitruu. l. 10.  Vitruvius calls the intersections of lines, decusses, and decussationes. And 
f Columella l. 5.  Columella useth the phrase in stellam decussari, when lines meet diamond-wise, or lozenge-like, as these in the character X or 𐆖▪ Neither did the denarius long pass at the valuation of X. asses, nor the asses which before, and then were librales, continued at one stay, but with the exigencies of the Roman State, the rate of the denarius risen, and the weight of the asses fell; that is in effect, both the silver, and the brass moneys, come to be augmented in their estimation. For by a public edict of Fabius Maximus the Dictator, the Commonwealth being hardly pressed upon by Hannibal, the denarius come to be priced at XVI. asses, and the asses which were then se ●tantarii, or the sixth part of the Roman pound, (for in the first Punic war, by reason of the excessive expenses of the State, they first fell from being librales, to be sextantarii) come now in the second Punic war to be unciales. The whole progress, and manner of this alteration, is by noon so well, and fully expressed as by 
g Argentum signatum est Ann● Vrbis Dlxxxu. Q. Fabio Cosquinque annis ante primum bellum Punicum. Et placuit denarius pro X libris aeris, quinarius pro quinque, sestertium pro dupondio, ac semisse. Librae autem pondus aeris imminutum bello Punico primo, cum impensis Resp. non sufficeret, constitutumque ut asses sextantario pondere ferirentur. Plin. lib. 33. c. 3.  Pliny, and therefore I shall a little insist upon his words. Silver, says he, come to be coined in the 585th year of the City, Q. Fabius being Consul, five years before the first Punic war, and then the denarius passed for X. pounds of brass, the Quinarius for five, the sestertius for two pounds and an half. The weight of the assis in brass was diminished in the first Punic war, the Commonwealth not being able to support the expenses, and then it was decreed that the asses should be coined sextantario pondere; that is, with the weight of the sixth part of a pound, or two ounces, whereas before they were librales. Though Alciatus here upon a very gross mistake contends that they were then coined dextantario pondere, and not sextantario, but yet that they were called asses sextantarii, because the sextans or sixth part of an ounce was wanting: whereas 
h Sext. Pompeius Fest. de verb. signif.  Festus expressly writes. Grave aes dictum à pondere, quia deni asses singuli pondo librae efficiebant denarium ab hoc ipso numero dictum: sed bello Punico populus Romanus pressus aere alieno, ex singulis assibus libralibus senos fecit, qui tantundem valerent. And these words of Pliny, which immediately follow those before recited, put it out of controversy. 
i Plin. l. 33 c. 3. Ita quinque partes factae lucri dissolutumque aes alienum.  Whereby, says he, five parts were gained, & the debts (of the Commonwealth) discharged. I would gladly see by what Arithmetic Alciatus can demonstrate, that the Commonwealth shall gain five parts, making the asses sextantarii in his sense; whereas on the contrary, taking them in this interpretation (as both 
k Agricola lib. 2 de pondere & temperat monetarum.  Agricola, and 
l Villalp. de appar. urbis ac templi par. 2. l. 2. disp. cap 9  Villalpandus do) it is a thing most evident. For the whole pound, or assis, before consisting of XII. ounces, being now reduced to two ounces, and these two passing at as high a rate in the valuation of things vendible, as the whole libra did, it is plain that the Commonwealth by this diminution of weight, keeping the same constant tenure of the estimation of the assis, gained ten parts in twelve, that is, five in six; and not one in six, as Alciatus would have it. But to omit this digression, and to return to 
m Postea Hannibale urgente, Q. Fabio Maximo Dictatore, asses unciales facti: placuitque denarium XVI. assibus permutari, quinarium octonis sestertium quaternis: Ita Resp. dimidium lucrata est. In militari tamen stipendi● semper denarius pro X assibus datus. Nota argenti fuere bigae atque quadrigae, & inde bigati, quadrigatique dicti. Mox lege Papiria semunciales asses facti. Livius Drusus in Tribunatu plebis octavam partem aeris argento miscuit. Plin. l. 33. c. 3.  Pliny. Afterwards being oppressed by Hannibal, under Q. Fabius Maximus the Dictator, the asses were made unciales, and the denarius passed for XVI. asses, the quinarius for VIII. and the sestertius for FOUR And hereby the Commonwealth gained half, yet in the pay of the Militia the denarius was always accounted for ten asses. The impress of the silver [that is, of the denarius] were the bigae, and quadrigae; from whence they are called bigati, and quadrigati. Not long after by the lex Papiria the asses come to be semunciales. Livius Drusus Tribune of the people mixed an eighth part of brass with the silver: thus far Pliny. Out of which words it is most evident (omitting many passages of his, worth our consideration) that as the denarius at the first institution passed fo● ten asses, so afterwards it was valued at XVI. And Vitruvius gives a reason why next to ten, they made choice of XVI. rather then of XII. or any other proportion. 
n Vitruu. l. 3. c. 1  Quoniam animadverterunt utrosque numeros esse perfectos, & sex, & decem, utrosque in unum conjecerunt, & fecerunt perfectissimum decussissexi, where 
o Budaeus l. 5. de ass.  Budaeus reads decussissexis: but 
p Villalp. de apparatu Vrbis ac Templi.  Villalpandus decussi sex, that it may the better, as he imagines, answer to the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
q Vitruu. l. 3. c. 1  Hujus autem rei, saith Vitruvius, autorem invenerunt pedem. E cubito enim cùm dempti sint palmi duo, relinquitur pes quatuor palmorum, palmus autem habet quatuor digitos, ita efficitur uti pes habeat sexdecim digitos, & totidem asses aereos denarius. 
r Vol. Metianus de assis distrib:  Metianus also purposely treating of this argument, after that he had related that the denarius, at the first institution, was valued at ten asses, adds now it is worth sixteen. And not to cite more authorities, the impress or stamp of XVI, as well as of X found upon several denarii, and seen both by 
s Anton. August. dialogo. 1.  Antonius Augustinus (a man very accurate in coins, as appears by his dialogues) and by Villalpandus, besides one with the inscription of C. Titinius, with the same character, mentioned by Fulvius Vrsinus, and 
t Dalechampius in Plin. l. 33. c. 3  Dalechampius, puts it out of controversy. And this valuation of the denarius, as it is more then probable, continued from the first institution of it in the second Punic war, without any interruption, to Justinian's 'time, and it is likely longer; since there is no proof out of any ancient Author, nor any character on any ancient denarius, found to the contrary. As for those authorities, which are alleged, and pressed by Budaeus, and Alciatus, of Varro, Apuleius, Arruntius; and Pompeius, affirming, that after the second Punic war, the denarius contained ten asses, the Quinarius, or Victoriatus five, the sestertius two and an half: we may given a true, and easy solution, that these Writers expressed the valuation of them, as they were in their first original, and beginning, with reflection to their primitive denomination: in which respect the Treviri monetales, or officers of the mint, usually imprinted on the denarius the character X, rather then XVI. the former being the impress of its first institution, and the latter of its after valuation. And so in like manner may those citations be answered of Plutarch, Dionysius, and others, produced by some learned men to strengthen their assertion, that the denarius after the second Punic war returned to its first estimation. Which thing could not have been effected, without extreme loss, and prejudice to particular men, in their private fortunes, and estates; which the justice, and wisdom of the Roman Senate, under the Consuls, was not likely to have introduced, or the people to have admitted.  
To conclude, the denarius, as it is evident by many irrefragable authorities before alleged, in the highest valuation passed for sixteen asses, and according to that proportion the quinarius, or Victoriatus for eight, the sesteritius for four: but in the lowest valuation, or first institution, it passed for ten asses: and then the proportion of the quinarius was five, of the sestertiu two asses and an half, and therefore was thus marked JIS, or thus HS. as the Quinarius had this character, V and also this X. as it is to be seen in a Victoriatus of my own (besides several others) with the face & inscription of M. Cato. By which coin that place may not unfitly be explained, which troubled 
x Budaeus lively ●. de ass.  Budaeus, why the Ordo decussatus, and ordo quincuncialis, signify in the ranking of trees the same thing, although the quinarius, or quincunx, given the denomination to the one, & the denarius, or decussis, to the other. The reason is, because the Quinarius had the character X imprinted on it, 
Cod. M.S. Temporarii.  as well as the denarius, or decussis. Besides in Temporarius, we found the quincunx to be thus {fivedash} represented, as the uncia thus ‐ so that five of these unciae making the quincunx, and these five being ranged like the figure X (the character of the decussis) it is no wonder if the ordo decussatus, and quincuncialis, were taken for the same.  
That the denarius should have passed at any other rate between XVI, and X. asses, as there is no coin extant to prove it, so there is no express authority to conclude it. Though some infer out of 
y Polyb. l. 2.  Polybius, that it was valued also at XII. asses: because he defines the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or semissis, to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the fourth part of the Attic obolus; and six obol● being in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to which drachma they suppose the denarius equal, therefore there must be XXIV. semisses, or XII. asses in the denarius▪ But with much better reason we may hence infer, that the drachma was somewhat bigger, then the denarius, as we shall prove in this ensuing discourse; and therefore Polybius allow● XII. asses to it: whereas, if it had been precisely equal to the denarius, he would have valued it at X, or else XVI. of the lesser sort of asses. So that Sir H. Savile, a man of exquisite judgement, and learning, in his discourse at the end of Tacitus, justly blames Hottoman for altering the text of Polybius, and is himself to be censured, as also 
a Lipsius' Elector. 1. c. 2.  Lipsius, in inferring thence that the denarius contained XII. asses.  
The several parts of the denarius, excepting the quinarius, and sestertius, of both which I have spoken before, are all comprised in this description of 
b Varro lib. 4. de Ling. Lat.  Varro, with which I shall conclude▪ Nummi denarii decima libella, quòd libram po● do as valebat, & erat ex argento parva; sembella quòd sit libellae dimidium quòd semis assis▪ Teruncius à tribus unciis sembellae quod valet di●midium, & est quarta pars sicut quadrants assis▪ By which proportions it appears, that the libell● was the Xth part of the denarius, when it wa● currant at ten asses, the sembella the XXth, the teruncius the XL the. And thus much of the denarius as it is nummus.  
The second, and our principal consideration of the denarius is as it is pondus. In which acception it will be necessary to praemise a second distinction; that the denarius was either 
* The Consularis again may be considered either in the time of the former, or of the later Consuls: that of the former Consuls, at the first institution of it by Q. Fabius five years before the first Punic war, Peireskius not improbably imagines to have been the sixth part of the Roman ounce: and Agricola by comparing it with the talentum Atticum, which Varro values at 15000. sestertii, and with the tetradrachme, which Livy (lib. ●4.) estimates trium fere denariorum, as also upon the authority of the Scholiast of Nicander, who equals the denarius to a drachma and an ●alf, as Priscian doth to a drachma and a third part, I say Agricola assigns to it almost the same proportion with Peireskius. But because I ●ave seen no denarii Consulares of so great antiquity, and these authorities ●ay perchance admit of other constructions, I shall leave this opinion as only probable, and follow what is more certain, and demonstrative, of ●e later Consuls.  Consularis, or Caesareus. The Consularis was that which was made under the government of the City by the Consuls, the Caesareus under the Caesars: The Consularis, (I mean the Consularis after the second Punic war, and under the later Consuls) contained precisely the seventh part of the Roman ounce, as the other did the eighth part, or somewhat near it.  
First, that the denarius Consularis of the later Consuls, was the seventh part of the Roman ounce: this shall be our principal inquiry, because it is more evident of the two, and will given us the best light to discover the true weight of the denarius, in the notion, and acception of the ancients, both Greeks and Latins. It is most apparent both by several fair coins, which I have perused of the later Consuls, as also by Cornelius Celsus, who lived in the beginning of the Roman Emperors, before there happened a general diminution o● the denarius, that it was then the seventh part of the ounce, who thus writes, 
c Celsus lib. 5. c. ●7.  Sed & ante● sciri volo in unciâ pondus denariorum esse septem. The same proportion is also expressed by 
d Scrib. Largus in praefatione.  Scri●bonius Largus, who lived not long after Celsus as some imagine, his words are these. Erit au●tem nota denarii unius pro Graecâ drachmâ; aequ● enim in librâ denarii octoginta quatuor apud nos quot drachmae apud Graecos incurrunt. 
c Plinius l. 33. c. 9  Pliny also confirms the same. Miscuit denario triumv● Antonius ferrum, alii (he means under the Em●perours) è pondere subtrahunt, cùm sit justum oct●●ginta quatuor è libris signari. Out of whi●● words of his, and of Scribonius Largus, it wi● by a necessary consequence be inferred, that th● true weight of the denarius Consularis is the s●●venth part of an ounce. For if we multipl● twelve the number of the ounces in the Roman libra (as by all it is confessed) by seven the numbs of the denarii, of which the ounce then consisted the sum will be LXXXIIII. denarii; and so man● say Scribonius, and Pliny, aught justly to be 〈◊〉 the Roman pound. And these are the one clear, and positive authorities that are to 〈◊〉 found in Classical Authors; most of the w●●tings of the Ancients de ponderibus & mensur● having long since been lost; or else those 〈◊〉 fragments that are left, of Cleopatra, Dioscorid● and of others, are so corrupted, that little tr●● with any certainty can be collected. Fro● whence it will by way of corollary follow, th● if either the denarius Consularis be given, the R●●mane ounce, and libra, in the same proportion will necessarily be thence deduced; or if the Roman ounce, and libra be given, the denarius will as necessarily be concluded.  
But before we farther treat of this argument, we shall endeavour also to demonstrate the de●arius, by the drachma Attica. For Scribonius ●eems, and so do other ancients, to make them equal. And therefore Pliny writes: 
f Plinius lively 21. ca 34.  Drachma Attica denarii argentei habet pondus: whereas the drachma Aeginaea was much larger, this containing X. such oboli as the Attic contained VI ●nd therefore the Athenians in hatred of the Ae●inaeans called it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as 
g Iul Poll. l. 9 c. 6.  Pollux testifies. And here as we considered the denarius, as nummus, and as ●ondus; so likewise must we take the drachma Attica, as nummus, and as pondus: in the prosecution of both which relatively to the denarius, I shall insist so much the ●onger, because it is an argument that hath scarce ●t all, or very perfunctorily been handled. The drachma as nummus, was a silver coin in use among the Athenians, (for I intent only to speak of the drachma Attica, for the same reason that 〈◊〉 Pliny doth. Ferè enim Atticâ observatione utun●ur medici) and so it was the measure of things ●endible, as all coins are: and as pondus, 
h Plinius l. 21. ca 34.  so was it ●he measure of their gravity, & weight. Now the drachma, as nummus, passed in the estimation of ●he best Authors, both Greek and Latin, at the ●●me rate, and valuation as the denarius did. And ●herefore, as often as the Latins are to express ●he Greek drachma, they tender it by the denari●s, and on the contrary, the Greeks the denarius by the drachma. Thus what 
i Cicer. 16. l. 5. ep. ●d Attic.  Tully renders by the denarius, Dio in his 45th book expresseth by the drachma. Their words, both speaking of Augustus, are these, Veteranos quique Casilini, & Calatiae sunt (as Tully relates) perduxit ad suam sententiam, nec mirum, quingenos denarios dat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith 
k Dio lib. 45.  Dio, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In like manner 
l Plinius lib. 8. cap. 57  Pliny writes, venisse murem ducentis nummis, (that is, denariis; for nummus absolutely put is often, though not always, taken for the denarius, as on the contrary the denarius is taken for nummus in Hesychius, 
* Hesychius in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.)  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Casilinum obsidente Annibale, eúmque qui vendidera● fame interisse, emptorem vixisse annales tradunt. The same thing 
m Valer: Max: lib. 6. cap. 6.  Valerius Maximus reports in his 7th book, and 6th changed. and 
n Strabo lively 5. Geogr:  Strabo in his 5th book; the former writing that it was sold for 200 denarii, and the later that it was bought for 200 drachmae. To these Authorities I shall adjoin 
o Fra●menta Cleopatra  Cleopatra. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Italian denarius containeth one drachma: and 
* A. Gellius l●●. c. 8. Noct. Att.  A. Gellius, Lais 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 poposcit, hoc facit nummi nostratis, denariûm decem millia.  
These two thus passing the one for the other, being also at the first institution much of the same fineness in respect of silver, it must necessarily be admitted, either that they were exactly the same for weight, which is our next inquiry, or else that they were not much different. For in comparing of foreign coins, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or nummularii, in ancient times, must have taken the same course, which our most knowing bankers do practise now. First, to respect the pureness, and fineness of the coins, wither they be alike for the intrinseck; and next, wither they have the same weight; and if they differ in either, or both of these, according to those differences to proportion their exchanges. Those other accidental causes of the rising, and falling, of exchanges of moneys, since they are merely contingent, depending upon the necessities, either of times, or places, or persons, I purposely pretermit, as not so proper, and essential to our inquiry. As for the extrinseck of coins, by which I mean the outward form, or character, and inscription of the Prince, or State, though this may raise the valuation of them in those Countries, which are subject to the Prince, or State, and lessen them in those which are out of their dominions; yet this can produce no remarkable difference, more then what is usually▪ assigned by the Masters of the Mint, for the waist in coining, and for the labour of the work.  
With these cautions if we shall examine the Attic drachma, and by such write of the Ancients, or by such coins as are extant, inquire their true weight, we shall come to such a preciseness, as may be hoped for in a work of this nature. 
p Suidas in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Suidas tells us in the general, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The drachma is the weight of the silver money. And 
q Hesychius in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hesychius more particularly informs us. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The drachma is the eighth part of the ounce: and 
r Rhemn. Fann.  Fannius yet more distinctly writes, 
In scrupulis ternis drachmam, quo pondere doctis  
Argenti facilis signatur pondus Athenis.  To which we may add 
s Fragmenta Cleopatra.  Cleopatra, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The drachma hath three scruples, six oboli, nine lupini, eighteen siliquae, forty eight aereola. The 
t Scholiastes Nicandri.  Scholiast of Nicander also makes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the fourth part of the [Attic] ounce. In the same proportion are we to take those other silver Athenian coins mentioned by 
u jul. Poll. l. 9 ●. 6.  Julius Pollux, namely, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which consisted of three drachmas, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which by a Syncope, is the same with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, containing four drachmas, or the half ounce. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith 
y Hesychius in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hesychius; though 
z Ammonius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Ammonius puts a distinction between them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This the Greeks also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as 
a Fragmenta Cleopatra.  Cleopatra, and 
b Epiphanius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Epiphanius witness. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Cleopatra, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: the stater weighs four drachmas, this they call the tetradrachme. And this also may most clearly be collected out of 
c Matth. ca 17. v. 24.  S. Matthew, where seeing the original expresseth it more fully then our translation, I shall recite the words as they are in the Greek. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; which the Vulgar renders thus, Et cum venissent Capernaum, accesserunt, qui didrachma accipiebant, ad Petrum, & dixerunt ei, Magister vester non solvit didrachma? and our Translation thus; And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money, come to Peter, and said, Doth not your Master pay tribute? In the 27th verse of the same chapter, our Saviour answers. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Notwithstanding, jest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up: and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt found a piece of money: that take, and given unto them for me, and thee. This, which our Translation calls tribute money, in the 24th ver. is called in the original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or two drachmas, & so much was paid by the pole, according to 
d josephus lively 7. bell. jud. ca 27  josephus, for each particular person. Our Saviour therefore paying for himself and S. Peter, in the 27th verse, bids him to given a stater, that is, a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or four drachmas, namely, the double to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which our Translation renders too generally by a piece of money: But the 
e Evangelia Pers. MSS. Eruditissimi Viri D. Pocockii.  Persian Translation interprets it distinctly by four drachmas. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt found four drachmas in it, that take, and given for thee, and me.  
With this Attic tetradrachme, or silver stater, the Hebrew, and Samaritane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shekel, that is, sickle, did also agreed. For if we given credit to josephus, who in 
f Scal. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. in libr. de Emend. Temp.  Scaliger's esteem is, Diligentissimus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omnium scriptorum, we shall found them to be the same. 
g josephus l. 3. antiq. judaic.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sickle is a sort of money among the Hebrews, that contains four Attic drachmas. The same proportion is evidently collected out of 
Philo de decalogo.  ʰ Philo, where for L. shekels mentioned in the Law he renders CC. drachmas, and for XXX. an hundred and twenty. 
i Hesychius in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hesychius likewise testifies as much, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the sickle is [in valuation] the Attic tetradrachme: and 
k Hieronym. in Ezek. 3.  S. Hierome, the ablest of the Fathers in the Jewish Antiquities, 
* Such sicles, I conceive, were those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the XXX pieces of silver, which were given to judas, as the reward of his treason. Eusebius relating the story expressly, terms them silver staters, which an Hebrew would have termed either silver shekels, or absolutely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cesef: this in the Scripture phrase being frequently put for the shekel, and therefore the Syriack Translation of the New Testament reads it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Whence Tremellius hath this annotation. Observant▪ Hebraei, ubicunque in Scripturis argentcorum fit mentio, non expressâ numismatis argentei specie, intelligi siclum sanctuarii aequivalentem quatuor denariis. Some modern Writers imagine them to have been but XXX. denarii; But Baronius contends that they were, vel librarum argenti XXX, vel aureorum coronatorum trecentorum: And Arias Montanus, that they were either XXX. librae, or XXX. talenta. The most probable opinion is, that this sum was neither so great as Baronius, and Montanus make it, nor yet so little as some Moderns would have it, but between both, and that is XXX. shekels. M. Casaubone in his Exercitations upon Baronius hath a probable conjecture to strengthen this assertion. Non enim temere factum videtur, quòd filius Dei qui sese exinanivit, assumptâ servi formâ, Phil. 2. 7. triginta argenteis venderetur, sicut lege Dei mancipia totidem siclis aestimantur. Exod. 21. 32. & apud josephum lib. IU. c. VIII. Facit hoc quoque non parum ad Domini abjectionem declarandum, quando caput ejus tam parvi aestimatum est. A small price I confess, XXX. shekels being less then XU of our ordinary crowns: But Hierome upon Saint Matthew thought it to be as little, who thus writes, as M. Casaubone renders him, Inselicem judam non cogitasse quanti pretii rem venderet. sed Christum mundi Salv●●●rem, Dei filium, ceu vile aliqu. d mancipium minimo pretio addixisse. Now the price of a servant we found in Exodus to have been XXX. shekels.  Siclus, id est stater, habet quatuor drachmas Atticas.  
These testimonies are so positive, and from so good Authors (to which also I might adjoin 
l Epiphanive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Epiphanius in his book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, did I not conceive him to be full of errors in that discourse), that I cannot sufficiently wonder at that strange opinion of 
m Grsepsius de multiplici sickle, & talento.  Grsepsius, and some others, introduced out of affectation of novelty, of a double shekel, the one sacred, equal to the tetradrachme, the other profane, weighing the didrachme: that used in the Sanctuary, this in civil commerce, without any solid foundation in the writ, or without any probability of reason, that in any wise State, the Prince and people should have one sort of coin, and the Priests should have another: and that this of the Sanctuary should be in a double proportion to the other, and yet that both should concur in the same name. It is true there is often mention in the 
n And all thy estimation shall be according to the shekel of the Sanctuary. Levit. 27. 25. Vet. vulg. sickle Sanctuarii ponderabitur.  Scriptures of the weights of the Sanctuary, not as if these were different from what were used vulgarly in the City; but because the Standards, and originals, the rules of commutative justice, and therefore of an high and sacred use, were kept (as it is more then probable) in the Sanctuary; For God himself makes this one of the Priests offices, 
o 1 Paral. 23. 29  ut sint super omne pondus atque mensuram. And it is no wonder that God, who so much hated a 
p Prou. 11. 1. item cap. 20. ver. 10. 23.  false balance, and a false measure, should commit the charge of these to the Priests, as things most holy; since the Heathens themselves out of a reverend estimation of them, placed them in their temples, as appears by that inscription of the congius of Vespasian before alleged, and now extant in Rome; and by these verses of 
q Rhemn: Fann. carmina de p●nd. & mensuris.  Fannius, treating of the Roman measures, 
Amphora fit cubus, quam, ne violare liceret,  
Sacravere jovi Tarpeio in monte Quirites.   
And afterwards in the times of Christianity they were kept in Churches, as it is to be seen in the 
r Authentic. collat. 9 de collatoribus tit. 11. novel. 128. c. 15  Authenticks of justinian; where he commands, that the weights and measures should be kept, in sacratissimâ cujusvis civitatis ecclesiâ, As for those allegations taken out of the interpretation of the LXX. whereby Grsepsius, and others go about to prove a double shekel, they are all well, and solidly, in my judgement, answered by 
s Villalp. de appar. urbis ac templi par. 2. lib. ●. disp. 4. c. 28. Item par. 2. lively 2. disp. 4.  Villalpandus, and others, to whom I shall refer the judicious Reader. For I intent not here to speak of the Hebrew shekel, or Attic drachma, more then what may serve to illustrate the denarius.  
Seeing therefore, as we have proved, that the Attic drachma was equal in the notion, and acception of the Ancients, to the denarius: if therefore an entire, either Attic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were found, we might thence conclude the denarius. Again, since the Hebrew shekel hath likewise been demonstrated to be equal to the Attic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and this Attic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to four denarii, by the common, and received 
* Quae eidem aequalia, sunt aequalia inter s●. Eucl. axe. 1. l. 1.  axiom of Geometricians, we may conclude, that the Hebrew shekel was also equal to 4 denarii, that is, that 4 Roman denarii, the Attic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were all respectively equal to one another. If therefore an Hebrew shekel, fair, & entire, were found, we might as necessarily thence infer the denarius, as by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
We shall endeavour by both these to inquire out the truth, and first by the Attic tetradrachmes in silver: because of these I have seen, and weighed many, some of them very fair, and perfect, and found at many several places, as Athens, Constantinople, Tenedos, and other parts: where the art of counterfeiting coins is not as yet crept in, and where it is to little purpose to practise it: seeing in those places there are few so curious as to buy them, or that will given a greater valuation, then what they are worth in the intrinseck. Wherhfore having in Italy, and elsewhere, perused many 100 denarii Consulares, I found by a frequent, and exact trial, the best of them to amount to LXII. grains English, such as I have carefully taken from the Standards of the Troy, or silver weights, kept in the Tower in London, and in Goldsmith's Hall, & in the University of Oxford: on the other side weighing many Attic tetradrachmes, with the image of Pallas on the fore part, and of the noctua on the reverse. I found the best of these to be CCL XVIII. grains, that is, each particular drachma LXVII. grains.  
And that no man may doubt wither these were true Athenian tetradrachmes, we are to observe, that the Ancients used several impresses on their coins, by which they might be known, and distinguished. And therefore argentum signatum, in the description of Quintius his triumph over Philip, is by 
t Livius l. 34●  Livy opposed to argentum infectum, which 
u Iul Poll. l. 9 c. 6.  Pollux terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as 
x Cicer. 6. Verr.  Tully calls the former sort factum, atque signatum, and the 
y jul. Poll. l. 9 c. 6.  Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Thus the denarius had the impress of the biga, or quadriga, as Pliny informs us: and therefore 
z Liu. l. 34.  Livy uses the word bigati for denarii, & 
a Plinius l. 33. ca 3.  Pliny both bigati and quadrigati. The brass coins of the Romans were thus marked. 
* Plin. ib.  Nota aeris fuit ex alterâ parte janus geminus, ex alterâ rostrum navis, in triente vero & quadrante rates. The Persians' stamped on the reverse an 
b Plutarch in Artaxerxe. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  archer: which occasioned that conceit of Agesilaus, mentioned by 
* Plut. Agesil.  Plutarch, that the King of Persia had beaten him back with ten thousand archers, when with so much money he had corrupted the Grecians. The Carthaginians on the one side signed the face of a woman, (I suppose in memory of Queen Dido) on the reverse the head of an horse, or in Virgil's 'expression 
* Virg. 1. Aeneid.  caput acris equi, both which I have seen. The Peloponnesians had the impress of a tortoise on their money, whence that witty Greek proverb took its original. 
c jul. Poll. l. 9 ●. 6.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The money at Tenedos had on the one side a double hatchet, and on the otherside two heads, one of a man, and another of a woman, a rising from the same stem, or neck, in memory of a Law made by the King of that Island (whom 
* Heraclides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Heraclides names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, placing him ancienter then the Trojan war), that a man, and a woman, taken in adultery should have their heads struck of with an hatchet. In which kind I met with two very rare, and ancient coins in silver, at Constantinople, both made with a very fair relevy, and both agreeing in the same image, and inscription: the one weighed less then the Attic tetradrachme, the other wanted somewhat of the drachma. And because the coin hath not, I think, been seen by any Antiquary, and the history is remarkable, I shall here express the figure of the fairest of these.  
And the history I shall relate out of 
d Heraclide● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Heraclide. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. They say King Tennes made a law, that if one took another in adultery, he should kill him with an hatchet. His son being found so, and he that took him, ask the King what he should do, he answered execute the Law: and for this reason of one side of his money there was an hatchet imprinted, on the other the face of a man, and of a woman, arising out of one neck. From hence is it said of severe actions, to be cut with a Tenedian hatchet. For which exemplary justice those of Tenedos▪ as it is probable, deified King Tenes. 
e Cicer. libr: 3. de natur● de●rum . Tully writes, Tenedi Tenem [Deum appellant]: and again, f Tenem apud Tenedios putant esse sanctissimum Deum, ac eorum Vrbem condidisse. Where his name is truer writ then in Heraclides. For the coin hath only a single N. and so hath 
Eustathii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  * Eustathius.  
The money of Chios, as julius Pollux witnesses, had the effigies, or resemblance, of Homer: no doubt in honour of his memory; though 
g Herodot. in vita Homeri.  Herodotus relates, that whilst he was living he found at first but cold entertainment in that Island. Theseus the tenth King of the Athenians signed his money with the impress of an ox; hence that proverb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This as 
h jul. Poll. l. 9 c. 6.  julius Pollux testifies was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: who farther adds, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This was an ancient coin among the Athenians, and was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, because it had the figure of an ox instamped. They imagine that Homer knew this, when he said, nine hecatombs of oxen, and also in the laws of Draco, it is to pay the mulct of ten oxen. And they say, that at the solemn show at Delos, the crier when any gift is to be given, cries so many oxen shall be given, and for every ox so many Attic didrachmes are given. The same 
l jul. Poll. ibid.  Author writes, that the Attic tetradrachme was stamped with the face of Minerva, and he might have added with the noctua on the reverse. This 
* In Anchise.  Eubûlus pleasantly calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Minervae pullum. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had the face of jupiter, it may be it is an error in Pollux, for Pallas, and on the other side the noctua. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had on the one side Jupiter, according to 
* jul. Poll. l. 9 c. 6.  Pollux, (I conceive it to be a mistake for Pallas, or Minerva) on the other side two noctuae, because it was the double to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. From the diobolun, 
k Plautus in Poenulo.  Plautus uses the term diobolaris Servorun Sordidulorum, Scorta diobolaria, which 
l Sextus Pompeius Fe ●us de Verb. signif.  Festus interprets thus, meretrices diobolares appellatas, ex ●o quòd duobus obolis ducerentur. To which I may adjoin, out of such ancient coins as I have seen, that ●he triobolum (whence that phrase of 
m Plautus in Poenulo.  Plautus, homo trioboli, and of the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) which by 
n jul. Poll. l. 9 c. 6  Pollux is called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, had the face of Pallas on the one side, and the noctua on the other; and so likewise had the ●bolus, and drachma, of such as I perused, and all of them on the reverse the inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And I think I may safely add, that on such coins as we found the noctua, with a deep relevy, we may conclude them to be Athenian coins. 
o Plutarch in Lysandro.  Plutarch ●s of the same opinion in the life of Lysander, where he discourses of Gylippus a Commander, ●s famous for defeating the Athenians in Sici●y, as infamous for stealing the silver consigned ●o him by Lysander, for the city Sparta. When 〈◊〉 arrived, saith Plutarch, at Sparta, he hide the ●●lver that he had stolen under the tiles of his house, ●nd delivered into the hands of the Ephori the bags, ●●ewing them the seals [entire]: Which being opened, and the money told, they found the sums to disagree from the labels: wherewith being troubled 〈◊〉 servant of Gylippus in obscure terms intimated to them, That under the tiles of his Master's house there were hid many noctuae, or owls; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For the greatest part (as it seems) of the money then had the stamp of the noctua, by reason of the Athenians: who not long before, as Thucydides, and the best Historians of those times show, were the richest, and most flourishing State among the Grecians.  
Having therefore had the opportunity to have bought, or else the favour to have weighed many fair, and perfect Attic tetradrachmes, found at remote places, with the Pallas galeata on the one side, and the noctua, with the inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the reverse, where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being placed for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proves the antiquity of them. (For the Attics at the first used not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) I found by the best of these (to reassume what I said before) that the Attic tetradrachme is 268 grains, and the drachma 67 of our Troy, or English standard. Which may farther be confirmed by an Attic drachma of my own, found in the Black Sea, with this inscription, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and by a 
* I have since perused a fair Athenian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of my very worthy, and learned friend, john Marsham Esquire, weighing completely 33 grains English. As also another of Sir Tho. Roes, together with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his, weighing 11 grains.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or semidrachme bought by me a● Alexandria: that weighing near 66 grains, and this 30 and better: the face of Minerva, either by use, or time being a little diminished in both: but yet so little, that they cannot have lost above two or three grains of their primitive weight. And as this single Attic drachma of my is much to be valued by Antiquaries for the weight, and therefore was desired by the learned Peireskius: so is the inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not less worth consideration, for the explication of a place in 
p Livius l. 37.  Livy: who describing the naval triumph of L. Aemilius, writes thus. Pecunia translata nequaquam tanta pro specie regii triumphi. Tetracina Attica CCXXXIII. millia, Cistophori CCCXXII. mil. Where 
q Bud. lib. 2. de ass. Rhodigin: lect: antiq. l. 10. c. 2.  Budaeus, and Rhodiginus in stead of tetracina, read tetradrachma. Tetracinum enim quid sit, nemo ut arbitror novit, saith Budaeus: I would rather read it, as the coin doth, Tinarnica: this having almost the same letters with Tetracina, which by the Scribes, I suppose, have been inverted. Neither is there any reason, why Livy might not as well mention in this triumph, Attica Tinarnica, as Tetradrachma; these being the fourth part of the tetradrachme; and therefore better agreeing with his description: Pecunia translata nequaquam tanta pro specie regii triumphi: and also better agreeing with the Cistophori he here mentions: a sort of coin about half of these Attica Tinarnica, whereas the tetradrachma were eight times as great. For 
r Sextus Pompeius Festus de Verb: signif:  Festus expressing the talentum Euboicum, renders it by 7500 cistophori, and by 4000 denarii, or Attic drachmas, that is, M. tetradrachmes. Euboicum talentum nummo Graeco septem millium & quingentorum cistophorûm est▪ nostro quatuor millium denariorum.  
And as these testimonies above alleged are beyond all exceptions, so the gold coins of the Grecians, which I have examined, do most evidently prove this proportion assigned to the Attic drachma. Which that we may the better understand, we are to observe what proportion the valuation of the gold of those times had to the silver; and next, what proportion it had in respect of weight.  
For the first, 
s Iul Poll. l. 9 c. 3.  julius Pollux in very perspicuous terms, puts it down, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That the gold was in a tenfold proportion to the silver one may evidently learn out of Menander's ' paracatathece. 
t Scholiastes Aristophanis . The Scholiast of Aristophanes implies as much. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Darics are golden stuters, each of them is worth as much as that which is named by the Attics the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. They are called so not from Darius the Father of Xerxes, but from another King more ancient then he. Some say that the Darick is valued at XX. drachmas of silver, so that V Darics are worth a mina of silver. For the Attic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or mina, containing an hundred drachmas in weight, as it is very clear out of 
u Plinius l. 21. c 34.  Pliny, 
jul. Poll l 9 c. 3.  * Pollux, and others. Mna (saith Pliny) quam nostri minam vocant, pendet drachmas Atticas centum. And Pollux, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: The mina with the Athenians containeth an hundred Attic drachmas, and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Darius, consisting of two drachmas in weight, as we shall presently prove, it will necessarily follow that the proportion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in decuplâ ratione: and therefore that five Daricks, or ten drachmas of gold, were equal in valuation to an hundred drachmas in silver, that is, to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The same proportion may be collected out of 
y Polybii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ ca 28 Ex biblioth. Fulvii Ursini. Antu. 1582.  Polybius, when the Romans upon a sum of money to be received, concluded a peace with the Aetolians. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which words 
z Livius l. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Zonaras.  Livy renders thus. Pro argento si aurum dare mallent, dare convenit, dum pro argenteis decem aureus unus valeret. This being granted, as certainly of necessity it must, I would correct that place of 
a Hesychius in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hesychius concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and read it thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. as it is in the printed copies. And by this of Hesychius I would supply the defect of 
b Suidas in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Suidas, who writes. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and make it thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For without the addition of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, there is no sense: And I believed Suidas took these very words out of Hesychius.  
Having thus found the proportion that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had to the silver, our next inquiry is, how many of these drachmas in weight the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or aureus contained. 
c jul. Pollux libr. 4. c. 24.  julius Pollux gives us in this particular the best, and most positive information of any, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The golden stater [or aureus] contains two Attic drachmas. The same is confirmed by 
b Hesychius in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Hesychius: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Polemarchus says that the aureus among the Athenians contains two drachmas; and that the drachma of gold is worth ten drachmas of silver. And to this of Pollux and Hesychius all the aurei of the ancient Grecians, which have passed through my hands, do very well correspond. Now these aurei as they had several impresses upon them, so had they several names, by which they are distinguished. For they were either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the like, all which we may prove by Xenophon, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (as jos. Scaliger rightly corrects the printed copies, which tender it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Harpoer. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Xenophonti sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Talentum autem 600 drachmae. Ergo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sunt 20. drachmae. Scal. de re num.  Harpocratio, the Scholiast of Aristophanes, and others, to have been equal unto two Attic drachmas, and therefore respectively equal to one another. Neither is this much to be wondered at, that the Grecians, and Persians', though at enmity among themselves, yet should agreed in the aurei; seeing that in our times, the Venetian Chequeen, the Barbary Ducat, the Egyptian, and Turkish Sheriff, are almost all of the same pureness in respect of the gold, and not differing above a grain in the weight. Which difference we may also allow to those of the Ancients, without any prejudice to our inquiry. Concerning these aurei, or golden staters, the observation of 
e Iul Poll. l. 9 c. 6.  julius Pollux is worth our consideration, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Of the staters some were denominated from Darius, some from Philip, some from Alexander & were all of gold. And when you say the aureus, the stater is understood, but if you say the stater, the aureus is not always meant. And this is most true; for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or aureus (I speak not here of the aureus Romanus, this being somewhat less then these mentioned by Pollux) did always imply the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not always infer the aureus: the stater being more general, signifying as well the argenteus, as the aureus, and that was double to this; the stater argenteus being four drachmas, as we proved before, and therefore the same with the tetradrachme, & the aureus two drachmas, and therefore equal in weight to the didrachme. Wherhfore every aureus was rightly called a stater, but every stater could not rightly be called an aureus.  
From these aurei then, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we may deduce the silver Attic drachma, if we either had the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, some of which to this day are found in Persia, or if we had the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. To pass by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, because I have not perused any of them, and to speak only of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of which there are many extant.  
Concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
* Snellius de r● nummariâ.  Snellius writes thus. Philippi nummum unicum, & Alexandri Macedonum, solertissimus veterum nummorum aestimator Nicolaus Rockoxius possidet, utrumque eodem ponere granorum 179. Now CLXXIX. grains of gold in Holland, such as Snellius used, are answerable to an hundred thirty four grains English and an half. Near which proportion I have observed two others, with the inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, excepting only a grain, or two.  
As for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I found the weight of one of the fairest for impression, and character, I think in the world, which I bought at Alexandria, with the image, and inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be exactly of English grains 133 ●, and another at Constantinople 133, and in the same proportion several others. With which comparing one of my honoured and learned friend john Marshan Esquire, I found his a grain defective: And weighing since some others out of that choice, & rare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of ancient coins collected by the noble Sir Simonds D' Ewes, Knight Baronet, I observed two of his to exceed 133 by ½ a grain.  
Wherhfore I may conclude (allowing only half a grain for so much wanting by time, or by the mint) from the aureus being double to the Attic drachma, that it hath been rightly assigned by me to be LXVII. grains; And from this with those limitations above mentioned I may conclude the denarius Consularis, (which is our principal inquiry) seeing 
Galenus l. 8. de composit. medicam.  Galen lively 8. c. 3. de compositione Medicam: according to the Latin manner of division), speaking of an antidote prescribed by Asclepiades, whereof the dosis was to be one drachma, or denarius, writes thus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I suppose, that he means the silver drachma, for so all the later Physicians are want to call it, neither will the nature of the thing suffer us to understand any other. And it is manifest ●hat in such things as we all now name the drachma, the Romans name the Denarius.  
The denarius also, as we proved before out of Philo, josephus, Saint Hierome, and Hesychius, may be inferred by the Hebrew, or Samaritane shekel: the shekel, by the joint testimony of all of them, being equal in valuation to the Attic stater argenteus, or tetradrachme, and the Attic tetradrachme, as we have showed, to 4 denarii Consulares: if therefore an Hebrew, or Samaritane shekel in silver, fair, and not impaired, were found, we might by this as well discover the denarius, as by the tetradrachme, or the aureus. And here I must confess I have not seen so many perfect, and entire, with the Samaritane characters, which certainly are the best, and truest, (For those with the later characters, invented, as some suppose, by Esdras, are most of them counterfeit) as to given myself satisfaction. For though I have perused that of Arias Montanus, now in the University of Oxford, which he describes in his tract de Siclo, and from whence he deduces the proportion of the Hebrew shekel, yet to speak the truth, there is no trust to be given to it: Not but that the coin is very ancient, and the inscription upon it in Samaritane characters well made; but the sides of it have been so filled away, that it hath very much lost of the true weight. For I found it to be scarce the weight of twenty pence of our English Standard. Whereas Montanus, if he made his observation exactly, equals it to almost four Spanish rials, or to four Roman julios ': bo●● which exceed two of our English shillings. So that till such time as I may procure out of the East, (wither I have often sent) some perfect shekels, I must be content to take up the relations of others. And here I shall begin with Moses Nehemani Gerundensis a Jew, a learned expositor of the Pentate●ch, who as Arias Montanus tells us, flourished in Catalonia above 400 years since. His words, as Montanus hath delivered them in his tract de Siclo, are these. 
g Arias Montanus de siclo. in libro qui inscribitu● Thubal 〈◊〉, sinc de mensurit.  In comment, Exod. 39 multis verbis disserens significabat se non facile ad Salomonis jarrhaei, qui ante illum in Galliâ scripserat, sententiam de siclo accedere; cum Solomon affirmasset, Siclum esse dimidiam argenti unciam. Postea jam absoluto in omnem Legem Commentariorum opere, idem Moses Gerundensis capite ad eam rem propriè addito, sicli aestimationem à Salomone illo indicatam, re ipsâ doctus, ingenuè, & apertè, ut viros doctos, & veri inveniendi, atque docendi cupidos decet, comprobavit. Narrat autem se eo anno, quo illa scriberet, in Palaestinam ex Hispaniâ sacrorum locorum visendi causâ navi delatum Acconam, quam nunc jachan vocant, devenisse; ibidémque sibi ab incolis ostensum fuisse nummum argent●um antiquissimum, expressis tamen signis & literis conspicuum; in cujus altero latere forma esse● vasculi illius, quod mannâ plenum in sacra arca ad saeculorum monumentum, Dei jussu, & Mosis procuratione fuerat repositum: & in altero ramus ille admirabilis, quem in fasciculum virgularum plurimarum Aaronis nomine illatum (cùm illius sacerdotali dignitati ab aemulis quibusdam obtrectaretur) posterâ die populus omnis florentem, amygdaláque explicantem vidit; inscriptiones etiam fuisse in eodem nummo Samaritanis ch●racteribus, quae olim communes totius Israelis literae fuerant, ante discessionem decem tribuum à duabus, lingua planè Hebraica, quarum exemplum ex alterâ parte erat SEKEL ISRAEL, quod Latinè sonat Siclus Israelis: ex alterâ verò JERUSALEM KEDESSAH, hoc est jerusalem sancta: qui nummus antiquitatem cùm primis magnam probabat, utpote cusus nomine Israelis, eo tempore quo omnes XII. tribus communi concordia Israelis nomen obtinebant; quóque Hierosolyma ipsis omnibus regia urbs, sanctaque erat; eademque communis omnibus & religionis, & publicae rei & monetae, atque literarum ratio, quae postea discessione factâ, alia atque alia utrique parti fuit. Namque judaei, ut omnes ferè scriptores asserunt, ne cum Schismaticis Israelitis ullo Sacrorum usu communicarent, eam Literarum for●●am, quae nunc etiam in usu est, hoc est quadratam, mutatis valde alterius prioris figuris, ad●invenêre. Affirmat praeterea idem Gerundensis, nummum illum, qui Siclus inscribebatur, sibi in staterâ pensum dimidiae argenti unciae pondus reddidisse, ostensam quoque alteram monetam dimidiato pondere minorem, iisdem omnino vasis & rami figuris quae tamen non SEKEL, sed HHASZI SEKEL, ho● est dimidius Siclus diceretur▪ probari itaque sibi vel maximè Salomonis jarrhaei, de sicli pondere, & valour, sententiam. Thus far Gerundensis: who if he had expressed with what half ounce he compared his shekel, or if Montanus had done it for him, they had given the judicious Reader better satisfaction. But this I suppose, by a a probable conjecture, may be supplied, in saying that he living in Catalonia weighed it with the Catalonian, or Spanish half ounce; which 
h Eaedem omnino sunt unciae, quibus olim Romani, Hispanique utuntur. etc. Villalp. de appar. Vrb. ac Templi par. 2. l. 3. c. 20.  Villalpandus, and 
i Ciaconius de ponderibus pag. 45.  Ciaconius, both of them Spaniards, make equal to the half ounce now used at Rome, that is, to two shillings three pence farthing, q. of our money. This conjecture of my will exceeding well confirm those many observations of Villalpandus, a man in this kind very curious, which he made of several ancient shekels in filver, who thus writes. 
k Villalpand. de app. Vrb●s ac Templi par. 2. l. 2. disp. ●. c. 28.  Igitur ante aliquot annos appendimus Siclum unum apud F. Vrsinum, & postmodum eos omnes, quos praecedenti capite percensuimus, atque comperimus singulos argenti siclos ex aequo semunciae Romanae antiquae respondere; ita ut ne minimum quidem hordei aut frumenti granulum, huic, vel illi lanci addi potuerit, quin in eam examen propenderet. Nec mirum cuiquam videri debet, antiquissimos nummos suo pristino ponderi nunc respondere, neque ullam argenti partem vetustate consumptam tot saeculis fuisse. Nam singulari Dei beneficio nobis contigit, tot integros appendere potuisse siclos. Id quod nummi ipsi integri vetustatem maximè prae se ferentes, literae expressae, extantésque, argenti color, atque alia id genus multa, facile probant. With these observations of Villalpandus I found the weight of a very fair Samaritane shekel of the truly noble, and learned M. Selden to agreed: to whom I stand obliged for this favour, as he doth for the coin to the honourable Antiquary Sir Robert Cotton. To these testimonies, though (it may be) sufficient of themselves, I shall add 
* We may also insert the observation of Anton. August. dialogo 2. Ne ho uno [siclo] che è d' argento, & è di peso di quattro dram conforme à quello che dice San Girolamo sopra Ezechielle: where by four drams he means half the Roman ounce.  one more, for farther illustration of the weight of the Hebrew, or Samaritane shekel, and that is of an ancient, and fair one, in silver, among his Majesty's coins, perused by the most reverend Primate of Ireland, a man of exquisite learning, and judgement, who hath often assured me that it weighs two shillings five pence of the English standard; which proportion excepting some few grains, in which it doth exceed, does well correspond with those of Villalpandus. And this may farther be confirmed out of the Talmud 
l Kiddushf. 11.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Argentum omne cujus in Lege fit mentio, intelligitur argentum Tyrium (ponderis & bonitatis ut in urbe Tyri: as 
m Schindlerus in pentaglotto.  Schlinder interprets it) sed Rabbinorum argentum intelligitur argentum commune provinciale. Taking therefore the silver money of Judea, as the Talmud doth, to be equal to the Tyrian, and that of Carthage to be equal to that of Tyre: as it is very probable, that the Carthaginians, being a plantation of the Tyrians, might observe their proportions in coins, as well as their customs, in religion, we may by these discover the shekel to be much about the same weight that hath been assigned. For 
n Ant. August dia●og. 6.  Ant. Augustinus, describing in his dialogues the weight of two fair Carthaginian coins in silver, writes, that they are each of them somewhat more then four drachmas, that is, as he elsewhere explains himself, a little more then half the Roman ounce. If therefore we shall adhere to the observation of Gerundensis, made four hundred years since, or to these later of Villalpandus, and others; or to this conjecture of my, the Hebrew shekel, and half the present ● Roman ounce, are either both the same, or else very near in proportion.  
And this may easily be granted; but if it be, how will 4 denarii Consulares, 4 Attic drachmas, and the Hebrew shekel, be reciprocally equal one to another, as they should be by those several testimonies before alleged? Whereas ●y many hundred denarii Consulares, tried by a● exact balance, I found the best of these to contain LXII. grains English, and the Attic drachma LXVII. And the fourth part of the shekel to be but LIV. grains ¾ if we admit of Gerundensis, and Villalpandus 'observations. Which notwithstanding according to Philo, josephus, Saint Hierome, Epiphanius, and Hesychius, should be equal to the Attic drachma, and the Attic drachma by the testimonies of the ancients should be likewise equal to the denarius. For the solution of this objection I answer. First, that the denarius, and Attic drachma, being distinct coins of different States, and not much unequal in the true weight, it is no wonder, especially in Italy, and in the Roman dominions, that they should pass one for another: no more then that the Spanish rials in our Sea Towns in England, should pass for testars, or the quarters of the dolar be exchanged for our shillings: whereas the rial in the intrinsical valuation is better then our testar by four grains, and somewhat more, and the quarter of the dolar is better then our shilling by more then 8 grains, or a penny; but because they want the valuation, character, and impression of our Princes, which I call the extrinseck of coins, therefore doth the Spanish money fall from its true value with us, and so would ours do in Spain. By the same analogy must we conceive the Attic drachmas, though in the intrinseck they were somewhat better worth then the denarius, yet for want of the extrinseck, to have lost in Italy, and thereby to have become equal in valuation to the denarius. And this seems to be implied by 
o Vol. Metianus de assis distributione. These words of Metianus I found in a MS. of Temporarius thus corrected. Victoriatus enim nunc tantundem valet, quantum quinarius Olim ut peregrinus nummus loco mercis, ut nunc tetradrachmum, & drachma habebatur. Wither it be by conjecture, or that he found it in some ancient MS. I know not, but the emendation I cannot but approve.  Volusius Metianus. Victoriatus enim nunc tantundem valet, quantum quinarius olim. At peregrinus nummus loco mercis, ut nunc tetradrachmum, & drachma, habebatur. Which words of his loco mercis, plainly show they made some gain of the tetradrachmum, and drachma: as our Merchants, and Goldsmiths do of the Spanish rials, and quarters of a dolar: Which they could not do, if they were precisely equal, but must rather be losers in the melting, or new coining of them. And therefore all 
p Budaeus drachmam putat ejusdem ponderis esse cum denario, Onuphrius verò inter utrumque statuit rationem sesquitertiam, Agricola sesquiseptimam, ut Panvinio tres denari● quatuor drachmas, Agricolae verò septem denarii octo drachmas efficiant. Capel. de pond. & nummis l. 1. LXXXIV. denarii, quae est Libra Romana, sunt aequales XCVI. drachmis, quae est libra Italica, & medica. Scal. de re nummariâ.  modern Writers that have treated of this argument, some of them making the drachma less then the denarius, others equal, but noon greater, have been deceived by a double paralogism, in standing too nicely upon the bore words of the Ancients, without carefully examining the things themselves. First, in making the denarius, and Attic drachma precisely equal, because all ancient Authors generally express the Attic drachma by the denarius, or the denarius by the drachma; either because in ordinary commerce, and in vulgar estimation they passed one for another, in the Roman state; or else if any were so curious to observe their difference, as surely the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were, yet by reason of their nearness, and to avoid fractions, and having no other names of coins that were precisely equal, whereby to tender them, therefore all Greek, and Latin Authors, mutually used one for the other. And secondly, because some Writers, as Dioscorides and Cleopatra affirm, that the Roman ounce contained eight drachmas, therefore modern Authors infer, that the denarius being equal to the drachma, and eight drachmas being in the Roman ounce (as so many were in the Attic) that therefore there are eight denarii in the Roman, and consequently that the Roman, and Attic ounces are equal. Whereas Celsus, Scribonius Largus, and Pliny, as we shown before, expressly writ, that the Roman ounce contained in their time, which was after Dioscorides, seven denarii. And being natural Romans, and purposely mentioning the proportion of the denarius to the ounce, thereby the better to regulate their doses in physic, it is not probable, but they must better have known it then the Grecians. Besides, who with any certainty can collect out of these imperfect fragments of Dioscorides, and Cleopatra (for those tracts of theirs de ponderibus are no better) wither at the first they wrote in that manner, as they are now printed? Or if they did, why might not they endeavour to introduce into the Roman ounce, in imitation of the Attic, that manner of division, which is now generally received in our times, of making the ounce, of what kind soever it be, to contain eight drachmas. And surely this of eight being a compound number, as Arithmeticians use to speak, was much fit then seven, used by the Romans, which being a prime number, is therefore incapable of any other division. And then for to conclude, that because the Attic ounce had eight drachmas, and the Roman as many, that therefore their ounces are equal: is all one as to conclude, that the Paris, and English ounces are equal, because the French as well as we (and so do all Physicians of all Countries that I know) divide their ounce by eight drachmas. And thus, I suppose, I have sufficiently answered the first part of the objection, concerning the Denarius, and the Attic drachma: that if we respect the vulgar and popular estimation, in which sense classical Authors understood them (For they could not well otherwise tender them, then as they were currant) so were they equal; but if we respect the intrinsical valuation, which depends upon the weight, especially when coins are of a like fineness, so were they unequal: the Attic drachma being of our money eight pence farthing q, and the denarius Consularis seven pence half penny farthing: allowing for the standard 
* These proportions, with chose before, & those which 〈◊〉 follow, are 〈◊〉 from the English standard at five shillings the ounce (as it was formerly coined) to avoid fractions: that is, eight grains to the silver penny: whereas in these times it is five shillings ● two pence. Not that the ounce is increased, for this is always constant and fixed, but that for reasons of State, our silver coins are diminished, and consequently contain fewer grains. And this diminution must necessarily be, as often as other Nations, with whom we have commerce, rebate in the proportions of their coins; or else we must be content to be losers.  VIII. English grains to the silver penny.  
Neither do I know any authority, that either expressly, or by a true, & logical consequence, can be produced out of Classical Authors to infringe this assertion of my, unless it be one in Fannius, which being a fragment is the less to be valued: and another in Livy, who thus writes, lib. 34. in his description of the triumph of Quinctius. Signati argenti octoginta quatuor millia fuere Atticorum, tetradrachmum vocant; trium ferè denariorum in singulis argenti est pondus. Which words of his occasioned 
p G Agricolae responsio ad Alciatum de pond. & mensuris. Argentei Romanorum denarii triplices sunt: graves, qui pendunt arachmam Atticam cum dimidia: mediocres, qui drachmam & scptimam ejus partem: leves, qui plerunque drachmam.  Georgius Agricola, not knowing how to answer them, to bring in a distinction of three sorts of denarii: the Gravis, weighing an Attic drachma, and an half, the Mediocris, one & a seventh part, the L●vis, most commonly one; without any clear proof, or evidence in any ancient Author, and directly contrary to all ancient coins of the Attics, and Romans, which I have seen: of which error he would not have been guilty (For there is no man that hath writ either de ponderibus, & mensuris, or de re metallicâ, more solidly, and judiciously then he) if he had been so happy as to have perused many entire Graecian aurei, & tetradrachmes, or else to have examined a greater, and more select quantity of Roman coins. To satisfy myself concerning that place of Livy, I had recourse to our MSS. here (and I could wish I had done the like in Italy) and these I found to agreed with the printed copies; though the coins, which are much ancienter then any MSS. constantly disagree. Wherhfore if it be not a mistake in Livy himself, which I am not apt to believed in so grave an Author, I would correct the copies by the coins, and instead of III ferè denariorum, make it thus, IU. ferè denariorum. Where the figure V, being resolved into two lines, and left a little open at the bottom, might easily be taken by the scribe for the figure II And this I do certainly 
* If this answer be not satisfactory, we may say, as some have done, that Livy, Fannius, and the Scholiast of Nicander, speak of the denarii of the former Consuls immediately succeeding Q. Fabius, For there being but six of those in the ounce, (as they suppose) the denarius will be greater then the drachma, as it will be less when seven were coined, under the later Consuls, which is our assertion.  believed is the true ground of that error, wherewith so many of late have been perplexed. However it were, it is as ancient as Priscian, or Pseudo-Priscian (as Capellus styles him) who, in his tract de ponderibus, reads those words of Livy in the same manner, trium ferè denariorum.  
As for the denarius aureus, a name I think not known to the Ancients, which Salmasius and others collect out of 
q Livius l 38.  Livy, de foedere Aetolico. Pro argento si aurum dare mallent, dare convenit, dum pro argenteis decem aureus unus valeret. I see no solid foundation for that opinion; all that can be collected thence is, that the gold then was in decuplâ ratione to the silver, which I have proved before. And whereas 
r Plautus in Rudente.  Plautus hath his denaria Philippea.  

Nummi octingenti aurei in marsupio infuerunt,  
Praeterea centum denaria Philippea.  this is a metaphorical, or comical expression of him, and no certain sort of coin: which he pleasantly calls denarii, because half the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were equal in weight to the drachma, and so also was the Roman denarius supposed to be.  
Nor are we to take the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is thrice mentioned by Saint Matthew, and once by Saint Mark, for the denarius, as some have done: not, nor for any other sort of coin. For it is precisely the Latin word census, that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, tributum, and so is it rendered by Saint Luke, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; where Saint Matthew, and Saint Mark have it. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Though Hesychius, and Moscopulus, both upon an error, interpret it a sort of coin. Hesychius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as M. Casaubone corrects it: and Moscopulus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the census is a coin equal in weight to the drachma, that is, in the notion of the Greeks equal to the denarius. The error of these two Greek Grammarians, is a misunderstanding the propriety of the Latin word census: and that occasioned them to take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for the same. But the Evangelist Matthew puts a manifest difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tributum, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the money that was paid for tribute. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, writes Saint Matthew, show me the money of the tribute: or as our new Translation renders it, Show me the tribute money. And the three Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, immediately after expressly term this money the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, And they brought unto him a penny. Which being a Roman coin, and currant among the Jews, being then in subjection to the Romans, it is more then probable that they paid their tribute to Caesar, in the same species of money that was used by Caesar: and not with any new, or peculiar sort of coin, according to Baronius (which M. Casaubone hath justly confuted) but with the ordinary currant money of Rome, and that was the denarius.  
Our next solution should be of the shekel, how it could be equal to the tetradrachme, and consequently to 4 denarii, when by the constant weight of the best Hebrew, or Samaritane shekels, extant, we found them to be much less. And here I am a little unsatisfied, how to reconcile the coins to Philo, josephus, Epiphanius, Saint Hierome, and Hesychius: or else, if we admit of the coins (as I know no just exceptions against them) how to excuse these Authors of too supine negligence in comparing them, if so be they ever were so curious as to collate them with the Attic tetradrachmes. For if we shall say that the silver stater, or Attic tetradrachme, was a foreign coin, in respect of the Rep. of the Jews, and therefore that in Judaea it might somewhat fall from its true valuation, we shall say no more then what reason, and experience confirm. But then that the tetradrachme should sink so low, as to lose four pence half penny, if we take the reverend Primates 'observation before mentioned, or which is more six pence q. if we follow that of Gerundensis, and Villalpandus, or those of my, upon two shillings nine pence half penny, for so much was the tetradrachme of our money, it may seem too great a diminution: especially the Attic money being as pure, and fine▪ as that of the shekel: and therefore no Goldsmith among the Jews, but would have given a greater rate only to melt it, and turn it into bullion. Yet on the other side, when I consider the practice of the money-changers among the jews at this day, which it may be  
The sextarius, saith Fannius, contains one pound and eight ounces, wither we weigh clear water, or wine: where by wine, according to 
d Agricola l 3. de ponder. rerum.  Agricola, is to be understood, vinum fulvum, such as the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; rather I imagine that wine, which Galen calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The sextarius then being one pound eight ounces of clear water, or pure wine, and six sextarii being in the Congius, it is most evident that the Congius contains ten pounds of water, or of wine. This also appears by a Plebiscitum of the two Silii, Publius, and Marius, which is to be seen in the best copies of 
e Sextus Pomp. de verb signif.  Sextus Pompeius.  VTI. QVADRANTAL. VINI. OCTOGINTA. PONDO. SIET CONGIUS. VINI. DECEM. IS. SIET SFX. SEXTARII. CONGIUS. SIET. VINI DVO. DF. QVINQVAGINTA. SEXTARII. QVADRANTAL. SIET. VINI SEXTARIUS. AEQWS. AEQVO. CUM. LIBRARIO. SIET 
The same is confirmed by 
f Fragmenta Dioscoridis.  Dioscorides: who, for farther certainty, mentions with what sort of water we should measure it: and that is with rain 
* The proportion 〈◊〉 rain water hath to fountain water, is as 10 0000 to 1007●22, & the proportion that it hath to water distilled, is as 1000000 to 997 65, as it hath been observed by Snellius in Eratosth. Bat l 2 c. Est in aequali mo●e ratio aquae pluviae ad distillatam, quenadmodum 100●000 ad 997065. pluviae autem ad putealem ut 1000000 ad 1007522.  water, which he makes to be the most infallible of all. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Chus, (that is, the Congius) contains ten pounds, the semicongius five, the sextarius one pound, and eight ounces, etc. The weight of water, and of Vinegar is the same. They say that if it be filled up with rain water, the weight will be most certain. 
* This authority of Dioscorides, with that other citation following out of an Anonymus Greek Author, strongly proves my assertion, that the drachma Attica was more ponderous, then the denarius Consularis. For there being eighty four of these denarii in the Roman pound, as we have elsewhere proved, and ten Roman pounds in the Congius, it is most evident there are DCCCXL. denarii in the whole Congius. Again, DCCXX. drachmas, by the testimonies of Dioscorides, and this Anonymus writer, being equal to the Congius, and the Congius being equal to DCCCXL. denarii, therefore DCCXX. drachmas are equal to DCCCXL. denarii, and therefore of necessity every particular drachma of these, must be greater then each particular denarius. And though, according to my assertion, the Congius containeth some few drachmas more then are by them assigned; yet that difference, seeing it might many ways hap, as I afterwards show in the like experiments of Villalpandus, and Gassendus, it cannot any way overthrew my conclusion. For the drachmas are still fewer then the denarii consulares, and therefore greater: which was the thing intended to be proved. And this my farther be confirmed, in that both Cleopatra, and this Anonymus Author, make also the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or sextarius (being the sixth part of the Congius) to contain an hundred twenty drachmas of fountain water. Whereby it appears there is no error committed in the former numbers. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The sextarius, saith Cleopatra, contains in measure two cotyls, but in weight an hundred and twenty drachmas. And the Anonymus writer, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The sextarius contains in weight an hundred and twenty drachmas.  The Congius weighs seven hundred and twenty drachmas. An Anonymus Greek Author, falsely reputed to be Galen in the edition at Venice, confirms the same, 
f Anonymus Graec.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Among the Romans is found the Congius, containing in measure six sextarii (that is) XII Cotylae: but in weight, of rain water, which is most infallible, DCCXX. drachmas. And whereas 
g Fragmenta Dioscoridis.  Dioscorides elsewhere writes. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Congius hath nine pounds, the semicongius four and an half, the sextarius one and an half; there is no repugnancy between this, and his former assertion. For here he speaks of the Congius filled with oil, and before of the same Congius filled with water, or wine: and that this should be but nine pounds, whereas the former is ten, is no more repugnant to reason, then it is to nature, that oil should be lighter then water, or wine: which 
h Ghetaldus in Archim: promoto.  Ghetaldus, in his Archimedes promotus, hath demonstrated the most accurately of any man, to be in the proportion that 1 is to 1 1/11in respect of water, and as 1 is to 1 4/55in respect of wine: which is almost the same with Dioscorides. The not observing this difference of weight, arising from the different gravity of several liquors, in vessels of one and the same capacity, is that which hath occasioned much incertainty, and confusion, in modern writers. And therefore we shall for farther perspicuity insert that distinction, which is often inculcated by 
i GaleNus l 1. & 6. de comp. medicam. secundum genera.  Galen, that the Romans used two sorts of ounces, and pounds: and those were either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ponderall, or mensurall: the one had respect solely to the gravity, the other to the moles, and gravity conjointly: the former were always certain and fixed, consisting of solid matter: the later were Vasa (frequently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) being receptacles, and measures of liquid substances: and therefore the librae, and unciae mensurales, in these were greater or less, according as the liquor to be measured was heavier, or lighter. Whence 
k Lively 6. de compos. medicam: sec: genera.  Galen blames Physicians for not expressing this difference. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And he gives the reason of it. 
l Lib 1. de composit. medicam: secundum genera.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For the ponderall examine the weight of bodies, but the mensural the moles. But to return to the Congius, and by it to our discovery of the denarius. The water then must be natural, either of some fountain, or of rain. For if it be artificial, such as are made by distillations, wither by a strong reverberation, or by a gentle, in an alembeck, these having somewhat of the property of fire will be lighter then the natural, as 
m Perinde verò ut vinum hoc factitium omni nativo est levius, sic aquae ferè omnes, quae ignis calore rebus quibuscunque excoctis destillarint, quas ob id distillatas appeilant, caeteris aquis leviores sunt. Agricola l. 3. de pondere rerum.  Agricola, and others observe. I shall produce two observations of the Congius wit● fountain water, made by two very eminent, and able men, Villalpandus, and Gassendus, the one at Rome, with the Roman weights, from the 
* This Congius I had weighed, if I could have procured a balance of such exactness, as was fitting for such a work. The want of which occasioned Villalpandus to suspect the observation of Paetus: though Paetus writes thus of himself. Plenum, cùm justissimâ trutinâ, quâ hodie Romae utimur cùm appendissem [congium], inveni aquam, quâ eum compleveram, libras nostri temporis novem, uncias sex semis efficere, quibus uncias quinque, drachmas quatuor, scripulum unum, & grana FOURTEEN. (quae amplius sunt in his nostris, quam in antiquis libris computando eum congium libras decem) & ultra scripulum unum, & grana FOURTEEN. (de quibus nullam rationem habendam esse judicavi) ex antiquis libris praedictis pendere inveni. But Villalpandus trying it long after Paetus, with more care, and with a balance made of purpose, found it to be exactly ten such pounds, as are now used in Rome. All that I could do was to fill the capacity of it with milium well cleansed, and to compare it with the English measures taken from the Standards. It contained of our measures for wine three quarts, one pint▪ and one eighth part of a pint. Of our corn, or dry measures, three quarts and about one sixth part of a pint. At my being in Italy, there was found among the ruins at Rome a Semicongius in brass, of the same figure with this of Vespasian's, the sides much consumed by rust. This I also measured, and found it to be the half of Vespasian's 'Congius. From this measure of the Congius we may rightly apprehended how vast that draught was of Novellus Torquatus, who drank three of these Congii at once: from whence he was called Novellas Tricongius. The story is recited by Pliny [l. 14. c. 22.] Apud nos cognomen etiam Novellus Torquatus Mediolanensis ad Proconsulatum usque è praetur● honoribus gestis, tribus congiis (unde & ●omen illi fuit) epotis uno impetu, spectante miraculi gratiâ Tiberio principe in senecta jam severo, atque etiam aliàs saevo, sed ipsâ juventâ ad merum pronior fuerat. In the same chapter Pliny likewise discourses thus of Cicero, son to that famous Orator. Tergilla Ciceronem Marci filium binos congios simul haurire solitum ipsi objicit, Marcoque Agrippae à temulento scyphum impactum.  original Congius itself, the other at Aix, with the Paris weights, from a model, or copy of that at Rome, procured by Peireskius. And here to compare the denarius Consularis with their observations, it is necessary to have exactly both the Roman, and Paris weights. The former, with as much accurateness, as it was possible, were taken in Rome. The other were sent me by Monsieur Hardy, a learned man of honourable quality in Paris, who compared them with the Standard. To begin with that of Villalpandus, who gives us a large description, with how much caution, and circumspection, and with how exquisite a balance he twice made his experiment, whereby he discovered the weight of it in water to be exactly answerable to ten such pounds, as are now used in Rome: Whence he concludes, 
n Villalpandus l 2. disp. 2. c. 11. de apparatu Vrbis ac Templi  Constanter asserimus antiquam Romanorum libram, unciam, ac pondera, tot aetatum successione, ac Romani imperii perturbationibus minimè immutata fuisse, sed eadem per manus tradita usque ad nostra tempora perdurasse. This Roman pound of his reduced to the English Standard for silver, or Troy weight, with which I have faithfully collated it, is 5256 grains English, such as the Troy pound is 5760: the whole Congius therefore consisting of ten pounds, will be 52560 English grains. The other observation is related by 
o Gassendus in vitâ Peireskii.  Gassendus, in his elegant discourse de vitâ Peireskii. ut paucis ergo res dicatur, cautiones adhibuimus easdem, quas Lucas Paetus, & Villalpandus, dum vas ipsum, ad summum collum puteali aquâ opplevimus, expendimus, vasis pondus subduximus. Deprehendimus autem aquam, quae Romano pondere esse debuit decem librarum, seu unciarum centum viginti, esse pondere Parisiensi (quale nempe Parisiis exploratum, missumque est) librarum septem, minus unciae quadrante: seu unciarum centum undecim, & quadrantum unciae trium. Deinde ex hac proportione collegimus unciam Romanam continere grana quingenta, & triginta sex, qualium quingenta septuaginta sex in Parisiensi continentur: unde & illis in drachmas collectis, obvenere cuilibet drachmae grana sexaginta septem: idque proinde censuimus pondus denarii Caesarei, quem dictum est fuisse 
* The inference of Gassendus I easily grant, that the denarius under some of the Caesars 'was drachmalis, that is, the eighth part of the Roman ounce. But neither was it always so under the Caesars, nor if it had been so, will it therefore follow that it was drachmalis, or the eighth part in respect of the Attic ounce. Seeing the Athenian ounce was greater then the Roman, as we have before proved; and therefore the Denarius Consularis, which was the seventh part of the Roman ounce, was scarce the eighth part of the Attic. Where fore he must see how he can make it good, where he brings Peireskius in the second book of his life thus discoursing— Denarium, cùm tempore Regum pependisset trientem unciae, sub antiquâ tamen Rep: pependisse solum sextantem, sub recentiore partem septimam, sub primis Caesaribus octavam, seu drachmam (Atticae nempe drachmae aequalem.)  drachmalem. Now the Paris ounce sent come by Mon unto him Caesars '. This denarius Caesareus, if we respect some definitive quantity, and weight, was as various, and uncertain, as the denarius Consularis of the later Consuls was constant, and fixed: being under the first Emperors, sometimes more, sometimes less, as the reasons, and exigencies of the State did require, or the profuseness, and prodigality of those times. Yet this uncertainty (as far as I have observed) was limited within some certain, and determinate bounds: the denarius Caesareus never exceeding the seventh part of the Roman ounce, and never being less then the eighth part, but often in a middle proportion between both, and that with much inequality. And this made 
b Villalpandus de apparatu Vrbis ac Tem. pli par. 2. l. 2. disp. 2. c. 13.  Villalpandus, after many experiments at Rome, to conclude, that out of the denarii nothing concerning the Roman weights could be determined. Though Portius, Agricola, Ciaconius, Snellius, and several others, before, and after him, are of a contrary opinion. And it may be, if Villalpandus had distinguished between the difference of times, and in them of the different coins, and considered those of the Consuls, distinctly from those of the Caesars, and those of the former Caesars, from those of the later, he would have reform his judgement▪ For it plainly appears, upon examination, tha● the diminution of their weight was an invention introduced after Antonius the Triumvirs 'time wherasbefore the denarius was fixed. Miscuit, saith 
c Plin. l. 33. c. 9  Pliny, denario Triumvir Antonius ferrum, ali● è pondere subtrahunt (his meaning is under th● Emperors, to Vespasian's ', or his own time) cù● sit justum octoginta quatuor è libris signari. Where he says very well in speaking so generally, alii è pondere subtrahunt, without precisely limiting the proportion. For this, as we observed, was very various, and undeterminate: so that whereas the just number of the denarii, according to the practice of the later Consuls, should be eighty four in the Roman pound, we found by the weight of the best of them under the former Caesars, that they coined sometimes eighty six, eighty eight, etc. till at last there come to ●e ninety six denarii in the Roman pound, that is, eight in the ounce. And this, by a very necessary consequence, may be inferred out of another place of Pliny, if we take for granted, what some learned Moderns confess, and the gold and silver coins found to this day, of the later Consuls, and first Emperors, strongly prove, that as the Attics made their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or aureus, double in weight to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: so did the Romans make their aureus double in weight to the denarius. Which proportion they might borrow from the Athenians, and other Grecians, who, 
d Arias Montanus in T●ubal● Cain, sive de mensuris.  as Arias Montanus imagines, first received it from the practice of the Hebrews: or rather, as I suppose, from the Phoenicians, and these from the Hebrews. From whencesoever it come, it is not much material in our inquiry: that which we may safely conclude from thence is this, that the gold being, in respect of weight, double to the silver, the aureus Romanus falling in its weight, the denarius likewise of necessity must fall: else could they not have continued in duplâ ratione. Now in what manner the aureus was first coined, and how afterwards it lost of its primitive weight, Pliny informs us. 
Plin. l. 3. c. 33  Aureus nummus, post annum LXII. percussus est, quam argenteus, ita ut scrupulum valeret sestertiis vicenis, quod efficit in libras ratione sestertiorum, qui tunc erant, sestertios DCCCC. Post haec placuit XL.M. signari ex auri libris: paulatimque principes imminuere pondus, imminuisse vero ad XL.UM. For this testimony, and the former, we are to thank Pliny, seeing there is neither Greek, nor Latin Author extant, from his time to Theodosius, that gives us any certainty, what to conclude concerning the ancient coins. And therefore since this later is of great consequence, but somewhat corrupted, I compared it with the MSS. in the Vatican, and Florentine Libraries, and with a fair one in Balliol College, which renders the later part of it thus. Postea placuit X.XL. signari ex auri libris, paulatimque principes imminuere pondus, imminuisse verò ad XLVIII, where for XLVIII. 
f Villalped● appaer. Vrbis ac Templ●. par. 2. l 2. disp. 2. c. 12  Villalpandus corrects, or rather corrupts, the text, in writing XLV. But Agricola, and 
g Snell. in Eratosth. Batavo. l. 2. c. 5.  Snellius read it by conjecture thus. Post haec placuit XLII. signari ex auri libris, paulatimque principes imminuere pondus, minutissime verò ad XLVIII. And 
h Ibidem.  Snellius gives a reason of it in his Eratosthenes Batavus. Nam ita argentei denarii, & aurei nummi cadem manet analogia, pondere subduplo, ut quamdiu octoginta quatuor argentei è libra, & è singulis unciis septem cudebantur, tam di● quoque aurei duo & quadraginta libram implerent. Postquam vero argentei nummi pondus imminutum est: ut sex & nonaginta in libram constituerentur, tum quoque duo de quinquaginta aurei, pondere tanto leviore, in singulis libris cudi coeperunt. Which conjecture seems not altogether improbable, if we respect the later Consuls, and first Caesars, in whose times we found the aurei to have been double to the denarii Caesarei; but surely long before justinian, the aurei, or as they were then also called the solidi, lost that proportion to the silver, and kept it only to the s●misses aurei, to which they were double, as they were in a triple proportion to the tremisses.  
Wherhfore in stead of these conjectures (which have been the bane of many a good Author) of Agricola, Villalpandus, and Snellius, I would read the later part of those words of Pliny, as the MSS. do, till I can see some concluding reason, or good authority of ancient Authors to the contrary. For I do not see why the Romans at the first might not coin forty aurei out of the libra, as well as forty silver teruncii out of the denarius: which 
i Varro l. 4. de L. Latin.  Varro assures us they did. And who knows wither at the first making of their gold coins, which was sixty two years, according to Pliny, after the first coi●ing of silver, they endeavoured to keep them in ●uplâ ratione, in respect of weight: which graceful manner they might afterwards intro●uce by commerce with the Grecians.  
And here, ere I proceed any farther in my ●nquiry after the Denarius Caesareus, I cannot ●ut complain, either of the negligence of for●er times, or unhappiness of ours: in that not one Author extant mentions the true weight of the denarii, under the Caesars. 
k Xiphilinus in Anton. Caracalla.  Xiphilinus relates in his epitome of Dio, how Antoninus Caracalla corrupted, & abased the coins; but makes no mention of the weight. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. To Antoninus, as other things, so also his money was adulterated. For the silver & gold, which he gave us, the one was prepared of lead silvered over, and the other of brass guilt. 
l Suidas in vote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 siv 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Suidas also speaking of the monetarii writes thus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Monetari● are Artisans employed in the ma●ing of money. These in Aurelians' time corrupted the money, and, having slain their Governor Felicissimus▪ raised a civil war: whom Aurclianus with much difficulty conquering, pu● to death with exquisite torments. And many good laws were made, by several Emperors against adulterating, and corrupting of coins 〈◊〉 ●nd those executed with much severity, even in the time of Christianity. For we found under the Emperor Constantine, that such as offended in this kind, were not only put to death, but to a cruel, and bitter death by fire. L. OM●NES SOLIDI. C. THEOD. SIQVIS SOLI●DI CIRCULUM EXTERIOREM INCI●DERIT, VEL ADULTER ATUM IN VEN●DENDO SUBJECERIT. Omnes solidi, in qui●bus nostri vultus, ac veneratio una est, uno pretio aestimandi sunt, atque vendendi, quanquam diversa formae mensura sit: quod siquis ali●er fecerit, aut capite puniri debet, aut flammis tradi, vel aliâ poena mortifer â. Quod ille et●●m patietur, qui mensuram circuli exterioris adraserit, ut ponderis minuat quantitatem, vel figuratum solidum, adulterâ imitatione, in vendendo subjecerit. In Constantius 'time the same punishment was inflicted. L. PRAEMIO. C. THEOD. DE FALSA MONETA. Pr●mio accusatoribus proposito, quicunque solidorum adulter potuerit reperiri, vel à quoquam fuerit publicatus, illicò omni dilatione submot● flammarum exustionibus mancipetur. And afterwards under V●lentinianus, Theodosius, and Arcadius, they were accounted, and suffered as rei laesae Majestatis. L. FALSAE MONETAE. COD. EODEM. Falsae monetae rei, quos vulgò paracharactas vocant, Majestatis crimine tenentur obnoxii. But no where is it mentioned concerning the denarii, and quinarii, which were the nlver coins, in common use, how much should be their weight. Wherhfore in such a silence of ancient Authors, we have no more solid, and sure foundation of our inquiry: then either by ourselves to examine the weight of the fairest coins under the Emperors: or else to relate, what others long before our time have observed, Antonius Augustinus in general informs us, when coins were at their highest perfection, and how they began to decline with the Roman Empire: as commonly when money comes to be abased, and that the mint, like the pulse, beats too slowly, and irregularly, it is an evident symptom of some distempers in the bowels of a State 
o Le medaglie di tutti i tempi [sono degne da esser osservate degli Artifeci] comminciando de Alessandro magno, well'et à del quale principalment fiorirono, per fin al tempo dell' Imperador Gallieno, nel quale caddero affatto in sieme con l' imperio. Da indi poi in finà Giustiniano si trovano bon medaglic di tutti gli Imperado●i ma con notabil perdita della pulitezza, & perfettione antica. Quelpoi che habbiamo duppo Giustiniano, è tanto cattivo che non si può sosserire. Et se ne dà quasi da ognano la colpa à gli Unni, à i Vandali, à gli Alani, à i Goti, à i Longobardi, & ad altre barbare, & fiere nationi, che signoreggiarono gran parte d' Europa. Ant. August. dialog 1.  The medailes of all times (saith he) [are worthy to be observed by Artisans] beginning from Alexander the great, in whose time they principally flourished, till the Emperor Gallienus, when they chief fell together with the Empire. From thence to the end of justinian, there are found good medailes of all the Emperors, but with a notable diminution of their politenes, and ancient perfection. Those which we have after justinian, are unsufferably bad. The fault by all men is assigned to the Huns, and Vandals, and Alanes, and Goths, and Longobards, and to other barbarous, and savage Nations, who conquered the greatest part of Europe. Erizzo, who lived almost an hundred years since, a very diligent man in the Roman coins, but it is to be wished that he had used more judgement in the explication of them, more particularly informs us. 
p Havendo io tali monete le quali sono del peso di un denario Rome pareggiate di peso alle medaglie di argento, che hanno scolpile le teste de i Principt Romani, le ho ritrovate differenti non poco del peso, si che quelle medaglie p●sano quasi tutt● meno del Denario; & havendo ancora pesate quelle medaglie che hanno scolpita la effigy de i Caesari, le ho sempre ritrovate differenti fra loro nel peso, Erizzo.  Having compared the weight of those sorts of money, which are equal in weight to the Roman denarius, with the medailes of silver, which have the heads of the Roman Emperors imprinted, I have found them not a little different, so that as it were all those medailes weigh less then the denarius. And having also weighed those medailes which have the effigies of the Caesars, I have continually found them different among themselves in weight. This uncertainty so troubled Villalpandus, after many experiments made at Rome, that he knew not what to determine. And it seems 
q Blondus l. 5. de Roma triumph.  Blondus long before conceived it impossible. Haec omnia qualia per singulas aetates fuerint, examussim ostendere, non magis difficil●, quàm impossibile fuerit, non solùm quia obscuris, & nostrâ aetate ignotis verbis sunt à majoribus tradita, sed quia omnis ferè aetas suam habuit cudendi varietatem, & formam. Wherhfore, for farther satisfaction of the Reader, I shall relate some observations of my own: especially those of the twelve first Caesars, which I took, with many others, by an accurate balance, from some choice cabinets in Italy. And first, I shall begin with the gold coins. For seeing the aurei under the former Caesar's 'were in duplâ ratione to the denarii, therefore the weight of those being known, we cannot be ignorant of the weight of the denarii Caesarei. Besides; they are not subject to be consumed by time, and rust, but only ex intertrimento, and therefore we may the safelier given credit to them. And lastly, because the difference, though but of a grain, is of some consideration in gold, the Masters of the Mint use to be the more circumspect about them: whereas in silver coins; since it is hardly worth the pains to stand precisely upon the excess, or defect of every grain, therefore there are few of these so exact, but either exceed, or want, in the very mint, one or two grains, and sometimes more.  

The weight of some aurei under the first twelve Caesars.  
* C. CAES. COS. III Eng: grains. CXXIII7/12

* A second, on the reverse. A. HIRTIUS. PR CXXII¼  
* A third CXXIU¼    
AUGUSTUS. CAESAR. III VIR CXIX½ 

A second, on the reverse, OB CIVES SERVATOS CXIX⅕  
* A third, on the reverse, DIVOS. AUG. DIVI. F CXIX    
TIBERIUS CXVIII¼ 

* A second 

On the forepart TI. CAESAR. DIVI. AUG. F. AUGUSTUS' CXVII½  
On the reverse, a temple      
CALIGULA. CLAUDIUS, on the reverse, S. P. Q. R. OB. CIVES. SERVATOS CXVII 

A second CXVII½  
A third CXVIII½    
* NERO, on the reverse, SALUS CXVI 

* A second, on the reverse, JUPPITER. CUSTOS CXIII½  
* A third, on the reverse, CONCORDIA. AUGUSTA CXIII    
GALBA, on the reverse, CONCORDIA. PROVINCIARUM CXV  
OTHO, on the reverse, SECURITAS S. P. Q. R. CVIII¼  
VITELLIUS, on the reverse, LIBERTAS. RESTITUTA CXII 1/● 
VESPASIANUS, on the reverse, PACI AUGUSTI CXI 

* A second, on the reverse, COS. III TR. POT. CXIU¼  
A third, on the reverse, PONT. MAX. TR. P. COS. VI CXI  
* A fourth, on the reverse, PACI. AUGUSTI CVIII¾  
A fifth, on the reverse, PACI. AUGUSTI CX    
* T. VESPASIANUS, on the reverse, ANNONA. AUG CIX¼  
* DOMITIANUS. COS. II CXIII 

* A second, DOMITIANUS. COS. VI CAESAR. AUG. F. on the reverse, IWENTUTIS. PRINCEPS CXII¼     
These aurei were selected by me, out of several others, as the fairest and intirest; and among these to such as I have prefixed an asterisc, they are such as seemed so perfect, that I could make no just objections against them. By these it appears that 
r Plin. l. 33. c. 3.  Pliny, speaking of the gold coins, rightly informs us. Paulatímque Principes imminuere pondus, imminuisse vero ad XLVIII. That by degrees the Emperors lessened the weight [of the aurei] to the forty eighth part of the Roman pound; that is, to the fourth part of the ounce. For this is the lowest weight, that I found, till Heliogabalus time, who coined new sorts of aurei, different from what had been the constant practice of the Roman State: some of which were the fiftieth part of the libra Romana, and others again so massy, that they were centeni, or bilibres; which not long after were altered, and abolished, by Alexander Severus. The manner is expressed by 
s Lampridius in Alex: Severo.  Aelius Lampridius, in the life of Alex: Severus. Formas binarias, ternarias, & quaternarias, & denarias etiam, atque amplius, usque ad bilibres quoque, & centenas, quas Heliogabalus invenerat, resolvi praecepit, nec in usu cujusquam versari: atque ex eo his materiae nomen inditum est, cùm diceret plus largiendi hanc esse Imperatori causam, si cum multos solidos minores dare posset, dans decem vel amplius unâ formâ, triginta, & quinquaginta, & centum dare cogeretur. Under the same Alex: Severus began the semisses aureorum, and tremisses to be coined, which had not formerly been in use. The semisses were answerable in weight to the denarii Caesarei, when they were lest, that is, ninety six in the Roman pound; though Agricola, Villalpandus, and others, upon a mistake, equal them then to the drachma Attica. 
t Lampridius in Alex: Severo.  Aelius Lampridius writing of Alex: Severus, plainly expresses that in his time they began. Túmque primum semisses aureorum formati sunt, tunc etiam, cum ad tertiam partem aurei vectigal decidisset, tremisses, dicente Alexandro etiam quartarios suturos, quòd minus non posset. Afterwards, Constantine, Constantius, julian, & other succeeding Emperors, lessened the weight of the aurei, whereby there come to be seventy two in the Roman pound, so that each of them weighed the sextula, ot four scrupula. That the aurei of Constantine's 'time were sixty two in the Roman pound, is most evident out of the Codex Theodosianus, where they are also absolutely called Solidi, without the addition of aurei. 
u Codex Theodos. l. 1. de ponderatoribus.  L. SIQVIS. C. THEOD. DE PONDERATORIBUS, ET AURI INLATIONE. Siquis solidos appendere voluerit auri cocti, septem solidos quaternorum scripulorum, nostris vultibus figuratos, adpendat pro singulis unciis. FOURTEEN. verò pro duabus, juxta hanc formam omnem summam debiti inlaturus: eâdem ratione servandâ, etsi materiam quis inferat, ut solidos dedisse videatur. 
x Gui: Pancirolli thesaur. var. lect. utr. juris.  Pancirollus, in his thesaurus variarum lectionum utriusque juris, reads VI solidos, instead of VII. and XII. instead of FOURTEEN. And that it must necessarily be so, besides that the solidi of Constantine now extant prove as much, may be collected out of the proportion of weight, which is here assigned by Constantine himself to the solidi, and that is four scruples, or the sextula. For the solidus containing four scruples, and the ounce containing twenty four scruples, there will therefore be six solidi in the ounce; again, the pound consisting of twelve ounces, and the ounce of six solidi, the whole pound therefore will consist of seventy two solidi. These aurei by justinian in like manner are termed solidi. L. QVOTIESCUNOV E. C. DE SUSCEPTORIBUS, PRAEPOSITIS, ET ARCARIIS. Where he also defines the same weight. 
* Cod. lib. 10. tit. 70. in rescripto Valentiniani & Valentis Impp.  Quotiescunque certa summa solidorum pro tituli qualitate debetur, & auri massa transmittitur, 
* This excellent place very hardly escaped Haloanders 'emendation, who had a great mind to have played the Critic, and to have altered it. For he thus writes. In vetusto codice in rasam membranam haec ita reposita sunt, ut certum sit alteram, & furtasse genuinam lectionem sublatam, & legendum, duodequinquaginta, aut certe quinquaginta. A goodly consequence, because the parchment was scraped, & the first writing altered, therefore the true reading must be expunged and a fal●e one put in: whereas he might with more candour, and ingenuity, have concluded the contrary, that the false one was expunged by the scribe, and the true one inserted. For who uses in copying of MSS. to scrape any thing out of the apographum, but only when by collating it he finds it to be different from the Original?  in LXXII. solidos libra feratur accepta. The same thing is implicitly confirmed by Isidorus (l. 16. Orig. c. 24.) Solidus alio nomine sextula dicitur, quod iis sex uncia compleatur. Hunc ut diximus, vulgus aureum solidum vocat, cujus tertiam partem ideo dixerunt tremissem, quod solidum faciat termissus. Where 
z Agricola l. 2. de pond. & temperate. monetarum.  Agricola, I imagine, truly finds fault with him for calling the solidus, sextula; though the proportion he assigns is right, that is, that the solidus was the sixth part of the Roman ounce, and contained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the weight of the sextula; as it is attested by 
* Zonar. l. 3.  Zonaras: or, which is all one, that seventy two solidi were made out of a Roman pound, as justinian before expressly assigned: and as infinite store of the solidi, or aurei, from Constantine to Focas, which I have weighed, manifestly prove.  
In the same place of 
a Isidorus l. 16. Orig. c. 24.  Isidorus we may collect the reason, why the aureus was called solidus. After that, the semisses, and tremisses aurei were coined, the aureus was called solidus, because nothing was wanting to it. Solidum enim Antiqui integrum dicebant, & totum: In which sense the solidus was also taken for the libra, or assis; that is, as the assis is taken for the whole, according to that usual phrase of Civilians ex ass haeres, when one is heir to the whole inheritance: so the solidus was taken for the whole assis. 
b Vol. Metianus de assis distrib.  Volusius Metianus. Prima divisio solidi, id est librae quod as vocatur, in duas partes dimidias deducitur. From hence (saith 
c Hinc & solidum aureum dixere Romani, ubi idem pondus habere coepit in auro, quod solidus, id est, as haberet in aere, duarum nempe drachmarum. Salmas. de modo Vsur.  Salmasius) the Romans called that the solidus aureus, when it had the same weight in gold, which the solidus, that is, the assis had in respect of brass, that is, two drachmas. Though I rather suppose that the aureus was called solidus, first of all in Severus 'time, not for containing two denarii in weight, (which Salmasius calls drachmas) for so it always did under the later Consuls, and first Emperors, but because the aureus was then first divided into two parts, that is, into the semisses, and tremisses, and so relatively to these the whole aureus was rightly called solidus. Of the same opinion is 
d Agricola l. 2. de pond. & temp. monetarum.  Agricola. Quos aureos, cùm respectum ad semisses & tremisses haberent, tunc primò dixerunt solidos, quòd semisses ex dimidiâ eorum parte, tremisses ex tertia constarent.  
The semisses, and tremisses, of the other Emperors, at some distance after Severus, come to be less in the same proportion, as the aurei were lessened. For the aurei of Severus were double to the denarii Caesarei, and therefore but forty eight in the pound, and not fifty as Heliogabalus made, whose error Severus corrected. But when the later Emperors made seventy two aurei out of the Roman pound, the semisses come also to be diminished, and were half of these new aurei, and not of the former, and the tremisses the third part. And here the aurei lost that proportion, which they kept before of being double to the denarii. Of these tremisses is Justinian to be understood, L. FORTISS. MILITIBUS. COD. DE MILIT ARIOSTO VESTE Fortissimis militibus nostris per Illyricum non binos tremisses pro singulis clamydibus, sed singulos solidos dari praecipimus. And this may be farther proved by a fair 
* I have since perused another tremissis in gold, a very fair one, with this inscription D.N. JUSTINUS. PF. AUG. weighing twenty two grains and better; which formerly belonged to the learned Geographer Ortelius. Besides a third, of Majorianus with CONOB superscribed (which signifies Constantinopolitanum obrizum or Constantinopoli obsignatum) weighing likewise twenty two grains. And a fourth, of justinian, weighing twenty three.  tremissis in gold of my own of justinian, with the inscription D.N. JUSTINIANUS, weighing twenty one grains English, and therefore wanting only three grains ⅓, which it may have lost by time: otherwise it would be exactly the 216th part of the Roman pound, that is, the third part of the aureus, or solidus of those times: whereas if it had been coined to the proportion of the aureus, when there were forty eight in the pound, it should have weighed 36 grains ½, so that it must have lost 15 ½, a difference so great, in a piece of gold so fair, and withal of so small a quantity, altogether improbable. And therefore this coin alone, if no more were extant, would confute their opinion, who maintain, that the tremissis of Justinian differed not from the tremissis of Severus, and consequently the aurei of them both, better then the reasons produced by 
b Covarruvias tom. 1. c. 3. paragr. 1. & 2. de vet. aureis, & argenteis numis.  Covarruvias to the contrary have done.  

The weight of some of the fairest Aurei of the Roman Emperors, from Nerva to Heraclius.  On the fore part of the Aurei are these characters. On the reverse these.  Eng: grains. IMP. NERVA. CAES. AUG. P. M. TR. P. II COS. FOUR P. P. FIDES. EXERCITUS 111½ IMP. TRAIANUS. AUG. GER. DAC. P. M. TR P. COS. VI P. P. DIWS. PATER. TRAIANI 110½ IMP. CAESAR. TRAIAN. HADRIANUS. AUG. COS. II P. M. TR. P. P. AUG 121⅝ ANTONINUS. AUG. PIUS. P. P. TR. P. XII. COS. IIII 119⅝ ANTONINUS. AUG. ARMENIACUS P. M. TR. P. XVIII. IMP. II COS. III in Scuto Victoriae. VIC. AUG 118⅞ IMP. CAES. L. AUREL. VERUS. AUG CONCORDIAE. AUGUSTOR TR. P. II COS. TWO 117¾ L. VERUS. AUG. ARM. PARTHI. MAX TR. P. V IMP. III COS. TWO 113⅛ M. COMM. ANT. P. FEL. AUGP. P JOVI. VLTORI 114 SEVER. P. AUG P. M. TR. P. X. COS. III FELICITAS. SAECULI 114⅛ IMP. M. ANT. GORDIANUS. AFR. AUG CAESAR. M. ANT. GORDIANUS. AFR. AUG 114 * Trebonianus Gallus P. M. TR. P. FOUR COS II P. P 75¾ * Gallienus P. M. TR. P. III COS. P. P. 74½ ●MP. PROBUS. P. F. AUG VICTORIOSO. SEMPER 106 ●MP C. CARINUS. P. F. AUG SPES. AUGG 72½ ... DIOCLETIANUS. P. F. AUG JOVI. CONSERVAT. AUGG 77½ ... MAXIMIANUS. VIRTUS. MILITUM. T 74¼ CONSTANTINUS. MAX. AUG SECURITAS. REIPUBLICAE infra TR 70 ●/●CONSTANTINUS. P. F. AUG. VIRTUS. AUGUSTI. N 68 CONSTANTIUS GLORIA. REIPUBLICAE VOT XXX MULTIS. XXXX. infra SNNS 70 IN. CAME. MAGNENTIUS. AUG VICTORIA. AUG. LIB. ROMANOR infra TR 70¾ FL. CL. JULIANUS. P. F. AUG VOT. X. MULT. XX. infra AUNT 68¼ D. N. JOVIANUS. P. F. PERP. AUG. SECURITAS. REIPUBLICAE VOT. V MULT. X. infra COS. P 68 D. N. VALENS. P. F. AUG RESTITUTOR. REIP. infra ANTO 68¾ D. N. VALENTINIANUS. P. F. AUG RESTITUTOR. REIPUBLICAE 69¾ A second—  69● D. N. GRATI●NVS. P. F. AUG VICTORIA. AUGG. infra TROES 69 A second—  68¾ D. N. THEODOSIUS. P. F. AUG VICTORIA. AUGG. infra CON 68 A second—  69¼ D. N. ARCADIUS. P. F. AUG NOVA. SPES. REIPUBLICAE intra corollam XX. XXX infra CONOB 67½ A second—  68 D. N. HONORIUS. P. F. AUG VICTORIA. AUGGG statua, cui inscript. R. FIVE infra CONOB 69 ●/●A second—  69 A third D. N. HONORIUS. P. F. AUG VICTORIA. AUGGG. N.D. infra CONOB 68● D. N. THEODOSIUS. P. F. AUG IMP. XXXXII. COS. XVII P. F. infra CONOB 69½ D. N. PLA. VALENTINIANUS. VICTORIA. AUGGG. infra CONOB 68 D. N. VALENTINIANUS. AUG VICTORIA. AUGGG infra CONOB 69¼ D. N. VALENTINIANUS. P. F. AUG VICTORIA. AUGG. infra TROES 68 D. N. IV●. NEPOS. P. F. AUG. VICTORIA. AUGGG. A. infra CONOB 69● D. N. ANASTASIUS. P. F. AUG VICTORIA. AUGGG. infra CONOB 68½ D. N. JUSTINIANUS. P. F. AUG VICTORIA. AUGGG. A infra CONOB 69 D. N. FOCAS. PERP. AUG VICTORIA. AUGG. infra CONOB 68 D. N. FOCAS. PERP. AUG VICTORIA. AUG. infra CONOB 69¾ .... HERACLIUS  69● a second  69●  
And thus much of the aurei under the former, and sater Emperors, as they serve to illustrate, and prove the weight of the denarii Caesarei, which is our next, and principal inquiry.  
The denarii under the Caesars were almost as various, and unconstant, as the aurei, sometimes more, sometimes less; and if they had not been so, they could not have kept that proportion to the aurei of the former Emperors, which we assigned. From Augustus time to Vespasian, as I found by examining many of them, they continually almost decreased, till from being the seventh part of the Roman ounce, they come now to be the eighth part: and therefore ninety six were coined out of the Roman libra, whereas before under the Consuls eighty four. From Vespasian to Alex: Severus, as far as I have observed, the silver continued at a kind of stay in respect of weight, excepting only such coins, as upon some extraordinary occasion, both then, and in the first Emperor's time, were stamped, either in honour of the Prince, or of the Empress, and Augusta familia, or else in memory of some eminent action. These last, most usually were equal to the denarii Consulares, and many of them had these characters EX. S. C or else S. P. Q. R Under Severus, and Gordianus, the denarii began to recover their primitive weight, and come to be equal to the denarii Consulares, the half of which also were exactly the Quinarii: and so continued during the succeeding Emperors till justinian, with little diminution, but most commonly with a notable abasement, and mixture of allay. After Justinian, there happened such a deluge of barbarous Nations, which overflowed the greatest part of Europe, that not only the coins, but even the liberal arts, and sciences, began with the majesty of the Empire to decline from their first lustre, and perfection.  
Wherhfore I shall not speak of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a sort of silver coin in use, before, and after justinian, which some collect out of Cedrenus to have been the eighth part of the ounce, 
Cedrenus in histor. compend.  and therefore equal to the denarius, in the lowest valuation; though 
* Suidas in voce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Suidas renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the Scholiastes Basilic. Eclog. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and to contain twenty four 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But I shall not positively determine, either the weight of this, or of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or siliqua in silver, both coined when the Imperial seat was translated to Byzantium, unless I had examined some of the fairest of them. And for the same reason I shalll not define the Hebrew denarius, mentioned by Elias in Thisbite, in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & by 
* p. 72. Col. 4.  Moses Gerundensis upon Exodus, and by the Chaldy Paraphrase, 2 Reg. 5. 5. which I imagine to have been no other then the Roman denarius, used by the Jews: neither shall I determine the Arabian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dinar, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 derham: the former of which the Rabbins call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, used by Rhasis, Avicen, Mesue, and by several other Arabians, both Physicians, and Historians. All that can certainly be concluded is this, that by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dinar, when we speak of a coin, is meant sometime the denarius, and sometime the aureus: but when we speak of a weight, always the aureus is understood: ●s by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 derham, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or silver ●ram. But surely the quality of the thing is different from the name: the silver drachma of the Arabians, as it is generally now used in the Mahometan dominions in the East, consisting ●f XLVII. 41/52.grains English, (as I have found by ●eighing many of them) which is much less then ●ther the Drachma Attica, or the denarius Consu●ris: & somewhat less then the Denarius Caesarean. And yet it is not improbable, but that this ●ay have continued with them, without any dimi●tion, for six, or seven hundred years to our ●mes: as well as the Roman pound, and ounce, ●ave continued entire sixteen hundred years, and better. But to omit any farther prosecution of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Arabians, which may hereafter more fully be discussed, when we shall handle their measures, and weights, and to go on with our discourse of the Roman denarius. After the breaking in of so many barbarous Nations, as of a torrent, into the Roman Empire, the denarius began generally to be disused, every one almost of these, as an argument of their Sovereignty, and conquests, making new coins of their own: or else such as continued the former, either by alleys so abased the fineness, and valuation of the coins, or by several diminution● so impaired the weight, that the denarius totally fell, and at last almost vanished into nothing▪ Neither will this seem strange, if we shall consider that the like alteration, in respect of weight hath happened, by the revolution of a less time, in our own coins. I shall instance in our denarius, or penny, which in Ethelreds' time, that is, a little more then DC. years since, was the twentieth part of the Troy, or silver ounce: as 
b Lambar●i Gl●ss●rium 〈◊〉 1644  M● Lambard in his Saxon Glossary observes, and a● by experience I have found (and the same proportion was anciently observed by the 
c In appendice libri de limit. agrorum: luxta Gallos vigesima pars unciae denarius est, & 12 denarii solidum reddunt.  French in their denier). This proportion continued successively to Ed●: the first, in whose time we found the weight of the denarius by 
* Stat. 31. Edov. 1.  Statute to be thu● defined. Per ordinationes totius regni Angliae denarius Angliae, qui vocatur Sterlingus, rotundus sine tonsur à, ponder abit 32 grana frumenti in medio spicae, & 20 denarii faciunt uncian, & 12 unci● faciunt libram. Under 
d Stat. 9 Ed. 3.  Edward the third it cam● first to be diminished to the twenty sixth part of the Troy ounce: and under 
e Stat. 2. Hen. 6.  Henry the sixth it fell to be the two and thirtieth. In 
f Stat. 5. Ed. 4.  Edward the fourths time it come to be the fortieth. Under 
g Stat. 36. H. 8.  Henry the eighth at first it was the fortieth, then the forty fifth. Afterwards sixty pence were coined out of the ounce in the second year of 
h Stat. 2. El:  Queen Elizabeth; and during her reign sixty two: which proportion is observed in these times. So that it is evident that Ethelreds' 'penny was bigger then three of ours. And after times may see this of ours, as well as the Roman Denarius, to be quite diminished, and brought to nothing. For if either our own exigencies, or the exigencies of foreign States, with whom we have commerce, 'cause us, or them (as occasions will never be wanting) to altar the proportions of the gold, and silver coins, either in respect of weight, or in respect of purity, or lastly, in respect of the valuation, the gold bears to silver; by all, or some of these causes, there will inevitably hap such a diminution of the penny (and proportionably of our other coins) that at length it will not be worth the coining. But I leave this speculation to such, whom it doth more nearly concern. And certainly it is a consideration not of the lest importance; money being as the sinews, and strength of a State, so the life, and soul of commerce: and if those advantages, which one Country may make upon another, in the mystery of exchanges, and valuation of coins, be not throughly discovered, and prevented, by such as ●it at the helm of the State, it may far with them after much commerce, as with some bodies after much food, that instead of growing full, and fat, they may pine away, & fall into an irrecoverable consumption. But I return to the Roman denarius, which we have brought so low, that there is nothing now left of it, but only the name: and that also suffered an 
* In the same manner the solidus, or aureus, as it lost its valuation, so suffered an alteration in the Greek name. For instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we found the Glosses to tender it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Glossae. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 solidu●: and in the same Glosses we read 〈◊〉 interpreted Biniones, and 〈…〉.  alteration. For the later Greeks instead of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called it the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and both Greeks, and Latins, and sometimes the Arabians, took it not in the same sense, as it passed for in the first institution, that is, for a silver coin, worth in valuation ten, or sixteen asses, but for any sort of coin whatsoever. And therefore 
i Meursii Glossarium Graeco-Barbar: in voce 〈◊〉.  Meursius 'observation, in his Glossarium Graeco-Barbarum, is worth our consideration. Postea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dixerunt aevo corruptiore, & generaliter pro quâvis pecuniâ. Sicut Itali denaro. Galli Denier, Hispani Dinero. Anonymus de bello sacro. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   
Whence the learned 
k Scalig de re numm.  Jos. Scaliger rightly observes, that, ultimis temporibus denarii pro exigua stipe usurpati sunt, ut hodie in Gallia. Imperator Aurelianus: Philippeos minutulos quinquagenos, aeris denarios centum. Eos Vopiscus in Bonoso sestertios aeris vocat. Macrobius de nummo ratito loque●s, qui erat sr●us: Ita fuisse signatum hodieque intelligitur in alcae lusu, cùm pueri denarios in sublime ●actantes, capita, aut navia lusu teste v●t●st●tis ●●●amant. In Evangelio secundum 〈◊〉 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Hilarius 〈…〉 inopis Deo acceptiores. Luc. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ambrose, duo aer●▪ Vetustissimus est igitur denarii usus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, vel stipe. Thus far Scaliger.  
Such an uncertainty being then, as we have mentioned, both of the aurei, and denarii, under the first Caesars, in whose times the purest coins, and the best wits most flourished, and such an abasement, and impureness of the silver under the later Emperors, no reasonable man can imagine, that either the ancient Grammarians, Poets, Orators, Historians, or especially Physicians, whom it did most concern to be precise, and most of which lived under the former Emperors, did ever allude to the weight of the denarius Caesareus, but rather to the Consularis. And to this only, and to no other, did the Attic drachma mentioned by Dioscorides, Cleopatra, Galen, Julius Pollux, Oribasius, and the rest of the Greek Authors correspond. And thus have we finished our discourse concerning the denarius, in the notion, and acception of the Ancients, both Greeks, and Latins.  
Our next labour should be to compare it with the standards for weights of divers Nations, used in these times. For which I had recourse to the public Zygostatae, and Ponderatores, in my travails abroad: and for my observations I must refer the Reader to this ensuing Table.  

A Table of the gold, and silver 
* These weights (excepting the rotulo of Damascus) were diligently compared with the Originals, and Standards: in like manner as I examined the measures above described. In both which if any shall found some ●ide difference, from some Originals, AS five, or six grains in the English pound, & it may be one, or two parts of a thousand in the English foot, different from the Standards in the Exchequer, or the Tower, or at Winchester, or some other place, it is not much to be wondered. For I have found as great differences in collating the English Standards themselves: and have heard Gasparo B●●ti (one of the 〈◊〉 men in this kind that I have known) to complain of the same diversity at Rome. 〈◊〉 though it be a 〈◊〉 that in any 〈…〉 Kingdom, 〈◊〉 Commonwealth, 〈…〉 Standard, which 〈…〉 of 〈…〉 justice, should be unequal, & therefore unjust; yet unless more art, and circumspection be used, then hitherto hath been put in practice, it is impossible but such inequalities will creep in. But this observation of my by some may be thought too nice, and curious. That which follows, I am certain, is as necessary▪ as the preservation of the life of many a man. And that is, that some Physicians erroneously imagine the granum auri to be alike in all Nations. And therefore Fernelius, a very able man (who, I think, was the first Author of that opinion) writes thus. (Fern l. 4. c. 6. Method. Medendi) Granum, cui tanquam basi reliqua innituntur pondera, ratum constansque esse decet; neque id granum esse hordei, neque tritici, neque ciceris, neque frugis ullius, aut legumi●s, quod aullius par s●t ubique gentium pondus. At vero nummarium minutum, quod aurifabri granum appellant, & Latinè momentum dici potest, omnibus mundi nationibus unum idemque est, & stabile, quod auri sacra fames, & opum furiosa libido, inviolatè & incorrupte servat, idque signis & exemplaribus undique identidem collatis. Indeed it was an useful fancy of his to think of some common measure, in which all Nations might concur: though it is more to be wished for, then ever to be expected: But that asseveration of his, inviolatè, & incorruptè servat, idque signis & exemplaribus undique identid● collatis, from a man of such rare abilities, I cannot but extremely wonder at. For if we shall go not farther to confute his assertion, then to compare our grana auri with those of Paris, which Fernelius used, we shall found ours much bigger: XXIX. English grains almost equalling XXXVI. of Paris. Or if we shall compare the Spanish grana auri, with his, we shall found those much less: XXXVI. Spanish grains weighing but XXVIII. ½. of his at Paris. The like could I demonstrate in those of other Countries. By which dangerous, and notable error, for want either of due care, or an exact balance, we may conceive that whatsoever also is delivered by the Ancients, in the like nature, is not presently without due examination to be credited.  weights of several Nations, taken from their Standards, and compared with the Denarius.  
Eng: grains.  
SUch parts, or grains, of the English Standard for gold, and silver (or of the Troy weight) as the denarius Consularis containeth 62, according to the weight of the best coins, or according to the weight of the Congius of Vespasian 62●  
The ancient, and modern Roman ounce containeth 438  
The ancient, and modern Roman pound, consisting of twelve ounces, containeth 5256  
The Troy pound, or English Standard of gold & silver; consisting of twelve ounces, containeth 5760  
The Troy, or English ounce, (to which five shillings two pence of our money in these times are equal) containeth 480  
The Paris pound, or Standard for gold and silver, of XVI ounces 7560  
The Paris ounce 4721/● 
The Spanish pound, or Standard for gold and silver, of sixteen ounces, taken by me at Gibraltar 7090  
Another weighed by me at Gibraltar 7085  
The Spanish pound in Villalpandus, is (I know not by what error) but 7035  
The Spanish ounce at Gibraltar (the pound consisting of 7090. grai. English) 4431/● 
The Venetian pound, or Standard for gold and silver, of XII. oun. 5528  
The Venetian ounce 460▪ ●  
The Neapolitan pound, or Standard for gold & silver, of twelve ounces 4950  
The Neapolitan ounce 4121/● 
The pound, or Standard for gold and silver, of twelve ounces, at Florence, Pisa, and Ligorn 5286  
The ounce at Florence, Pisa, and Ligorn 440½  
The pound, or standard, at Sienna, for gold & silver of twelve oun. 5178  
The ounce at Sienna 431½  
The ounce at Genoa, for gold and silver 405●  
The Turkish Okeh, or Oak, at Constantinople, consisting of four hundred silver drams ●9128  
The silver dram generally used in the great Turks 'dominions: as also in Persia, and in the Moguls ' Countries, if I be not misinformed 47●  
The Turkish sultani, or Egyptian sheriff, being a gold coin, with which the Barbary & Venetian chequeen, and Norimberg ducat, within a grain more, or less, agreed. 53½  
The Ratel, or Rotulo, for gold and silver of 144. drams, at Cairo 6886●  
The Ratel, or Rotulo, for silk of 720 drams, at Damascus (with which I suppose they there formerly weighed their gold and silver; because most Countries use the same weights for silks, gold, and silver) 34430⅖   
In this Table I judged it much fit to compare the denarius, with the Standards for gold, and silver of several Nations, then with their gold and silver coins, now currant. Because the pounds, and ounces of the Standard, continued always the same; whereas the gold, and silver coins, being cut in several proportions, according to the exigencies of the State, admit of several alterations, and diminutions.   

The CONCLUSION.  
IT was my intention from the Pes Rom. and denarius, together with the Congius of Vespasian, to have deduced the other weights, and measures, used by the Romans; and from those of the Romans, by such testimonies, as are upon record in the writings of the Ancients, to have inferred those of the Hebrews, Babylonians, Egyptians, Grecians, and of other Nations. A work I confess intricate, and full of difficulties: wherein I could expect neither to given myself, nor others satisfaction, without first laying some sure, and solid principles for the basis, and foundation. Therefore that occasioned me to insist the more largely in the prosecution of the pes Rom. and denarius, and to examine all the ways, I could possibly imagine, for the evident proof, and confirmation of them. What in this kind I have done, and with how much truth, and diligence, I leave to the impartial test of after times, the rest at more leisure may be perfected. Yet these following observations, as a coronis to the whole work, I thought would not be unacceptable, if by way of anticipation I communicated them to the world: and those are how the Originals, and Standards, of weights, and measures, notwithstanding the revolutions, and vicissitudes of Empires, may be perpetuated to posterity. Among several ways, which I have thought of, I know noon more certain, and unquestionable, then to compare them with some remarkable, and lasting monuments, in remote Countries, that have stood unimpaired for many hundred years, and are like to continued as many more. In which kind I made choice of the first, and most easterly of the three great Pyramids in Egypt; of the basis of that admirable Corinthian pillar, erected (as I suppose) by one of the Ptolemies, a quarter of a mile distant to the South from Alexandria, being one vast, and entire marble stone: Of the rock at Tarracina, or Anxur, where it adjoins to the via Appia, and almost touches the Tyrrhene sea: Of the gate, or entrance into the Pantheon, or Temple of Agrippa, dedicated by him to all the gods, and by the Christians to all Saints. Of the Porta sancta, in that new, and exquisite structure of Saint Peter's Church in Rome. If the like had been attempted by some of the ancient Mathematicians, our times would have been freed from much uncertainty, in discovering the weights, and measures of the Greeks, and Latins.  
The first, and most Easterly of the three great Pyramids in Egypt, hath on the North side a square descent, when you are entered a little passed the mouth of it, there is a joint, or line, made by the meeting of two smooth, and polished stones over your head, which are parallel to those under your feet, the breadth at that joint, or line, is 3 feet and ● of the English foot.  
Within the Pyramid, and about the midst of it, there is a fair room, or chamber, the top of which is flat, and covered with 9 massy stones: in it, there stands a hollow tomb of one entire marble stone: the length of the South side of this room at the joint, or line, where the first, and second rows of stone meet, is 34 feet ●  
The breadth of the west side of the same room at the joint, or line, where the first, and second row of stones meet, is 17 feet 190/●●●● 
The hollow, or inner part, of the marble tomb near the top, on the west side of it, is in length 6 feet 488/1●●●.  
The hollow, or inner part, of the marble tomb, near the top of it, on the north side, is in breadth a feet 218/●●●●.  
The uppermost line b c, over the figures CXX, in the innermost, and deepest part of the engraving, is in length 4 English feet, and 〈◊〉  
The stately gate, or entrance, into the Pantheon, or Temple built by Agrippa in Rome, the jambes, and top, and bottom of it, being all of one entire marble stone, is in breadth between the jambes, or sides, some three inches above the bottom, and some nine inches within, nineteen feet 6●2/1000 
The Porta sancta, on the right hand of the frontispiece of Saint Peter's Church in Rome, is in breadth on the pavement, or threshold, between the jambes, or sides of the entrance, eleven feet 928/1000 
The great gate, or entrance, which is the middlemost of the five in the frontispiece of Saint Peter's Church in Rome, the doors of which are covered with leaves of brass, with very fair and exquisite figures, is in breadth on the pavement, or threshold, between the jambes, or sides of it, eleven feet 948/1000 
The measures being fixed, we may likewise fix the weights in this manner; by making a vessel of a cubicall figure, answerable to the proportion of any one of these feet, or palms, or braces, which are described in the Table at the end of the first Treatise. This cubicall vessel being filled with c●eer fountain water, we are to weigh it with an exact balance, and to express, the weight of it by some one of those weights, which we have placed in a Table at the end of the second Treatise. The side of this cube being known, and the weight of it in water defined, the rest of the weights in the second Table, by way of consequence by those proportions, which we have assigned, may be discovered. Thus for example: the Roman foot described by Villalpandus is nine hundred eighty six parts, such as the English foot contains a thousand: this being cubed (saith he) weighs of fountain water eighty Roman pounds. If therefore there be given nine hundred eighty six parts of a thousand of the English foot, the cube of this will given us eighty Roman pounds in fountain water: and consequently the other weights will be discovered by those proportions, we have assigned to them, in respect of the Roman pound. Again, eighty Roman pounds of water being given, if we reduce this into a cubicall body, the side of it will given the Roman foot described by Villalpandus: and consequently the other measures may be deduced, by those proportions we have given them in a peculiar Table. Whereby it appears, that as by measures weights may be preserved, so on the contrary by weights measures may be restored.   

Some directions to be observed in comparing the valuations of coins.  
IN comparing the valuations, either of ancient coins with modern, or of modern one with another, we are to consider: first, the intrinseck of them, and then the extrinseck. The intrinseck is either the fineness of the coin in respect of metal, or the gravity in respect of weight. The extrinseck I term first, the character imprinted on the coin: and secondly, the valuation enjoined by the Prince, or State: by which character, and valuation, what originally, and materially, was but common metal, or plate, comes now legally, and formally, to be currant money. With these limitations, if we shall compare ancient coins with modern, and modern one with another, it will be no difficult matter to proportion out their several respective valuations; and withal to reconcile the seeming repugnancies, either of ancient coins, now found, differing from the traditions of ancient Authors: or the traditions of ancient Authors differing among themselves.  
I shall first given an instance of modern coins compared with modern, in our English money compared with that of Spain, as being most familiar to us: the application of which will by analogy serve for all other distinct States, and times, using distinct coins.  
In comparing therefore English money with Spanish money in England, or Spanish money with English in Spain, we are thus to proceed: First, we are to examine wither they be of a like fineness, for the intrinseck; if they be, then an ounce of English money, and an ounce of Spanish (supposing the weight of the ounce to be alike) will be of like value in any other Country out of England, and Spain; where neither are currant, but only considered as so much metal, or plate. Secondly, we are to consider the extrinseck, that is, the form, and stamp of the coin, with the valuation of it by the injunction of the Prince of either State; and here that which before was equal, comes now to be unequal. For an ounce of English money in England comes to be more worth, then an ounce of Spanish money in England: because this wants the character, stamp, and valuation of our Princes, whereby it is currant and for the same reason will an ounce of English money be less in valuation, then an ounce of Spanish money in Spain, supposing (as I said) the ounce in both Countries to be exactly one and the same.  
The same analogy will be, if we compare ancient coins, as those of the Hebrews, Greeks, and Romans, with our modern coins. We are first, to consider the intrinseck of them, wither they be of a like weight, and fineness for the metal, with ours: and this is the natural, or physical consideration. From whence we may conclude, that if, for example, so many Attic tetradrachmes do equal in pureness, and weight, so many of our English shillings, newly brought from the mint, or so many of our Troy, or silver ounces, taken from the Standard, then are they to be balanced with these in the acception of them as plate; and a silver-smith, abstracting from the extrinseck, that were to melt them both, would given a like value for them both. But if we secondly, look upon them with the image, and character of the State, and in the notion of money, which is the politic consideration, then that which before in the trutinâ, and scale, was equal, in the foro, and in commerce, comes to be unequal: and an ounce of English money shall pass for more, then an ounce in Attic tetradrachmes, with reference to the expenses of the mint, and to the civil valuation, depending upon a mandate, or law, enacted by the Prince.  
In like manner will it be, if we compare ancient coins with ancient, made in different States, as it is in comparing ancient with modern.  
Upon these grounds of reason it will follow, that whereas the Roman Authors make the denarius Consularis to be equal to the drachma Attica, and the Greeks equal the drachma Attica to the denarius Consularis, that both say true; and yet both of them, if we speak strictly, and exactly, may be deceived. For the denarius Consularis examined by the balance, which is the best judge of the intrinseck. (I speak of the intrinseck in respect of weight, and not of the intrinseck in respect of fineness, that being best discovered by the scale, and this by the test: which last for the more clearness of my discourse, I suppose in all these coins to be alike). I say the Denarius Consularis is found by me, contrary to the opinion of all modern writers, to be lighter, then the drachma Attica: and therefore, to speak strictly, and precisely cannot be equal to it in the intrinseck. But again, if we look upon the extrinseck of the drachma Attica, and denarius Consularis, that having the stamp of Athens, and this of Rome▪ here reason must be our balance, and not the trutina. For the Athenian coin being a foreigner, and not currant in Italy, in the way o● exchange, and commerce, will lose of its primitive valuation it had at Athens, and for wan● of the extrinseck of the Roman stamp, necessarily rebate in the intrinseck. And therefore both Greeks, and Romans, writing in Italy might truly say, that the denarius Consularis and drachma Attica, were equal, that is, speak●ing in civil commerce, and popular estimation: although they were unequal in the intrinseck, and natural valuation.  
But if we shall change the scene, and carry the denarius Consularis to Athens, the ca●● will quite be altered. For the denarius being stranger, and the drachma Attica a denizon, tha● cannot have the same privileges with this. An● therefore the extrinseck of the denarius bein● there of no use, and the intrinseck in respect o● weight falling short of the drachma, it must necessarily be much less in valuation at Athens, then the drachma: and I think not advised Athenian, writing in Attica, would make them equal, I am certain no nummularius would.  
The same may be said of the Hebrew shekel, and Attic tetradrachme, and of all other coins, of distinct States, mentioned in classical Authors. Thus Philo, and Josephus, in Judaea, both truly equal the shekel to the Attic tetradrachme, that is, in way of commerce; though the shekel be unequal, and less then the tetradrachme (as I have found by examining many of them) in a just notion of weight. The reason is evident by what hath been expressed before. For in Judaea the extrinseck makes amendss, for what the shekel wants in the intrinseck; and on the contrary, what the tetradrachme exceeds in the intrinseck, is diminished for want of the extrinseck, till at length in a popular estimation they come to be equal. But the quite contrary would hap, in the transportation of shekel from Jerusalem to Athens. Here the shekel would necessarily fall from its primitive valuation, and the tetradrachme, being considered now not longer as a foreigner, would recover what it lost in Judaea, and consequently rise above the Hebrew shekel: as having a double advantage in the extrinseck, from the State, and in the intrinseck from its weight.  
But what need we to go so far for examples, when as we instanced before, we have them nearer home? The Spanish quarters of the dolar, or double rials, pass ordinarily in our Sea towns but for shillings, (whereas they are worth in the intrinseck thirteen pence farthing) and our shillings pass in Spain scarce for a rial and an half. For theirs wanting in England our extrinseck, and ours in Spain wanting their extrinseck, must respectively rise, and fall in their valuation.  
FINIS.