 | This article has multiple issues. Please helpimprove it or discuss these issues on thetalk page.(Learn how and when to remove these messages) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
|
ThetraditionalFrench units of measurement prior tometrication were established underCharlemagne during theCarolingian Renaissance. Based on contemporaryByzantine andancient Roman measures, the system established some consistency acrosshis empire but, after his death, the empire fragmented and subsequent rulers and various localities introduced their own variants. Some of Charlemagne's units, such as the king's foot (French:pied du Roi) remained virtually unchanged for about a thousand years, while others important to commerce—such as the French ell (aune) used for cloth and the French pound (livre) used for amounts—varied dramatically from locality to locality. By the 18th century, the number of units of measure had grown to the extent that it was almost impossible to keep track of them and one of the major legacies of theFrench Revolution was the dramatic rationalization of measures as the newmetric system. The change was extremely unpopular, however, and a metricized version of the traditional units—themesures usuelles—had to be brought back into use for several decades.
Although in the pre-revolutionary era (before 1795) France used a system and units of measure that had many of the characteristics of contemporaryEnglish units (or the laterImperial System of units), France still lacked a unified, countrywide system of measurement. Whereas in EnglandMagna Carta had decreed that "there shall be one unit of measure throughout the realm", Charlemagne and successive kings had tried but failed to impose a unified system of measurement in France.[1]
The names and relationships of many units of measure were adopted from Roman units of measure, and many more were added – it has been estimated that there were seven or eight hundred different names for the various units of measure. Moreover, the quantity associated with each unit of measure differed from town to town and even from trade to trade. Some of the differences were large: for example thelieue (league) could vary from 3.268 km inBeauce to 5.849 km inProvence. It has been estimated that on the eve of the Revolution a quarter of a million different units of measure were in use in France.[2]Although certain standards, such as thepied du Roi (the King's foot) had a degree of pre-eminence and were used bysavants, many traders chose to use their own measuring devices, giving scope for fraud and hindering commerce and industry.[1]
These definitions use the Paris definitions for thecoutume of Paris,[3] and definitions for otherAncien régime civil jurisdictions varied, at times quite significantly.
The medieval royal units of length were based on thetoise, and in particular thetoise de l'Écritoire, the distance between the fingertips of the outstretched arms of a man, which was introduced in 790 byCharlemagne.[4]
Thetoise had 6pieds (feet) each of 326.6 mm (12.86 in). In 1668 the reference standard was found to have been deformed, and it was replaced by thetoise du Châtelet which, to accommodate the deformation of the earlier standard, was around 11 mm (0.56%) shorter.
In 1747 thistoise was replaced by a newtoise of near-identical length – theToise du Pérou, custody of which was given tol'Académie des Sciences au Louvre.[5]
Although thepouce (inch),pied (foot) andtoise (fathom) were fairly consistent throughout most of pre-revolutionary France, some areas had local variants of thetoise. Other units of measure such as theaune (ell), theperche (perch or rood), thearpent and thelieue (league) had a number of variations, particularly theaune (which was used to measure cloth).[6]
Theloi du 19frimairean VIII (Law of 10 December 1799) states that one decimal metre is exactly 443.296 Frenchlines, or3 pieds 11.296 lignes de la "Toise du Pérou".[7]Thus the French royal foot is exactly4500/13 853 metres (about 0.3248 m).[8]
InQuebec, the surveys in French units were converted using the relationship 1pied (of the French variety, the same word being used for English feet as well) = 12.789 Englishinches.[9] This makes the Quebecpied very slightly smaller (about 4 parts in one million) than thepied used in France.
| Unit | Relative value (pieds) | SI value (approx.) | Imperial value (approx.) | Notes | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| point | 1⁄1728 | 0.188 mm | 7.401 thou | 1⁄12 of aligne. This unit is usually called theTruchet point in English. Prior to the French Revolution theFournier point was also in use. It was1⁄6 of aligne or1⁄864 of the smaller French foot. | |
| ligne | 1⁄144 | 2.256 mm | 88.81 thou | 1⁄12 of apouce. This corresponds to theline, a traditional English unit. | |
| pouce | 1⁄12 | 27.07 mm | 1.066 in | 1⁄12 of apied du roi. This corresponds to theinch, a traditional English unit. | |
| pied du roi | 1 | 32.48 cm | 1.066 ft | Commonly abbreviated topied, this corresponds to thefoot, a traditional English unit. Known in English as theParis foot (properly a separate, shorter unit), theroyal foot, orFrench foot. | |
| toise | 6 | 1.949 m | 6.394 ft, or 2.131 yd | Sixpieds du roi. This corresponds to thefathom, a traditional English unit. Unlike the fathom, it was used in both land and sea contexts. TheToise du Chatelet was introduced in 1668 and defined by an iron bar on the Grand Chatelet. This was replaced by theToise du Perou in 1766.[10] | |
| Paris | |||||
| perche d'arpent | 22 | 7.146 m | 7.815 yd | Related to, but not directly corresponding with, the Englishperch or rod (which is16+1⁄2 feet, approximately three-quarters of the Frenchperche). | |
| arpent | 220 | 71.46 m | 78.15 yd | Tenperches. | |
| lieue ancienne | 10 000 | 3.248 km | 2.018 miles | This is an old Frenchleague, defined as 10 000 (a myriad)pieds. It was the official league in parts of France until 1674. | |
| lieue de Paris | 12 000 | 3.898 km | 2.422 miles | This league was defined in 1674 as exactly 2000toises. After 1737, it was also called the "league of bridges and roads" (lieue des Ponts et des Chaussées). | |
| lieue des Postes | 13 200 | 4.288 km | 2.664 miles | This league is 2200toises or 60arpents. It was created in 1737. | |
| lieue de 25 au degré | ~13 692 | 4.448 km | 2.764 miles | Linked to the circumference of the Earth, with 25lieues making up one degree of a great circle. (Compare the internationalnautical mile, of which 60 make one degree; onelieue therefore equaling 2.4 nautical miles.) It was measured by Picard in 1669 to be 2282toises. | |
| lieue tarifaire | 14 400 | 4.678 km | 2.907 miles | This league is 2400toises. It was created in 1737. | |
| North America | |||||
| perche du roi | 18 | 5.847 m | 6.394 yd | This perch was used inQuebec andLouisiana | |
| arpent (du roi) | 180 | 58.47 m | 63.94 yd | Tenperches du roi. | |
| Local | |||||
| perche ordinaire | 20 | 6.497 m | 7.105 yd | This perch was used locally. | |
| arpent (ordinaire) | 200 | 64.97 m | 71.05 yd | Tenperches ordinaires. | |
| Unit | Relative value (pieds carrés) | SI value | Imperial value | Notes | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| pied carré | 1 | ~1055 cm2 | ~1.136 sq ft | The Frenchsquare foot | |
| toise carrée | 36 | ~3.799 m2 | ~40.889 sq ft, or ~4.543 sq yd | The French square fathom | |
| Paris | |||||
| perche d'arpent carrée | 484 | ~51.07 m2 | ~61.08 sq yd | This was the main square perch in old French surveying. It is a square 22pieds du roi on each side. | |
| vergée | 12 100 | ~1277 m2 | ~1527 sq yd | A square 5perches on each side, or one quarter of anacre. | |
| acre, or arpent carré | 48 400 | ~5107 m2 | ~6108 sq yd, or ~1.262 acres | The French acre is a square 10perches (onearpent) on each side. (Does not exactly correspond to the English acre, which is defined as 43 560 square feet.) | |
| North America | |||||
| perche du roi carrée | 324 | ~34.19 m2 | ~40.89 sq yd | This square perch was used in Quebec and Louisiana. It is a square 18pieds du roi on each side. | |
| vergée (du roi) | 8100 | ~854.7 m2 | ~1022 sq yd | A square 5perches du roi on each side. | |
| acre (du roi), or arpent carré | 32 400 | ~3419 m2 | ~4089 sq yd, or ~0.8448 acres | A square 10perches du roi on each side. Certain U.S. states have their own official definitions for the(square) arpent, which vary slightly from this value. | |
| Local | |||||
| perche (ordinaire) carrée | 400 | ~42.21 m2 | ~50.48 sq yd | This square perch was used locally. It is a square 20pieds du roi on each side. | |
| vergée (ordinaire) | 10 000 | ~1055 m2 | ~1262 sq yd | A square 5perches ordinaires on each side. | |
| acre (ordinaire), or arpent carré | 40 000 | ~4221 m2 | ~5048 sq yd, or ~1.043 acres | A square 10perches ordinaires on each side. | |
| Unit | Relative value (pintes) | SI value | U.S. value | Imperial value | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| roquille | 1⁄32 | ~29.75 ml | One quarter of apoisson. | ||
| poisson | 1⁄8 | ~119 ml | A measure equal to a half ademiard. There were different sizes based on the commodity measured:poisson de vin (wine),poisson de eau de vie (brandy), orpoisson de lait (milk).[11] | ||
| demiard | 1⁄4 | ~238 ml | ~0.5 pint | demi in French means "half": in this case, half achopine, and – coincidentally – also approximately half a US pint [237 ml]. | |
| chopine | 1⁄2 | ~476.1 ml | ~1 pint | ~0.84 pint | |
| pinte | 1 | ~952.1 ml | ~2.01 pint | ~1.68 pint | Although etymologically related to the English unitpint, the French pint is about twice as large. It was the main small unit in common use, and measured1⁄36 of a cubicpied du roi. |
| quade | 2 | ~1.904 L | ~0.5 gallon | ~0.42 gallon | |
| velte | 8 | ~7.617 L | ~2.01 gallon | ~1.68 gallon | avelte was a measuring stick that was inserted into a cask or barrel to determine its depth. |
| quartaut | 72 | ~68.55 L | 9veltes, or two cubicpieds du roi. | ||
| feuillette | 144 | ~137.1 L | |||
| muid | 288 | ~274.2 L | Eight cubicpieds du roi. | ||
| cubic | |||||
| pouce cube | 1⁄48 | ~19.84 ml | The French cubic inch. | ||
| pied cube | 36 | ~34.28 L | The French cubic foot. In ancient times, a cubic foot was also known as anamphora when measuring liquid volume. | ||
| Unit | Relative value (boisseaux) | SI value | Imperial value | U.S. value | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| litron | 1⁄16 | 793.5 cm3 | 0.1745 imp gal | 0.1801 U.S. dry gal | 1⁄4 of aquart. Thelitre is etymologically related to this unit. |
| quart | 1⁄4 | 3.174 dm3 | 0.698 imp gal | 0.721 U.S. dry gal | 1⁄4 of aboisseau. |
| boisseau | 1 | 12.7 dm3 | 2.8 imp gal | 2.9 U.S. dry gal | Although etymologically related to the English unitbushel, the French bushel is about one third the size. Aboisseau was defined as10⁄27 of a cubicpied du roi. |
| minot | 3 | 38.09 dm3 | 8.38 imp gal | 8.65 U.S. dry gal | |
| mine | 6 | 76.17 dm3 | 16.76 imp gal | 17.29 U.S. dry gal | |
| setier | 12 | 152.3 dm3 | 33.5 imp gal | 34.6 U.S. dry gal | |
| muid | 144 | 1.828 m3 | 402 imp gal | 415 U.S. dry gal | |
| cubic | |||||
| pouce cube | 1⁄640 | ~19.84 cm3 | ~1.211 cu in | The French cubic inch. | |
| pied cube | 2+7⁄10 | ~34.28 dm3 | ~2,092 cu in | The French cubic foot. Exactly 2.7boisseaux. | |
| Abbeville | 93–94 |
| Avignon | 83 |
| Beaucare | 95 |
| Bordeaux | 100 |
| Bourg-en-Bresse | 96 |
| Dunkirk | 87 |
| Lille | 87–88 |
| Lyon | 87 |
| Marseilles | 81 |
| Montepellier | 83 |
| Nancy | 94–95 |
| Nantes | 101–102 |
| La Rochelle | 101–102 |
| Rouen (poids de vicomté) | 103 |
| Strasbourg (petit poids) | 96 |
| Toulouse | 84 |
| Nominal (marcs) | Error in actual (grains) |
|---|---|
| 20 | +1.4 |
| 14 | +4.5 |
| 8 | -0.4 |
| 4 | -2.1 |
| 2 | -1.0 |
| 1 (creux) | -0.7 |
| 1 (plein) | -1.7 |
Charlemagne's system had 12onces (ounces) to thelivre (pound).[14]Between 1076 and 1093Philip I (1052–1108) instituted a system ofpoids de marc (mark weight) used for minting coin, with 8onces to amarc.[14]
Jean II (1319–1364) constructed a new standard of measures, including alivre actuelle ("current" pound, also known as alivre de poids de marc or "mark weight" pound) of 2marcs, i.e. 16onces.[15]The Charlemagne 12-ouncelivre became known as thelivre esterlin ("true" pound) in order to distinguish it.[16][17]″Esterlin″ was an Old French word (ca. 1190, Anglo-Norman dialect) that referred to Scottish coin (sterling, or ″denier″).[18] As references cited later on this page show, its application changed over time in accordance with the changing historical context, though it is not current in Modern French.
Thelivre actuelle could be sub-divided into 2demi-livres (half-pounds), 4quarterons, or 8demi-quarterons.[19]Conversely, there were 100livres in aquintal (cf. Englishhundredweight).[19]The fractional parts of anonce had different names inApothecary measure (used in medicine) and measure of precious metals, but the fractional ratios were themselves the same: 1once was 8drachme (Apothecary, cf. Englishdram) orgros; 1drachme/gros was 3scruples (Apothecary, cf. Englishscruple) ordeniers, and 1scruple/denier was 24grains.[20][21]This makes 384deniers in alivre in weight measure, which contrasts with the oldmonetarylivre in France which was divided into 240deniers.[22]
Jean II's standards are preserved in the Conservatoire Nationale des Arts et Métiers, which also holds a set of later-still physical standards from the 15th century, the so-calledpile de Charlemagne.[21][23]Thispile defined the weight of 50marcs, i.e. 400onces, and thus 25livres actuelles, or 331⁄3livres esterlins.[14][24]It had been kept in the royal palaces originally.[25]In 1540François I (1494–1547) had transferred it to theCour des monnaies, where it had been held in a cabinet with three locks, whose keys had been held separately by the president of the Cour, one of its counsellors, and a clerk.[25]
The thirteen individual pieces that made up the Parisianpile de Charlemagne comprised an outer containing cylinder nominally weighing 20 marcs, and a set of hollow nesting cups within, topped with a filled weight as the smallest piece.[24][26][27]The heaviest cups were nominally 14, 8, 4, and 2marcs, sub-totalling 48 marcs (including the 20 marc outer container); followed by a nominally 1 marc hollow cup which was termed themarc creux (hollow mark); and followed by 6 further cups (4, 2, and 1onces, and 4, 2, and 1gros) with a final seventh filled 1gros weight, all totalling 1 marc, which was termed themarc plein (filled mark).[24][26][28][27]
Unfortunately, the weights were not consistent, with themarc plein not being the same weight as themarc creux, and neither being the same as amean 1 marc weight determined from the weight of the wholepile.[24][28]So when the time came to work out the conversion factors between these measures and the metric system, the wholepile was taken to define 50 Parisian standardmarcs, and thus 230 400grains (the number of grains in 50marcs).[24]Louis Lefèvre‑Gineau initially determined that the metric weight of the wholepile was 12.227 947 5 kg,[28] later corrected to 12.2376 kg,[29] thereby making (by division and rounded to three decimal places) amarc 244.753 g, alivre esterlin 367.129 g, and alivre actuelle 489.506 g.[20][30]Hence further the (Parisian)once was 30.594 g, thegros/drachme was 3.824 g, thedenier/scruple was 1.274 g, and thegrain was 0.053 g.[19][16]
However, the actual weights of the pre-metric measures were nowhere near even this simple.[31]These were just the Parisian standards, and individual provinces, cities, and even guilds, all had their own reference physical standards, which were not checked against one another and which sometimes conflatedesterlin andactuelle.[31]For just some examples: the Marseillelivre was 399.6 g, the Montpelier one 394.9 g, the Toulon one 465.5 g, and the Toulouse one 413.2 g; with all of the fractional subdivisions having different values accordingly.[32]The Limogesmarc was 240.929 g, the Tours one 237.869 g, and the Troyes one 250.050 g.[33]
Furthermore, there were alsolivres comprising different numbers ofonces to both theactuelle andesterlin, includinglivres of 14, 18, and 20onces, confusing things yet further.[34]Thelivre in thepoids de table (table weight) systems used in Provence and Languedoc (and a common name for provincial weight systems in general alongsidepoids de pays, country weight, andpoids de ville, town weight) was the same weight as 15onces or even as low as 13onces in the Parisianpoids de marc,[35][36][37][12] and thelivre in thepoids de soie (silk weight) system of Lyon was similarly just15⁄16 the weight of the Parisianlivre.[38][12]This caused an erroneous belief that theselivres comprised 13, 14, or 15onces, however this was a confusion stemming from the equivalentpoids de marc weights, and bothpoids de table andpoids de soie had 16 of their own, lighter,onces and so forth,[38][36][12]Rouen had apoids de vicomté system.[12]
{{cite journal}}:Missing or empty|title= (help){{cite encyclopedia}}:Missing or empty|title= (help)