Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;EWC3, post: 3298551, member: 93416&quot;]Yes - and there are a host of different &quot;dirhems&quot;, at different times and places.</p><p><br /></p><p>Back in the 1970&#039;s I was taught &quot;ordinary language philosophy&quot;.&nbsp; I thought it misguided and anti-scientific then, and I still do.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here is a very telling point I think - about the weight of the English &quot;Crown&quot;.&nbsp; The philosophical approach to the weight of the English coinage was central to political debate - really from around at least 1660 right down till around 1820.&nbsp; One of the leading figures at the height of the debate in the 1690&#039;s was Nicholas Barbon.</p><p><br /></p><p>He wrote about his fellow citizens at the time &quot;<i>not one in a thousand can tell you the weight of a crown in grains</i>&quot;!&nbsp;&nbsp; It was ever thus I think.</p><p><br /></p><p>I would certainly argue that the cannonical dirhem introduced under &#039;Abd al Malik (from around 700 AD) can be strictly defined as weighing 60 of his (&quot;wheat&quot;) grains, or 45 of his (&quot;barley&quot;) grains and that that is very close to 2.93g.&nbsp; But that al-Tom, al-Dick or al-Harry happened to call a silver coin &quot;a dirhem&quot; means very little.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I think that is quite possibly true.&nbsp; But I would be interested to hear if you can find any evidence for it&nbsp; <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie14" alt=":angelic:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>Rob T[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in