Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Cubit Lengths

cubit nippor cubit sacred cubit short cubit royal cubit

  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1    Bennu

Bennu

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2014

Posted 11 August 2014 - 08:32 PM

This image shows my theory about how three different types of cubits are interrelated by geometry. Which one came first? Hard to say but probably the Nippur Cubit. Adding 1/6th of the Egyptian Short Cubit (one palm) to itself gives a Royal Cubit of 20.62492921 inches.

Posted Image

Edited by Bennu, 11 August 2014 - 08:51 PM.


#2    DeWitz

DeWitz

    DeWitz

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,647 posts
  • Joined:11 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Niagara Frontier

  • "Follow me, it's in Room 101."
    Clyde P. Fesmire, PhD

Posted 11 August 2014 - 10:23 PM

I thought that the cubit was a measure of length, not area. From the American Heritage Collegiate Dictionary: "An ancient unit of linear measure, originally equal to the length off the forearm from the tip of the middle finger to the elbow, or about 17 to 22 inches (43 to 56 centimeter; (Latin, cubitum, 'cubit, elbow.')


[previously incarnate as 'szentgyorgy']

"Things fall apart. . . it's scientific." - Talking Heads

#3    Bennu

Bennu

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2014

Posted 12 August 2014 - 12:06 AM

View PostDeWitz, on 11 August 2014 - 10:23 PM, said:

I thought that the cubit was a measure of length, not area. From the American Heritage Collegiate Dictionary: "An ancient unit of linear measure, originally equal to the length off the forearm from the tip of the middle finger to the elbow, or about 17 to 22 inches (43 to 56 centimeter; (Latin, cubitum, 'cubit, elbow.')


Yes, and those are lengths being illustrated. The Nippur Cubit is the length of each side of the triangle, not the area inside the triangle.

Nobody has ever discovered this very precise interrelationship before. When I found it I was surprised that nobody had ever reported it, especially the Sacred Cubit of the Jews being the diagonal of a one short cubit square. The Egyptians must have used that diagonal measure at some point. Maybe that's where the Jews got it from. For some reason, there ls no record of the Egyptians using the Sacred Cubit though.

I should explain that I started with the Nippur Cubit. That's the exact length of a bronze Nippur Cubit rod that was found from 2650 BC, 518.5 mm. The Short Cubit and Sacred Cubit were then generated from the Nippur Cubit triangle.

Edited by Bennu, 12 August 2014 - 12:25 AM.


#4    DeWitz

DeWitz

    DeWitz

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,647 posts
  • Joined:11 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Niagara Frontier

  • "Follow me, it's in Room 101."
    Clyde P. Fesmire, PhD

Posted 12 August 2014 - 12:10 AM

View PostBennu, on 12 August 2014 - 12:06 AM, said:

Yes, and those are lengths being illustrated. The Nippur Cubit is the length of each side of the triangle, not the area inside the triangle. Nobody has ever discovered this very precise interrelationship before. When I found it I was surprised that nobody noticed it before, especially the Sacred Cubit of the Jews being the diagonal of a one short cubit square. The Egyptians must have used that diagonal measure at some point. Maybe that's where the Jews got it from. For some reason, there ls no record of the Egyptians using the Sacred Cubit.

But how does one measure linearity (length; a line) with a triangle? I never was very clever at math/geometry. How does/do the triangle/s function in calculations?

[previously incarnate as 'szentgyorgy']

"Things fall apart. . . it's scientific." - Talking Heads

#5    Bennu

Bennu

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2014

Posted 12 August 2014 - 12:31 AM

View PostDeWitz, on 12 August 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

But how does one measure linearity (length; a line) with a triangle? I never was very clever at math/geometry. How does/do the triangle/s function in calculations?

You start with a Nippur Cubit, drawing a triangle with sides that length. Then you can get the Egyptian Short Cubit from that by drawing a square with sides the length of the triangle's height. You don't actually need to draw the square, just use the height of the triangle. But you ned the square to get the Sacred Cubit, by using the length of the diagonal of the square. As for how they got the length of the Nippur Cubit, I think it's an earth measure of some sort.

Another way to look at it is that the Egyptian Short Cubit is half of a Nippur Cubit multiplied by the square root of 3 and the sacred cubit is the Short Cubit multiplied by the square root of 2.

Edited by Bennu, 12 August 2014 - 12:47 AM.


#6    Mangoze

Mangoze

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,616 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 August 2014 - 01:50 AM

How accurate do the calculations need to be?

Note:
  • 10/7 ~ sqrt(2)
  • 7/4 ~ sqrt(3)



#7    Mangoze

Mangoze

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,616 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 August 2014 - 01:55 AM

View PostBennu, on 11 August 2014 - 08:32 PM, said:

... Adding 1/6th of the Egyptian Short Cubit (one palm) to itself gives a Royal Cubit of 20.62492921 inches.
Posted Image

The short cubit is six palms and the Royal cubit is seven palm.

You really (believe that you) discovered:
  • 6 + 6/6 = 7
Congratulations.


#8    Bennu

Bennu

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2014

Posted 12 August 2014 - 02:08 PM

View PostMangoze, on 12 August 2014 - 01:55 AM, said:

The short cubit is six palms and the Royal cubit is seven palm.

You really (believe that you) discovered:
  • 6 + 6/6 = 7
Congratulations.

Hardly, I simply stated what the length of the Royal Cubit would be when you start with a short cubit of the length shown in the diagram. I do really believe that I discovered how the length of the short cubit originated though.


#9    Bennu

Bennu

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2014

Posted 12 August 2014 - 02:31 PM

View PostMangoze, on 12 August 2014 - 01:50 AM, said:

How accurate do the calculations need to be?

Note:
  • 10/7 ~ sqrt(2)
  • 7/4 ~ sqrt(3)

The actual ones, as shown in the diagram. I simply expressed what you see in the diagram mathematically. The ancients wouldn't have calculated it mathematically. They would have done it geometrically as shown.

Edited by Bennu, 12 August 2014 - 02:31 PM.


#10    Starhunter

Starhunter

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,315 posts
  • Joined:09 Sep 2014
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2014 - 11:21 AM

The most ancient cubit was 21.75", then came the Assyrian cubit as 20.41", then the Sacred Jewish cubit came after the Babylonian captivity, as 25" issued by Kabbalists.
Pre Babylon, the Jewish cubit was 21.75"
I don't know when the 18" Jewish cubit was introduced, but it may also have been just after Babylon.
Originally, the cubit was not mathematically derived, but was judged by the length on the arm of a ruling individual.


#11    Kenemet

Kenemet

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,605 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2014

Posted 09 September 2014 - 01:51 PM

But cubit rulers across Egypt and elsewhere show a great deal of variation in their size.  Wikipedia says of the Royal Cubits "These cubits range from 523 to 529 mm (20.6 to 20.8 in) in length, and are divided into seven palms; each palm is divided into four fingers and the fingers are further subdivided."

The Nippur cubit is known from one single example.

No one has ever found a Jewish cubit ruler.  It's estimated to be 18 inches.
(source: http://en.wikipedia....an_Nippur_cubit)

The Jewish people did not emerge from the Near Eastern groups until long after both Egypt and Sumeria were flourishing civilizations.

This page has some interesting research:
http://www.egyptorig...g/cubitrods.htm


#12    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 09 September 2014 - 03:49 PM

And this matters why?

"For me, it is better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
                                                                                                                                           - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark

#13    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    SCIENCE!

  • Member
  • 13,045 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 09 September 2014 - 08:45 PM

I'm always reminded of Bill Cosby's "God and Noah" sketch when people talk about cubits.
God: Noah.
Noah: Yes God?
God: I want you to build an Ark. It's 300 cubits, by 100 cubits by 200 cubits. It must contain two of all the species of animals. Do you have any questions?
Noah: What's a cubit?
God: .... I used to know ....


It also got me into some trouble once at Boys' Brigade, one of the older members of the group had just done a RE lesson on Noah, and asked "does anyone have any questions?" and I piped up with "what's a cubit?" and earnt a death glare from him. I thought it was funny, and it was something all the kids would have been wondering too I'm sure.

I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-Killer. It is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and to move through me. And when it is gone I will turn the inner eye to see it's path.
When the fear is gone, there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

#14    Bennu

Bennu

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2014

Posted 09 September 2014 - 10:15 PM

View PostStarhunter, on 09 September 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

The most ancient cubit was 21.75", then came the Assyrian cubit as 20.41", then the Sacred Jewish cubit came after the Babylonian captivity, as 25" issued by Kabbalists.
Pre Babylon, the Jewish cubit was 21.75"
I don't know when the 18" Jewish cubit was introduced, but it may also have been just after Babylon.
Originally, the cubit was not mathematically derived, but was judged by the length on the arm of a ruling individual.

I'm glad you took an interest in my thread. I don't know about the 21.75" cubit. I think that came from a guy named James Strong, didn't it? I haven't found any geometric or mathematical relationship between the known cubits and that one yet.


#15    Starhunter

Starhunter

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,315 posts
  • Joined:09 Sep 2014
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 10 September 2014 - 02:00 AM

View PostBennu, on 09 September 2014 - 10:15 PM, said:

I'm glad you took an interest in my thread. I don't know about the 21.75" cubit. I think that came from a guy named James Strong, didn't it? I haven't found any geometric or mathematical relationship between the known cubits and that one yet.
Sorry, I was going from memory, I just checked on that as 21.6."






Also tagged with cubit, nippor cubit, sacred cubit, short cubit, royal cubit

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users