Reference Pages	Page last modified:
Spanglish Glossary  Measures  People & Places

Measures & Currencies

Click on the following to jump directly to:
Distances & Lengths
Land Area
Weights & Volumes
Currency Values

———«♦»———

Our Benitz family history involves the currencies and measures of Argentina, Germany, Mexico, UK, USA, and Venezuela.  This page explains how we arrive at modern equivalents for past measures and monetary values of the 19^th century when each country, state, province, and even some cities had its own systems.  Systems that are today unfamiliar to us – and to say the least, confusing.

We include measuring systems referenced in family or legal documents.  Our modern standards are the metric system and US Dollars.  We include the past English / US system of measures for those still familiar with it and for the holdouts (US, Myanmar [Burma], & Liberia) who have not yet adopted the metric system.

Metrification: Argentina c. 1885, Germany c. 1870, Mexico 1860's, Spain 1850's, Venezuela c. 1915, UK / Canada / Australia, et al 1970's.

Sources: They do conflict, so welcome to the fun!

Argentina:

Spreadsheets created from the work of Juan Alvarez, “Temas de historia económica argentina”, Buenos Aires, El Ateneo, 1929.  The measuring systems used the same terms but varied in size by province and usage (urban vs. rural).  We are concerned with only the rural measures of Córdoba and Santa Fé – and have included Buenos Aires because of its political & commercial importance.  Metrified c. 1885.

Germany:

The German measuring systems varied by city and state – thankfully, we have not encountered them (yet) in our family history and so have omitted them.  However, see the cautionary note with the letters written to Thadeus Benitz in Germany by his brothers in the US.  There were three German currencies, and those we have included.  Metrified c. 1870.

Spain & Mexican California:

See the work of Kenneth Pauley, California Mission Studies Association and the Rescate de antiguas medidas – it includes an interesting historical perspective.  We have not found a definitive work on California weights & volumes and so have used the Mexican standards.  Spain went metric in the late 1850's, Mexico in the 1860's.

US:

See the NIST Handbook – includes conversion to metric.  Has not metrified.

Venezuela:

Haven't got there yet.  We will include them when we expand the pages on Alexander, et al, and the Colonia Tovar.  Metrified c. 1915.

Distances & Lengths:

Modern:

---

Old Spanish Measures:

The Spanish system of measures contained the following units – there were many more than those we list here.  The official Spanish vara de Burgos (or vara de Castilla) was set by royal Spanish edict in 1801 and measured 0.8359 meters (32.909 inches).

Mexican California 1840's:

The official vara had 22 accepted variations in California prior to the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo of 1847, which set the vara at 33 inches.  New variations upon 33 inches arose in south-west US until 1855 when the Texas vara was set at 33.333 inches.

US Survey 1850+:

Deeds and survey maps used the following survey measures, which are still used today:

---

Argentina, pre-metric:

Prior to metrification in 1885, the Argentine system of distance & length measures (established in 1835) recognized the following units, to which we added: (a) cuarta (it appears in our family documents and has been described variously as equal to ¼ of a vara, or as the width of a spread hand), and (b) the vara de Bustinza (a measure local to Santa Fé). 

 

 

 

Land Measures:

Modern:

---

Mexican California 1840's:

Please bear in mind that many survey maps of the early 1800's were estimates made without benefit of proper measurement, e.g. California diseños (survey maps) of the 1840's were often made a ojo (estimated by eye).  The 2.6% maximum variance in the standard Mexican land measure of the 1840's, sitio de ganado mayor, pales in comparison to the huge errors in mapping and translation – witness the legal problems Wilhelm's inaccurate diseño (made a ojo from the back of a horse) caused the subsequent owners of Rancho Herman.

Fanega de Sembradura:

The highly inexact area sown by a fanega of seed.  Its size varies enormously, e.g. corn (0.6 – 8.8 acres) or wheat (0.15 – 1.8 acres).  The sizes in the above table were used by Governor Vallejo for wheat sown at Fort Ross in 1841.

Sitio de Ganado Mayor:

During the first half of the 1800's in Mexico, of which California and Texas were part, large land grants were measured in sitios de ganado mayor (or sitios) – often translated into English as Spanish leagues, or simply as leagues which could lead to confusion.  Originally one sitio de ganado mayor was the amount of land considered necessary for a cattle ranch, however, land grants most often consisted of several sitios de ganado mayor.  A sitio de ganado mayor was a square of 5,000 x 5,000 varas.  Simple enough, except that the length of the vara varied over time and place – see above.  It was also considerably smaller than the Spanish or Argentine legua (of 6,666.7 or 6,000 varas per side respectively).

---

Argentina 1835-1885, pre-metric:

Cuadra:

Crop yields and land prices were quoted in cuadras. (Some of the older colonos were still using cuadras in the 1950's, stating crop yields in terms of the old quintal of approx. 46 kg. and not the metric quintal of 100 kg.!)

Legua:

Argentina, the size of estancias (aka: camps or ranches) are often broadly described in leguas de campo or leagues of land.  A legua was 1,600 cuadras (40x40).  In modern terms, a legua or league is a metric square league – we include it here for easier comparison.

Suerte de estancia:

An old term, still used occasionally to identify a tract of land.  Its size varied according to who (i.e. government body) or when (i.e. period) the land in question was first distributed or auctioned off, but generally speaking each suerte consisted of several leagues of land.  The sizes listed here are by example and varied within and between provinces.

Weights & Volumes:

Modern:

 

 

US Bushel:

In spite of being a volume measure it persists in the US for stating crop yields and prices (yet measuring is by weight, the weights are then converted to bushels!).  Being a volume measure, the weight of each seed is dependent on its density (we leave it to the farmers amongst us to adjust for moisture and foreign material).  The following table lists the Standard US Bushel weights by crop.

Conversion between US Bushels & Metric:

The following table contains multipliers for converting crop yields between quintales por hectarea (qq./ha.) and bushels per acre (bu./ac.) – the common measures of Argentina and the US.  A quintal is a colloquial term for 100 kilograms, inherited from an older now obsolete measure.

---

Mexican California 1840's:

The following are selected Mexican measures from Rescate de Antiguas Medidas.  We have not discovered a definitive study of Californian measures.  We doubt the accuracy of the volume (both dry & fluid) conversion factors – their relative values don't appear to be simple multiples of the next smaller unit, as would be expected. For example, a carga is exactly two fanegas (ok!), but a fanega is somewhat less than four cuarterones, which is not a practical relationship for it makes it difficult to add together portions of a fanega.

 

 

The weight measures make sense; that is, their relative values are simple multiples of the next smaller unit.

---

Argentina 1835-1885, pre-metric:

 

 

 

Currency Values:

For simplicity, on this site we state currency values in terms of US Dollars (close of 31 Dec., 2000) as follows:

• Convert to US Dollars, based upon contemporary exchange rates per the US Federal Reserve.
• Restate in US Dollars, 31 Dec., 2000, adjusting for inflation per the US Consumer Price Index (US-CPI) – the standard measure of inflation.
• To restate values from 2000 in 2016 values, add 40%; or use the US Bureau of Labor Statics Inflation Calculator.

However, estimating the value of money should be done more carefully and appropriate to the analysis sought.  Though the US-CPI is used widely, it typically underestimates the relative worth of past amounts.

Worth:

From the Historical Text Archive:

“One of the most difficult tasks in dealing with the past is to get people to think historically about prices and income. Remembering what something cost 40 years ago does not tell us much; knowing how long the person had to work to acquire it does.”

Economists, when calculating inflation (e.g. the US-Consumer Price Index "CPI"), exclude the cost of improvements to the standard of living (horse vs. combustion engine, heart transplants, telephones, computers).  Consequently, the CPI seriously underestimates the relative worth of a $1 (USD) earned in the past vs. today.

We stronlgly recommend you visit the Measuring Worth web-site for an enlightning discusssion with apt examples of how worth can and should be measured under different situations.  For an amusing example, quoting from the web page:

“George Washington was paid a salary of $25,000 a year from 1789 to 1797 as the first president of the United States.  The current [2012] salary of the president is now $400,000, to go with a $50,000 expense account, a generous pension and several other benefits.  Has the remuneration improved?

“Making a comparison using the CPI [Consumer Price Index] for 1790 shows that $25,000 corresponds to over $647,000 today [2012], so current presidents have an equal command over consumer goods as the Father of the Country.

“When comparing Washington's salary to an unskilled worker, or the measure of average income, GDP [Gross Domestic Product] per capita, then the comparable numbers are $12 to $27 million.  Granted that would not put him in the ranks of the top 25 executives today that make over $200 million.  It would, however, be many times more than any elected official in this country is paid today.  Finally, to show the "economic power" of his wage, we see that his salary as a share of GDP would rank him equivalent to $2.1 billion.”

Indices

There are many indices, the US-CPI being the most well known.  Indices should be applied appropriate to the analysis.  Again, for a clear discussion, please visit the Measuring Worth web-site.

As an example of an index, we can create our own cowboy index: the activities & skills of a cowboy have changed little during the past 100-150 years.  By several accounts, in about 1875 a cowboy earned $30 per month, or $360 per year. Adjusted for inflation per the US-CPI, the $360 in 1875 is worth about $7,800 in 2000 (a multiplier of 21.7).  In 2003, the mean wage of a farm hand in New Mexico was $20,010 per year.  Comparing the wages for the same work (360 vs 20,010) provides an earnings based multiplier of approx. 55.8.  That is, based on his earnings, the cowboy’s 25¢ shot of whisky in 1875 cost him ¼ day’s work or $14 earned in today’s dollars.

However inaccurate our multiplier may be, used appropriately it provides a better understanding of the worth, in today's terms, of a cowboy’s earnings in the past.  A similar measure could be created for a peón de campo's wages – see Alfred Benitz's diaries for the wages he paid during the 1890's.

Issues with Precious Metals

In terms of the US-Consumer Price Index, both gold and silver were relatively much more expensive in the 19^th century than in the 20^th.  In more recent times, the recession of 2007-2010 greatly increased the demand for precious metals, dramatically inflating their prices during that period.  Because of the distorting effects of temporary economic conditions, precious metals should not be used for comparing worth between periods.

Silver:

The ratio of silver ounces per gold ounce remained relatively stable at 15:1 or 16:1 until the mid to late 1870's when it began to slip with the discovery of large silver deposits.  At the close of 2000, the silver:gold ratio was 59:1.

Gold Standard:

It first emerged in the UK during the early 1700's, it was abandoned in 1790 (due to the Napoleonic wars) then resumed in 1819.  Its adoption spread during the 1800's – the US adopted it in 1879 (dropping its bimetal standard with silver).  It effectively placed the world economy on a single currency – the US Dollar was valued at 1.5047 grams (23.22 grains), the British Pound at 7.3224 grams (113.0 grains).  Attractive to entrepreneurs and capital rich countries (UK, US), it harmed the working class and primary product exporting countries (Argentina, Canada), and deepened economic down turns into depressions.  It collapsed with WW-I, was then resurrected for a short while until it was finally laid to rest by the Great Depression.  For more details, see:

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-gold.htm
http://www.cyberussr.com/hcunn/gold-std.html

Buying Power, & the Cost of Living

Buying Power:

Buying power is what a unit of currency will buy in one place (city, country) versus another on a given date.  Here is an example from the Economist magazine (17 Jan.'04) - it showed how the buying power of the US Dollar varied geographically by converting to US dollars the local price of a McDonald's Big Mac hamburger: Switzerland $5.11, Euro area $3.48, USA $2.80, Argentina $1.43, China $1.23.  Same product, same currency, different price.

[2010: Because of the “Big Mac” index, the Argentine government in a vain attempt to hide the true inflation rate from its people pressured McDonald’s to not offer the sandwitch in Argentina.]

Cost of Living:

Cost of living is typically expressed in comparative terms, e.g. New York is twice as expensive to live in as Miami, Buenos Aires twice as expensive as Bahia Blanca.   You should be aware that:

• the cost of living in Argentina is typically considerably less than in the US or Europe (2010: approx. 1/3), and

• the cost of living on a farm (fort, ranch, estancia) is typically half or less that of living in a city.

Brief Histories of the Currrencies:

For a historical discussion of past currencies, see Money and Coinage in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe.

Spain:

The Spanish Real de a Ocho reigned as the monetary standard in world trade for nearly 400 years, from 1500 until the late 1800's, giving birth to more than 50% of the world's currencies, including the US dollar.  The official name of the Spanish colonial and early Mexican currency was the Real de a Ocho (o Ocho Reales) - “pieces of eight” – which became known colloquially as a Peso, Peso Fuerte, o Peso Duro because of its unchanging weight in silver.  According to a Spanish Royal Ordenanza (decree) of 1497, 67 Reales were to be minted from a single Marco de Castilla of pure silver that weighed 230.465 grams (the standard weight of a Cologne Mark), i.e. each Real weighed 3.4335 grams and each Peso Duro weighed 27.4680 grams.  For more details, search the web for: “Marco de Castilla”, “Real de a Ocho”, and “pieces of eight”.

Argentina:

Following independence from Spain in 1810, Argentina continued to recognise the Spanish Peso Duro (known colloquially as a Patacón) as legal tender for a number of years.  The Peso Argentino, first emitted in 1812, fared badly during years of chaos until 1853 when order was restored.  In 1881 Argentina struck its first silver Peso, valued at 1:1 with the Peso Duro (Spanish Real de a Ocho).  However, once again it soon lost value.

Currrencies used by our ancestors when they first arrived in Argentina include the following:

• Spanish Real de a Ocho, a.k.a. Peso Duro, Peso Fuerte, Patacón.   During the 1860's and 1870's, Franz X. Benitz and Wilhelm Benitz paid for their land purchases in Pesos Duros.

• Bolivian currencies were used widely in Argentina during the 1880's.  See the letters and diaries of Frank J. and Alfred Benitz.

  •  Real Boliviano – the Bolivian sol replaced 1:1 the Real de a Ocho.  The US Treasury in 1879 valued 1 real (sol) = USD 0.965. Coins were struck 1827-1864 in silver (soles: 1/2 to 8) and gold (scudos: 1 to 8, where 1 scudo = 16 soles).  (Search the web on: "Bolivian silver coins".)

  • Peso Boliviano – struck in silver 1864 (centésimos in copper), and pegged to 5 French francs (approx. 1.40 USD) it lost value over time.  In 1881, the US Treasury valued it at USD 0.823.  In May 1884, Alfred valued it at $0.80 m/n. (approx. USD 0.73).  In 1908 it revalued at 12.5 to 1 UK pound (approx. USD 0.39). Inflation continues, revalued in 1963, 1987, & ??

  • Bolivian Dollar – Frank J. Bz's term for the real boliviano.

• Condor – the peso chileno (Chilean peso) – a silver coin with a condor engraved on its front (obverse) side.  First issued in 1817: equal to 8 Spanish Reales; revalued 1851: $1.00 = 5 French Francs (silver); 1885: $13.50 = British £1 (gold); 1926: $40 = British £1 (gold); 1932: taken off gold standard, value dropped; 1960: replaced by escudo.

•  Peso Cordobés, the provincial currency of Córdoba. a.k.a. soles, cuartillos, reales, realitos, & by Alfred: Cordoba nates. At sporadic intervals between 1815 and 1843, the provinces of Córdoba and La Rioja struck a coins in various nominal values.  We don't know their true contemporary value in other currencies for they were struck in low quality silver and pewter (peltre).  Today they are collectors items. (Search the web on: "moneda provincial de Cordoba" and "moneda provincial de La Rioja".)

For more about Argentine currency, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_peso
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_exchange_rates_of_Argentine_currency

The value of one current peso (2000) is 10,000,000,000 pesos of 1969 (or 1914), and more than 13,000,000,000 pesos of 1914 with the U.S. dollar as reference.

Germany:

In very simplified terms, three currencies (there were many others, most local) were the basis of trade during the period that concerns us, 1830-1870: (1) Thaler – used in the northern principalities including Mecklenberg and Prussia; (2) Gulden – used in the southern principalities including Baden; and (3) Mark-Banco – used by Hamburg and Luebeck.  In 1871 the three currencies were consolidated into the Mark.  For more details, see the archives in:
http://www.germanlife.com

Mexico:

During the years we are concerned with, 1830-1850, Mexico continued with the Spanish Real de a Ocho (Peso Fuerte), minting its own – see Spain above.  For more details, see:

http://www.chicagocoinclub.org/projects/PiN/ccp.html

UK:

The British Pound became of interest to the family when they began travelling to Europe in the late 1800's and/or married British subjects or their Anglo-Argentine descendants.  Consequently, we include it here.  Since the 16^th century, one pound was 20 shillings or 240 pennies, that is, until 15 February, 1971, when the pound was decimalized with 100 (new pence) pennies.  For the rest of the old coins, find a good pub, offer a Brit a pint of ale and have him explain farthing, hapenny, pence, crown, guinea, etc. (Cheaper but less fun, search the web for: "England decimalisation").

US:

The US Dollar has had its tribulations like any other currency.  Named after the German Thaler, its value was originally based upon the Spanish Real.

---

© Peter Benitz (Benitz Family)