Brothers+

I have reproduced below a discussion on "Crosstalk" of the widow's "mite" (Mark chapter 12:42), which mite or mite not be of interest.  The third to last paragraph reveals how such a small detail about coinage could help in dating this parable.  

The discussion is not exactly a Friday Funny, but at least it is diverting.

Charles+
-------------------------------------

XTalk Digest 23 Jul 2004 

subject:ORIGIN OF "MITE"

There are 2 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

      1. Re: Origin of 'mite'
           From: Bob Schacht <bobschacht@...>
      2. Mite or might not
           From: "Bill Woerlee" <bill_woerlee@...>

________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1         
   Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:42:05 -0700
   From: Bob Schacht <bobschacht@...>
Subject: Re: Re: Origin of 'mite'

At 02:41 PM 7/22/2004, you wrote: 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? 
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Robert Brenchley


Robert, I posted your query to a more likely list, the Ecclesiastical History list, and received the following response:


>From: "Kevin P. Edgecomb" <kevino@...>
>Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:33:44 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: [ecchst-l] Fwd: Re: Origin of 'mite'
>
>Dear Bob, >The online OED can be a real lifesaver. Here is the etymology for "mite, n.2":
>
> Middle Dutch meite, meute, mite, mütte small copper coin, also in 
fig. use in sense ˜little bit, jot, whit” (Dutch mijt, mieter, mijter), 
>prob. orig. spec. use of mite MITE n.1 In English perh. partly via Middle 
>French mite (1288 in Old French in sense “small Flemish copper coin”, 
>first half of the 14th cent. in Old French in fig. use; also in Old French 
>as mitte). Cf. Middle Low German mīte, mīt small Dutch coin, also in 
>fig. use, German Meit, Meite little bit, whit, jot (16th cent. or 
>earlier), both  Middle Dutch.
>   In early examples in Flemish sources app. denoting a coin worth 1/3 of  a Flemish penny, though other, chiefly smaller, values are also found.  
>  From the late 14th cent. mite has been the usual rendering (though the  Wyclif versions have “mynutis”) of post-classical Latin minutum 
> (Vulgate), Hellenistic Greek lepton in Mark 12:42, where two “mites” 
> are stated to make a “farthing” (Hellenistic Greek kodr/anths, 
> post-classical Latin quadrans); hence the word was popularly taken as 
> equivalent to “half farthing”.  With sense 4a cf. earlier MITING n.]
>
>Enjoy!
>Kevin P. Edgecomb
>Berkeley, California

Robert M. Schacht, Ph.D.
Northern Arizona University
Flagstaff, AZ 

________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2         
   Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:30:00 +1000
   From: "Bill Woerlee" <bill_woerlee@...>
Subject: Mite or might not

Robert

An interesting question about mites and one that gave me pause for thought many years ago. As yet I don't think there is a definitive connection between the minutum or lepton and the sixteenth century mite except for the name.

Webster says: A small coin formerly circulated in England, rated at about a third of a farthing. The name is also applied to a small coin used in Palestine in the time of Christ.

This is not quite accurate because the mite was a Flemish coin worth three to the Flemish penny. During this same period in Merrie Olde Englande, the low end official currency included the farthing, halfpenny and penny. No mention of mite. Indeed, the mite was never part of the official currency.

That doesn't mean that it was not used as part of the currency system.
Indeed, it was used as an accounting term throughout the various trading ports in England. Since there were numerous ports, so too did the value change according to geographical location. It ranged from 1/12th, 1/24th and 1/64th of a penny depending upon the port. Since Tyndale was writing for a south eastern English audience centred upon the port of London, he would use that measure which was commonly used by the merchants of the day which is also where the Webster definition gets its information.

The problem is translating this information into the context of Palestine in the days of yore. If the minimum accounting unit of the mite was three per farthing as existed in London we have to know on what basis Tyndale made his claim that two mites equalled a farthing, a value that is unrecorded in the books of account in England during that period.

The Easton Bible Dictionary Definition gives a romantic definition - it
being a contraction of minute, from the Latin minutum, the translation of the Greek word lepton, the very smallest bronze or copper coin (Luke 12:59; 21:2). Two mites made one quadrans, i.e., the fourth part of a Roman as, which was in value nearly a halfpenny.

This opens up speculation about the location of the author in relation to the subject of the story. Since Judaea was an autonomous province of Rome, the local currency was left undisturbed. There is no mention of such a coinage in use at that time. So possibly the author is writing from a period or place where Roman currency is in common usage so the passage resonates. This could not have occurred prior to the first Jewish uprising from 66-69 AD.

The parable may have been given by Jesus but the currency unit described is asynchronous for the period.

Where does this leave you? Well as confused as me but better informed
confusion.

Bill Woerlee
10 Ah Mouy Place,
Kambah, ACT, 2902.
Phone: +61 [0]2 6231 0452
Cell: 0419 251 433