A discourse of the Romane foot and denarius from whence, as from two principles, the measures and weights used by the ancients may be deduced / by Iohn Greaves ...

OF THE ROMANE FOOT.

THat the foot was the most recei∣ved, and usuall measure amongst the Romans, as the cubit amongst the Jews, is a thing not contro∣verted by any. Fora 1.1 Polybius de∣scribing their Scutū, makes it in breadth over the ••bend two [Romane] feet and an half, and in length four feet: or, if it be of a greater sort, a palme more is to be added to this measure. And not long after expressing the manner of their castra∣metation, or encamping, he* 1.2 writes; that as of∣••en as a place is designed for the camp, the Praetori∣••um (or Generals lodging) takes up that part, which is fittest for prospect, and direction. Set∣••ing therefore up the Standard where they intend to ••ix the Praetoriū, they so measure out a square about the Standard, that each side may be distant from it ••n hundred feet, and the whole area contain foure ••ugera. In like mannerb 1.3 Caesar, in the descripti∣on of his bridge over the Rhine, makes the bin∣ders, or transversary beames, to be bipedales. c 1.4 Tully also judges the quantity of the apparent diameter of the Sun to be pedalis. And not to produce more Authorities,d 1.5 Suetonius relates, that Augustus presented before the people of Rome〈2 pages missing〉〈2 pages missing〉

so the sestertius pes was two feet and an halfe. * 1.6 Volusius Maetianus,

Sestertius duos asses & semissem, quasi semis tertius; Graeca figura 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Nam sex talenta & se∣mitalentum eo verbo significantur. Lex eti∣am XII. Tabularum argumento est, in qua duo pedes & semissis sestertius pes vocatur.

But to return to Frontinus, who farther discour∣sing of the Romane foot, gives a distinction of three sorts of feet: and those were first, pes porrectus, next, pes constratus, or ash 1.7 A∣gricola reades it, contractus, and lastly, pes quadratus. The first was the measure of longi∣tudes, the other two of superficies. There were, writes* 1.8 Frontinus, In pede porrecto semi∣pedes duo, in pede constrato semipedes quatuor, in pede quadrato semipedes octo. Which words of his are to be thus explicated; the pes por∣rectus, was the Romane foot extended in length, and therefore there were in it semi∣pedes duo: The pes constratus, was the square of the semipes, and therefore the perimeter of it contained semipedes quatuor, or, which is all one, two intire Romane feet: The pes quadra∣tus, was the square of the Romane foot; where∣fore of necessity there must bee foure feet in the perimeter, or in Frontinus' expression, eight semipedes. The samei 1.9 Author likewise in his book de aquaeductibus, describing the digit, & uncia of this, (Est autem digitus, (saies he) ut convenit, sexta decima pars pedis, uncia duo∣decima) useth a distinction of digits, as hee did of feet before, not mentioned by any other Au∣thor: Quemadmodum autem inter unciam, & di∣gitum

diversitas, ita & ipsius digiti simplex ob∣servatio non est. nam alius vocatur quadratus, ali∣us rotundus. Quadratus tribus quartis decimis suis rotundo major: rotundus tribus undecimis suis quadrato minor est. The proportions here assigned by him to the digitus quadratus, and rotundus, are the same, whichl 1.10 Archimedes long before used: and those are, that a circle hath the same proportion to the square of the dia∣meter, that XI. hath to XIV. Hero also, dis∣coursing of severall sorts of measures, in∣formes us thus concerning the foot: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the digit is the least measure, the palm consists of IV. digits, and is called dactylodochme, and palaiste, and doron. The lichas is tenne digits, the orthodoron eleven: The span XII. The foot hath IV. palmes, or XVI. digits the pygme XVIII. digits. The pygon XX. The cubit XXIV. or VI. palms the orgyia IV. cubits, or VI. feet. Most of which mea∣sures the Romanes borrowed from the Greeks; as on the contrary the Greeks borrowed the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, from the Romane jugerum, and milliare. The same Hero describes another sort of foot used in Italy. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Italian foot contains thirteen digits, and one third. Whence m 1.11 Salmasius concludes, that the Romanes used

one sort of foot in Rome, consisting of XVI. digits, and in some parts of Italy another being but XIII. digits, and one third. Which might be granted, did notn 1.12 Hyginus, who is much an∣cienter, in his tract de limitibus constituendis, contradict it. His words are these: Item di∣citur in Germaniâ in Tungris pes Drusianus, qui habet monetalem, & sescunciam, ita ut ubi∣cunque extra fines, legésque Romanorum, id est, ut solicitiùs proferam, ubicunque extra Ita∣liam aliquid agitatur inquirendum; & de hâc ipsâ conditione diligenter praemoneo, ne quid sit, quod praeteriisse videamur. Where speaking immediately before of the pes Romanus, or as he also cals it, the pes monetalis, by which hee measures and defines the limites, he gives us this caution, that out of Italy (for in Italy he sup∣poses one measure to be generally received) we are to observe the quantity of the foot, or mea∣sure of the Country. And for this reason, to a∣void ambiguity, he assigns the proportions of the pes Drusianus, at Tongeren in Germany, to be a sescuncia more then the pes monetalis used at Rome, and in Italy. And so in another part a∣bout Cyrene, which Ptolemy gave to the Ro∣manes. c 1.13 Pes corum qui Ptolemaicus appellatur habet monetalem pedem, & semunciam. But to omit the pes Ptolemaicus (For our inquiry is onely of the Romane foot.) I cannot but won∣der at the mistake of* 1.14 Joseph Scaliger, concern∣ing the pes Drusianus, and Romanus, who thus writes. Pes igitur ille Drusianus major est Roma∣no sescunciâ. fuit enim XXII. digitorum, quan∣torum XVI. est pes Romanus. If it were but a

sescuncia, greater then the Romane foot, as Hyginus, and he also make it, how can it pos∣sibly be XXII. digitorum? or how can he excuse his words, which immediately follow? Ex quo colligimus pedem Drusianum omnino esse eum, qui hodie in Galliâ, & Belgio in usu est, qui profectò major est VI. digitis, quantorum XVI. est pes, qui Romae in hortis Angeli Colotii sculptus in saxo visitur. Eum enim nos cum pede Gallicano com∣parantes, id verissimum esse deprehendimus. Nei∣ther is the errour of some others much lesse, in making the pes monetalis, or Romanus, and pes Regius Philetaerius, to be equall, Because the Romane foot consisted of XVI. digits, as Fron∣tinus writes, and the pes Philetaerius of as many, asp 1.15 Hero shews: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. there∣fore both these are equall. The errour is in sup∣posing all digits to be alike; and therefore the same number of digits being in both, that both are equall. By the same argument we may con∣clude the Romane foot, and Arabian foot, and the derah, or cubit of these, to be equall to the cubit, or sesquipes of the Romanes: seeingq 1.16 A∣bulfeda, an Arabian Geographer, defines the de∣rah to consist of XXIV. digits, and so many also did the Romane sesquipes contain. But the ob∣servation ofr 1.17 Rhemnius Fannius in this particular is much better; which he applies to weights, and we may by analogy assign to measures.

Semina sex alii siliquis latitantia curvis Attribuunt scripulo, lentes veraciter octo, Aut totidem speltas, numerant, tristésve lupinos Bis duo; sed si par generatim his pondus inesset,

Servarent eadem diversae pondera gentes: Nunc variant. Etenim cuncta non foedere certo Naturae, sed lege valent, hominúmque repertis.

But to return to the Romane foot. Lastly, we may alleages 1.18 Isidorus Hispalensis. Palmus autem, quatuor habet digitos, pes XVI. digitos, Passus pedes quinque, Pertica p••••ssus duos, id est decem pedes. And this is that which I finde delivered by such of the Ancients, as are extant. Out of which bare, and naked descriptions, it is as im∣possible to recover the Romane foot, as it is for Mathematicians, to take either the distance, or altitude of places, by the proportions of trian∣gles alone, or by Tables of Sines, and Tangents, without having some certain and positive mea∣sure given, which must be the foundation of their inquiry. All that can be collected by these descriptions, is this, that wee may know into how many parts the Romanes usually divided their feet; and all these divisions I have seen in some ancient ones. But suppose there were no Romane foot extant; how by XVI. digits, or by IV. palms, or by XII. unciae, (which is the most uncertain of all; seeing whatsoever hath quan∣tity, how great or small soever it is, may be di∣vided in XII. uncias) could it be precisely resto∣red? For if that of* 1.19 Protagoras be true, as well in measures, as in intellectuall notions, that man is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: Whenceu 1.20 Vitruvius ob∣serves, that the Latines denominated most of their measures, as their digit, palm, foot, and cu∣bit, from the parts and members of a man: who shall bee that perfect and square man, from whom we may take a pattern of these measures?

or if there be any such, how shall we know him? or how shall we be certain the Ancients ever made choice of any such? Unlesse, as some fancy, that the cubit of the Sanctuary, was taken from the cubit of Adam, he being created in an excellent state of perfection: So we shall ima∣gine these digits, and palms, to have been taken from some particular man of completer linea∣ments then others. On the other side, if this foot may be restored by the digits, and palms of any man at pleasure, since there is such a diffe∣rence in the proportions of men, that it is as difficult to finde two of the same dimensions, as two that have the same likenesse of faces, how will it be possible, out of such a diversity, to pro∣duce a certain and positive measure, consisting in an indivisibility, not as a point doth in re∣spect of parts, but in an indivisibility of appli∣cation, as all originals, and standards should doe? The Arabians, to avoid this difficulty, shew us a more certain way, as they suppose, how to make this commensurall digit, and consequent∣ly the foot: and that is by the breadth of sixe barly corns laid one contiguous to another. For thusx 1.21 Muhammed Ibn Mesoud in his book, intituled in Persian gehandanish, relates; that in the time of Almamon (the learned Calife of Babylon) by the elevation of the pole of the aequa∣tor, they measured the quantity of a degree upon the globe of the earth, and found it to be fifty six miles, and two thirds of a mile: every mile con∣taining four thousand cubits, and each cubit twen∣ty four digits, and every digit six barly corns. The same proportions are assigned in the Geogra∣phia

Nubiensis, printed in Arabick at Rome: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The cubit is twenty four digits, and every digit is six barly corns. But this is as uncertain as the former, and is built upon a supposition, that all such are of the same dimen∣sion. Whereas those of one Country differ much from those of another; and those of the same Country (as I have made triall in Aegypt, more out of curiosity, then as hoping this way to give my self satisfaction) are not all of the same big∣nesse: and not onely so, but in the self same ear, there is a sensible difference, as experience doth shew. And yet Snellius, a man much to be commended for his abilities in the Mathema∣ticks, and to be blamed for his supine negli∣gence, both in his measure of the magnitude of the earth, and in his dimensions of the Ro∣mane foot, upon these sleight & weak principles, deduces the Arabian foot,z 1.22 this containing ninety sixe grains, such as his Roman foot (for none be∣sides himself will own it) contains ninety. Where∣fore some other Arabians to mend the matter, limit the breadth of one of them,a 1.23 by six hairs of a camel, evenly joyned one by another: by which invention their derah being almost an∣swerable

to the Romane sesquipes, or cubit, shall consist of twenty four digits, and every digit of sixe barly corns, and every barly corn of six hairs of a camell. So that in conclusion the hair of a camell, shall be the minimum in respect of mea∣sures. But this invention however at the first it may seem somewhat subtile (for we are come now almost as low as atomes) is least of all to be approved. For though the supposition were true that all hairs are of a like bignesse in all ca∣mels, whereas they are different in one and the same; yet this objection is unanswerable, that seeing hairs are not perfectly round, though the the sense judges them so, but angular, and that with some inequality, as magnifying glasses plainly demonstrate, it will be very difficult so to size them together, that they shall always take up the same breadth: and if they do not, little errors committed in such small bodies, though at the first insensible, will infinitely in∣crease, and multiply, in the measuring of great distances, to which these are supposed the foun∣dation. And therefore I cannot but approve the counsell ofb 1.24 Villalpandus, who adviseth such as will examine measures and weights, to begin with the greater, and not with the lesser. And that there is reason for his assertion, may be made evident, especially in weights, to such as shall make an experiment. For admit there were a Standard of ten thousand grains, and a∣nother of one grain, it will be easie, by a conti∣nued subdivision of the former, with a good ba∣lance, to produce a weight equall to the stan∣dard of one grain: yea, though at the begin∣ning,

some little errour had been committed, which after many divisions will vanish, and be∣come imperceptible. Whereas on the contrary, the most curious man alive, with the exactest scale that the industry of the most skilfull arti∣zan can invent, shall never be able out of the standard of one grain, to produce a weight e∣quall to the weight of ten thousand grains, but that there shall be a sensible, and apparent diffe∣rence; yea, though he had that excellent scale mentioned byc 1.25 Capellus at Sedan, which would sensibly be turned with the IV. hundreth part of a grain. The like difference as we find in weights, we may conceive by analogy to be in measures, when they shall be made out of such litle parts, as hairs, barly corns, digits, and the like. And therefore I cannot but disapprove the ordinary course of most Geographers, whither Greeks, Latines, or Arabians, that from such nice begin∣nings, measure out a degree upon earth, and con∣sequently the magnitude of this globe. On the contrary the enterprise ofd 1.26 Snellius in his Erato∣sthenes Batavus, and of our Countrymane 1.27 M. Wright, hath been more commendable: who by the space of a degree on earth, (or which were better of many degrees) have endeavou∣red to fixe measures, with more exactnesse, and certainty for posterity. But of this argument I shall have occasion to speak hereafter. And therefore to return to the businesse in hand.

Since the Romane foot cannot be recovered by hairs, grains, digits, palms, and such like phy∣sicall bodies, which being of a various, and in∣determinate magnitude, cannot give, unlesse by

accident, the commensuration of that which ought to be precisely limited, and determined: some relinquishing the former way as errone∣ous, have endeavoured, with much ingenious∣ness, by weights, to find out the Roman foot. For there is the same analogy between measures and weights, as between continued, and discrete quantiti••s: And as Mathematicians by numbers demonstrate, or rather illustrate the affections of lines, superficies, and Geometricall bodies: so by weights, measuring some physicall bodies, especially such as are liquid, in cubicall vessels, (which are easiest commensurable) we may ren∣der the exact quantity of the Romane foot, and by consequence of all their other measures. And thereforef 1.28 Lucas Paetus, andg 1.29 Villalpandus, have attempted with probable reasons to discover the Romane foot, the one by the Sextarius, the other by the Romane Congius. For the Sexta∣••ius being the sixth part of the Congius, and the Congius containing X. librae, or pounds, as it is manifest by that exquisite standard in Rome, with this inscription.

IMP. CAESARE VESPAS. VI T. CAES. AUG. F. IIII^COS MENSURAE EXACTAE IN CAPITOLIO

PX* 1.30

Again the Congius being the eighth part of the amphorae, or quadrantal, filled with water or wine, as by the testimonies ofh 1.31 Dioscori∣des, i 1.32 Sex: Pompeius, and of an ancient Ano∣nymus Greek Authour translated by Alciat, it doth appear: if therefore a Vessell be made of a cubicall figure, which may receive VIII. con∣gii, or XLVIII. sextarii, or LXXX•• pounds of water or of wine, out of the sides of this cube, byk 1.33 Rhemnius Fannius his description, or rather by Sextus Pompeius, who is ancienter, will the Romane foot be deduced. For both these write (neither is it as yet contradicted by any man) that the longitude of one of the sides of the am∣phora (being a cube) is answerable to the Romane foot. And here our inquiry would be at an end (supposing the Authorities of Festus, and Fan∣nius to be unquestionable) were there not far∣ther some objections, which cannot easily bee removed. And those are first, a supposition that we have the true Roman libra (for by this we are to finde the Congius, admitting there were none extant, as by the Congius, the amphora, or qua∣drantal:) a thing of as great difficulty as the foot it self. And besides, if this were obtained, yet we cannot have an absolute certainty, that water, or wine, shall in all places alike ponde∣rate; by reason of the different gravity, which is observed in naturall bodies, though they be homogeneous, and of a like substance. Wherefore laying aside all such speculations, as being farre from that accuratenesse, which is required, there is no other possible means left for this discovery, but to have recourse to such monuments of An∣tiquity,

as have escaped the injury, and calami∣ty of time, which is our next, and second inqui∣ry.

And here it will not be amisse to see what learned men, who not long preceded our age, have observed out of ancient monuments, con∣cerning the Romane foot: and then to relate what course I took to give my self private sa∣tisfaction, which, I hope, will be also satisfacto∣ry to others. Philander in his Commentaries upon Vitruvius, being one of the first that had seen, and diligently perused many ancient measures in Rome (whereas Portius, Agricola, Glareanus, and some others, received them upon trust) gives us so much the more certain informa∣tion. His words are these:l 1.34 Veruntamen quoni∣am non statim ex cujuscunque pollicibus, aut digi∣tis, quis fuerit apud antiquos Romanus pes sciri po∣test, facturum me studiosis rem gratam putavi, si ad marginem libri semipedem apponerem, dimen∣sum ex antiquo pede, in marmore, quod est in hor∣tis Angeli Colotii Romae sculpto, cujus etiam, nisi me fallit memoria, meminit Leonardus Porcius lib. de Sestertio. Eum enim pedem, nos caeteris qui circumferuntur, praetulimus, quòd conveniret cum eo, quem sculptum invenimus in alio marmo∣reo epitaphio T. Statilii Vol. Apri mensoris aedifi∣ciorum, quod operâ Jacobi Meleghini summī Pont. Architecti ex Janiculo non ita pridem refossum, in Vaticanum hortum translatum est. Quamvis jacentem in Basilicâ Apostolorum columnam ex porphyrite, cum his Graecis in calce literis 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ☉ id est pedum novem, nos cum dimensi essemus, deprehenderimus non respondere nostro eum, quo

usus fuerat ejus columnae artifex, sed nostro esse majorem duobus scrupulis & besse, id est unciae parte nonâ. Vt argumentum aliquod esse possit pedis Graeci fuisse modulo scapum columnae factum; quod facilius conjicere potuissem, si integra esset a∣lia ex eodem lapide columna, quam in viâ latâ est conspicere jacentem, his in calce literis 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 insignitam. Verùm quando stadium Herodoto l. 2. Heroni, Suidae, caeteris Graecis sit sexcentorum pedum; Plinio, Columellae, caeteris Latinis sex∣centorum viginti quinque nostrorum, necesse est Romanum à Graeco semunciâ superari. Thus far Philander. Not long after him Lucas Paetus, ha∣ving examined the foot on T. Statilius tombe, and that other of Cossutius, together with seve∣rall ancient ones in brasse, found amongst the rudera at Rome, concludes: that them 1.35 true Ro∣mane foot dictis duobus marmoreis comparatus, septimâ unciae parte, sive unciae scripulis tribus, & duabus scripuli sextulis, & sextulae semisse bre∣vior est. Much about the same time I finde in Ciaconius out of Latinus Latinius, another ex∣periment to have been made, by many eminent men together at Rome. Superioribus autem an∣nis (saithn 1.36 he) Ant: Augustinus, qui postmodum fuit Archiepiscopus Tarraconensis, Io: Baptista Sighicellus Episcopus Faventinus, P. Octavius Pacatus, Achilles Maffaeus, Achilles Statius, Bene∣dictus Aegius, Fulvius Vrsinus, Latinus Lati∣nius, cùm veram pedis Rom. quantitatem statu∣••re vellent, plures ejusd. pedis mensuras simul contulerunt, & earum octo cum antiquissimâ di∣cti pedis formâ, quae in basi quâdam in hortis Vati∣canis extat, adamussim convenire videntes, ex

hoc pede quadrato vas confecerunt, quod etiam nunc octoginta aquae, vel vini libras, quibus publicè signatis civitas utitur, omnino capere invene∣runt, & cum octo congiis antiquis ita congrue∣re, ut reque minus quidquam, neque amplius in∣ter utraque esset. Quo experimento evidentissimè cognoverunt; & libras nostri temporis cum anti∣quis Romanis esse easdem, cùm congii antiqui vas sub Vespasiano Imp: signatum decem libras conti∣neret, quot etiam nostri temporis libras capit; & hunc esse justum pedem Romanum, cùm ex ejus modulo perfectum Quadrantal octoginta libras contineat, quae cum congii antiqui libris ad mo∣mentum respondent. Notwithstanding these ob∣servations, Villalpandus, knowing how necessary it was to have the true dimensions of the Ro∣mane foot, to find out the proportions of the Hebrew cubit, made new experiments: and after examination of the measures, and weights at Rome, he thus concludes.o 1.37 Sed iis omnibus tam variis, aliisque multis sententiis praetermis∣sis, in hâc unâ conquiescimus, ut arbitremur u∣num Farnesianum Congium posse omnes antiquas Romanorum, atque aliarum gentium mensuras, omniáque pondera pristinae integritati restituere. And in another place. Quapropter aliis omnibus conjecturis, argumentationibus, aereis pedibus, mar∣moreis dimensionibus, aut sculpturis, quasi maris fluctibus praetermissis, in hâc unâ pedis longitudi∣ne, quasi in portu conquiescere jam tendem decre∣vimus. Yet Snellius in his Eratosthenes Batavus, could not rest satisfied with this foot of Villal∣pandus, how exquisite soever he imagines it. For he had a minde to discover it neerer home:

making the Rhinland foot equal to the Romane. The proof of his assertion is taken from an anci∣cient Romane armamentarium, or Fort, neer the sea, not far from Leiden, which by the Natives is called het huys te Briten: And is supposed by Ortelius to have been built by Claudius Caesar, in his intended voiage for Britanne, of which* 1.38 Sue∣tonius, and Dio, make mention: sive in commo∣diorem legionum, cohortiumque transvectionem, sive quo milites hibernarent (saith Ortelius). Arcis ipsius fundamenta, (according toq 1.39 Snellius) qua∣dratâ sunt formâ, & quaquaversum ducentis qua∣draginta Rhinlandicis pedibus patent. Vt vel hinc Romanae mensurae vestigia quàm planissimè agno∣scas. Nam ipsius podismus duorum Romanorum ju∣gerum magnitudinem complectitur. Jugeri enim mensuram ducentos & quadraginta longitudinis pedes esse, non est ferè quisquam qui ignoret, inquit Quintilianus l. 1. cap. 10. Varro de re rustica li∣bro 1. cap. 10. Iugerum quod quadratos duos a∣ctus habet. Actus quadratus, qui & latus est pedes 120. & longus totidem. Is modius, ac mina Latina appellatur▪ ut mihi planè dubium non vi∣deatur, eos hic Romanae mensurae modum secutos, hujus structurae podismum ita comprehendisse se∣cundum jugeri mensuram, ut duo jugera, vel actui quatuor contineret. Frontinus de limitibus. Hi duo fundi juncti jugerum definiunt, deinde haec duo jugera juncta in unum quadratum agrum efficiunt, quòd sint omnes actus bini: ut singula ideò latera ducentos & quadraginta pedes in lon∣gum patêre necesse sit. Atqui totidem pedibus Rhinlandicis singula latera exporrigi Geodaetarum experientia confirmat. Vnde efficitur Romanum

antiquum pedē nostro Rhinlandico planè aequari.

After these experiments of so many able, and learned men, and those too taken from ancient Monuments, it may seem s••••ange, that we should not be able as yet to define the true quantity of the Romane foot. For this I can assigne no other reasons then these. First, that those which have described it, have either not exactly, and with such diligence, as was requisite, performed it; or else, if they have been circumspect in this kind, they have omitted to compare it with the Standards for measures of other Nations. On the contrary, those which have compared it with the present Standards, never took it from the ancient Monuments, and Originals, which are at Rome, but onely from some draughts, or schemes, delineated in books. Now how uncer∣tain a way this is, doth appear byr 1.40 Villalpandus, who thus writes. Ego dum haec scriberem, hunc Colotianum pedem circino expendi, & in annota∣tionibus Guil: Philandri solertissimi viri, & apud Georgium Agricolam, & apud Lucam Paetum, & Stanistaum Grsepsium, & nallum potui reperire ••lteri aequalem, imo verò neque ejusdem pedis as∣signatas similes partes. The same have I obser∣ved in those Romane feet described by Portius, Agricola, Philander, Paetus, Ciaconius, and Vil∣lalpandus himself, that they differ one from a∣nother: and not onely so, but those of the ••ame Authour, in the same impression, are like∣wise different. Which last must arise, either by the diverse extention of the paper in the presse, when it is moist, or by the inequall con∣traction of it, when it grows dry, or by some

other accident, in the beating, and binding. So that though it were granted, that so many lear∣ned men had found out, what we inquire after, the Romane foot; yet it is impossible out of those schemes, and draughts, delivered in their books, for the reasons before specified, to attain an ab∣solute certainty. Butf 1.41 Snellius shews us a remedy of this difficulty, which in my opinion is as vain as his Romane foot, (seeing by his supposi∣tion all paper must shrink alike, be it thick or thinne) and that is, to allow one part in sixty for the shrinking of the paper. For so much, saith he, doe Typographers observe, that letters contract thē∣selves, when they are taken off wet from the types.

Wherefore having received small satisfacti∣on from the writings of the Ancients, and not much better from the imperfect designations of the Romane foot by modern Authors, I pro∣posed to my self in my travails abroad, these waies, which no reasonable man but must ap∣prove of. And those were first, to examine as many ancient measures, and monuments, in Italy, and other parts, as it was possible. And se∣condly, to compare these with as many Stan∣dards, and Originals, as I could procure the sight of. And last of all, to transmit both these, and them, to posterity, I exactly measured some of the most lasting monuments of the An∣cients. To this purpose, in the year 1639 I went into Italy, to view, as the other Antiquities o•• the Romanes, so especially those of weights, and measures; and to take them with as much exact••nesse, as it was possible, I carried instrument•• with me made by the best Artizans.

Where my first inquiry was after that monumē of T. Statilius Vol. Aper, in the Vatican gardens, from whencet 1.42 Philander took the dimensions of the Romane foot, as others have since borrow∣ed it from him. In the copying out of this up∣on an English foot in brasse, divided into 2000 parts, I spent at the least two houres (which I mention to shew with what diligence I proceeded in this, and the rest) so often com∣paring the severall divisions, and digits of it respectively one with another, that I think more circumspection could not have been used; by which I plainly discovered the rudenesse, and insufficiency of that foot. For besides that the length of it is somewhat too much, (whatsoever u 1.43 Latinius out of an observation made by Ant. Au∣gustinus, Sighicellus, Pacatus, Maffaeus, Statius, Ae∣gius, and Fulvius Vrsinus, pretends to the con∣trary) there is never a digit, that is precisely answerable to one another. Howsoever it con∣tains 1944. such parts, as the English foot con∣tains 2000.

My next search was for the foot on the monu∣ment of Cossutius, in hortis Colotianis, frō whence ••t hath since received its denomination (though ••t be now removed) being termed by Wri∣••ers pes Colotianus. This foot I took with great care, as it did well deserve, being very ••air, and perfect: afterwards collating it with ••hat Romane foot, which Lucas Paetus caused ••o be ingraven in the Capitol, in a white mar∣••le stone, I found them exactly to agree; and ••herefore I did wonder, why he should con∣••emne this with his pen (for he makes some

x 1.44 objections against it) which notwithstanding he hath erected with his hands (as appears by the inscription in the Capitol, CURANTE LU: PAETO). It may be upō second thoughts, he after∣ward privately retracted his error, which he vvas not willing to publish to the vvorld. Now this of Cossutius is 1934. such parts, as the English foot contains 2000.

Next I sought after that Porphyry Columne mentioned by* 1.45 Marlianus, as also byy 1.46 Phi∣lander, and others, with this iuscription 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . For if the length of that Columne were as∣signed according to the proportion of the Greek foot, then would the Romane foot be thence deduced: this (as I shall elsewhere shew) containing 24. such parts, as that contained 25: Or if it were made according to the Romane foot, as the Grecians after their subjection to the Romane Empire, often used the same mea∣sures that the Romanes did, then had I my de∣sire. But the Column being defaced, or lost, my labour was in vain: And it seemsz 1.47 Paetus about LXX. years before, made the same inquiry, with as litle satisfaction.

I should be too tedious in describing the se∣verall feet, which I have perused in brasse, found amongst the rudera at Rome, and care∣fully preserved by Antiquaries: of most of which Peircskius hath given a good character, in some letters of his, which I have seen in the hands of Bucharaus, a learned man, not yet printed.a 1.48 Who thus writes: I cannot suffici∣ently wonder at the inequality which I have found in the divisions by digits, and inches, of the an∣cient

Romane feet; which seem to me to have been made for fashion sake, & dicis causâ (as lamps that are found in tombes incapable of oile) more to expresse the mystery, and profession of those that were to use them, then for to regulate the mea∣sure of any thing besides them.

Besides these, I examined the ancient stru∣ctures of the Romanes, hoping by collating one with another, to deduce the dimension of their foot. For I presumed that those excellent Architects, before they began their work, must necessarily propose some models to themselves, according to the proportions of which, they meant to raise their fabricks: which propor∣tions could not be assigned, but in the parts of some common, and received quantity; and this in probability was the Romane foot; being a measure generally used, and by publick autho∣rity prescribed. Upon which grounds, I mea∣sured the stones in the foundation of the Capitoll, Domitians', or rather Vespasians' amphitheater, the triumphall arcs of Titus, and Severus, to∣gether with that of Constantine the great, and a∣bove all that exquisite temple of the Pantheon, built by Agrippa, I know not whither with more cost, or art: concerning whichb 1.49 Sebasti∣anus Serlius is of opinion, that if all rules of Architecture were lost, they might be revived out of this monument alone. And in truth, this place gave me more satisfaction then any o∣ther. For most of the white marble stones on the pavement, contained exactly three of those Ro∣mane feet on Cossutius monument, and the lesser stones in Prophyry contained one and an half.

But yet I thought this not sufficient, unlesse I

went to Tarracina, which is the ancient Anxur, and LIII miles distant from Rome: having read in c 1.50 Andreas Schottus, out of Pighius' Hercules Pro∣dicius, that neer the sea by the via Appia, in the heighth of a white rock, whence that ofd 1.51 Horace,

Impositum saxis latè candentibus Anxur,

there are described the Romane decempedae. And indeed the place is very memorable, for the whitenesse, altitude, and hardnesse of the rock, which notwithstanding is cut away perpendicu∣larly, on the side towards the Tyrrhene sea, a∣bove an hundred and twenty feet in depth, to make passage for the Appian way; and at the space of every decempeda, these characters X XX XXX &c. (being almost cubitales) are fairly in∣graven in a continued order descending to CXX. Measuring below the distance between CXX and CX, it amounted to IX. English feet, and 1314/2••00 of a foot computing it from the* 1.52 line ingraven above CXX to the line next under CX. The rest I examined with my eyes, by of∣ten comparing the distance between CXX and CX whither it were equall to that between CX and C, and this again (ascending upwards) to that between C and XC. which manner though it be uncertain, and conjecturall, and farre from that exactnesse, I used in all others, yet it was the best means I could then put in practise; and I am confident that whosoever shall mea∣sure those spaces, shall find a manifest inequa∣lity. To which opinion I am the rather indu∣ced, because measuring there, in severall places, the breadth of the Appian way, cut out of the same rock, I found a difference sometimes of one, or two inches, or more. It being in one

place XIII. English feet, and 1620/•••••••• of a foot, in another, XIII. feet and 18••0/•••••••• in a third XIII. and 1975/••••••••. Whereby I concluded, that the Ancients in making that way, had not respect to a Ma∣thematicall point (as it was not necessa∣ry) but onely that if any difference were, it should not be sensible. And such differences have 〈◊〉〈◊〉 observed in the white Corinthian pil∣lars, in the Pantheon before mentioned, of a∣bove an inch, or two, in the circuit of the sca∣pus, neer the torus: vvhich inequality, seeing no eye could discover, the masters of that ex∣quisite vvork did justly contemn. Whereas the Prophyry stones, and those of white marble, on the pavement, are sized so even, and so exactly to the proportions of the Romane foot, that nothing can be more accurate. And this the nature of the vvork required. For the temple being round (which hath occasioned the Italians vulgarly to call it the Rotundo) the circle within, could not so exquisitely have been fil∣led up, if there had not been a speciall care ta∣ken in observing the true dimensions, in every particular stone. But to return to the rock at Anxur; the spaces between those characters, to an eye, that shall be intentively fixt upon them, will be apparently different. So that I concur in opinion with* 1.53 Schottus, that those figures were placed there, to give notice to posterity, how much of the rock had been removed, to make passage for the Appian way; and not for any me∣moriall of the Romane measures.

Having measured those places in the Appian way at Tarracina, I made triall of at least XX.

others between Tarracina, and Naples, with∣out any great satisfaction; and therefore part∣ly the incertainty that I found there, and part∣ly the danger of theeves, discouraged me from measuring the Romane milliare; a work con∣ceived to be of great use, for the discovery of the Romane foot. Seeing the milliare contai∣ning mille passus, as the very name imports, and every passus consisting of five feet, asc 1.54 Co∣lumella, andf 1.55 Isidorus, expresly tell us, here there∣fore would be 5000 feet to help us to one, could there be but found out a perfect Romane mile. And this I imagined might probably be discove∣red amongst those many vestigia of Romane waies, which to this day are frequently seen in Italy. Wherefore conferring with Gasparo Ber∣ti, a man curious, and judicious (as appears by his ichnography of Roma Subterranea in Bosius) as also with Lucas Holstenius, a learned compa∣nion of Cluverius, in those honourable tra∣vails of his, for the restauration of the anci∣ent Geography: they both informed me, that there are still in the Appian way, where it passes over the Pomptinae paludes, severall co∣lumnae, or lapides milliarii, standing; whereby the Romanes divided, and distinguished their miles; and which occasioned those phrases, ad primiū, ad quartum, ad centesimum lapidem, and the like. And these, it may be, at the first were ordi∣nary stones, till C. Gracchus caused columnes to be erected in their places: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. He measured out, saithg 1.56 Plutarch, by miles all the

waies, the mile containing litle lesse then eight stadia, and placed columnes of stone to designe the measure. The thing vvas of that ornament, and use, as that it was afterwards taken up, and continued by the Romane Emperours; as ap∣pears by these inscriptions, which are fairly in∣grave ••on the first columne, found amongst the ruines in the Appian way, and from thence lately removed into the Capitol, by order of the* 1.57 Se∣nate, and people of Rome.

I

IMP. CAESAR VESPASIANVS. AVG PONTIF. MAXIM TRIB. POTESTAT. VII IMP. XVII P. P. CENSOR COS. VII DESIGN. VIII

Below this, on the end of the Scapus.

IMP. NERVA. CAESAR AVGVSTVS. PONTIFEX MAXIMVS. TRIBVNICIA POTESTATE. COS. III PATER PATRIAE. REFECIT

Below this, on the Basis of the same pillar.

IMP. CAESARI. DIVI TRAIANI. PARTHICI. F DIVI. NER VAE. NEPOTI TRAIANO. HADRIANO AVG. PONTIF. MAXIM TRIB. POTEST. II COS. II VIA TORES. QVI. IPSI. ET. COS. ET PR. CETERISQVE. MAGISTRATIB APPARENT. ET. H. V.

To these I shall also add the inscription of a∣nother columna milliaria, not extant in Gruterus, or any other, that I know, which I have seen at Tarracina; the columne being exactly of the same magnitude with the former, but wanting by the injury of time, a basis below, & a globe, of nigh three feet diameter on the top, serving in stead of a capitel, both which the former hath.

X

IMP. CAESAR DIVI. NERVAE FILIVS. NERVA TRAIANVS. AVG GERMANICVS DACICVS PONTIF. MAX TRIB. POT. XIIII IMP. VI COS. V P. P XVIIII SILICE. SVA. PECVNIA STRAVIT

LIII

Appii forum Ad medias IX. Tarracina X.

The figure LIII below, signifies the distance of Tarracina from Rome: Which distance may be farther proved out of Appian, in his third book of the Civill wars, speaking of Augustus:* 1.58〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.Being about Tarracina, which is distant CCCC. stadia from Rome. These stadia reduced to miles, if wee allow VII. Greek stadia, and an half, to a Romane mile, as Suidas doth, will make up LIII. miles, and one third part of a mile; that is, two stadia, and an half over and above. Which fraction Appian neglects; and therefore uses the round number CCCC. stadia for LIII. miles.

The figure XVIIII signifies the Decennovium, or way passing over the fens, between Appii forum, and Tarracina: so denominated, because it con∣tained nineteen miles in length: which may also bee proved out of Proco∣pius, where he speaks of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. This way was paved by Traian, as the inscription shews, and I think first of all by him. Long after it was repaired by Theodoricus, according to another inscription, that I have seen at Tarracina, of which Gruterus, and Cluverius, also make men∣tion; where, omitting the titles of Theodoricus, in the marble we finde these words ingraven.

DECENNOVII. VIAE. APPIAE. ID. EST. A. TRIP VSQVE. TERRACENAM. ITER. ET. LOCA. QVAE CONFLVENTIBVS. AB. VTRAQVE. PARTE. PALVDVM PER. OMNES. RETRO. PRINCIPVM. INVNDAVERANT VSVI. PVBLICO. ET. SECVRITATI. VIANTIVM RESTITVIT.... PER PLVRIMOS. QVI. ANTE NON. ERANT. ALBEOS ... DEDVCTA. IN. MARE. AQVA.

By this number XVIIII. signifying the decennovium, and by the Itinera∣rium Hierosolymitanum, we may safely correct the Itinerarium Antonini, in which Tarracina is placed but XVIII. miles distant from Appii forum. And from hence likewise we may certainly know how farre the Christians went to meet Saint Paul, and that was XXXIV. miles. For so much was Appii forum distant from Rome, if we subduct XVIIII. out of LIII. whereas the Itineraries of Bertius Edition make it more.

If therefore two such columnes were found intire, (as I am informed there are four, or five, in the Decennovium, standing in a continued or∣der) the distance between two such being ex∣actly measured, vvould much conduce to the discovery of the Romane foot. Upon vvhich supposition, I had almost resolved to have gone thither, as I did to other places, vvith no other intention, but only to have been a spectator of those Columnes, and to have trusted to mine own hands, in taking their distances. But upon a more deliberate examination of the businesse, I perceived that this inquiry did depend upon a very nice supposition. For if the Decempedato∣res, or Curatores viarum, proceeded not with extreme caution, and aimed almost at a Ma∣thematicall point, in designing the just space of each particular mile (which in a work of that

length is not probable; vvhere the inequality of many feet could not be discerned by the eye, and might be admitted without any blemish. For in * 1.59 Varro's judgement, Sensus nullus quod abest mille passus sentire potest) it could not be, but the same differences, or somewhat like, must have crept in with them, which have been observed amongst us, in our measured, and statute miles; out of vvhich it vvould be a vain attempt exactly to demonstrate the English foot. The neglect of which circumspection, amongst some other reasons, that may be assigned, I take to be one, of the diversity, which Astronomers found in that memorable observation, made in the planes of Singiar, or Sinar, by the command of Almamon, the renowned Calife of Babylon, a∣bout eight hundred years since, in proportio∣ning the magnitude of a degree upon earth. For having taken the altitude of the pole at two se∣verall stations, differing a degree in the heavens, they measured the distance between these stati∣ons on earth, going on in the same Meridian; whereh 1.60 some of them, saies Abulfeda, found it to be fifty sixe miles, and two thirds, others fifty six, without any fraction. If therefore the Romane decempedatores, or geodaetae, used not more cir∣cumspection, then the Babylonian Astronomers (which is not likely), there can be no trust gi∣ven to their miles, and lesse trust to the foot, ••hat shall be deduced from thence.

Wherefore to come to a conclusion; having made inquiry more waies,* 1.61 then it may be any ••an hath done, and I think vvith as much cau∣••ion, and exactnesse, as any, it will be necessary

after all to shew amongst so many feet, as are taken to be Romane, vvhich I conceive to be the most genuine, and true. And though in such an incertainty, and scarcity of ancient monuments, and in such a diversity of opini∣ons, amongst modern Writers, it may seem too great presumption, positively to define the magnitude of the Romane foot; yet having had the opportunity, to have perus'd in this kind, more antiquities, then any that have pre∣ceded, I may with the more confidence conclude, that the Pes Colotianus, in my judgment, is the true Romane foot; and that for these reasons.

For first, it most exactly agrees with some ve∣ry ancient, and perfect Romane feet in brasse, found long since amongst the rudera at Rome: especially with that excellent one (as I remem∣ber) of F. Vrsinus, a learned Antiquary. Though I cannot deny but that I have seen two ancient feet in brasse, different from this; the one of Gualdus, a very fair one, wanting two parts and an half, of such as this con∣tains a 1000. a small, and inconsiderable diffe∣rence. The second of Gottifridus, a Gentleman of honourable quality, (to vvhom I stand ob∣liged for the free donation of severall anti∣quities) which exceeds it by eight parts; but this last hath been made by a very rude, and unskil∣full hand.

Next, the proportions of almost all the white marble stones, as also of those lesser in por∣phyry, in the pavement of that admirable temple of the Pantheon, are either completely three of these feet, or one and an half; which,

it is not probable, in a structure of so much art, should have been the vvork of chance. Add to this the dimensions of severall stones, in the foundation of the Capitol, in Titus, and Seve∣rus, triumphal arc's, corresponding either to the whole foot, or conjointly to the whole, and some unciae, or digits of it.

Thirdly, the inscription on the same monu∣ment, vvhere this foot is found, of the circi∣nus, the libella, the norma, and the like, plainly shew that these were intended to expresse Cos∣sutius' profession, (whomi 1.62 Paetus imagines to have been a sculptor) and this being intended, I see no reason why the Romane foot should have been cut in so fair a relevy, either too short, or too long; when the same hand, and the same pains, might have made it exact. It is true, that the foot upon Statilius' tombe, is 1944. such parts, as this is but 1934. whereof the English foot taken by me from the iron yard, or standard of three feet in Guildhall in London, contains 2000: but how rudely in respect of di∣gits, that foot of Statilius is described, I have be∣••ore discovered. And therefore I wonder that k 1.63 Philander in his Commentaries upon Vitruvius, should in a matter of such high concernment in Architecture, proceed vvith so much inadver∣••ency, affirming that between this of Statili∣us, & that of Cossutius, there is no difference. And ••f he a Mathematician, hath thus erred, (though ••ommonly men versed in those sciences take not ••p things at too cheap a rate, without due exa∣mination) what opinion may vve conceive of a∣••other observation, made at the same monu∣ment,

byl 1.64 Ant. Augustinus, Jo: Baptista Sighi∣cellus, P. Octavius Pacatus, Achilles Maffaeus, Achilles Statius, Benedictus Aegius, Fulvius Vrsi∣nus, Latinus Latinius, with as many ancient feet, as there were men present? I shrewdly suspect they slubbered over their observation, as not regarding in nineteen hundred parts, and better, the small excesse, or defect, of ten parts: or not rightly apprehending what might be the consequences of such an errour, how litle soever, in measuring the vast magnitude of the terrestriall globe, or of the celestiall bodies.

Lastly, besides the authorities of Portius Vi∣centinus, Georgius Agricola, Glareanus, Ghetaldus, Donatus, and of many other learned, and judici∣ous men, who approve of this Pes Colotianus, (though bare authority is the worst, because the weakest kinde of argument) that excellent Con∣gius of Vespasian, now extant in Rome, so highly and so justly magnified bym 1.65 Villalpandus, may likewise serve to confirm, if not totally my asser∣tion, yet thus far, that I have not exceeded in assigning the true longitude. For by the cleer evidences ofn 1.66 Dioscorides, and of an anonymus Authour before cited, eight Congii are the just measure of the Romane amphora, or quadrantal and again by as many testimonies ofo 1.67 Sextu•• Pompeius, andP 1.68 Rhemnius Fannius, each of th•• sides of the amphora is equall in longitude to th•• Romane foot. Wherefore having procured by speciall favour the congius of Vespasian, I too•• the measure of it with* 1.69 milium (being next to water, very proper for such a work) carefull•• prepared, and cleansed, which being done, with

much diligence. I caused a cube to be made an∣swerable to the true dimension of the Pes Colo∣tianus; filling up the capacity of which, and often reiterating the same experiment, I found continually the excesse of about half a congius to remain, and that an amphorae made by the Pes Colotianus, would contain but VII. congii, and a∣bout an half. And therefore▪ I cannot sufficient∣ly wonder at the observationr 1.70 of Ant. Augusti∣nus, Pacatus, Maffaeus, Statius, Vrsinus, and others, with a cube of that foot, which is descri∣bed on Statilius' monument: who affirme the quadrantal of this exactly to contain eight of these congii of Vespasian. Whereas upon due ex∣amination I confidently affirm, that they have erred. And therefores 1.71 Villalpandus in this parti∣cular, with more judgement, and ingenuity, hath published his observation, concerning the mea∣sure, and precife weight, of Vespasians' congius, then any other whatsoever. Although I cannot be induced to assent to that deduction, which he infers of the Romane foot, (from the side of a quadrantal containing eight of these congii) relying upon the authorities of Festus, and Fannius, against so many evidences, produced to the contrary. Wherefore as he is singular in his opinion (for there is not one author of cre∣dit, which follows his assertion) so is his foot as singular, there being not one, of at least ten ancient ones, in the hands of severall Antiqua∣ries (besides those inscribed on two Monu∣ments in Rome) vvhich arrive to the proporti∣ons of his, by XXVII. parts in 2000. As for those other fancies of his (for they are no bet∣ter)

of describing also the Romane foot, by the altitude of Vespasians' congius, and assigning the t 1.72 latus cubicum, of the modius, the semicongius, the sextarius, and hemina, from certain parallel cir∣cles circumscribed about it, (vvhich certainly, as the scheme of the congius it Self, drawn by me to the full proportion, shews, were delineated without any farther intention then for orna∣ment) I doe not think them worth the confu∣tation.

And therefore it will be much better to give some solution to those authorities of Sextus Pompeius, and Rhemnius Fannius, alleaged by him. For the objection vvhich may be raised thence is very materiall: How the Pes Colotia∣nus can be the true Romane foot, since it is confessed by me, that it doth not precisely an∣swer to the sides of a quadrantal, or cube, con∣taining eight of those congii of Vespasian, or XLVIII. sextarii? Whereas on the contrary, Fe∣stus expresly writes, that the quadrantal was the square (he means the cube) of the Romane foot u 1.73 Quadrantal vocabant Antiqui, quam ex Graec•••• amphoram dicunt, quod vas pedis quadrati, octo & quadraginta capit sextarios. Andx 1.74 Fannius confirms the same.

Pes longo spatio, latóque notetur in anglo, Angulus ut par sit, quem claudit linea triplex Quattuor ex quadris medium cingatur inane▪ Amphora fit cubus: quam ne violare liceret, Sacravére Iovi Tarpèio in monte Quirites.

We might elevate their authorities by saying, these are only the testimonies of two Gram∣marians,

better versed in disputes of vvords, then criticall in measures, which more properly are the speculation of Mathematicians: and there∣fore if Vitruvius had affirmed it, much more credit might have been given. But we shall rather say, they wrote vvhat was vulgar∣ly, and commonly, upon tradition beleeved, that the length of one of the sides of the ampho∣ra was equall to the Romane foot: not that it was precisely, and exactly equall, but that of any known measure vvhatsoever then extant, this came the neerest to it, as indeed it doth; yea, so neer, that if at this day the amphora, and Romane foot, were in use amongst us, ma∣ny a writer that had never been so curious, as diligently to compare them, would not be scru∣pulous to affirm as much. Which may appear by the practise of Ant. Augustinus, Pacatus, Maffaeus, Statius, Vrsinus, and of severall other learned men, not long before our times: Who though they purposely made it their inquiry, to discover the true Romane vveights, and mea∣sures, and therefore made speciall use of this Congius of Vespasian, yet have no lesse erred, as we shewed before, in the dimension of the am∣phora, then both Festus, and Fannius have done. Neither will this answer seem improbable con∣cerning measures, if we shall examine a place, or two, concerning coins, in which the anci∣ents, and those too of the better sort of Au∣thors, have in the very same manner erred. For Livy writing that Marcellus gave to L. Ban∣••ius (or Bandius) D. bigati,* 1.75 that is denarii (so called because the biga was ordinarily stamped

upon the reverse of the Denarius):z 1.76 Plutarch de∣scribing the same gift, renders it by so many drachmae, the Grecian manner of computation; not that the drachma in the exact, and intrinsecal valuation, was equall then to the Denarius, or the Denarius to the drachma (as we shall shew in the insuing discourse) but that in the vulgar, and popular estimation, the one passed for the other, being both not much different in their weight, as well as valuation.a 1.77 Likewise Dio in∣forms us, that Octavius promised the Veterane souldiers D. drachmae a man: whereasb 1.78 Cicero expressing the same thing to Atticus terms them D. denarii. And Suetonius writes that Caesar by Testament gave to each of the common people sestertia trecenta, that is, LXXV. denarios, whichc 1.79 Plutarch both in the life of Brutus, and of Antonius, renders 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seventy five drachmes. In like manner we may say, that Festus, and Fannius, have described the amphora by the Romane foot; not as if this were the exact measure of it, but as being the most known, and neerest proportion, in which, without falling into fractions, it might eevenly, and roundly be expressed.

And thus have we finished our inquiry after the Romane foot: our next labour should b••

to compare it with the present Standards, and Originals, for measures of divers Nations. For which I must refer the Reader to this insuing Table.

The Romane foot compared with the measures of divers Nations.

• SVch parts as the Romane foot, or that on the monument of Cossutius in Rome, contains 1000
• The foot on the monument of Statilius in Rome, contains 1005 17/100
• The foot of Villalpandus, deduced from the Congius of Vespasian, contains 1019 65/100
• The ancient Greek foot, being in proportion to the ancient Roman foot, as XXV to XXIV, contains 1041 67/100
• The English foot 1034 13/100
• The Paris foot 110•• 45/100
• The Venetian foot 1201 65/100
• The Rhinland foot, or that of Snellius 106•• 25/100
• The Derah, or cubit, at Cairo in Ae∣gypt 1886 25/100
• The Persian arish 3306 1••/100
• The greater Turkish pike at Con∣stantinople 2275 ••••/100
• The lesser Turkish pike at Constan∣tinople, is in proportion to the greater, as 3•• to 32
• The braccio at Florence 19••8 25/100
• The braccio for wollen at Siena 12••4 31/100
• The braccio for linnen at Siena 2041 37/100
• The braccio at Naples 2171 6••/100
• The canna at Naples 7114 7••/100
• The vara at Almaria and at Gibral∣tar in Spain 2854 19/100
• Il palmo di Architetti at Rome, whereof X make the canna di Architetti ••56 51/100
• Il palmo del braccio di Mercaniia, & di Te••••ito di Tela at Rome; this and the former are both ingraven in a white marble stone in the Capitol with this inscription. Curante Lu. Paeto 719 21/100
• The Genoa palm 842 ••••/100
• The Anwerp ell 2360 ••••/100
• The Amsterdam ell ••345 4••/100
• The Leyden ell 2337 13/100

The English foot taken from the iron Standard at Guild-hall in London, and compared with the Standards for measures of divers Nations.

• SUch parts as the English foot contains 1000
• The Romane foot, or that on the monument of Cossutius in Rome, contains 967
• The foot on the monument of Statilius in Rome, contains 972
• The foot of Villalpandus, deduced from the Congius of Vespasian, contains 986
• The Greek foot 1007 29/100
• The Paris foot 1068
• The Venetian foot 1162
• The Rhinland foot, or that of Snellius 1033
• The Derah, or cubit, at Cairo in Aegypt 1824
• The Persian arish 3197
• The greater Turkish pike at Constantinople 2200
• The lesser Turkish pike at Constantinople is in pro∣portion to the gre••ter, as 31 to 32
• The braccio at Florence 1913
• The braccio for wollen at Siena 1242
• The braccio for linnen at Siena 1974
• The braccio at Naples 2100
• The canna at Naples 6880
• The vara at Almaria & at Gibraltar in Spain 2760
• Il palmo di Architetti at Rome, whereof X make the canna di Architeti 732
• Il palmo del braccio di Mercantia, & di Tessito di Tela at Rome: this and the former are both in∣graven in a white marble stone in the Capitol with this inscription Curante Lu. Paeto 6951/2
• The Genoa palm 815
• The Anwerp ell 2283
• The Amsterdam ell 2268
• The Leyden ell 2260

This Table I made by the Standards, the former by proportion.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Polyb. li. 6.
• * 1.2

  Polyb. ibid. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.
• b 1.3

  Caes: Comm. lib. 4.
• c 1.4

  Cicero l. 2. Academ. quaest.
• d 1.5

  Suetonius in Augusto.
• * 1.6

  Vol. Maet: de assis distrib.
• h 1.7

  Agricola de mensuris qui∣bus intervalla metimur.
• * 1.8

  Frontinus de limitibus agro∣rum.
• i 1.9

  Frontinus de aquaeductibus.
• l 1.10

  Archim. de circ: dimens. prop. 2.
• m 1.11

  Salmas••i Ex∣••rcit: Plinianae. p. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 4.
• n 1.12

  Hyginus de li∣mit: constit:
• c 1.13

  Hyginus ibid.
• * 1.14

  Ios: Scaliger de re nummariâ
• p 1.15

  Heroin Isa∣goge.
• q 1.16

  Abulsedae Geo∣gr. Arab. MS.
• r 1.17

  Rhemnii Fan∣nii fragmentū.
• s 1.18

  Isid. Hispal. l. 15. c. 15.
• * 1.19

  Protagoras a∣pud 〈◊〉〈◊〉. l. 1••. cap. 5. Mc∣taphys. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• u 1.20

  Nec minus m••••surarum ratio∣nes, quae in omnibus viden∣tur necessariae esse, ex corpo•• is membris colle∣gerunt: uti di∣gitum, palmum, pedem, cubitum. Vitruv. l 3 c. 1.
• x 1.21

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 MS.
• z 1.22

  S••ellius in E∣ratosth. Batav. lib. 2. cap. 2.
• a 1.23

  Aly Kush∣gy, who assisted Vlug Beg in compiling his Astronomicall Tables in Per∣sian (Tables the most exact of any in the East) limits their breadth by VI. hairs of an horse. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Every digit is sixe barly corns laid ••••venly together, and the breadth of every barly corn is sixe haires of an horses taile. Instit: Astron: Aly Cushgy. MS.
• b 1.24

  Villalpandus de apparatu Vrbis ac Templi par. 2. l. 3. c. 25. Atque in uni∣versum illud unum monitos velim eos om∣nes, qui mensu∣rarum ac pon∣derum cognos∣cendorum desi∣derio tenētur, ne à minimis inci∣piant examina∣re majora: nom vel minimus quisque error saepius multi∣plicatus in magnum ••ddu∣cit errorum cumulum.
• c 1.25

  Capellus de pond. & num∣mis lib. 1.
• d 1.26

  Snell: in Era∣tosth: Bat. lib. 2.
• e 1.27

  Wright, of the errours of Na∣vigation.
• f 1.28

  Luc. Paetus li. 3. de mensur. & pond: Rom.
• g 1.29

  Villalpandus de appar. Vrbis ac Templi. par: 2. l. 3. cap. 25.
• * 1.30

  PX signifies Pondo decem.
• h 1.31

  Fragmenta Dioscoridis.
• i 1.32

  Sext. Pomp: Festus de Verb: signif.
• k 1.33

  Rhemn: Fann: fragment.
• l 1.34

  Philander in li. 3. cap. 3. Vi∣truvii.
• m 1.35

  Luc. Paetus l. 1. de antiq. Rō. & Graec. in∣tervall. mensu∣ris.
• n 1.36

  Ciaconius è Lat. Latinii observationibus de pede Rom.
• o 1.37

  Villalpandi apparatus Vr∣bis ••c. Templi. par. 2. l. 3. c. 25.
• * 1.38

  Suetonius in Claudio Dio hist. Rom. lib. ••0.
• q 1.39

  Snell. in Era∣tosth. Bat. l. 2. cap. 2.
• r 1.40

  Villalpand. de apparatu Vrbi•• ac Templi par. 2. l. 3. c. 25.
• f 1.41

  Pars sexagesi∣ma typorum & sormarum loa∣gitudini excusis decedit, quem∣admodū à dili∣gentibus & pe∣ritis typogra∣phis sciscitando edoctus sum. Snell. in Era∣tosth. Batavo. l. 2. cap. 1.
• t 1.42

  Philander in l. 3. c. 3. Vitru∣vii.
• u 1.43

  Ciaconius è Latino Latinio.
• x 1.44

  Luc Paetus l. 1 de antiq. Rom. & Graec. inter∣vall mensuris.
• * 1.45

  Marlianus de antiquit. Vrbis
• y 1.46

  Philander in lib. 3. c. 3. Vi∣truvii.
• z 1.47

  Luc Paetus l. 1 de antiq Rom. & Graec. inter∣vall. mensuris.
• a 1.48

  Ex Epistolis Peircskii MSS.
• b 1.49

  Sebast: Ser••: delle Anti∣chita.
• c 1.50

  Andr: Schott: i••ine••ar.
• d 1.51

  Horat l. 1. Serm Sat. 5.
• * 1.52

  See at the end of this book the figure of these characters as they are cut in the rock at Anxur, with lines incom∣passing them.
• * 1.53

  Schot••i itiner.
• c 1.54

  Columella de Re Rust. l. 5.
• f 1.55

  Isiderus l. 15. c 15. Origin.
• g 1.56

  Plutarchus in Gracchis.
• * 1.57

  S. P. Q. R COLVMNAM. MILIARIAM PRIMI. AB. VRBE LAPIDIS. INDICEM AB. IMPP. VESPASIANO. ET. NERVA RESTITVTAM DF. RVINIS. SVBVR••ANIS. VIAE. APPIAE IN. CAPITOLIVM. TRANSTVLIT
• * 1.58

  The figure X signifies the distance of Tarracina from the next City, or Town, in the way to Rome: And that was, Ad medias: a place so called, either because it was, ad medias pa∣ludes, or else because it was in the midway almost between Tarracina, and Appii forum. For it was X. miles from Tarracina, and IX. from Appii fo∣rum; as appears by the Itinerarium Hierosolymitanum in Bertius.
• * 1.59

  Varrode L. L. lib. 5.
• h 1.60

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.61

  Abulf Geogr: Arab: MS.
• i 1.62

  Luc. Paetu•• lib. 1 de antiq. Rom. & Graec. interval. men∣suris.
• k 1.63

  Philander in li. 3. c. 3. Vitru∣vii.
• l 1.64

  Ciaconius è Latini Latinii observ.de pede Rom.
• m 1.65

  Villalpandus l. 2 disp. 2. c. 11 de apparatu Vr∣bis ac Templi.
• n 1.66

  Fragmenta Dioscoridis.
• o 1.67

  Sext. Pomp. Festus de Verb. signif.
• P 1.68

  Rhemn Fann. carm. fragm:
• * 1.69

  It had been better to have made my expe∣riment with water, and then to have weigh∣ed it with an exact balance: but because no balances are found in Rome so exact as with us, I was fain to measure it with milium.
• r 1.70

  Ciaconius è Latini Latinii observationibus de pede Rom. Cum veram pe∣dis Rom. quan∣titatem statuere vellent ejusd. pedis mensuras simul contule∣runt, & earum octo cum anti∣quissima dicti pedis forma, quae in basi qua∣dam in hortis Vaticanis ex∣stat, adamussim convenire vi∣dentes, ex hoc pede quadrato vas confecerunt &c. Vide supra.
• s 1.71

  Villalp. de apparatu Vrbis ac Templi par. 2. lib. 3. c. 25.
• t 1.72

  Vides etiam latus cubicum modii, semicon∣gii, sextarii, he∣minae &c. Vil•• lalp. ibidem.
• u 1.73

  Sext. Pomp. Festus de Verb. signif.
• x 1.74

  Rhemn. Fan∣nii carmina de pond. & men∣suris.
• * 1.75

  y Livius l. 23.
• z 1.76

  Plutarchus in MarcellS.
• a 1.77

  Dio lib. 45. in Caesare Octav.
• b 1.78

  Cicero lib. 16. 5. ep. ad A••i∣cum.
• c 1.79

  Plut. in Bru∣to. Idem in An∣tonio.