Dunno. Seems to fit right into the ratio whereby Solon in ancient greece reduced the ratio of silver in the talent and reconfiguring a continued trust
in a private bank. Seems to happen when a people realize they can issue interest free money without private banking cabals. Let us pray he follows in
the path of Lincoln and FDR in this respect.
It could be a golden age.
Dictionary of Greek and
Roman Antiquities
7. The Old Attic Talent, and the Solonian Talent.—We have already noticed, under Nummus (p. 812, b.), Plutarch's account of the reduction effected
by Solon in the Attic system of weights and money, according to which the old weights were to the new in the proportion of 100 : 73. An important
additional light is thrown on this matter by an extant Athenian inscription, from which we obtain a more exact statement of the ratio than in
Plutarch's account, and from which we also learn that the old system continued in use, long after the Solonian reduction, for all commodities, except
such as were required by law to be weighed according to the other standard, which was also the one always used for money, and is therefore called the
silver standard, the old system being called the commercial standard, and its mina the commercial mina (ti fiya y ifaropiicit). The inscription, which
is a decree of uncertain date (about 01.155, B. c. 160, according to Bockh, C.I. No. 123, § 4, vol. i. p. 164), mentions the commercial mina as
weighing "138 drachmae 2rf(J>an;(f>ifpoi>, according to the standard weights in the mint " | \m;\ Rocopeion], that is, of course, 138 drachmae of
the silver, or Solonian, standard. This would give the ratio of the old to the new Attic weights as 138 : 100, or 100 : 72£f, certainly a very
curious proportion. It appears, however, on closer research, that this ratio is still not quite exact. It often happens that, in some obscure passage
of a grammarian, we find a statement involving minute details, so curious and so inexplicable, till the clue is found, that the few scholars who
notice the passage reject it as unintelligible, without considering that those strange minutiae are the best evidence that the statement is no
invention; and that the grammarian, who copied the statement, without troubling himself to understand it, has preserved a fact, which more systematic
writers have lost or perverted. Such passages are grains of pure gold amidst the mud which forms the bulk of the deposit brought down to us by those
writers. A striking instance is now before us, in a passage of Priscian (de Re Namm.) in which, following a certain Dardanus, he says: " Talentum
Atheniense parvum minae sexaginta, magnum minae octingenta tres et unciae quattuor." Taking the last words to be the Roman mode of expressing
'\',',\, and assuming, what is obvious, that the minae meant in the two clauses are of the same standard, namely, the common Attic or Solonian
(for, as a general rule, this standard is to be understood, where no other is specified), and understanding by the great Attic talent that of the
commercial standard, and by the small, the niter, or Solonian, we obtain this result, — that the ratio of the old A ttic or commercial talent to
tlte new Attic or Solonian, was as 83£ : 60, or as 138|: 100, or as 100 : 72. For the masterly argument by which Bockh sustains the truth of this
statement, we must refer to his own work (c. viii.). It is easy to understand how, in process of time, the fraction came to be neglected, so that, in
the decree quoted, the commercial mina of 100 commercial drachmae was spoken of as containing 138 silver drachmae instead of I.'!!;;;, and how,
further, when Plutarch came to calculate how many drachmae of the old scale were contained in the Solonian mina, he gave an integral number 73,
instead of 72M, and thus, by these two rejections of fractions, the true ratio of 100 : 72 w