8 NATURE 
[Dec. 26, 1872. 
measures is to be found in Don. V. Quiepo’s Zssaz sur les 
systémes Meétrigues des Anciens Peuples (Paris, 1849) 
which contains much curious and instructive information 
on the subject, as well as reference to the best existing 
authorities. . 
It would appear that very little is known of the system 
of Egyptian weights previous to the time of the Ptolemies, 
the first of whom, Ptolemy Lagus, one of the Generals of 
Alexander the Great, became King of Egypt, 323 B.C. 
It is also stated that there is no certainty of the existence 
of any Egyptian weights which were constructed much 
before that period. But there is evidence that the 
ancient system was continued by Ptolemy Lagus, when 
he reformed the Egyptian weights and measures, although 
it can hardly be imagined that the Egyptian unit of 
weight remained unaltered for nearly twenty centuries. 
The earliest systems of weights and measures not only in 
Egypt, but in Assyria and Phoenicia, were based on the 
same principle, that of the length of the cubit and of the 
foot, which were to each other in the proportion of 3 to 2. 
The Cubit was the unit of length measure; the measure 
of a cubic foot of water ((Zefretes) was the unit of capacity 
both for liquids and dry goods ; the Talent or the weight 
of a cubic foot of water, was the larger unit of weight, 
whilst the Mina, either the Soth, 60th, or 1ooth part of 
the talent, and the Sicle or Shekel, either the goth, 6oth, 
or r1ooth part of the Mina, were the smaller units of 
weight. 
The great Alexandrian Talent of Ptolemy Lagus has 
been shown to have weighed 42°480 kilogrammes. The 
60th part was the Mina = 708 grammes, the 5oth part of 
which was the Didrachma or Shekel = 14 grammes. 
This was also the weight of the Jewish Shekel of the 
Sanctuary, often mentioned in the Old Testament. 
Another Talent was also in use which was half the weight 
of the Great Talent, its Mina weighed 354 grammes, and 
the Drachma 3'54 grammes. Don. V. Quiepo mentions 
the fact of there being now in the Louvre two ancient 
Egyptian standard weights of roughly rounded stone, 
weighing 352'16, and 176'75 grammes respectively, evi- 
dently Mina and half-mina weights, as well as a simi- 
larly rounded stone weight, marked with six lines of 
hieroglyphics, found to weigh 414 grammes ; this is 
thought to be an Attic Mina, known to be used in Egypt 
in the time of the Ptolemies, the weight of which was 425 
grammes. There are also in the ‘Louvre three ancient 
Egyptian bronze weights, weighing respectively 3°57, 
3'56, and 3°62 grammes, evidently drachma weights. 
Let us now endeavour to ascertain the length of the 
Cubit at the period of the construction of the great 
Pyramid, and thence deduce the weight of the ancient 
Egyptian Mina. In this computation it will be desirable 
to make use of metric weight and measure, from their 
great convenience in expressing the measure of length, 
capacity, and weight, by the same significant figures. 
The weight of water in relation to its bulk will thus be 
taken as determined for the metric system, that is to say, 
of pure water at its maximum density. 
The latest and most satisfactory information on the 
length of the Cubit during the construction of the Great 
Pyramid, is to be met with in the Notes of Sir Henry 
James, published in 1866, with reference to the_measure- 
ments made in the previous year by Ordnance Surveyors. 
Herodotus, writing 450 B.C., says that “the Egyptian 
Cubit is equal to that of Samos » that is to say, to the 
Greek Cubit. 
Now the length of the Greek Cubit has been satisfac- 
torily ascertained from a recent measurement of the 
Hecatompedon of the Parthenon of Athens, being the 
platform on which the columns stand,and the exact length 
of 100 feet. The Greek foot has thus been found to be 
equal to 12'16032 English inches, and, adding half its 
length (6'08016 inches), shows the length of the Greek 
cubit to be 18°2405 inches, This, therefore, was the length 
of is Greek cubit 2,320 years ago, and, according to. 
Herodotus, also the length of the Egyptian cubit. 
But it has been considered by the greatest authorities 
that the length of the Egyptian cubit at the period of the — 
construction of the Great Pyramid may be ascertained — 
from the dimensions of the Pyramid itself. ‘ 
Sir Isaac Newton, in his celebrated “ Dissertation on. 
Cubits,” says that it is very probable that at first the 
Measure of the Great Pyramid was determined by some — 
round number of Egyptian cubits. 
According to the measurement of the four sides of the 
base of the Great Pyramid, as it must have stood when 
complete with its casing stones, the mean length of each 
side, as measured by Mr, Inglis in 1865 (Prof. Piazzi 
Smyth’s “The Great Pyramid,” vol. ii. p. 134), and by 
the Ordnance Surveyors in 1 868, was 9,120 English ae 
or 760 feet. 
But 9,120 inches are precisely equivalent to 500 
Egyptian or Greek cubits of 18'2415 inches. ) 
From the measurements by Col. Vyse and Mr. Perring © 
of the second and third Pyramids it would also appear that ~ 
the same unit of length was used, the base of the second 
pyramid being a square of 700 Egyptian feet, and that of 
the third 350 Egyptian feet. Assuming, therefore, 500 
ancient Egyptian cubits, or 750 Egyptian feet, to have 
been equal to 760 English feet, the Egyptian foot equals 
1'013 English foot, or 30°86 centimetres, 
The Talent derived from the weight of water contained 
in this Egyptian foot would be equal to 29°3892 kilo- 
grammes, and the Mina, its fiftieth part, would Bee 
587°'76 grammes. These weights agree very nearly with 
those of the ancient Phcenician weights, used as com- 
mercial weights in Egypt in the time of the Pharaohs— 
viz., the Kikkar (equal to 29°360 kilogrammes) and the 
Mina of the market (equal to 587'213 grammes), as showr 
by Don V. Quiepo. 
This common or profane cubit (equal to 18'2415 English 
inches, or 46°319 centimetres) is to be distinguished from 
the sacred cubit or cudit of Memphis, as it has been 
termed by Sir Isaac Newton, equal to 20°628 inches, o rr 
52°379 centimetres, which was derived by him from the 
zntertor dimensions of the Pyramid, and more particular: 
from the length and breadth of the King’s Chamber, ta 
to be twenty and ten cubits respectively. The cubits cut 
on the Nilometer at Cairo now measure 20°699 English 
inches, or 52°559 centimetres, leaving no doubt of their 
being intended to be cubits of Memphis. 
The double or Royal cubit af Memphis would shuad 
according to Isaac Newton, be 41'256 English inches, 
An ancient Royal cubit found at Cairath, is now in the 
British Museum, the length of which has been found to 
be 41°398 inches, or 105"118 centimetres, being exactl} 
double the Nilometer cubit. It is divided into fo 
palms (of 2°956 inches, or 75 millimetres), and the pa 
into four digits (of 0739 inches, or 18'7 millimetre 
The length of its cubit differs only 0'071 inches from th 
length as deduced by Sir Isaac Newton. 
The Chaldzeo-Hebraic, or sacred Jewish Cubit was 
taken by Sir Isaac Newton to be } longer than the cubit 
of Memphis, and thus to be equal to 24°84 English inches, 
This was the first result of his investigations, and it 
agrees with an actual measurement by Mersennus of 
24°83 inches. This cubit was probably divided into sit x 
palms of 4:14 inches, ten of which would be very nearly 
equal to a Royal Cubit of Memphis, in terms of which ie 
interior dimensions of the Great Pyramid appear to have 
been set out, as well as those of the second and th 
Pyramids. : 
It is very probable that the ancient cubit of Memphi is, 
several of which have been found in buildings, was used 
in the measurement of buildings, whilst the cubit of 
18'24 inches was employed for measuring land only. 
The Egyptian foot corresponding with the cob 
Memphis, of 20'628 inches, derived from the Great Pyr 
