cheenc03a.pdf

SHEKEL
derivative of the Babylonian. The chief denominatior~
were the talent (rdhavrov, 7;. niyxop, ]or. Ant. iii. 6 ,),
the mina (pv:, a,?, MANEH [g.v.]. cp Ezek. 4511; translated
' pound ' in I K. 1017 Ezra 269 Neh. f 71 f.; the
word ,pound' is also used for hlrpo, the Roman iidra
of 1053.3 grs. troy, in In. 123 1939). and the shekel.'
For ordinary purposes the talent was divided into 60
minas, and the mina into 60 shekels ; but for weighing
gold a mina of only jo shekels and a talent of 3000
instcad of 3600 shekels were used. The shekel was the
same in both. Further, payments to the royal treasury
in Babylonia were calculated on a slightly higher scale
(the'royal norm') than ordinary payments (for which
the 'common norm' was used). (This difference is
probably alluded to in 2 S. 1426: Absalonl's hair weighed
'two hundred shekels after the king's weight.' Schrvder
[XATIZ1 1421 $upposes that the trade-shekel weighed
more than the money-shekel, and that the heavier is
here referred to ; but there seems to be no reason for
identifying the trade-norm with the royalLnorm.) Next,
since it was desirable to be able to exchange a round
number of shekel5 (minas, talents) of silver against a
shekel (mina, talent) of gold, and since the ratio of
value between gold and rilver was inconveniently 134 : I.
a new shekel imina, taientl had to be errahlished for
the weighing the less precious metal. Finally, there
were two systems. the heavy and the light, in the former
of which the denominations weiehed " twice as much as
in the latter.
The evidence of extant Babylonian weights, checked
by the weights of coins struck in Later timer on derived
standards, enables us to obtain the followine series of
weights ured for the precious metals :-
Talent '717,789' !3~8,8go' 757,380'
Minn. i 12,963. 6.481.51 12.623V
ShckcI . . ~59.~1
L
) ~29.631 152.51
Value of the 1
pol< rhekel ! i3,4SF3 1 1,718.4 3,366.6
m SIIVCI I
378,6906
6,3rr.s*
n6.zj"
1,684.3
By adopting silver units of the weights given in the lust
two rows, a round number of units of rilver (10 or 15)
could always be exchanged against a single unit of
gold, provided the two belonged to the same norm and
5ystem. The standard according to which ten pieces
of silver corresponded to one of gold is known as the
Babylonian or Persic, because silver coins which agree
with this standaid were rtruck by the Persian kings
(who adopted it from its Babylonian source) and by
their immediate subordinates ; the standard reached
the Greeks overland through dirtrictr, such as Lydia.
which were under Persian influence. On the other
hand, the standard equating fifteen pieces of silver to
one of gold w;cr adopted by the great Phaenician trading
cities, and reached the Greeks directly by sea; hence
it is known as the Phaenician standard.
What evidence. then. have r e for the use of either
or bth oi there svstemr in Palestine? A certain
Epidencs "Umber of extant weights (see
forPdestine, WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. 8 4)
seem to sueeest -" that a low form of the
Babylonian rhekel war in use in Palestine. On the
other hand, the literary and numismatic evidence points
to the Phaenician standard havine been ured, at least
in port-exilic timer, side by ride with the orher system.
SHEgEL
In the first place, we know (by calculation) from Ex.
38.5 / [PI that the Hebrew talent contained 3000
shekels. Again, Joiephus (Anf.xiv. 71) equates the
mina ured for weighing gold to ah Roman poundsi.e,
12.633.3 grx troy-which is very near to the
heavy gold mina of the common norm (2). The same
writer (op.