Parsa

Derived from Babylonia.

— Biblical Data:

While the references in the Old Testament are sufficient for a general knowledge of the ancient Hebrew system of weights and measures, and of the mutual relations of the several units, they are not adequate for an exact determination of the absolute standard of measurement. The rabbinical statements that a fingerbreadth equals seven barleycorns laid side by side, and that a log is equivalent to six medium-sized eggs, are as indefinite as the statement on the Siloam inscription that the Siloam canal (537.6 meters as measured by Conder) was 1,200 ells long—evidently a round number. Since, however, the entire system of measures corresponds almost exactly with the Babylonian, from which the Hebrew measures were in all probability derived, it may be assumed that the Hebrew system corresponded with the Babylonian with regard to the absolute standard as well. It is true that the Egyptian system may have exerted some influence here and there, as will be shown later, but it is now generally recognized that the culture of ancient Syria, even before the Israelites had migrated there, was almost wholly under Babylonian influence.

I. Measures of Length:

The Cubit.

The original measures of length were derived from the human body: the finger, hand, arm, span, foot, and pace. As these measures differ with each individual, they must be reduced to a certain definite standard for general use. The Hebrew system, therefore, had such a standard; the ell ("ammah") contained 2 spans ("zeret"), while each span was made up of 3 handbreadths ("ṭefaḥ") of 4 fingers ("eẓba' ") each. This division of the ell into 6 handbreadths was the one customarily employed in antiquity, but it was supplanted in Babylonia by the sexagesimal system. The Old Testament mentions two ells of different size. Ezekiel implies that in his measurement of the Temple the ell was equal to a "cubit and a handbreadth" ( 5, 43:13)—that is, one handbreadth larger than the ell commonly used in his time. Since among all peoples the ell measured 6 handbreadths, the proportion of Ezekiel's ell to the others was as 7 to 6. The fact that Ezekiel measured the Temple by a special ell is comprehensible and significant only on the assumption that this ell was the standard of measurement of the old Temple of Solomon as well. This is confirmed by the statement of the Chronicler that the Temple of Solomon was built according to "cubits after the first measure" (2 Chronicles 3:3), implying that a larger ell was used at first, and that this was supplanted in the course of time by a smaller one.

The Egyptians in like manner used two kinds of ells in exactly the same proportion to each other, namely, the smaller ell of 6 handbreadths and the larger "royal" ell, which was a handbreadth longer. The latter measures 525-528 millimeters, and the former 450 millimeters, estimating a handbreadth as 75 millimeters. It would seem at first sight that the Egyptian system of measurement had influenced the Hebrew, and the two Hebrew ells might naturally be considered identical with the Egyptian measures. This assumption is, however, doubtful. Since all the other measures were derived from Babylon, in all probability the ancient Hebrew ell originated there also. The length of the Babylonian ell is given on the famous statue of King Gudea (beginning of 3d millennium B.C.), found in Telloh in southern Babylonia. A scale is inscribed on this statue, according to which the ell may be reckoned at 495 millimeters, a measurement which is confirmed by certain Babylonian tablets. These measure, according to the Babylonian scale, ⅔ ell, or, according to the metric system, 330 millimeters (1 foot) on each side. The ell of 495 millimeters seems to have been used also in Phenicia in measuring the holds of ships, but these computations can not be discussed in detail here. The length of the ancient Hebrew ell can not be determined exactly with the data now controlled by science; but it was either 525 or 495 millimeters, and this slight difference between the two figures is scarcely appreciable in an estimate of the size of Hebrew edifices, etc.

II. Measures of Capacity:

The Hebrew system here corresponds exactly with the Babylonian. In contradistinction to the Egyptian metrology, which shows the regular geometric progression—1, 10, 20, 40, 80,160—the Hebrew and the Babylonian systems are based on the sexagesimal system. The unit of the Babylonian system was the "maris," a quantity of water equal in weight to a light royal talent. It contained, therefore, about 30.3 liters. The maris was divided into 60 parts, probably called "minæ" (= .505 liter). All the other measures are multiples of this mina: 12, 24, 60, 72 (60 + 12), 120, 720 minæ.

The Log.

In the Hebrew system the log (Leviticus 14:10) corresponds to the mina. Since the Hellenistic writers equate the log with the Græco-Roman sextarius, whatever these writers say on the relation of the sextarius to other measures applies also to the relation of these measures to the log. The log and the sextarius, however, are not equal in capacity. The sextarius is estimated at .547 liter, while there is no reason to regard the log as larger than the Babylonian mina, especially as other references of the Greek metrologists support the assumption that the log was equal to the mina. The fact that in the Old Testament the log is mentioned only as a fluid measure may be merely accidental, for the dry measures, which are distinguished in all other cases from the liquid measures, also have the log as their unit. The corresponding dry measure may, however, have been known under a different name. The same possibility must be borne in mind in the case of the cab, the next larger measure, containing four logs and mentioned only as a dry measure. A differentiation of the dry and liquid measures gives two simple systems, as follows:

In these tables that homer has been omitted which is, according to Exodus 16:36, one-tenth of an ephah, and which is, therefore, identical with the " 'issaron" (Numbers 28:5 et al.). The tenth part of a bath, for fluids, which is mentioned in Ezekiel 45:14 without a special name, corresponds in content to the homer, or 'issaron, among the dry measures. The homer and its liquid equivalent do not belong to the original system, as may be seen by the proportion the homer bears to the other measures: 3⅓ homers = 1 se'ah, 1⅔ homers = 1 hin, 1 homer = 1⅘ cabs = 7⅕ logs. The tenth part of a bath is, furthermore, mentioned only in Ezekiel and in the Priestly Code. The old division of the ephah and the bath was into three parts; Ezekiel mentions also the sixth part of an ephah. At a later period the se'ah and the cab disappear as dry measures, so that the Priestly Code refers simply to the tenth part of the ephah. This new division into tenths may be connected with the appearance of the decimal system, which can be traced elsewhere, especially in weights and coins.

Babylonian Weight in the Form of a Lion with Inscription

Only one measure in addition to those enumerated above is mentioned in the Old Testament. This is the "letek," which occurs but once (Hosea 3:2). It is a dry measure, and is uniformly designated in tradition as equal to ⅓ homer, although it is doubtful whether a definite measure is implied by this term. The Septuagint translates "letek" in its single occurrence as νήβελοἴνου = "a skin of wine."

III. Measures of Weight:

It is evident from inscriptions that the Babylonian system of weight was used in Syria and Palestine even before the entrance of the Israelites into the country. The Egyptian inscription of Karnak records the tribute which the kings of Egypt exacted from their Syrian vassals. Although the sums are given according to Egyptian weight, the odd numbers clearly indicate that the figures were computed originally by some other system, which may easily be shown to have been the Babylonian.

The Mina.

The Babylonians reckoned weight in talents, minæ, and shekels. Layard found in the ruins of Nineveh several Babylonian units of weight, some in the form of a crouching lion and others in that of a duck, the former being twice as heavy as the latter. This proves that a heavy and a light talent were used in Babylon, the latter one-half the weight of the former. A heavy talent = 60,600 grams; 1 mina (1/60 talent) = 1,010 grams; 1 shekel = 16.83 grams; 1 light talent = 30,300 grams; 1 light mina = 505 grams; 1 light shekel = 8.41 grams. There was, in addition to this "royal" weight, another "common" weight which was somewhat lighter (compare the large "royal" ell and the "common" ell, mentioned above). According to this common weight the heavy talent weighed 58,944 grams; its mina 982.4 grams; its shekel 16.37 grams; and the light talent, mina, and shekel just one-half as much. The common heavy talent and its subdivisions were the weights current in Syria and Palestine, as Josephus expressly states ("Ant." 14:106, ed. Niese). According to him, 1 Jewish mina (of 50 shekels) was equal to 2½ Roman pounds, or 818.62 grams; hence 1 shekel was equivalent to 16.37 grams, and 1 old mina of 60 shekels to 982.2 grams. There were also the half-shekel or bekah ("beḳa,'").

In the course of time the sexagesimal system was superseded in Babylonia also, perhaps under Egyptian influence. The mina of 60 shekels was replaced throughout Asia Minor by the mina of 50 shekels. The shekel remained the same, forming the unit of weight, while the mina and talent were reduced, containing respectively 50 shekels = 818.6 grams and 3,000 shekels = 49,110 grams.

Money.

The period of these changes is unknown. In the Old Testament the first reference occurs in Ezekiel; if the Septuagint is correct in its translation of Ezekiel 45:12, that passage reads, "You shall count the manhe [mina] as fifty shekels." There is other evidence in Exodus 38:25 (Priestly Code), where the tax levied upon 603,550 men at ½ shekel each was computed to be 100 talents and 1,775 shekels, whence 1 talent equaled 3,000 shekels, and 1 mina was equivalent to 850 shekels. These measures were further changed in the currency, which was also reckoned in talents, minas, and shekels. In Jewish silver 1 shekel = 14.55 grams, 1 mina = 50 shekels = 727.5 grams, 1 talent = 3,000 shekels = 43,659 grams. What bearing this change—which was confined to silver—had upon the relative values of gold and silver, and how far it was conditioned by the demands of exchange day by day, can not be discussed in detail here (comp. Benzinger, "Arch." pp. 192 et seq.). With this silver shekel the shekel of weight must not be confounded. In the Pentateuch the heavy shekel of weight is called, in contradistinction to the silver shekel, the "holy shekel, the shekel of 20 gerahs" (Exodus 30:13; Leviticus 27:25; Numbers 3:47). This refers to the tax payable to the Sanctuary, which, it is expressly stated, must not be paid in silver shekels, but according to weight, conforming with ancient custom.

The division of the shekel into 20 gerahs is mentioned only in the passages just quoted and in Ezekiel 45:12 (LXX.). Otherwise the Old Testament refers only to quarters and halves of shekels. See see MONEY; NUMISMATICS.