Accordingly we find the term _nomos_ applied to certain bronze coins struck on the sextantal (two ounce) and uncial standards, at Arpi and other towns, which are inscribed N II (the double _nummus_), N I (_nummus_), ..... (_quincunx_), .... (_triens_), ... (_quadrans_), .. (_sextans_), . S (_sescuncia_), . (_uncia_), and Σ (_semuncia_). The divisions being those of the _as_, it is clear that the _nomos_, or current coin in those places, was the reduced _as_. Finally, when the Romans first use the term _nummus_, it means the silver _sestertius_ (2½ asses), the one-fourth of the _denarius_ or ten-_as_ piece, which weighed a scruple (_i.e._ 18½ grs.) at the time of the first Roman coinage of silver. Here we have all our positive evidence for the _nomos_. As diobols of 18 to 17 grs. are found in the coinages of various towns in Magna Graecia, such as Arpi, Caelia, Canusium, Rubi, and Teate, it has been plausibly held that such a diobol was the _nomos par excellence_ of these states, and that it was from contact with them that the Romans learned both the use and the name of such a monetary unit. But Rome may have been influenced by her Etruscan neighbours, for, as we have seen, the smallest denomination in the second silver series of Etruscan coins (of which the coins weigh 129 grs., 32 grs. and 17 grs. respectively) is just the weight of the Roman sestertius, and bears the symbol 𐌡𐌠𐌠 (2½), just as the latter bears 𐆘 (2½). Taking into consideration these facts, it looks as if the Romans and Etruscans grafted on to a native system the diobol, or current silver coin of Southern Italy, the Romans (and for all we can tell the Etruscans likewise) adopting at the same time the name _nummus_. Finally, we observe that this _nummus_ is identical with the Sicilian _nomos_, which in turn was found to be none other than the Aeginetic obol. The Roman _sestertius_ being a _scriptulum_ (17⁷⁄₁₂ grs.) in weight, we thus find a direct connection between the latter and the Aeginetic obol (16⅔ grs.). This need not surprise us, for it is most natural that in the welding of a weight system (partly foreign, and on the native side only employed for gold and silver) and of a system of measurement employed for bronze, certain features derived from the special silver units in use would be introduced into the new system, which afterwards became universal for weighing all commodities. The term _Sicilicus_[434] employed for the quarter-ounce is good evidence for this hypothesis. Its name seems to mean simply _Sicilian_. In weight it was about 108 grs. Now, didrachms struck on such a foot are found in the Greek cities of south-western Italy, at Velia, Neapolis and at Tarentum, after the time of Pyrrhus. Did the Romans, who must have carried on by weight all dealings in silver up to 268 B.C., treat such coins as quarter-ounces, and ultimately take the name of the coin (wrongly connecting it with Sicily) to designate the quarter-ounce? In like