PRIMITIVE SYSTEMS OF CURRENCY.
ἘΞ ἈΝΆΓΚΗϹ Ἠ ΤΟΫ ΝΟΜΊϹΜΑΤΟϹ ἘΠΟΡΊϹΘΗ ΧΡΗϹΙϹ.
ARISTOTLE.
Let us here propound the doctrine which seeks to obtain an explanation
of the origin for weight-standards more in accordance with the facts of
history and the process of development as exemplified both in ancient and
modern times.
In early communities[17] all commodities alike are exchanged by bartering
the one against the other. The man who possesses sheep exchanges them
for oxen with the man who possesses oxen, the owner of corn exchanges
his commodity for some implement or ornament of metal with the owner of
the latter. The metals are only regarded as merchandise, not yet being
in any degree set apart to serve as a medium of exchange in the terms
of which all other commodities are valued. This is the practice which
prevails in so civilized a country as China down to our own days. The
only coinage which the Chinese possess is copper _cash_. According to M.
le Comte Rochechouart (_Journal des Économistes_, Vol. XV. p. 103) both
gold and silver are treated simply as merchandise, and there is not even
a recognized stamp or government guarantee of the fineness of the metal.
The traveller must carry these metals with him, as a sufficient quantity
of strings of _cash_ would require a waggon for their conveyance. Yet in
exchanging silver or gold he is sure to suffer loss both from the falsity
of balances and of weights and the uncertain fineness of the metal.
When in a certain community one particular kind of commodity is of
general use and generally available, this comes to form the unit in terms
of which all values are expressed. The nature of this barter-unit will
depend upon the nature of the climate and geographical position, and
likewise upon the stage of culture to which the people have attained. In
the hunting stage, all the property of each individual consists in his
weapons and implements of war and the chase, and the skins of wild beasts
which form his clothing, and sometimes the cover of his hut or wigwam.
At a later stage, when he has succeeded in taming the ox, the sheep, or
the goat, or the horse, he is the owner of property in domestic animals,
whose flesh and milk sustain him and his family, and whose skins and wool
provide his clothing.
By this time too he has found out that it is better to make the captive
whom he has taken in war into a hewer of wood and drawer of water than
merely to obtain some transient pleasure from eating him after putting
him to death by torture, or by wearing his skull or scalp as personal
decorations.
This is now the pastoral or nomad stage.
Next comes the more settled form of life, when the cultivation of land
and the production of the various kinds of cereals renders a permanent
dwelling-place more or less necessary.
Property now consists not merely in slaves and domestic animals, but
likewise in houses of improved construction, and large stores of grain.
Man now possesses certain of the metals, gold and copper being the first
to be known. How does he appraise these metals when he exchanges them
with his neighbour? We shall find that he estimates them in terms of
cattle, and that he at first barters them all by measures based on the
parts of the human body, a method which continues to be employed for
copper and iron long after the art of weighing has been invented; next
he estimates his gold by certain natural units of capacity such as a
goosequill, and finally fixes the amount of gold which is equivalent
to a cow, by setting it in a rude balance against a certain number of
natural seeds of plants. Such is the process which history tells us has
taken place in the temperate regions of Asia and Europe, Africa and
America. Just as it is impossible to learn the history of the growth of
the earth’s crust by confining our observations to one locality, and as
the geologist only succeeds in gaining a true insight into the relations
between the various strata by a study of the phenomena of many regions,
so we shall only be able to comprehend properly the various stages in
the growth of metallic currency and the origin of weight-standards by
observing the facts revealed to us in various countries. Whilst in some
places we shall meet with but one or two steps, in others we shall find
traces of many, though often, broken strata. Like advance, however, seems
impossible under the extremes of heat and cold. Hence in the latter
regions the conditions of life remain almost unaltered. In the extreme
north the rigour of an arctic winter forbids the keeping and rearing of
domestic animals, or the cultivation of corn and vegetables. Hence the
hunter form of existence remains almost unaltered. The sole or chief
wealth of the people consists of the skins of the fur-bearing animals
such as the seal, the beaver, the marten, or the fox, or stores of dried
fish, which they exchange with traders for a few scant luxuries, or which
form their own sustenance and protection against the pitiless frosts and
snows.
In these regions therefore we find the skins of certain animals serving
as units of account, in spite of the difference in value between those
of different quality and rarity. In the Territory of the Hudson’s Bay
Company, even after the use of coined money had been introduced among
the Indians, the skin was still in common use as the money of account.
A gun nominally worth forty shillings brought twenty ‘skins.’ This term
is the old one used by the Company. One skin (beaver) is supposed to be
worth two shillings, and it represents two martens and so on. “You heard
a great deal about skins at Fort Yukon, as the workmen were also charged
for clothing, etc., in this way[18].” Similarly in the extreme north of
Asia we find some Ostiak tribes using the skin of the Siberian squirrel
as their unit of account.
The name of a small coin equal to a quarter kopeck indicates that
originally the Slavs had a like form of currency. It is called
_polooshka_. _Ooshka_ (properly little ears) means a hare-skin, and
_polooshka_ means _half a hare-skin_[19].
[Illustration: FIG. 1. Cowrie Shell (_Cypraea moneta_).]
When we turn to the torrid zone, where clothes are only an incumbrance
and Nature lavishly supplies plenteous stores of fruits and vegetables,
the chief objects of desire will not be food and clothing but ornaments,
implements and weapons. Hence we find amongst the inhabitants of such
regions in especial strength that passion for personal adornment, which
is one of the most powerful and primitive instincts of the human race.
Shells have from very remote times formed one of the most simple forms of
adornment in all parts of the world. Shells which once perhaps formed the
necklace of some beauty of the neolithic age are found with the remains
of the cave men of Auvergne. Strings of cowries under their various names
of _changos_, _zimbis_, _bonges_ or porcelain shells are both durable,
universally esteemed, and portable, and therefore suited to form a medium
of exchange, and as such they are employed in the East Indies, Siam,
and on the East and West Coasts of Africa; on the tropical coasts they
serve the purposes of small change, being collected on the shores of the
Maldive and Laccadive islands and exported for that object. The relative
value varies slightly according to their abundance or scarcity. In India
the usual ratio was about 5000 to the rupee. Marco Polo found the cowry
in use in the province of Yunnam. He says (II. p. 62, Yule’s Transl.):
“In Carajan gold is so abundant that they give one Saggio of gold for six
of the same weight of silver. And for small change they use the porcelain
shell. These are not found in the country but are brought from India.”
How ancient is their use in Asia is shown by the fact that Layard found
cowries in the ruins of Nineveh.
[Illustration: FIG. 2. Wampum (made from the _Venus mercenaria_).]
Beyond all doubt the wampum belts of the North American Indians served
the purpose of currency. They consisted of black and white shells
rubbed down, polished and made into beads, and then strung into belts
or necklaces, which were valued according to their length, colour and
lustre, the black beads being the most valuable. Thus one foot of black
peag was worth two feet of white peag. It was so well established as
a currency among the natives that in 1649 the Court of Massachusetts
ordered that it should be received as legal tender among the settlers in
the payment of debts up to forty shillings[20].
[Illustration: FIG. 3. Al-li-ko-chik.]
Nor has this employment of strings of shells as money even yet
disappeared from North America. Thus Powers writes[21] of the Karoks
and other tribes of California: “For money they make use of the red
scalps of woodpeckers, which rate at $2.50 to $5.0 a piece, and of the
dentalium shell, of which they grind off the tip, and string it on
strings, the shortest pieces are worth 25 cents, and the longest about
two dollars, the value rising rapidly with the length. The strings are
usually about as long as a man’s arm. It is called _al-li-ko-chik_ (in
Yarok this signifies literally Indian money) not only on the Klamath
but from Crescent city to Eel river, though the tribes using it speak
several different languages. When the Americans first arrived in the
country an Indian would give 40 or 50 dollars gold for a string, but
now the abundance of the supply has depreciated its value and it is
principally the old Indians who esteem it.” Again he writes, “Some
of the young bloods array their Dulcineas for the dance with lavish
adornments, hanging on their dress 30, 40 or 50 dollars worth of dimes,
quarter dollars and half dollars arranged in strings.” This shows that
the new currency of silver is treated by them in exactly the same way
as the old shell strings, both of them deriving their value as media of
exchange from the fact that they are the objects most universally prized
as ornaments for the person.
Elsewhere the same writer observes: “Immense quantities of it (shell
money) were formerly in circulation among the Californian Indians, and
the manufacture of it was large and constant to replace the continual
wastage caused by the sacrifice of so much on the death of wealthy men,
and by the propitiatory sacrifices performed by many tribes, especially
those of the coast range. From my own observations, which have not
been limited, and from the statements of pioneers and of the Indians
themselves, I hesitate little to express the belief that every Indian
in the state in early days possessed an average of at least 100 dollars
worth of shell money. This would represent the value of almost two women
(though the Nishinam never actually bought their wives), or two grizzly
bear skins, or 25 cinnamon bear skins or about three average ponies.
The young English-speaking Indians hardly use it at all except in a few
dealings with their elders or for gambling. One sometimes lays away a few
strings of it for he knows he cannot squander it at the stores. It is
singular how old Indians cling to this currency when they know it will
purchase nothing for them at the stores; but then their wants are few,
and mostly supplied from the sources of nature, and besides that the
money has a certain religious value in their eyes, as being alone worthy
to be offered up on the funeral pile of departed friends or famous chiefs
of their tribes[22].”
Here we see how amongst the Indian tribes there was a fully developed
system of inter-relations between the various objects which formed their
wealth.
The horse was but a new comer into America, but he had his place soon
allotted in the scale of values, being little less valuable than a
squaw. We cannot doubt that if the Indian had succeeded in domesticating
the buffalo before the advent of the white man, it would have formed the
most general unit in use, as we shall find its congeners being employed
in all parts of the old world. But before the coming of the Spaniards at
least one race of North America had advanced a stage beyond shell money.
The Aztecs[23] of Mexico were employing a currency of gold and cacao
seeds. The former in the shape of dust was placed in goose quills, which
formed a natural unit of capacity, for weights were as yet unknown to the
Aztecs; whilst the cacao seeds were placed in bags, each containing a
specified number.
In Queen Charlotte Islands the dentalium shell was recognized as a medium
of exchange by most of the coast tribes, but not so much as a medium of
exchange for themselves as for barter with the Indians of the interior.
With the Haidas it is still sometimes worn as an ornament though it has
disappeared as a medium of exchange. The blanket of the trader has now
however supplanted the _skin_ as the principal unit. Not only among the
Haidas but all along the coast it takes the place of the beaver-skin
currency of the interior of British Columbia and of the North West
Territory. The blankets used in trade are distinguished by the points or
marks on the edge, woven into their texture, the best being four-point,
the smallest and poorest one-point. The acknowledged unit of trade is
a single two and a half-point blanket, now worth a little over $1.50.
Everything is referred to this unit, even a large four-point blanket
is said to be worth so many _blankets_. There is also the “Copper,”
“an article of purely conventional value and serving as money. This is
a piece of native metal beaten out into a flat sheet and made to take
a peculiar shape. These are not made by the Haidas—nor indeed is the
native metal known to exist in the islands, but are imported as articles
of great worth from the Chilcat country north of Sitka. Much attention
is paid to the size and make of the copper, which should be of uniform
but not too great thickness, and should give forth a good sound when
struck with the hand. At the present time spurious coppers have come into
circulation, and although these are easily detected by an expert, the
value of the copper is somewhat reduced and is often more nominal than
real. Formerly ten slaves were paid for a good copper as a usual price,
now they are valued at from forty to eighty blankets”.[24] It is obvious
that such costly imported articles, though now used as occasional higher
units of account—much as we employ fifty-pound notes—must have had some
definite use, owing to which they were so highly prized. The attention
paid to their tone would lead us to conjecture that they were employed as
a kind of gong, and further on we shall find certain peoples of Further
Asia paying a large price in buffaloes for gongs.
Before we quit finally the northern latitudes, it is worth our while to
observe the method of currency employed by the Icelanders. As metals and
other products of the land were scarce in their bleak home, the stockfish
(dried cod) formed naturally their chief commodity, and hence it appears
on the arms of Denmark as the emblem of Iceland. There is still extant
a proclamation for the regulation of English trade with Iceland issued
sometime between 1413 and 1426. As, _mutatis mutandis_, it affords
admirable insight into the methods by which trade was carried on between
men of different nations in the emporia of the Mediterranean, and in fact
everywhere else, it is worth giving it _in extenso_[25].
“I, _N. M._ do proclaim here to-day a general market between the English
and the Icelandic men, who have come here with peace and fair dealing,
and between the Icelandic men and the men of the islands who wish to
carry on their trade here.
“First I proclaim this market on conditions of peace and lawful security
between one and the other, so that each can entirely dispose of his own
if he buy or if he sell. Price list in stockfish: of fish 2, 2½, or
1¾ lbs., 80 lbs. must be the equivalent of a hundred (of cloth, i.e.
129 _alens_ of _vadme_, a cloth formerly used as a medium of exchange),
provided the persons concerned cannot agree as to the price.
Price of (foreign) goods. Stockfish.
48 _alen_ of good and full width trade cloth 120
48 _alen_ linen cloth double width 120
6 tonder (tuns) malt 120
4 do. trade flour 120
3 do. wheat 120
4 do. beer 120
1 tonde clean and clear butter 120
1 do. wine 100
1 do. pitch 80
1 do. raw tar 60
1 cask of iron, containing 400 pieces 120
⅛ tonde honey 15
⅛ do. blubber 15
½ lb. of coppers (i.e. copper cauldrons) by weight 2½
1 pair black (leather) shoes 4
1 pair of women’s shoes 3
1 trade rug 30
1 “alen” timber, in planks or spars 5
⅛ tonde salt 5
½ lb. wax 5
Horse shoes of iron for 5 horses 20
Caps, knives, and other small mercer’s wares, according
to mutual agreement.
“I charge all, not only the people from the country, but also the
inhabitants of these islands, that ye do in no way compass any disorder
or disturbance to the strangers, from the moment the guard flag is
hoisted, unless they themselves allow it.
“They, who here are annoyed by word or deed, have a right to demand
double indemnity therefor.
“Also I charge, and the merchants in no way the least, that they use
aright the “alen” and other lawful measure for everything, as the law
demands, especially as regards butter, wine and beer, flour or malt,
honey or tar, so that no one deals false or with deceit with another.
“He who does so intentionally shall have sinned as greatly against the
state as if he had stolen goods of like value, whereas the bargain
becomes void, and damages moreover must be given to him who was deceived.
“Let us now, Ye good men, eschew all malice and trickery, riot or
disturbance, quarrels and careless words: but let every man be the
other’s friend, without deceit.
“Prizing unity
And old custom,
And abiding in God’s peace.”
Some such proclamations were probably often made in the marts of the
Aegean, such as Aegina, when Greek, Phoenician and Etruscan met for
traffic under the control of some local potentate, and the protection of
the god of some neighbouring shrine.
Passing to the islands of the Pacific we shall find shell money playing
an important part among the primitive peoples, such as those who inhabit
New Ireland, New Britain, the Pelew and the Caroline groups. It will
suffice for our purpose to describe the form in which it is employed in
New Britain. Mr Powell[26] tells us that the native money in New Britain
consists of small cowrie shells strung on strips of cane, in Duke of York
Island it is called Dewarra. It is measured in lengths, the first length
being from hand to hand across the chest with arms extended, second
length from the centre of the breast to the hand of one arm extended, the
third from the shoulder to the tip of the fingers along the arm, fourth
from the elbow to the tip of the fingers, fifth from the wrist to the
tip of the fingers, sixth finger lengths. Fish are generally bought by
the length in Dewarra unless they are too small. A large pig will cost
from 30 to 40 lengths of the first measure (fathom) and a small one ten.
The Dewarra is made up for convenience in coils of 100 fathoms or first
lengths; sometimes as many as 600 fathoms are coiled together, but not
often, as it would be too bulky to remove quickly in case of invasion or
war, when the women carry it away to hide. These coils are very neatly
covered with wickerwork like the bottom of our cane chairs.... At Moko
and Utuan they use another kind of money as well as this, the other being
a little bivalve shell, through which they bore a hole and string it on
pieces of native made twine[27]. It is also chipped all round until it is
a quarter of an inch in diameter and then smoothed down into even discs
with sand and pumice. Here we find strings of shells, which undoubtedly
in the first instance were used for personal adornment, converted into
a true currency. The simple savages whose possessions were exceedingly
few and scanty, equated their fish to strings of shells which formed
their only ornament, and when they got a more valuable possession in the
pig, they quickly learned to appraise that animal in shell worth, just
as the North American Indians learned to estimate the horse in _Wampum_.
Instead of shells the natives of Fiji are said to have employed whales’
teeth as currency, red teeth (which are still highly prized) standing to
white ones somewhat in the ratio of sovereigns to shillings with us[28].
Passing on to the mainland of Asia we shall find that the Chinese, who
in the course of ages have developed a bronze coinage of their own apart
from the influences of the Mediterranean people, had in early times an
elaborate system of shell money. Cowries appear in the _Ya-King_, the
oldest Chinese book, 100,000 dead shell fishes being an equivalent for
riches. Tortoise shell currency is also mentioned in the same book. The
tortoise of various kinds and sizes was used for the greater values
which would have required too many cowries. Tortoise shell is still
elegantly used to express coin. Several kinds of _Cypraea_ were used,
including the purple shell, two or three inches long; all the shells
except the small ones were employed in pairs. A writer of the second
century B.C.[29] speaks of the purple shell as ranking next after the
sea tortoise shells, measuring one foot six inches, which could only be
procured in Cochin China and Annam, where they were used to make pots,
basins and other valuable objects. So attached were the Chinese to these
primitive coins that the usurper Wangmang restored a shell currency of
five kinds, tortoise shell being the highest. From this time we hear no
more of cowries in China Proper, but they left traces of themselves in
the small copper coins shaped like a small Cypraea, called Dragon’s eye
or Ant coins[30]. It is doubtless to a similar survival that we owe those
curious silver coins made in the shape of shells which come from the
north of Burmah and of which there are several specimens in the British
Museum. They are about the size of a cowrie, and doubtless served as a
higher unit in a currency, of which the lower units were formed by real
shells.
[Illustration: FIG. 4. Burmese silver shell money.]
In 685 B.C. in parts of China pearls and gems, gold, knives and cloth
were the money, and under the Shou dynasty (1100 B.C.) we understand from
ancient Commentaries that the gold circulated in little cubes of a square
inch, and the copper in round, tongue-like plates by the _tchin tchu_,
while the silk cloth 2 feet 2 inches wide in rolls of 40 feet formed a
_piece_.
In the _Shu King_, when in 947 B.C. commutation for punishment was
enacted, the culprit according to the offence was to pay 100, 200, 500
or 1000 _hwars_, or rings of copper weighing 6 _ounces_. The Chinese
likewise used hoes as money, just as we shall find the wild people of
Annam doing at the present hour. But in the course of time the hoe became
a true currency and little hoes, such as that here figured, were employed
as coins in some parts of China (_tsin_, agricultural implements). The
copper knives which played so important a part in the development of
Chinese coinage will be dealt with more particularly in a later chapter.
In Marco Polo’s time cowries were in full use, as in the province of
Yunnan[31].
[Illustration: FIG. 5. Chinese hoe money.]
On the borders of China and Tibet we may still find a state of things
not far removed from that existing in the China of 2000 years ago[32].
The Tibetans, who in recent years employ Indian rupees, for purposes of
small change cut up these coins into little pieces, which are weighed by
the careful Chinese, but the Tibetans do not seem to use the scale, and
roughly judge of the value of a piece of silver. Tea, moreover, and beads
of turquoise are largely used as a means of payment instead of metal.
Speaking of this same region (called by him Kandu), Polo says[33]: “The
money-matters of the people are conducted in this way: they have gold
in rods which they weigh, and they reckon its value by its weight in
_saggi_, but they have no coined money. Their small change again is made
in this way: they have salt which they boil and set in a mould, and every
piece from the mould weighs half-a-pound. Now eighty moulds of this salt
are worth one _saggio_ of fine gold.” Tea seems to have taken the place
of salt in modern times.
Turning next to the southern frontier of China, we shall find among the
tribes of Annam a system of currency which strongly reminds us of that
found in the Homeric Poems.
Among the Bahnars of Annam who border on Laos, “everything,” says that
excellent observer M. Aymonier, “is by barter, hence all objects of
general use have a known relationship: if we know the unit, all the rest
is easy. Here is the key: a _head_, that is to say, a male slave is
worth six or seven buffaloes, or the same number of pots (_marmites_; so
in Homer, _Il._ XXXIII. 885, an ox is estimated at a kettle); the buffalo
and the pot have the same value, which naturally varies with the size and
age of the animal and the size and quality of the pot.
“A full-grown buffalo or a large pot is worth seven earthenware jars of
a grey glaze, after the Chinese shape, and with a capacity of fifteen
litres. One jar = 4 _muk_. (The _muk_[34] is an unit of account, but
originally meant some special article.) 1 _muk_ = 10 _mats_, that is to
say ten of these _hoes_, which are manufactured by the Cédans, and which
are employed by all the savages of this region as their agricultural
implement. The hoe is the smallest amount used by the Bahnars. It is
worth 10 centimes in European goods, and is made of iron[35].” Thus the
buffalo is worth 280 hoes, or a little more than an English sovereign,
since each hoe is worth a penny (10 centimes). The Bahnars have sheet tin
½ millim. thick cut into pieces 11 centim. square, to be used to ornament
sword-belts or to make earrings (iv. p. 390). A stick of virgin wax the
size of an ordinary candle = 1 hoe, a pretty little cane hat = 2 hoes;
a large bamboo hat = 2 hoes; a Bahnar knife = 2 hoes; a fine sword and
sheath = 1 jar, 1 _muk_, 3 hoes; a crossbow and string = 3 hoes; ordinary
arrows are sold at 30 for 1 hoe; arrows with movable heads, 20 for 1 hoe,
and poisoned arrows 5 for 1 hoe; a lance-head = 3 hoes; a lance with palm
handle = 4 hoes; a horse = 3 or 4 pots or buffaloes; a large elephant =
10 to 15 _heads_ (slaves).
The same method of using the buffalo as the chief unit is employed by
the Moïs, among whom a slave is reckoned at 10 buffaloes. Again, among
tribes such as the Tjams, with whom the string of copper _cash_ (or
sapecs) borrowed from the Chinese, is employed as their lowest unit, a
full-grown buffalo = 100 strings;[36] the Mexican _piastre_ or dollar
circulates freely as in China, a small pig costs 10 strings, pork by
retail costs two strings per lb. (_livre_), ducks cost 1½ to 2 strings. A
large caldron costs 3 buffaloes; a handsome gong = 2 buffaloes; a small
gong = 1 buffalo; 6 copper platters = 1 buffalo; two swords = 1 buffalo;
2 lances = 1 buffalo; a rhinoceros’ horn = 8 buffaloes; a pair of large
elephants’ tusks = 6 buffaloes; a small pair = 3 buffaloes. When the wild
people have dealings with the more civilized peoples of the plain, who
employ the Chinese cash and silver dollars, a large buffalo = 100 strings
of cash, a small one = 50 strings; a fine horse = 100 strings; a she goat
= a piece of cloth. The Orang Glaï have often to buy elephants’ tusks,
at the rate of 8 buffaloes for a pair, or 8 bars of silver (640 francs).
The Szins of Kharang have often to pay a tax of a buffalo per hut, or
for the whole village 10 buffaloes, the horns of which must be at least
as long as their ears[37]. In Cambodia iron ingots[38] form a special
kind of money. These ingots are not weighed, but they are as long as from
the base of the thumb to the tip of the forefinger; they are in breadth
two fingers, and one finger in thickness in the middle, tapering off to
either end.
Cowries and other shells seem to have gone out of use altogether among
these tribes, but we may recognize in the practice of reckoning the
_cash_ by the string a distinct survival of the olden time when shells
were so employed. It is of great importance to note that where silver has
come into use, its unit, the bar, is equated to the buffalo, the unit of
barter, just as we find the Homeric gold Talent equal to the ox.
Next let us turn to India, and to the Aryans of the Rig Veda, who dwelt
in the north-west of the Punjaub at the time when we first meet them.
From their prayers and invocations it is easy to learn in what the wealth
of this simple folk consisted. One or two examples will serve for our
purpose: “The potent ones who bestow on us good fortune by means of cows,
horses, goods, gold, O Indra and Vaya, may they, blessed with fortune,
ever be successful by means of horses and heroes in battle[39].”
Again, “O Indra bring us rice cake, a thousand _soma_ drinks, and an
hundred cows, O hero. Bring us apparel, cows, horses and jewels, along
with a _mana_ of gold.” Yet once more: “Ten horses, ten caskets, ten
garments, ten gold nuggets (_hiranya pindas_) I received from Divodāsa.
Ten chariots equipped with side horses, and an hundred cows gave the
Açvatha to the Atharvans and to the Pāyu.” Even without further evidence
than that which we have already drawn from the wild people of Annam, we
might well assume that there were definitely fixed relations in value
between the cows, horses, gold, rice, and cloth of the Vedic people. But
absolute proof is at hand, for their close kinsmen, the ancient Persians,
have left us in the Zend Avesta ample means of observing their monetary
system. Thus we read in the ordinances which fix the payment of the
physician that “he shall heal the priest for the holy blessing; he shall
heal the master of an house for the value of an ox of low value; he shall
heal the lord of a borough for the value of an ox of average value; he
shall heal the lord of a town for the value of an ox of high value; he
shall heal the lord of a province for the value of a chariot and four; he
shall heal the wife of the master of a house for the value of a she ass;
he shall heal the wife of the master of a borough for the value of a cow;
he shall heal the wife of the lord of a town for the value of a mare;
he shall heal the wife of the lord of a province for the value of a she
camel; he shall heal the son of the lord of a borough for the value of an
ox of high value: he shall heal an ox of high value for the value of an
ox of average value; he shall heal an ox of average value for the value
of an ox of low value; he shall heal an ox of low value for the value of
a sheep; and he shall heal a sheep for the value of a meal of meat[40].”
So too in the fees of the Cleanser we read: “Thou shalt cleanse a priest
for a blessing; the lord of a province for the value of a camel of high
value; the lord of a town for the value of a stallion; the lord of a
borough for the value of a bull; the master of an house for the value of
a cow three years old; the wife of the master of an house for the value
of a ploughing cow; a menial for the value of a draught cow; a young
child for the value of a lamb[41].” Again in the chapter on Contracts:
“The third is the contract to the amount of a sheep, the fourth is the
contract to the amount of an ox, the fifth is the contract to the amount
of a man (human being), the sixth is the contract to the amount of a
field, a field in good land, a fruitful one in good bearing[42].”
From these extracts it is plain that the ancient Persians had a system
of clearly defined relations in value between all their worldly gear,
whether the object was a slave or an ox, or a lamb or a field, precisely
like that existing at the present moment among the hill tribes of Annam.
But not simply was it between one kind of animal and another, but they
had evidently strict notions as regards the inter-relations in value
of different animals of the same kind; thus the ox of high value, the
ox of low value, the cow of three years old, or the bull all stood to
one another in a fixed relationship. We may without hesitation conclude
that the same system of conventional values prevailed among the ancient
Hindus. Nor can we doubt that articles of every kind, such as arrows,
spears, axes, and articles of personal use and adornment all had their
regularly recognized prices, and that the less valuable of them were used
as small change. Gold, no doubt, occupied an important place in relation
to the other forms of property in portions of fixed size or weight, as
in the days of Marco Polo. In mediaeval times in parts of India money
consisted of pieces of iron worked into the form of large needles, and in
some parts stones which we call cat’s eyes, and in others pieces of gold
worked to a certain weight were used for moneys, as we are told by Nicolo
Conti, who travelled in India in the 15th century[43]. If iron was so
employed at this late date we may well infer that bronze and afterwards
iron were probably so used by the ancient Indo-Iranian people.
[Illustration: FIG. 6. Fish-hook money (_Larina_).]
[Illustration: FIG. 7. Siamese silver bullet money: A. B. Early form as
simple piece of wire. C. Last stage of degradation.]
Among the fishermen who dwelt along the shores of the Indian Ocean, from
the Persian Gulf to the southern shores of Hindustan, Ceylon and the
Maldive islands, it would appear that the fish-hook, to them the most
important of all implements, passed as currency. In the course of time it
became a true money, just as did the hoe in China. It still for a time
retained its ancient form, but gradually became degraded into a simple
piece of double wire, as seen in Nos. 3 and 4 of our illustration. In its
conventional form it is known as a _larin_ or _lari_, a name doubtless
derived from Lari on the Persian Gulf. These _larins_ made both of silver
and bronze were in use until the beginning of the last century, and
bear legends in Arabic character. Had the process of degradation gone
on without check, in course of time the double wire would probably have
shrunk up into a bullet-shaped mass of metal, just as the Siamese silver
coins are the outcome of a process of degradation from a piece of silver
wire twisted into the form of a ring and doubled up, which probably
originally formed some kind of ornament. The bullet-shaped _tical_ is
now struck as a coin of European form. Just as perhaps the silver shells
of Burmah became the multiple unit of a large number of real cowries, so
the fish-hook made of silver came into use as a multiple unit, when the
bronze fish-hook had already become conventionalized into a true coin.
The silver _larins_ of Ceylon weigh about 170 grs. troy, and those of
Southern India are said by Professor Wilson to weigh the same, although
some of them weigh only 76 grs. or less than half. As the rupee weighs
about 180 grs. the silver fish-hook may represent the usual unit employed
for silver, strong national conservatism requiring that the silver
currency should take the same form as the ancient fish-hook currency of
bronze[44]. There are still in circulation in Nejd in Arabia small bars
of silvered brass, which bear on the back Arabic inscriptions. It is
hardly possible to doubt that in these little pieces of metal we have the
last surviving descendants of the old fish-hook. In the Maldive Isles a
silver _larin_ was worth 12,000 cowries.
[Illustration: FIG. 8. Silvered brass bars used as money in Nejd[45].]
Advancing westward we find the Ossetes of the Caucasus at the present
moment employ the cow as their unit of value, the prices of all
commodities being stated as one, two, three or four cows, or even at
one-tenth or one-hundredth of the value of a cow. The ox is worth two
cows, and the cow is worth ten sheep. This people regulate compensation
for wounds thus: they measure the length of the wound in barley corns,
and for every barley corn which it measures a cow has to be paid[46].
We can have little doubt that over all Hither Asia the same method of
employing the cow as the principal unit of value obtained. It is that
which we found among the Greeks of the Homeric Poems, who were in full
contact with Northern Asia Minor, and was almost certainly that of the
Semites who dwelt in the South. Just as we find the buffalo, and the
pots, bronze platters, arrows, lances and hoes standing side by side in
well defined mutual relation among the Bahnars of Cochin China, so we
find in Homer that whilst the cow is the principal unit, the slave is
employed as an occasional higher unit, and the kettle (_lebes_), the
pot (_tripous_), the axe and the half axe, hides, raw copper and pig
iron stand beside the cow as multiples or sub-multiples. When Ajax and
Idomeneus make a bet on the issue of the chariot race, the proposed wager
is a pot or a kettle[47], whilst from another passage we learn that the
usual prizes given at the funeral games of a chieftain were female slaves
and pots (Tripods).
Passing from Greece into Italy we have no difficulty in proving that the
cow was the regular unit of value in that peninsula and the adjacent
island of Sicily. Down to 451 B.C. all fines at Rome were paid in cows
and sheep. By the Tarpeian Law these were commuted for payments in
copper, each cow being set at 100 asses, each sheep at 10 asses. As I
shall deal with the whole question of the Roman As at considerable length
later on I shall here simply note that the Italian tribes had evidently
the same system of adjusting the relations between their cattle and sheep
and their metals which we found among the Persians and modern Ossetes. In
Sicily it is clear that the cow had played the same part as elsewhere,
for we learn from Aristotle[48] that when the tyrant Dionysius burdened
the Syracusans by excessive taxation, they ceased in a great degree to
keep cattle, inasmuch as the unit of assessment was the cow. If then in
the 4th century B.C. at Syracuse, the most advanced community in Sicily,
the cow still continued to be the unit of assessment, _à fortiori_, at an
earlier period that animal must have been the monetary unit of the whole
island.
From the Italians we pass on to their close kinsmen the Kelts. We are
told by Polybius[49] that when the Gauls entered Italy, their wealth
consisted of their cattle and gold ornaments, but although an argument
will be offered below to show that the cow was the monetary unit of both
Gauls and Germans, we have no definite evidence respecting the barter
system. But fortunately the Ancient Laws of Wales and Ireland afford
us ample insight into the Keltic system. Irish tradition goes back far
beyond the date at which the Brehon Laws were compiled, and from it we
get a glimpse of a system almost Homeric: thus we read in the _Annals of
the Four Masters_ under the year 106 A.D. that the tribute (_Boroimhe_,
literally cow-tax) paid by the King of Leinster consisted in 150 cows,
150 swine, 150 couples of men and women in servitude, 150 girls and the
king’s daughter in like servitude, 150 caldrons, with two passing large
ones of the breadth and depth of five fists[50]. As this tradition makes
no mention of payment in metals, but only of slaves, cattle and caldrons,
which doubtless stood to one another in well defined relations, we need
have no hesitation in assuming that the cow formed the chief unit of the
earlier, as it did of the later Kelts.
The Welsh naturally adopted the monetary system which sprang up after the
reign of Constantine the Great in the Later Empire. Accordingly we find
in certain of their Ancient Laws[51] tables giving in _denarii_, _solidi_
or _librae_ the values of various kinds of property. From these we can
learn with accuracy the relations in value which existed between various
kinds of property. Thus the calf from March (when the cows calved) to
November was worth 6 _denarii_, to the following February 8 _den._,
till May 10 _den._, till August of the second year 12, till November
14 _den._, till February 15 _den._, till February of the third year 28
_den._ The heifer is then in calf, her milk is worth 16 _den._ Thus the
milch cow is worth 46 _den._, and up to August she is worth 48 _den._,
up to November 50 _den._, and up to May of the fourth year is worth
60 _den._ A month’s milk is worth 4 _den._; a bull calf 6 _den._, the
young ox when put to the plough is worth 28 _den._, when he can plough,
48 _den._, that is the same as the young milch cow of the same age; a
gelding is worth 80 _den._, a farmer’s mare 60 _den._, a trained horse
is worth half a _libra_; a bow with twelve arrows is worth 7 _denarii_
and an _obolus_; a queen bee (_modred af_) is worth 24 _den._, the first
swarm 16 _den._, the second 12, the third 8; a foal is worth 18 _den._ to
24 _den._, a two year old 48 _den._, a three year old 96 _den._ A young
male slave (_iuvenis captivus_) is worth 1 _libra_, a slave both young
and of large stature (_captivus iuvenis et magnus_) is worth 1½ _libra_.
It would appear that the Welsh, when taking over the Roman system, had
adjusted their own highest barter-unit, the slave (probably female as
well as male), to the _libra_ or pound, the highest unit in the Roman
system. Of course slaves of exceptional strength or beauty would always
command a higher price. But the regulations for the value of cattle are
especially of interest, as shewing the extraordinary minuteness with
which pastoral peoples discriminate the values of animals of different
ages, and estimate the milk of a cow in proportion to her actual value.
The full-grown cow is worth exactly ten times the newborn calf, an
estimate which holds good just as much in 1890 as it did 1000 years ago,
for it is not a mere convention but is based upon a natural law. At the
present moment a calf is worth from 30 to 35 shillings, a cow from £15 to
£17. 10_s._ The yearling calf was worth one-sixth of the full-grown cow,
a relation which still holds good.
The Irish Kelts borrowed their silver system from Rome at a period
probably before Constantine, as they seem never to have employed the
_libra_ and _solidus_, but simply the _uncia_ (_unga_) and _scripulus_
(_screapall_), adding thereto a subdivision called the _pinginn_ or
penny, borrowed doubtless from the Saxon invader at a later period.
Thus 1 unga = 24 screapalls; 1 screapall = 3 pinginns. They equated the
principal silver unit, the _uncia_, to the old chief barter-unit, the
cow (_bo_). As elsewhere, however, the slave formed occasionally the
highest unit, and was reckoned nominally at three cows. The slave woman
(_cumhal_, _ancilla_ in Latin writers) was in course of time used as a
mere unit of account.
Slave woman (_cumhal_, _ancilla_) = 3 ounces (_unga_)
Full-grown cow (_bo mor_) = 1 ounce = 24 screapalls
Heifer now in third year (_samhaisc_) = ½ ounce = 12 screapalls
Heifer of second year (_colpach_) = 6 screapalls
Yearling (_dairt_) = 4 screapalls
A cow’s milk for summer and harvest = 6 screapalls
A sheep = 3 screapalls
A goat’s milk for summer and harvest = 1¾ pinginn
A sheep’s fleece = 1½ pinginn
A sheep’s milk = ½ pinginn
A kid (_meinnan_)[52] = ⅔ pinginn.
Here again the yearling is worth one-sixth of the cow. Gold was abundant
among the ancient Irish, (almost certainly obtained in large quantities
from the Wicklow mountains,) and passed from hand to hand in the form of
rings, which were weighed on a system different from and probably far
older than that employed for silver (see Appendix A).
Passing to the Teutonic peoples we find traces of the same ancient
practice. For according to one system a _mancus_ of silver (a mere
unit of account) corresponded with the value of an ox. Similarly the
_pound_ (_libra_) was generally regarded as the silver equivalent of the
worth of a man[53]. But the strongest proof is that Charlemagne in his
dealings with the Saxons found it necessary to define the value of his
_solidus_ of 12 pence (_denarii_) by equating it to the value of an ox
of a year old of either sex in the autumn season, just as it is sent to
the stall. In the same law we find a list of regulation prices for other
commodities, such as oats, honey, rye, similar to those already quoted
from the Welsh laws[54]. The English word _fee_, which originally meant
an ox, as is shown not only by the German _Vieh_, which still retains its
original meaning, and by such expressions in Anglo-Saxon as _gangende
feoh_, is in itself a proof that cattle served as the most generally
recognized form of money. It might be expected that much the same state
of things existed among the Scandinavian peoples. Their chief media of
exchange were cows, and woollen cloths, slaves, and gold ornaments. By
the laws of Hakon the Good penalties could be paid in cows, provided that
they were not too old, in slaves, provided they were not under fifteen
years of age, in cloths, and in weapons[55].
Gold and silver were employed by the northern peoples in the form of
rings.
This has led people to talk much about _ring money_ as if it was a true
currency, circulating like the stamped money of later times. The truer
view seems to be that these rings, whether employed by the ancient
Egyptians or the prehistoric inhabitants of Mycenae, the Kelts or
Teutons, were nothing more than ornaments and passed in the ordinary
way of barter, having a recognized distinct relation to other forms
of property, such as cattle and slaves. It has been the custom in all
countries for the person who desires to have an article of jewellery
made to give to the goldsmith a certain weight of gold or silver, out of
which the latter manufactures the desired ornament. Such is the practice
at the present day in India; you give the goldsmith so many gold mohurs
or sovereigns, or rupees, as the case may be; he squats down in your
verandah, and with a few primitive tools quickly turns out the article
you desire, which of course will weigh as many mohurs or sovereigns as
you have given him (provided that you have stood by all the time, keeping
a sharp look-out to prevent his abstracting any of the metal). That in
like fashion gold ornaments for ordinary wearing purposes were regularly
of known weights in ancient times is shown clearly by the account of the
presents given to Rebekah by Abraham’s servant, ‘a gold earring of half
a shekel weight and two bracelets for her hands of ten shekels weight’
(Genesis xxiv. 22). The same word appears in Job xlii. 11: ‘Then came
there unto him all his brethren and all his sisters and all that had
been of his acquaintance before ... every man also gave him a piece of
money and every one an _earring_ of gold.’ Consequently Rebekah’s golden
ring (whether it was to adorn her nose or ear) of half a shekel weighed
65 grains, being half the light shekel or ox-unit. We are not told the
weight of the earrings contributed by his sympathetic kinsfolk for the
afflicted patriarch, but it is evident that they were of a uniform
standard. No doubt such rings had from time immemorial passed in the
ordinary course of barter from hand to hand. This is strongly supported
by a piece of evidence produced independently of the previous suggestion
by Dr Hoffmann of Kiel, who has showed[56] that _betzer_ (בצר) the
word used for gold in Job xxii. 24-25 (_bĕtzĕr_) and in Job xxxvi. 19
(_b’tzar_), from a comparison of its cognates in Hebrew and Arabic
means simply a _ring_, which through the extended meaning _ring-gold_
came finally to be used as a name for the metal simply. To take another
example from a very different region, the golden ornaments of the ancient
Irish (of which numerous specimens exist in the Museum of the Royal Irish
Academy) were made according to specified weight. Thus queen Medbh is
represented as saying: ‘My spear-brooch of gold, which weighs thirty
ungas, and thirty half ungas, and thirty crosachs and thirty quarter
[crosachs].’ O’Curry, _Manners and Customs of Ancient Irish_, iii. 112.
But we need not go beyond Greek soil itself for such illustrations. The
well-known story of Archimedes and the weight of the golden crown, which
led to the discovery of specific gravity, is sufficient to show that the
practice in Greece was such as I describe.
[Illustration: FIG. 9. Rings found in the tombs of Mycenae.]
The rings seen on Egyptian monuments (of which we give a representation
in a later chapter) are of round wire; those found by Schliemann in the
tombs of Mycenae[57] (Fig. 9) consist both of round wire rings like the
Egyptian, and likewise of spirals of quadrangular wire. As _finger_ rings
(δακτύλιοι) are not mentioned in Homer, it has been assumed that the
Homeric Greeks did not employ rings at all. Hence in a famous passage
where the ornaments made by Hephaestus for the goddesses are described,
we find mention of brooches, _bent spirals_ (ἕλικες) ear-drops[58], and
chains. Helbig[59] explains the _helikes_ as a kind of brooch made of
four spirals, such as are worn in parts of Central Europe, but it is
difficult to believe that people who were using brooches with pins and
necklaces would not have known and employed the far simpler ring. Again,
why should we find two distinct words for brooches coming thus together?
Is it not far more likely that in the spirals of Mycenae we have the real
_bent helikes_ of Homer? These spirals would serve not only for finger
rings, but might be used in the hair, or more probably still were used
as a means of fastening on the dress, being passed through eyelet holes
or loops, on the principle of the modern key ring[60]. On comparing them
with the Scandinavian spiral (Fig. 1) the reader will see that this
primitive form of employing gold was widely diffused over Europe. The
Scandinavians used such ornaments of _bent_ wire (O.N. _baugr_, A.S.
_beag_ from root BUG, _to bend_) very commonly, beside oxen and other
property, as media of exchange. Thus both _beag_ in Anglo-Saxon, and
_baugr_ in Old Norse became used as general names for treasure. Thus
_baugbrota_ (cf. _hring brota_), literally _ring-breaker_, was used as
an epithet of princes, meaning _distributor of treasure_[61].
[Illustration: FIG. 10. Nos. 1, 2, found in Tipperary; 3, Scandinavian;
4, 5, found in Co. Mayo; 6, 7, 8, ordinary Irish type.]
The same spirals of quadrangular wire were probably employed by the
Kelts, as that shown in Fig. 10, No. 3 was found in Ireland; Nos. 4 and 5
are of quadrangular wire but are simple hoops, whilst in Nos. 6, 7, 8, we
get the regular Irish type of a round wire not completely closed[62]. The
latter probably represent a more advanced state of art, as their makers
must have had considerable metallurgic skill, No. 8 being made of gold
plated over a copper core.
As we shall see further on, the Egyptian rings are made on a standard
almost identical with the Homeric talent, and I have shown elsewhere that
the rings from Mycenae were made on almost the same standard[63]. I shall
endeavour to show in an Appendix that the Irish rings also show evidence
of being made on a definite standard, whilst it has been long well known
that the Scandinavian rings and armlets have likewise a standard of their
own.
When occasion arose they cut off a piece of this bent wire (for it was
really nothing more), and gave it by weight. Such a piece was called a
_scillinga_, and is the direct ancestor of our own _shilling_[64]. It
is not unlikely also that the ancient inhabitants of Portugal employed
similar pieces of wire, as Strabo tells us that the Lusitanians have
no money, but that they employ silver wire, from which they cut off a
portion when necessary[65].
We now pass on to Africa, where we shall find most varied systems of
currency. Thus on the West Coast of Africa the _bar_ is the unit. In fact
all merchandise is reckoned by the bar[66], which now at Sierra Leone
means 2_s._ 3_d._ worth of any kind of commodity, although originally
it meant simply an iron bar of fixed dimensions, which formed the chief
article of exchange between the natives and the earliest European
traders. In other parts of the same region axes serve as currency; these
are too small to be really employed as an implement, but are doubtless
the survival of a period not long past when real axes served as money.
Thus we get a complete analogy to the hoe money of the Chinese and the
fish-hook currency of Ceylon and the Maldive Islands. In Calabar they
formerly employed bunches of quadrangular copper-wire as currency. Each
wire was about 12 inches long, and they were of course meant to be made
into necklets and armlets[67].
[Illustration: FIG. 11. Axe Money (West Africa).]
In other parts of the West Coast, as in the Bonny River territory, iron
rings very closely resembling in shape the bronze fibulae found in
Ireland, which probably were armlets, are employed as money. Those which
I have seen seem too small to be used as bracelets, and are now probably
a true money, retaining the old conventional shape (see Fig. 12)[68].
[Illustration: FIG. 12. Old Calabar copper-wire formerly used as money.]
In the region of the Upper Congo brass rods are employed as currency
for articles of small value. This wire, made at Birmingham, about the
thickness of ordinary stair-rod, is sent out in coils of 60 lbs., and is
then cut into pieces of a foot long[69]. Short brass rods and armlets
are also largely exported from Birmingham for the African trade.
[Illustration: FIG. 13.
1. Bronze Irish Fibula found in Co. Cork.
2. Bronze Irish Fibula found in King’s Co.
3. Iron Manilla from W. Africa.
4. Iron Manilla used as money in Bonny River Territory.]
There is no absolute standard length—and thus while 36 inches is the one
most commonly used, the length varies from 32 to 36 inches.
They go out in boxes containing 100, in straight lengths, and soft to
admit of their being wound into armlets, &c.
The diameter of the rod varies from ³⁄₁₆ in. to about ⅜ in.—but a rod
weighing about 24 oz. to 3 ft., and ⅜ in. thick, is the one most often
made.
Arm rings are made from solid brass rod about ⁷⁄₁₆ in. thick and are
usually 2½ in. to 3½ in. in diameter—they are also made in large
quantities from brass tubes of ½ in. to ⅝ in. diameter, more frequently
from ⁹⁄₁₆ in., the rings being from 2½ in. to 3½ in. in diameter, and
weighing from 2½ to 4 oz. each[70].
* * * * *
Slaves and ivory tusks form the chief units in the same region. The slave
usually is worth a tusk. In other parts pieces of precious wood of a red
colour, each piece being a foot long, were employed as currency[71].
When we come to regions where the ox can live we at once find that animal
occupying a foremost place. Thus when the Cape of Good Hope was first
colonized, the Hottentots employed cattle and bars of iron of a given
size as currency[72], and at the present moment the cow is the regular
unit among the Zulus, ten cows being the ordinary price paid for a wife,
although as in Homeric Greece fancy prices are paid by the chiefs for
ladies of uncommon attractions. But our chief interest must centre in
the peoples north of the Equator, who from time immemorial have been in
contact with the ancient civilization of the Mediterranean.
Thus among the Madis of Central Africa, a pure negro tribe, cattle form
the chief wealth; a rich man may have as many as 200 head, a very poor
one only 3 or 4. The average number possessed by one man is from 30 to
40. They keep the milk in gourds.
“A regular system of exchange is carried on in arrows, beads, bead
necklaces, teeth necklaces, brass rings for the neck and arms, and
bundles of small pieces of iron in flat, round, or oval discs. All these
different articles are given in exchange for cattle, corn, salt, arrows,
etc. The nearest approach to money is seen in the flat, round pieces of
iron which are of different sizes, from three-quarters to two feet in
diameter and half an inch thick. They are much employed in exchange.
This is the form in which they are kept and used as money, but they
are intended to be divided into two, heated and made into hoes. They
are also fashioned into other implements, such as knives, arrow-heads,
etc. and into little bells hung round the waist for ornament or round
wandering cows’ necks. Ready-made hoes are not often used in barter.
Iron as above-mentioned is preferred and is taken to the blacksmith to
be fashioned according to the owner’s requirements. Any tools may be
obtained ready made from a smith, and can be used in barter when new.
“Compensation for killing a woman or any serious crime must be paid for
in cattle. No cowries are used as coins in this district, no measure of
weight, quantity or length is used. The payment for a wife must be made
in cows of a year old, or in bulls of two or three years[73].”
But it is in Darfour and Wadai that we find the primitive system in its
fullest form. Wives are bought with cows, 20 of which with a male and
female slave are the usual price of a wife, hence the Darfouris prefer
daughters to sons. Hence the proverb that girls fill the stable, but boys
empty it, which recalls the _cow-winning maidens_ of Homer (παρθένοι
ἀλφεσίβοιαι). There is absolutely no metal of any kind in Darfour, except
that which is imported. Having no money, they accept certain articles as
having a certain monetary value.
Facher was the first place in Darfour which had anything like a currency;
it consisted of rings made of tin, which were employed in the purchase
of every-day necessaries of life. These rings are called _tarneih_ in
Darfouris. There are two kinds, the heavy ring and the light ring;
the light serves for buying the most trivial articles. For purchasing
articles of value they have the _toukkiyeh_, a piece of cotton cloth six
cubits long by one broad. There are two kinds of this stuff, _chykeh_
and _katkât_. Four pieces of the former and 4½ pieces of the latter are
worth a Spanish dollar. Buying and selling is also carried on by means
of slaves: thus one says, “this horse is worth 2 or 3 _sedâcy_ (a name
given to a negro slave, who measures six spans from his ankle to the
lower part of his ear)[74].” A _sedaciyeh_ is a female negro slave of the
same height. A _sedâcy_ is worth 30 _toukkiyeh_, or six blue _chauter_,
or 8 white _chauter_ or six oxen, or 10 Spanish pillar dollars, the only
coined money known in Darfour, where it is called _abou medfa_, i.e.
_cannon_ piece, the pillars being taken for cannons. The inhabitants
of Kobeih employ beads for money, which are called _harich_. They are
green and blue and circulate in strings of 100 each. This bead takes
the place of the tin ring (_tarneih_) used at Facher in the purchase of
cheap commodities. The _harich_ as money is employed in numbers of from
5 to 100 beads (the string), from one string to ten and indefinitely
further[75].
The _toukkiyeh_ is worth in the markets mentioned 8 strings of _harich_.
Thus a _sedâcy_ is worth 240 strings. At Guerly and its environments the
_falgo_ or stick of salt almost as big as one’s finger is employed. This
salt is obtained artificially, and when liquid is poured into little
moulds of baked clay. This salt is sold by the _falgo_, not by weight,
and one buys by 1, 2 or 3 _falgo_ according to the value of the article.
At Conca tobacco is used as money. At Kergo, Ryl, and Chaigriyeh articles
of moderate value are bought with hanks of cotton thread. These threads
are ten _ells_ long, and there are only 20 threads in each hank. For
common articles raw cotton with the pods attached is given; it is not
weighed but simply estimated by guess. At Noumleh onions are employed
as money for common articles, and the _rubat_ or hank of thread, and
_toukkiyeh_ for the more valuable, whilst the _chauter_ and dollar are
unknown.
At Ras-el-Fyk[76] the hoe (_hachâchah_) serves as currency. It is simply
a plate of iron fitted with a socket. A handle is fitted into this
socket, and one has an implement suited for chopping the weeds in the
corn fields. Purchases of small value are made with the hoe from 1 to 20:
above that amount the _toukkiyeh_ is employed and likewise the _chauter_.
At Temourkeh they use as moneys cylindrical pieces of copper (called
_damleg_) for articles of some value, whilst a kind of glass bead called
_chaddour_ is used for small articles. Near Ganz, the eastern part of
Darfour, the principal article of exchange is the _doukha_ for articles
of moderate value. They give it by the handful, or by the double handful
up to the amount of half a _moda_; whilst as elsewhere articles of value
are bought by the _toukkiyeh_ or dollar. In a very great number of places
merchandise is exchanged against oxen; thus the horse is worth 10 to 20
oxen.
Accordingly while each district of Darfour has some peculiar form of
currency for small change the higher currency is the same everywhere, the
piece of cloth, the ox, the slave[77].
In the region of Wadai the same shrewd Arab tells us that cattle are
kept by even the most barbarous tribes[78]. Thus the Fertyt tribe, who
go in a state of almost complete nudity, and thus have no need of cloth,
possess large herds of cattle, which are not branded, but each owner
distinguishes his cattle by giving a peculiar shape to their horns as
soon as they begin to grow. In the less barbarous communities of Wadai
slaves and beads are employed as currency as well as cattle. The bead
used is called the _mansous_. It is of yellow amber and of different
sizes. Number 1 is so called because one string (containing 100 beads)
weighs one _rotl_ (pound) of 12 ounces; Number 2 because two strings
weigh a _rotl_; Number 3 because 3 strings make a _rotl_ and so on. The
first is the most costly of all beads. Often a single bead of this sort
(_soumyt_) is worth two slaves; if it is abundant each bead is worth a
slave.