Byrd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ahatmose Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > Another observation ...
> >
> > The Longitude of Perihelion (... The longitude
> of
> > the perihelion represents the angular position
> of
> > the perihelion of the orbit from the vernal
> > equinox. This angle gives the position of the
> > Earth on its orbit at the spring equinox.
> Knowing
> > the longitude of the perihelion, it is possible
> to
> > determine the Earth-Sun distance at any time in
> > the year.) if one looks, is extremely close to
> 10
> > times the value for "the cubit" . It also
> changes
> > as the angle of The Tropic changes and is
> always
> > increasing toward I guess 360 degrees. During
> The
> > building of The Great Pyramid the longitude of
> > Perihelion varied from 205.049 at 2600 BC to
> > 206.723 at 2500 BC and 207.091 at 2478 BC
>
> First you have to show how they measured the
> perihelion accurately (and how they wrote those
> fractions since they didn't have decimals.)
>
> > Now this presents us with a couple of
> > possibilities.
> >
> > 1) Could 1/10 the angle of longitude = the
> cubit
>
> If they'd done latitude and longitude then they
> could have made accurate maps. None of the
> surviving maps (or any map from any civilization
> in those times) show a division of the Earth's
> surface into regular quadrants of latitude and
> longitude.
>
>
>
> >
> > 2) and interesting that at the end of The
> Pyramid
> > age the longitude sat at -2478 0.018264
> > 23.9722 207.091 and I believe that is as
> > large as the cubit ever got in relationship to
> the
> > inch.
> >
> > So was the measurement used ... The Longitude
> of
> > Perihelion ?
>
> I'll go you one better. I'm going to start
> maintaining that the cubit measurement is simply
> the length of a bull's tail (and the Apis bull in
> specific.) and unlike the speculation that you
> guys have been doing, I can actually point to
> cultural signs for this.
>
> Namely:
> * A bull's tail is about the same length as a
> cubit. No adjusting, no calculations, just lay it
> down and set up your measuring cord/rod/etc.
> * the bull's been worshiped as a manifestation of
> the king's power going back to 3100 BC. And it's
> the king's power/edicts that get things built.
> * One of the names of the pharaoh is "strong bull
> of his mother" which ties into Hathor and
> reinforces the association of the king with the
> bull. And the title goes back to the time of
> Narmer
> * The Narmer palette shows the king with a bull's
> tail and as a bull defeating enemies.
> * The hieroglyphs for the Apis Bull name includes
> two upside down "v" marks that are the exact shape
> of the relieving chambers found in every pyramid.
> * the king's official regalia includes a bull's
> tail, as shown on the Narmer Palette.
> * the spelling of the measurement called "setat"
> includes an animal pelt with a tail hieroglyph
> * use of the Official Apis Bull tail versus
> another bull tail explains the difference in
> length between the "small cubit", the royal cubit,
> and the "reformed" cubit. Royal construction used
> the length of the Apis bull tail while other
> construction used a different bull tail (this
> explanation covers something that neither of your
> models do -- but should.)
> * it also ties in with other measurements; the
> volume measurement D.wt (from the Old Kingdom)
> being a measurement of meat, according to
> Pommering.
> * all other measurements used are related to
> observable things, and most of them are
> agricultural in nature
> * models of workers (such as the grainery model)
> and inscriptions at Edfu show that the scribal
> palette was also used as a cubit measuring device.
> (Hirsch, p. 43)
> * the Amenemope cubit artifact shows that two
> systems were in use simultaneously and each cubit
> was slightly different. The length of bulls'
> tails accounts perfectly for this.
>
>
> In short, I have a lot more evidence for a bull's
> tail than both of you have for your mathematical
> musings - all of which seem to boil down to "well
> just LOOK at it! It's obvious!" or "Beautiful
> Math!" Your suggestions don't show the king
> directly associated with them (he's not wearing a
> maths t-shirt or carrying astrolabes) nor do they
> explain why there's two different cubits being
> used at the same time
>
>
> References:
>
> Stone, Mark H. "The cubit: a history and
> measurement commentary." Journal of Anthropology
> 2014 (2014): 1-11.
> Hirsch, Antoine Pierre. Ancient Egyptian
> Cubits–Origin and Evolution. University of Toronto
> (Canada), 2013.
> [central.bac-lac.gc.ca]
>
> [ancientegyptonline.co.uk]
> [en.wikipedia.org]
>
>
>
> (note: I don't actually believe this. But as
> long as we're doing the "Egyptologists say stupid
> things so we should reexamine what they do and fix
> this by proposing new and more correct 'out of the
> box' explanations, I decided to do my own with
> something that was the same size as a cubit.
> Hence, bulls.)


It's not 'you guys' or 'you two'. I'm the author and you are dealing with said author here, not with those who misappropriate or are wont to append their wack to what I have written.
The longitude of the perihelion is not relevant to the length of the Royal Cubit, neither is equating any angular measure to inches. Neither have I proposed such.

Just think if you had put half the effort into your 'investigation' of the origin of the 'Strides of Re' as you did into your little bull fable, well, we would perhaps be getting somewhere by now..

I don't understand why some appear so horrified at the very mention of the word 'Pyramid'. They really don't exist in some other realm, or in one parallel to the history of AE. Or why you are so very eager to dismiss my work, yet appear to be too apprehensive to read it? I didn't ask for your review, neither are you here to review my work unseen, based on your prescient opinion.

You have at least not repeated your claims that the Royal (i.e.,"of the Sun") Cubit was based on the length of the forearm. Which, as Stone wrote in the work you reference "the Egyptian Royal Cubit was longer than". At ~20.6", by almost three inches than the average AE forearm length of 17.72". (Robins & Shute, Historia Mathematica 12,1985:114) Or as Petrie (1883:181) wrote on the Royal cubit that its "value slightly increased", giving a cubit of 20.58" for the Great Pyramid of Dashur – the Khufu as 20.62" ± .005, the Khafre as 20.64" ± .03, and the Menkaure as 20.71" ± .02 (1883:179)
You'd think people would do basic due diligence before making spurious forearm claims. I mean, what if there are children reading your posts? Do you think your opinion supersedes the facts? Or that such is sufficient to ignore the pinnacles of ancient Egyptian architecture in your 'investigation': ones which clearly show the increase to the length of 'Re's Stride' and, hence to that of the cubit-values employed over time.

I had hoped Waggy might have chipped in here to confirm that he used a cubit of 20.55" in his reconstruction of the Red Pyramid's interior chambers and base dimensions. Or that he may have ventured his thoughts on my claim that the base-lengths of "every royal Pyramid in Egypt" derive from the average and/or specific lengths of the 'Strides of Re' – for which you found no evidence to substantiate their existence.
I really like Keith's Guides, they're well researched, though, his recent on the NFC was, well, not among his best: since he doesn't or didn't know the right Stride-lengths and cubit-values employed in the Khufu, or the 30.5 feet distance the Tropic traveled southward in the Year of the Unification in 3246 BC, at the midpoint of the first Sothic Cycle. Or how this length is thus symbolic of the Unity of Egypt: as also employed as the height of the 1680 carved recesses of the average Stride-high-in-2670 BC perimeter wall of the Djoser complex.
Speaking of, the so-called Nippur Cubit rod, discovered and dated by Unger to c.2650 BC, evidences a gradation of 518.5 mm / ~20.41", which accords to the length of the Egyptian Royal Cubit in ~2690 BC, i.e., that length was a twentieth part of the distance the Tropic of Cancer traveled only in that era. Not long before the Djoser Pyramid was raised to six average Strides in height: by a cubit-length of 20.45" during its 2670 BC year of foundation. Since only the lands of Egypt, not the lands of Nippur, lay under the latitude of the Tropic, one could perhaps surmise the origin of such to somewhere located under the overhead Sun. See pgs. 256 – 259 of my book for exact cubit-values and the chronologies of the Old Kingdom Pyramids. You don't have to tell anyone if you take a look, OK? You may even learn something new.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you were schooled in AE history by some old Caucasian men... by those educated in the colonial era, taught by those of the era of women's disenfranchisement, themselves schooled by those of the era of slavery, and so on. By what we call the ABA team – the Babylonian boosters, Sumerian supporters, Greek miracle makers, Holy Roman rooters – of the history of scientific achievement. The Anywhere-but-Africa team. By old men who see the face of the Sphinx in their own image... by those who can't even conceive the Giza Pyramids are any more than some random examples of pharaonic tombs. Because if they weren't, well, let's not go there, facts be damned, eh?

Below is a link to a photo taken by Bob Sacha at the Solar Well located at (24.45236 N) the Temple of Horus and Sobek at Kom Ombo. It was taken at local noon on Midsummer Day, 1998, as evident by the lack of shadow.

[ibb.co]

Even though the Tropic did not lie exactly over this Well then, as it once had, the effect of the overhead Sun reflected in the waters is striking. Not quite as striking as it would have been in the similarly interior-staired Sun Well on Elephantine (24.08536 N) built at least 1500 years before the era of Eratosthenes, which lay slightly closer to the (23.439 deg. N) latitude of the Tropic in 1998. So, if anyone still thinks that the AE did not know when the longest day of the year was, or that they didn't know how the Sun traveled over Egypt, or that they hadn't figured out a way to observe activity on the "face of Re", well, that might be akin to claiming that Eskimos don't know snow.

There is little information available on these remaining, accessible Sun Wells. Neither has been explored or published or even much-considered. The one on Elephantine Island is in a disgraceful, trash-filled state, as with those specifically oriented and positioned well-shafts to the west of the Sphinx at Giza. Whose significance, as with the 'mortar boxes' adjoining the body of the Sphinx, has not been realized.

As far as the latitudinal locations of the Pyramids of Giza corresponding, in N – S extent, to six degrees of latitude above the position and travel of the Tropic of Cancer during their thus-defined construction eras, see the records of the AE Senut Festival, those of the "sixth sky", and the annals of the Palermo Stone of the Senut Shrines, first known from the reign of Den. (Wilkinson, Royal Annals of Ancient Egypt. 2000:242. For the predynastic Kings of the PS see pg.83). Just because a lot of people have written a lot of nonsense about 4th Dynasty architecture, one shouldn't judge a book by other people's covers. Let alone the condescending foolishness of reviewing a book unread. Read it and trash it, fine! Don't read it & no comment, great! But to not read it and trash it... that's on you.