Scanned text contains errors.
438
DRACHMA.
the husband must return the like sum or the like quantity. If the things, whether movable or immovable, were valued when they were given to the husband (dos aestimata), this was a species of sale, and at the end of the marriage the husband must restore the things or their value. If the things were not valued, he must restore the specific things, and he must make good all loss or deterioration which had happened to them except by accident. But the husband was intitled to be reimbursed for all necessary expences (impensae necessariae) ; as, for instance, necessary repairs of houses incurred by him in respect of iiis wife’s property, and also for all outlays by which he had improved the property (impensae utiles).
The husband’s heirs, if lae were dead, were bound to restore the dos. The wife’s father, or the surviving wife, might demand it by an actio ex stipulatu de dote reddenda, which was an actio stricti juris, if there was any agreement on the subject ; and by an actio rei uxoriae or dotis, which was an actio foowae Mei, when there was no agreement A third person who had given the; dos must always demand it ex stipmlatu, when he had bargained for its restoration. Justinian enacted, that the action should always be ex stipulatu, even when there was no contract, and should be an actio bonae fidei.
The wife had no security f©r her dos, except in the case of the funclus dotalis, unless she had by contract a special security ; but she had some privileges as compared with the husband’s creditors. Justinian enacted that on the dissolution of the marriage, the wife’s ownership should revive, with all the legal remedies for recovering such parts of the dos as still existed ; that all the husband’s property should be considered legally -pledged (tacita hypotheca) as a security for the ‘dos ; .and that the wife, but she alone, should have a priority of claim on such property over all other creditors to whom the same might be pledged.
The dos was a matter of great importance in Roman law, both because it was an ingredient in almost every marriage, and was sometimes of a large amount. The ‘frequency of divorces also gave rise to many legal questions as to dos. A woman whose dos was large ..(dotata uxor} had some influence over her husband,,anasmuch as she had the power of divorcing herself, and thus of depriving him of the enjoyment of her property. The allusions to the dos and its restitution are numerous in the Roman writers. (Cic. ad Att. xiv. 13.)
It is a disputed point whether there could be dos, properly so called, in the case of a marriage with conventio in manum. [matrimonium.] (Hasse, Rhein. Mus. ii. 75.)
The name by which the Greek writers designate the Roman dos is tyspvri (Plutarch, Caesar, c. 1, Marius, c. 38, Cicero, c. 8).
(Ulp. Frag. vi. ; Dig. 23. tit. 3 ; Cod. 5. tit. 12 ; Thibaut, System, &c,, § 728 &c.9 9th ed,, § 747, &c.; Mackeldey, Lelirbuch9 &c..5 § 517, &c., 12th ed.) [G. L.]
DOULOS (8oDA.os). [seryus.]
DRACHMA (SpaxM), the principal silver coin among the Greeks. Like all other denominations of money, the word Spax^’h (sometimes written . §pay[jdi) no doubt signified originally a weight; and it continued to be used in this sense,
DRACHMA.
as one of the subdivisions of the talent, of whicli it was the 6000th part. [talentum.] The original meaning of the word is a handful. The two chief standards in the currencies of the Greek states were the Attic and Aeginetan. We shall therefore first speak of the Attic drachma, and afterwards of the Aeginetan.
The average weight of the Attic drachma from the time of Solon to that of Alexander was 66’5 grains. It contained about ^th of the weight alloy ; and hence there remain 65*4 grains to be valued. Each of our shillings contains 80*7 grains of pure silver. The drachma is therefore worth
f £• A
-1— of a shilling, or 9’72 pence, which may be
called 9%d. (Hussey, Ancient Weights and Money, pp. 47, 48.) After Alexander’s time, there was a slight decrease in the weight of the drachma ; till in course of time it only weighed 63 grains. The drachma contained six obols (6§oAoi) ; and the Athenians had sepaiate silver coins, from four drachmae to a quarter of an obol. Among those now preserved, the tetradrachm is commonly found ; but we possess no specimens of the tri-dvachm, and only a few of the didrachm. Specimens of the tetrobolus, triobolus, diobolus, three-quarter-obol, half-obol, and quarter-obol, are still found. For the respective values of these coins, see the Tables.
The tetradrachm in later times was called stater (Phot. s. v. 3raTT/p ; Hesych. s. v. TAaC/ces Aau-planned : Matth. xxvii. 27) ; but it has been doubted whether it bore that name in the flourishing times of the republic. _ (Hussey, Ibid. p. 49.) We know that stater^ in writers of that age, usually signifies a gold coin., equal in value to twenty drachmae [stater] ; but there appear strong reasons for believing that the tetradrachm, even in the age of Thucydides and Xenophon, was sometimes called by this name. (Thucyd. iii. 70, with Arnold’s note ; Xen. Hell. v, 2. § 22.) The obolos, in later times, was of feronze (Lucian, Contempt. 11. vol. i. p. 504, ed. Reiz) ; but in the best times of Athens we only read of silver obols. The xo.kovs was a copper >coin, aiasd the eighth part of an obol. [chalgus.jj
ATHENIAN DRACHMA. BRITISH MUSEUM, ACTUAL SIZE.
The Aeginetan standard appears to have been used in Greece in very early times. According to most ancient writers, money was first coined at Aegina by order of Pheidon of Argos ; and the Aeginetan standard was used in almost all the states of the Peloponnesur., in Boeotia and in some other parts of northern Greece, though the Attic standard prevailed most in the maritime and commercial states.
The average weight of the Aeginetan drachma, calculated by Mr. Hussey (pp. 59, 60) from the coins of Aegina and Boeotia, was 96 grains. It
