I mentioned the Scandinavian Quantum (with reference) in the other thread, DaveL. Archibald Thom did some research on various Scandinavian monuments, and concluded that they might have been surveyed using a unit (which he called a quantum) of 4.71 feet. From what your previous post, it seems that this is the same measurement as the third side of a 30/60/90 deg. triangle (although, if either of the Thoms were aware of this, they don't seem to have mentioned it).

It has been suggested - admittedly, in a mediaeval context – that two mediaeval Roman units known as the canna (2.234218 m.) and the staiolo (1.284675 m.) bore a 1: root 3 relationship to one another (although as part of a whole equilateral triangle rather than as half an equilateral triangle). It’s argued that this was because they were architectural ratios that, having originally been applied to Classical Roman units, came to be used even in an agrarian context [P. Kidson, "A Metrological Investigation", Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 53 (1990), 71-97: 93-94].

So could the Megalithic Yard, the Scandinavian quantum and the Megalithic Fathom have been examples of a prehistoric rational metrological system? Multiples of the Scandinavian quantum would certainly fit the diameters of some henge monuments, such as the Rollrights (http://www.le.ac.uk/archaeology/rug/AR210/circles/project/site7.htm; [www.megalithicsites.co.uk]), although there are many others where it doesn’t. In any case, I would guess that anyone who doubts Alexander Thom’s methodology, and who might also doubt Archibald Thom’s methodology, might simply argue that the data are still too uncertain to safely support any conclusions about a supposed ratio-based unit system.


Hermione
Director/Moderator - The Hall of Ma'at

Rules and Guidelines

hallofmaatforum@proton.me