I hate maths, but l dusted down some twenty odd year old notes on the sarcophagus. I converted Petrie and Smyths measures to digits, not allowing myself to go smaller than a third of a digit due to errors present. For the external l got 122 x 52.66 x 56 and internal 106 x 36.33 x 46.66. This would provide a very close approximation to interior volume being half of the solid box. If we take the sides to be all 8 digits thick, then the internal width could be slightly more at 36.66. The bottom of the box thickness at 9.33, would mean the solid bottom is one sixth of the volume of the solid box. If we give 8 digits for missing lid thickness (to match the chamber courses of 64 digits) then the lid would be one seventh of the solid box. The surface area of the four external vertical sides is also a close approximation to the area of a square of 5 cubits

In my notes l have a volume unit from Petrie called the 'hen' which he gives as 29 plus or minus .3 cubic inches, 5000 of which could be the volume of the solid box, or 2500 for the interior volume.
Yes the volume of a sphere of 2.5 cubits is also a close approximation to the internal volume, but its hard to prove intent. It may be a simple case of the designer creating a box, that for them were harmonious proportions.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/08/2019 06:36AM by waggy.