See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324182595

Notes on Obols and Agios in Demotic Papyri

Article in The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology · December 1965 DOI: 10.2307/3855628

CITATIONS READS 2 8

1 author:

Richard Holton Pierce University of Bergen

63 PUBLICATIONS 177 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Fontes Historiae Nubiorum View project

ACACIA View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Richard Holton Pierce on 16 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. NOTES ON OBOLS AND AGIOS IN DEMOTIC PAPYRI

By RICHARD H. PIERCE

THE Demotic formula tn tbc 24 r kd-t 2·t, 'at the rate of twenty-four obols to two kite', has recently been discussed by Erichsen and Nims, 1 who took as their starting point a discussion by Heichelheim.2 They noted that Heichelheim was aware of Grenfell's3 discovery that the Demotic formula cited above is a rendering of the Greek formula tl.YJi/10µ,cBa cl,; Tbv aTaTijpa o{Jotl.ov,; KO and related phrases. They further asserted that 'beyond denying that this formula has any bearing on the relative values of copper and silver coinage, he [Heichelheim J is unable to give any explanation of it' .4 But is it not a sufficient explanation of the Demotic formula to show that it is a rendering of a Greek formula when the latter's function is well understood? Heichelheim had only introduced a discussion of the Demotic text into his work in order to show that the earlier reading of the number following kd-t as 2/10 was no longer accepted by demotists and that the Demotic formula could not be used to prove that one drachma of silver was worth 120 drachmae of copper.5 The meaning and purpose of the Greek formula were established by Grenfell,6 and it may not be out of place to review his discussion. He demonstrated that the formula was introduced to show that for a sum set in terms of silver money but payable in copper money twenty-four obols would be accepted as worth one stater. This is in contrast to other passages in which it is declared that more than twenty-four obols would be demanded to make one stater. Now to say that twenty-four obols are equi• valent to one stater is to utter a truism; but from the contexts in which this formula occurs it seemed clear to Grenfell that either the obols or the stater had to be copper coins. Since silver was most commonly coined in staters (i.e. tetradrachms) and since there is no documentary or numismatic evidence for Ptolemaic copper statcrs, Grenfell

1 For the reading of this formula see the discussion below. Cf. W. Erichsen and C. F. Nims in Acta Orientalia, 23 (1959), 132-3. 2 F. Heichelheim, Wirtschaftliche Schuianltungen der Zeit uon Alexander bis Augustus (Jena, 1930), 14-17. 3 B. Grenfell, Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus (Oxford, 1896), 207-8. The same suggestion had been made by F. Lenormant in 1895, but Grenfell had probably completed his manuscript before he could learn of Lenormant's views; cf. Grenfell, op. cit. xiv, and Th. Reinach, Revue des etudes grecques, 41 (1928), 142. 4 Erichsen and Nims, op. cit. 133. By 'this formula' I assume they mean the Demotic formula. On p. 15 of his book Heichelheim refers to the meaning of the Greek formula. 5 This rate of exchange had been proposed by Revillout, who, on the basis of the reading 2/10, set up the formula: 24 units of copper, where one unit equals 20 drachmae of copper, equals two tenths units of silver, whence r20 units of copper equal one drachma of silver. Cf. Grenfell, op. cit. 200-10. For a resume of the theories about the rate of exchange between silver and copper coins, see Th. Reinach, loc. cit. 6 Op. cit. 195 and 199-200. RICHARD H. PIERCE concluded that the obols were copper coins and that the stater was a silver coin. At twenty-four obols to the stater, copper coins would be accepted as being worth their equivalent denominations of silver coins-in effect, a rate of exchange between silver and copper coins of one to one.1 If more than twenty-four obols were required to pay for a debt of one stater, extra copper coins were being demanded.2 The formula, then, is used to show either that copper currency is to be accepted at par with silver currency of the same denomination or that an agio is to be charged, the percentage of the agio being established by the ratio of obols to staters given in the formula. To Grenfell's discussion I can only add that so long as copper continued to be coined on the silver standard there is no need to identify the obols and the staters as representing silver or copper coins. Whether the ratio be copper obols to a copper stater, copper obols to a silver stater, silver obols to a silver stater, or silver obols to a copper stater, the sum to be paid in copper coins will remain the same. The following formula can be set up to determine the number of copper drachmae to be paid for a given sum set in terms of silver drachmae when an agio is charged. Let x be the sum to be paid in silver drachmae, and let y be the number of obols to be paid per stater in excess of twenty-four. Then: x+ y(i) -6 = the sum to be paid in copper drachmae.

In its function of setting the percentage of the agio this formula is comparable to another common Greek formula which sets rates of interest on loans by reckoning on the mina.! The purpose of the agio is a matter for discussion. Milne4 has pointed out that governments which mint copper money are obliged to mint their coins somewhat lighter than their face value to avoid a possible appreciation in the value of copper as metal which would render the coins more valuable as metal than as currency, and it is conceivable that the agio originally represented the difference in value between the weights of the coins and the values ascribed to them.5

1 This is what is meant by saying that copper was being coined 'on the silver standard'. Copper coins were being minted so as to be worth their nominal value in silver coins of the same denomination, or at least they were officially declared to be so. 2 I prefer to express myself in this manner rather than to speak of a discount on copper, or of copper being accepted at less than its nominal value. The coins were accepted for what they were, only more were demanded. Hereafter I shall employ the term agio to describe this extra payment. [Agio is the word used in monetary transactions for the 'percentage charged for changing paper-money into cash or an inferior for a more valuable currency' (Shorter Oxford Engl. Dict.., s.v.)-Ed.J 3 For example, at ten drachmae per rnina (one mina equals one hundred drachmae) the rate of interest for the period set is ten per cent. The mina was a unit of account and was never coined. In Greek Papyrus Paris 62, col.v(112 D.c.) the agio was calculated on the mina. Cf. U. Wilcken, Urkunden der Ptolenuierzeit, I (Berlin-Leipzig, 1922), document no. 112. 4 J. G. Milne, 'The copper coinage of the Ptolemies' in LAAA 1 (1908), 31. See also B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. Smyly, The Tebtunis Papyri (London, 1902), 599. 5 Such an explanation assumes that the ratio of silver to copper in the coins was by weight within ten per cent. (the normal agio) of the ratio by weight in raw metal; but this is a matter of dispute. OBOLS AND AGIOS IN DEMOTIC PAPYRI 157 Grenfell' suggested that this agio included the expense of transporting and storing the heavy sums of copper. It may even be that the agio was instituted as a penalty to encourage payment in silver.2 At all events, the size of the agio was set by the govern• ment.s When copper coinage was removed from the silver standard (see above, p. 156, n. r), sums were regularly expressed in terms of copper money without reference to silver. Some taxes, however, continued to be set in terms of silver money; and in these cases an agio was still charged. When an agio was charged, the sums were said to be in copper 'at the rate of twenty-six and one half ( o bols) ( to the stater) (xatl.Kov els KS'L )'4 or in copper 'with an agio' ( oo at\t\ay~) ;5 when no agio was charged, the sums were said to be 'in copper at parity' (TTpd,; xatl.Kdv iaovoµ,ov).6 Thus in time the Greek formula which showed that no agio was to be charged was abbreviated, and no mention was made of staters or obols. Now Erichsen and Nims in their discussion cited above assert that in the middle of the second century B.C. 'the silver stater was at a premium relative to the obol, the former being worth 24·25 to 27·12 silver obols instead of the usual 24'.7 It appears that their assertion is deduced from the very Greek formulae of which the Demotic formula under discussion is a rendering. I have not been able to find any mention of silver obols in Svoronos,8 and it is a priori unlikely that obols would have been coined on the Ptolemaic standard since the Ptolemaic drachma weighed 3 ·6 gm. and an obol was one sixth of a drachma. Erichsen and Nims further assert that copper money came into use in Egypt during the second century B.C., but in this they appear to be mistaken.9 Grenfell'? showed long ago that copper coinage was used to pay very large sums of money already in the reign of Philadelphus, and the copper coinage of the early Ptolemies has been known and discussed for many years.11

' Revenue Laws, 200. 2 Cf. T. Reekmans in Studia Hellenistica, 5 (Louvain, 1948), 18, n. r. It is to be noted, however, that the government itself occasionally paid a small agio (cf. Greek Papyrus I-Iibeh 67, 1. I 5 and the note ad loc.); and there is no reason why the government should desire that private persons be encouraged to expect payment in silver from the state. 3 This applies only to official transactions. In Greek Papyrus Hibeh 51 (245 B.c.) a price is set in silver (npos dpyvpwv); and the agio (J1raAAay~) was set at one and one half obols per four clrachmae (i.e. one stater) and was stated to be the official rate (TDUDLJTO yap ElAthens, 1904-8). Number 35 of Svoronos, vol. II, 8, gives nine examples of hemidrachmae coined while Ptolemy I was still satrap of Egypt. It should be noted that the reference to Heichelheim given by Erichsen and Nims (op. cit. 1 33) in support of their assertion is a discussion of Wilcken, op. cit. I, document 149, 1. 32, in which a silver stater was sold for four times its normal value. Heichelheim attributed this to the issuance of debased silver coinage, which is 'l problem quite different from that under discussion. 9 Op. cit. 133. 10 Op. cit. 195. 11 Cf. the references given inn. 5, p. 155, and n. 4, p. 156 above. RICHARD H. PIERCE To return to the Demotic formula tn tb: 24 r kd-t 2·t, then, it is a rendering of its Greek prototype and serves the same function; namely, either to show that no agio is to be charged on sums paid in copper1 or to set the percentage of the agio.2 The sums of money defined by the Demotic formula are often explicitly said to be 'of copper' (n bmt),3 'of pure copper' (n hmt sp-sn),4 or 'in copper' (r b bmt).5 In its fullest form the Demotic agio formula reads tn tbr 24 r hd-t 2·t, 'at the rate of twenty four obols to two kite'.6 Generally, however, it is more or less abbreviated in the manner of its Greek prototype. Thus tn, 'at the rate of', is almost always omitted, tbr, 'obol,' is often dispensed with, and sometimes the whole formula is reduced to the numeral 24.7 The reading of the Demotic word for 'obol' has been a lexicographical crux since the days of Revillout and Brugsch.8 The readings IJ,d·t,9 "J:,.mt10 tn, and sr·t11 have been proposed; while some scholars have adopted the expedient of using the siglum (ofJ.) to indicate that a word meaning obol is to be read. 12 In fact, the key to the correct reading is provided by the Coptic rendering of ofJo>..os:; namely, Td1,n.13 Spiegelberg14 noted that the Coptic word for obol (nJn) and the Coptic word for seal (TWu)fi1oS, Twr11F) are so similar as to suggest that they are identical; and if one compares the Demotic ancestors of these words, the same similarity is found. The Demotic word for obol is usually written with a single sign which occurs in the following common variants:

15 'l.-16 r:J--17 '1-.+ I A comparison of this sign with the Demotic seal-determinatives of the words tbr, 'seal,' and btm, 'seal,' as given in Erichsen's Demotic dictionary confirms Wente's

1 E.g., Demotic Papyrus Lille 21, l. 6 (238 n.c.) and Demotic Papyrus Rylands 16, I. 7 (152 B.c.). These texts are published in I-I. Sottas, Papyrus demotiques de Lille, I (Paris, 1921) and F. LI. Griffith, Catalogue of the demotic papyri in the John Rylands Library, etc. (Manchester, 1909). 2 E.g., Demotic Papyrus Lille 30, I. 2 (iii s.c.), in Sottas, op. cit. 3 E.g., Demotic Papyrus Rylands 16, I. 7. This phrase is a translation of the Greek xaAKoiJ, 'of copper'. • G. Mattha, Demotic Ostraha, etc. (Le Caire, 1945), 79. 5 E.g., Demotic Papyrus Lille 21, l. 6. This phrase is a rendering of the Greek -rrpos xaAKov, 'in copper, on the copper standard'. 6 See M. Malinine, 'Taxes funeraires egyptiennes 11 I'cpoque greco-romaine ' in Melanges Mariette (Le Caire, 1961), 159, ostracon no. 16, I. 3. 7 E.g., Demotic Papyrus B.M. 10609, I. 2, published by Erichsen and Nims, Acta Orientalia, 23 (1958), 125 ff. 8 For the earlier bibliography consult Wilcken, Griechische Ostraha, I (Leipzig-Berlin, 1899), 718, n. 1, and Griffith, op. cit. III, 137-8. 9 This reading was proposed by H. Brugsch in ZAS 30 (1892), 8, and has recently been followed by M. Malinine, op. cit. 1° Cf. Martha, op. cit., p. 73; also S. Wangstedt, Ausgezoahlte demotische Ostraka (Uppsala, 1954). 11 For tn and sr·t see Nims, Acta Orientalia, 25 (1960), 271-2. 12 This siglum was suggested by Sir Herbert Thompson, Theban Ostraca (London, 1913), 28, and was recently adopted by E. Li.iddeckens, Agyptische Eheuertrdge (Wiesbaden, 1960), 311-12. 13 W. E. Crum, A Coptic Dictionary (Oxford, 1939), 397 a. '4 Koptisches Handsoorterbuch. (Heidelberg, 1921), 140-1. 15 W. Spiegelberg in Th. Reinach, Papyrus grecs et demotiques (Paris, 1905), 184. 16 M. Malinine, op. cit., ostraca nos. 13 and 26. 17 H. Thompson, A Family Archive from Siut (Oxford, 1934), 128, no. 315. OBOLS AND AGIOS IN DEMOTIC PAPYRI 159 transcription of the Demotic sign for obol as a seal. 1 Moreover in Demotic Papyrus Loeb 62, recto, IL 9, 10, 13, and 16,2 there occurs what I believe to be a fuller writing of tbr : bJ7,S 2...1,~ ~ ~ Spiegelberg read this passage as /:td LXX hmt IJ,d XXIV r kd II, '70 Silberlinge (nach dem kurs) von 24 Kupferkite auf 2 Kite (Silber)'; and Nims read J:td 70 hmt sp-sn rsr·t1 24 lr n kd-t 2, '70 (deben) of copper coinage, 24 obols making 2 kite'. Now the sign which Spiegelberg ignored and which Nims read as sp-sn ( f) looks very much like the demotic version of the hieroglyphic sign of the extended finger 0), a tri• consonantal sign read tbr in Demotic. A comparison of the writings given by Erichsen3 of the tbr-finger with the sign previously read sp-sn lends very strong support to the case for reading it tbr, I therefore suggest that the Loeb passage be read: J:td (dbn) 70 ( n) hmt ( tn) tbr 24 I/ 2 r l!,d· t 2, 'seventy ( de ben) of copper money, ( at the rate of) twenty• four and one half obols to two kite' .4 Finally, I submit that both the Coptic and Demotic evidence combine to demonstrate that the Demotic word for obol is tbc . As for the reason why the Egyptians chose tbc to translate obol, I can only suggest that if the words tbr, 'obol,' and tbr , 'seal,' are the same, the word may have been chosen with reference to the figures stamped on the coins.

1 Cf. W. Erichsen, Demotisches Glossar (Kopenhagen, 1954) under the entries tbr and [um, Wente's suggestion is recorded by Nims, Acta Orientalia, 25 (1960), 266-7. 2 W. Spiegelberg, Die Demotischen Papyri Loeb (Mi.inchen, 1931), cols. 94-97 and pl. 34, and C. F. Nims, 'Demotic Papyrus Loeb 62: a reconstruction', Acta Orientalia, 25 (1960), 266-76. J Op. cit. 372 and 623. • The reading 24 I/2 r instead of 24 lr n I owe to Professor R. A. Parker. Reprinted front THE JOURNAL OF EGYPTIAN ARCHAEOLOGY

VOLUME 51, 1965

lN GREAT BJUTAIN AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, OXFORD

View publication stats