Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk] Re: Origin of 'mite'

Expand Messages
  • Jack Kilmon
    ... From: To: Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 4:41 PM Subject: [XTalk] Re: Origin of mite ... coin ... and
    Message 1 of 7 , Jul 23, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <RSBrenchley@...>
      To: <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 4:41 PM
      Subject: [XTalk] Re: Origin of 'mite'


      > Does anyone know what a mite was? The older translations tend to render
      coin
      > denominations in terms of familiar coinage, but I can't find any trace of
      > the 'mite'. Tyndale (1526) has 'And there cam a certayne povre widowe,
      and she
      > threwe in two mytes, whyche make a farthinge' in Mark 12, so presumably
      it
      > would have meant something to a 16th-century readership. Henry VIII
      issued
      > farthings, but not mites, so what would it have referred to?


      The "mite" was a prutah, in Greek a lepton. It was the lowest denomination
      coin and was minted by the Hasmonians, Herodians, Roman prefects and
      procurators. It was about the price of one pomegranate. You can view some
      of them that are in my collection of biblical coins at:
      http://www.historian.net/coins.htm

      Jack
    • RSBrenchley@aol.com
      In a message dated 24/07/04 19:36:01 GMT Daylight Time, crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com writes:
      Message 2 of 7 , Jul 24, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 24/07/04 19:36:01 GMT Daylight Time,
        crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com writes:

        <<The "mite" was a prutah, in Greek a lepton. It was the lowest denomination
        coin and was minted by the Hasmonians, Herodians, Roman prefects and
        procurators. It was about the price of one pomegranate. You can view some
        of them that are in my collection of biblical coins at:
        http://www.historian.net/coins.htm

        Jack>>



        Lepton and prutah aren't normally considered as the same denomination
        though; a lepton was probably half a prutah. I think your Augustus is actually RIC
        vol I 493, the reverse being capricorn R, head L, bearing cornucopia, within
        laurel wreath. Minted in Pergamum, c27-26BC, R2 (ie rarer than the one you
        have it attributed as).

        Regards,

        Robert Brenchley


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • RSBrenchley@aol.com
        Thanks to everyone for the replies, which settle quite a bit of confusion. Regards, Robert Brenchley [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Message 3 of 7 , Jul 24, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks to everyone for the replies, which settle quite a bit of confusion.

          Regards,

          Robert Brenchley


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Joseph Weaks
          ... This is what J. W. Betlyon says in his ABD article, that the mite was probably a Greek lepton, the smallest coin then in circulation. He also suggests
          Message 4 of 7 , Jul 24, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            On Jul 24, 2004, at 6:37 PM, RSBrenchley@... wrote:
            > Lepton and prutah aren't normally considered as the same denomination
            > though; a lepton was probably half a prutah.

            This is what J. W. Betlyon says in his ABD article, that the mite "was
            probably a Greek lepton, the smallest coin then in circulation." He
            also suggests that it was "half a Roman quadrans or Jewish peruta."
            (pg. 1076, "Coins", J.W.Betlyon)

            Joe Weaks
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.