398 PROFESSOR C. PIAZZI SMYTH'S ACCOUNT OF 



perature for it under natural circumstances, which if not 68° exactly, is as close 

 to it, as the mean temperature of any one year is usually found to the mean of a 

 number. 



(D.) Standards of Angle. 



Measures of angle present themselves shortly at the Pyramid in the following 

 manner : — several modern philosophers have already stated their beliefs else- 

 where that the builders of the Pyramid must have been too barbarous and 

 primitive to have any idea of angle, as angular measure ; and that although the 

 interior passages are set at certain angles, that arose only as a consequence of 

 specified linear proportions being adopted in the building, — the proportion of two 

 horizontal to one vertical being a very favourite instance and giving an angle of 

 26° 34/ Against this statement the answer seems to be, 1st, That every one of 

 the inclined passages points to a sensibly smaller angle than 26° 34'. 2d, That 

 the manner of showing the angles in the azimuth trenches, is incompatible with 

 linear, and only adapted to angular, measure. And 3d, The angles of the sides 

 of the Pyramid, as well as those of the passages and some other features too, are 

 strongly indicative of angular measure having been highly appreciated in some of 

 its crucial refinements. That such Pyramid angular measure too, if existing at 

 all, was represented in the favourite Pyramid numbers, would seem to follow on 

 the rule applied to obtain the dominant standards elsewhere ; for if we assume a 

 quadrant = 250°, and the circle 1000°, then the two dominant angles of the Pyramid, 

 the 51° 51' 14" yy of the sides, and the 26° 18' 10" (^) of the passages are 

 representable by even numbers of the Pyramid degrees, to an accuracy of less 

 than a tenth of one of those degrees; as thus, 144*0 (y^) and 73-0 (rj&o). 



(E.) Standards of Time. 



At first sight we might consider that measures of time could have no place in 

 a pyramidally arranged building, because the utter incommensurability of the 

 day and year prevent any satisfactory introduction there of fives and tens. 



Yet time evidently was included in the idea of the Great Pyramid, when the 

 linear standard, as we showed some time since, was expressed in terms of time. 

 Moreover some persons may argue that though the day and year may be difficult 

 to settle pyramidally, — the day and week are easy enough ; for what is to prevent 

 men having weeks of five days or ten days each ! And in fact some of the hiero- 

 glyphic scholars maintain that the Egyptians of and about the Pyramid age 

 actually did employ weeks of ten days each. May we expect then to find such 

 weeks enshrined in the Great Pyramid ? 



Not necessarily, seeing that the several departments of measure hitherto 

 recognised in the monument, have by no means proved to be those in use among 

 the Egyptians, but rather to point to a different origin altogether. Let us there- 



