Agricola, Georgius
,
De re metallica
,
1912/1950
Text
Text Image
Image
XML
Thumbnail overview
Document information
None
Concordance
Figures
Thumbnails
Table of figures
<
1 - 30
31 - 60
61 - 90
91 - 120
121 - 150
151 - 180
181 - 210
211 - 240
241 - 270
271 - 300
301 - 312
[out of range]
>
<
1 - 30
31 - 60
61 - 90
91 - 120
121 - 150
151 - 180
181 - 210
211 - 240
241 - 270
271 - 300
301 - 312
[out of range]
>
page
|<
<
of 679
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
pb
/>
<
p
type
="
head
">
<
s
>
<
emph
type
="
bold
"/>
APPENDIX C.
<
emph.end
type
="
bold
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
head
">
<
s
>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>As stated in the preface, the nomenclature to be adopted for weights and measures
<
lb
/>
has presented great difficulty. </
s
>
<
s
>Agricola uses, throughout, the Roman and the Romanized
<
lb
/>
Greek scales, but in many cases he uses these terms merely as lingual equivalents for the
<
lb
/>
German quantities of his day. </
s
>
<
s
>Moreover the classic language sometimes failed him, where
<
lb
/>
upon he coined new Latin terms adapted from the Roman scale, and thus added further
<
lb
/>
confusion. </
s
>
<
s
>We can, perhaps, make the matter clearer by an illustration of a case in weights.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>The Roman
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
centúmpondium,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
composed of 100
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
librae,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
the old German
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
centner
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
of 100
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
pfundt,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
and the English hundredweight of 112 pounds can be called lingual equivalents. </
s
>
<
s
>The first
<
lb
/>
weighs about 494,600 Troy grains, the second 721,900, and the third 784,000. While the
<
lb
/>
divisions of the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
centumpondium
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
and the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
centner
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
are the same, the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
libra
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
is divided into 12
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
unciae
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
and the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
pfundt
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
into 16
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
untzen,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
and in most places a summation of the units given proves that
<
lb
/>
the author had in mind the Roman ratios. </
s
>
<
s
>However, on p. </
s
>
<
s
>509 he makes the direct statement
<
lb
/>
that the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
centumpondium
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
weighs 146
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
librae,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
which would be about the correct weight if the
<
lb
/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
centumpondium
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
referred to was a
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
centner.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
<
s
> If we take an example such as “each
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
centum
<
lb
/>
pondium
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
of lead contains one
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
uncia
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
of silver”, and reduce it according to purely lingual equiva
<
lb
/>
lents, we should find that it runs 24.3 Troy ounces per short ton, on the basis of Roman
<
lb
/>
values, and 18.25 ounces per short ton, on the basis of old German. </
s
>
<
s
>If we were to trans
<
lb
/>
late these into English lingual equivalents of one ounce per hundredweight, then the value
<
lb
/>
would be 17.9 ounces per short ton.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>Several possibilities were open in translation: first, to calculate the values accur
<
lb
/>
ately in the English units; second, to adopt the nearest English lingual equivalent; third,
<
lb
/>
to introduce the German scale of the period; or, fourth, to leave the original Latin in the
<
lb
/>
text. </
s
>
<
s
>The first would lead to an indefinite number of decimals and to constant doubt as to
<
lb
/>
whether the values, upon which calculations were to be based, were Roman or German. </
s
>
<
s
>The
<
lb
/>
second, that is the substitution of lingual equivalents, is objectionable, not only because
<
lb
/>
it would indicate values not meant by the author, but also because we should have, like
<
lb
/>
Agricola, to coin new terms to accommodate the lapses in the scales, or again to use decimals.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>In the third case, that is in the use of the old German scale, while it would be easier to adapt
<
lb
/>
than the English, it would be more unfamiliar to most readers than the Latin, and not so
<
lb
/>
expressive in print, and further, in some cases would present the same difficulties of cal
<
lb
/>
culation as in using the English scale. </
s
>
<
s
>Nor does the contemporary German translation of
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
De
<
lb
/>
Re Metallica
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
prove of help, for its translator adopted only lingual equivalents, and in conse
<
lb
/>
quence the summation of his weights often gives incorrect results. </
s
>
<
s
>From all these possibilities
<
lb
/>
we have chosen the fourth, that is simply to reproduce the Latin terms for both weights and
<
lb
/>
measures. </
s
>
<
s
>We have introduced into the footnotes such reductions to the English scale as we
<
lb
/>
considered would interest readers. </
s
>
<
s
>We have, however, digressed from the rule in two cases,
<
lb
/>
in the adoption of “foot” for the Latin
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
pes,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
and “fathom” for
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
passus.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
<
s
> Apart from the fact
<
lb
/>
that these were not cases where accuracy is involved, Agricola himself explains (p. </
s
>
<
s
>77)
<
lb
/>
that he means the German values for these particular terms, which, fortunately, fairly closely
<
lb
/>
approximate to the English. </
s
>
<
s
>Further, we have adopted the Anglicized words “digit”,
<
lb
/>
“palm”, and “cubit”, instead of their Latin forms.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>For purposes of reference, we reproduce the principal Roman and old German scales,
<
lb
/>
in so far as they are used by Agricola in this work, with their values in English. </
s
>
<
s
>All students
<
lb
/>
of weights and measures will realize that these values are but approximate, and that this is
<
lb
/>
not an occasion to enter upon a discussion of the variations in different periods or by different
<
lb
/>
authorities. </
s
>
<
s
>Agricola himself is the author of one of the standard works on Ancient Weights
<
lb
/>
and Measures (see Appendix A), and further gives fairly complete information on contem
<
lb
/>
porary scales of weight and fineness for precious metals in Book VII. p. </
s
>
<
s
>262 etc., to which
<
lb
/>
we refer readers.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
head
">
<
s
>ROMAN SCALES OF WEIGHTS.
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
table7
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>