Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T06:01:06.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Three Greek Numeral Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Marcus Niebuhr Tod
Marcus Niebuhr Tod
Affiliation:
Oriel College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A study of the Greek numeral systems as illustrated by extant inscriptions has convinced me that there are many misconceptions still current which require correction, and that there is an urgent need for the collection and tabulation of the evidence for the acrophonic systems of Greece, those, that is, of which the numerals employed in Attica down to Roman times form the best known example. This task I hope to essay in the forthcoming volume of the British School Annual, but meantime I may briefly discuss three instances which have not hitherto met with the attention they deserve. If the results attained are not in all cases certain, I hope that I shall at least succeed in calling attention to the problems and in stimulating someone else to seek and to discover their true solution.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Hellenic Studies , Volume 33 , November 1913 , pp. 27 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1913

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Žurnal Ministerstva Narodnauago Prosviesčenia.

2 In the semi-alphabetic system of Halicarnassus (Ditt., Syll. 211Google Scholar) -, are used to represent ¼, ½ and ¾ obol respectively.

3 See Keil's, B. comment on Inschriften von Priene, 174Google Scholar.

4 Mr. G. F. Hill has called my attention to the use on certain Eoman coins, dating from the middle of the third century B.C. to the close of the Republic, of the sign , with its modifications and to denote 50 (Mommsen, , Hist. mon. rom. ii. 190Google Scholar; Grueber, Coins, of the Rom. Rep. in the Brit. Mils. i. p. cv). On Etruscan coins denotes 50 (Head, , H.N. 2 p. 12)Google Scholar.

5 Van Herwerden, quotes the form μυριαστόν (for μυριοστόν) from Pap. Lips. 13Google Scholar II 20, III 7 (Lex. Sappi., s.v.).

6 Read c.

7 A similar inconsistency may be found in Ditt., Syll. 211Google Scholarc, I.G. ix. 2, 1109, B.G.H. xxvi. 349 ff. No. 54, and elsewhere.

8 Larfeld does, it is true, refer to the closely cognate system in use at Orchomenus, which he attributes to ‘Boeotia’ (op. cit. i. 417), but his account of it is incorrect and misses the most interesting feature of the system, the existence of a separate sign for 30.

9 This is Colin's dating, accepted by R. Meister, who has discussed afresh some words and passages in the inscription, but has not dealt with the numerals (Berichte d. k. sächs. Gesellschaft d. Wissenschaften zu Leipzig: Phil. Ust. Cl. LI No. 3).

10 This is not contradicted by the occurrence in 1. 20 of a sum expressed in drachmas, for (i) drachmas and staters are found side by side in other Boeotian documents, e.g. I.G. vii. 2419, 3073; (ii) the number of drachmas is written out in words, as if to indicate that the numerals were reserved for sums expressed in staters; (iii) the word δραχμάς is prefixed to the number in 1. 20, but never to the numeral signs.

11 The at the end of the numeral group in 1. 9 I take to be part of a rather than the sign for ½ obol.