WEIGHTS AND MEASURES, HEBREW.
I. Measures of Length.
Basis and Development of System (§1).
Basal Hebrew Measure (§ 2).
Ezekiel’s Two Cubits (§ 3).
The Cubit, Hebrew, Egyptian, Baby-
lonian (§ 4).
I. Measures of Length: As in modern systems of measures, so in the ancient, measures of length furnished the basis. The original units of measurement were taken by man from his own body—fingerbreadth, hand-breadth, span, arm, foot, and step,
and these are found among all peoples. 1. Basis and But such measures are only relative,
Develop- since the bases are not of the same abment of solute length in different individuals. Systems. There was therefore need for an arti-
ficial normalization in order to obtain from these relative measures an absolute, secure, and generally applicable measure. This normalization has naturally worked out in different ways among different peoples, so far as they have not borrowed one from another. And yet this process of borrowing has been very extensive. The various systems of weights, measures, and coinage known to us as used in the ancient world appear to go back to the same fundamental system. But whether this fundamental system was of Babylonian or of Egyptian parentage is a question which has of late years once more come to the front; though it must not be forgotten that Egyptian culture was not uninfluenced by the Babylonian. The conclusion must be that the basis for the system of weights and measures used in Hither Asia was given in Babylonia; but again this does not exclude modification of this or that particular measure so as to agree more closely with Egyptian than with Babylonian norms. The system of Hebrew weights and measures can not be considered as a thing apart and by itself; it must be studied in connection with the varied systems in use in Asia.
As instruments of measurement there are mentioned in the Old Testament the measuring reed or rod (Hebr. keneh hammiddah, also shebet, Gk. kalamos, kanon, Lat. pertica mensoria, Assyr. kanu; Ezek. xl. 3, 5, xlii. 16 sqq.; Jer. x. 16, li. 19; Rev. <i, 1); and the line (Hebr. kaw, pethil pishtim, hebhel middah, Septuagint metron, schoinion, spartion;
II Kings xxi. 13; Ezek. xl. 3, xlvii. 3;
2. Basal II Sam. viii. 2). Of the relative size of
Hebrew these two instruments of measurement
Measure. nothing is known, though they were
doubtless related to some basal unit. There is a tradition that in the Second Temple, as at Athens and in Rome, there was deposited a measure which was the norm and an ell (cubit) in length.
Larger Measures of Length (§ 5). II. Measures of Surface. III. Measures of Capacity. Dry and Liquid Measure (§ 1). The Basis Sexagesimal (§2).
Absolute Values (§ 3). IV. Weights. The Shekel (§ 1). The Talent; Absolute Values (§ 2). Changes Introduced (§ 3).
In fact, among Hebrews, as in Asia generally, the cubit was the unit of length, and was designated 7ammah. Whether this term originally meant the fore-arm is not certain; the term is found in the Siloam Inscription (q.v.), and corresponds to the Assyrian ammatu. The New-Testament term for the same is péchos (Matt. vi. 27; Luke xii. 25; Rev. xxi. 17). This unit was employed as the basal measure in building-operations (as in the Tabernacle, the Temple, and the “ house of the forest of Lebanon ”’; Ex. xxvi. 15 sqq.; I Kings vi. 2 sqq., vii. 2 sqq.), in the making of furniture and furnishings (I Kings vii. 23 sqq.), was applied to such materials as curtains (Ex. xxvi. 1 sqq.), and to ground measures (Ezek. xlviii. 1 sqq.); it is indeed designated the most general measure (Deut. ii. 11, ‘‘ the cubit of a man,” i.e., the common cubit), and upon it other units were based (Ezek. xl. 5, ‘‘ a measuring reed of six cubits long by the cubit and a handbreadth,” ie., a handbreadth longer than the common cubit; the reed here is six cubits). The cubit divides into spans (Hebr. zereth, Ex. xxviii. 16; I Sam. xvii. 4; Ezek. xliii. 13), and this into handbreadths (Hebr. tephah, I Kings vii. 26, or fophah, Ex. xxv. 25, xxxvii. 12; LXX. palaisté); while the smallest measure is the fingerbreadth (Hebr. ’ebza‘, Gk. daktylos, Jer. lii. 21). In an ascending scale, it will be remembered, is to be placed the reed as above, which was equivalent to six cubits (Hzek. xli. 8). Mention is made once (Judges iii. 16) of a unit of measure called the gomedh (Judges iii. 16, ‘‘ cubit’’), the relation of which to the ordinary cubit is not at all defined, the Septuagint equating it with the span, the Syriac and Arabic versions with the cubit. Concerning the varied relations of the cubit to other measures (apart from the reed) nothing exact is given in the Old Testament; but there are available the rabbinic statements, and, what is of still greater importance, the analogy of the entire orient, so that
‘it is with comparative certainty ascertained that
the cubit contained six handbreadths or twentyfour fingerbreadths. The following table therefore results, showing a duodecimal basis:
OCC mere sole. oascray and 1 GiibiGnecers. ans hese 6 1 5
Sonia, age eee ieea 12 2 1 a Andes Suen 36 6 3 1 Fingerbreadth ...... 144 24 12 4
There are met in the Old Testament two different
Weights and Measures