A Ruler for a Ruler

I made a claim a couple posts back that the Egyptians were the first to have what modern man would call or recognize as a ruler. The Egyptian ruler is most often called a cubit stick or a cubit rod. Rods of various forms had been found. Wooden rods were most likely those actually used by craftsman in their labor or architects while drawing or building. Stone cubit rods have also been found and it is suggested these were strictly ceremonial. (though some ceremonial cubit rods were also wood.) This makes perfect sense. A heavy stone ruler a foot and a half long would be unwieldy for drafting or carrying around all day. Also, a stone rod would likely break often when dropped or hit wrong against the stone or bricks being measured. However, it is not unusual that Egyptians created a ceremonial replica because this is a common trend both in their spiritual practices and in their death practices.

So, what is a cubit?

A cubit is the standard Egyptian measurement comparable to the modern foot or meter. There are two cubits used. The short cubit which is the distance from the elbow to the tip of the fingers of the pharaoh. The royal cubit is the distance from the elbow to the fingertips plus a palm width. The royal cubit was the standard cubit in use.

Like the foot or meter, cubits were also broken into smaller measurements. These increments were 6 palms for the short (7 palms for the royal), 4 fingers for each palm, a finger was then broken into fractions from halves to 1/16th. 1/16th of a finger seems to be the smallest measure the Egyptians used. 1/16th of a finger is approximately .12 cm (mm) or .05 inches. To give you an idea of how small this is the width of 1/16th of a finger is approximately the width of a standard earring post or an 16-18 gauge piece of piercing jewelry. It is this precision that was likely to allow for such perfection in their buildings as far as fitting stones together.

Two other measurements were common the short span and the great span. Short Span is the distance between the thumb and the pointer finger when they are spread as far as possible. The Great Span is the distance from the thumb to the little finger when they are spread as far as possible.

Great Span

Short span

This leads us to why the Egyptians were the first in history, that we know of, to show up with a standardized ruler. Large scale building and moving of materials. The ruler is a necessary tool when you consider an architect on the Giza Plateau telling some overseer in a stone quarry how big to make the stone blocks. The second reason for a ruler was the obsessive way the Egyptians measured the flooding of the Nile. Priests needed a standard to exist over many generations so that Nile floods and Nile predictions could be made. 

A workman's cubit rod at the Liverpool Museum.

A little more about the cubit rod.

The rods had other markings on them besides the tick marks for measuring. Most of the rods included inscriptions invoking gods related to science and craft. Th inscription from the wooden rod above is:
"A boon which the King gives (to) Amun-Re and (to) Ptah, Lord of the Two Lands, and (to) Thoth, Lord of Divine Words, great god who dwells in Hermopolis, that they may give life, prosperity and health, and a good lifespan, following their Ka's, for the Ka of the Servant in the Place of Truth, Any."

In addtion to the inscription ceremonial cubit rods had lists of the nomes arranged by their order from Lower Egypt to Upper Egypt. These nome inscriptions were usually listed by the image or name of the god of that nome.

Ceremonial cubit rod at the Louvre showing the names of the nomes along the top

as well as the measurement symbols along the edge.

(Remember to read right to left like an Egyptian.) Photo by Jon Bodsworth.

Close up of the Louvre Cubit rod

Notice on the rod that the fractions are very clear. The mouth glyph which indicates that it is a fraction and then the number after. We can also more clearly see the second line from the top which names the sections of the cubit and then the upper most line with the names of the nomes.

Fragment of a stone, ceremonial cubit rod on display
at the Metropolitan Museum of Art

Quick Cubit Conversion Chart:

(Conversions are approximations from measuring a variety of cubit rods)

- 1 Short Cubit = 45cm = 18 inches

- 1 Royal Cubit = 53 cm = 21 inches

- 1 Royal Cubit = 1 Short cubit + 1 palm

- 1 Royal Cubit = 7 Palms

- 1 Palm = 4 Fingers

- 1 Royal Cubit = 28 Fingers

- 1 Great Span = 2 Palms

Confessions 11-15

Confession 11: O He-of-the-Cavern who came forth from the West, I have not fornicated with the fornicator.

In Egypt this was different than we might expect. Marriage was considered not by a service but by declaring love or the intent to be together to the populace/family. This could also be a parent or set of parents setting up an arranged marriage. In Ancient Egyptian terms fornication here refers to what we would call cheating on a marriage, an affair or a similar act. There are many additional laws governing this confession. For example, a woman could nullify a marriage simply by stating that her husband was not providing for her. (In some cases even if the thing he was not providing was sex.) Divorce also did not happen in the long drawn out manner it does in modern times. From the few records I have read on the matter (primary source stuff) apparently speaking it to those involved was enough.

Ok enough on that. I will try to get a coherent post on marriage practices in the future. For now let us move on to who this confession is spoken to. From the west can refer to either one who is rising from the dead(walking out of the Duat) or someone who rules the desert. More than likely this is Set. He hid out in a cavern and he is also associated in some mythology with fornication and/or misdeeds. 

Confession 12: O He-Whose-Face-is-Behind-Him who came forth from his hole, I have not caused anyone to weep.
This is what it sounds like. It means that a follower has not purposefully said or done things with the intention of hurting others.. of making them weep. As to who, this is one that eludes me as well. I have to make a guess because while there have been studies of the Book of the Dead I have yet to find a source that tries to name the assessors. This research has been all mine. Coming forth from the hole is a term I have seen in reference to the mound of creation. The hole could refer to where Nun came from at the beginning of the world. I don't really know what it means that his face is behind him. Another possibility is Hra-f-ha-f a god who steers the boat of Ra who is often depicted looking over his shoulder.

The Gayer-Anderson Cat at the British Museum.

Confession 13: O Bast coming forth from the secret place, I have not eaten my heart.
This time they were nice enough to give us the goddess. Her secret place is likely her temple at Per-Bast. There are two possible translations of eating the heart. The first, and more straightforward one, is that committing offense against Ma'at's law. This is probably not the case after reading the next confession. More likely it refers to being false in appearance, attitude or personality. The heart, ab, is the center of good and evil thoughts and weighed in judgement. Eating your heart would be destroying it in the way Ammut would and that would be infecting it with evil.

Confession 14.O Hot-Legs who came forth at twilight, I have not transgressed.
I am again not sure who "Hot Legs" is aside from some reference to pin-ups that I am sure the Egyptians knew nothing about. However, the description does suggest they come from night time or dusk. It could be Nut or Hathor who are both supposed to be images of beauty and are associated with twilight times. Aside from that I am not sure who "Hot Legs" might be. One who walks in fire at night? Could be. The second part is much more clear. I have not transgressed refers to laws. These could be the laws of Ma'at, the government or the society. It isn't specific in what the transgression is against but the glyph choice suggests it is related to law. 

Confession15. O He-Who-is-Blood who came forth from the place of slaughter, I have not grain-profiteering.

Grain profiteering is gaining monetary profits by cheating others. Again, this is about treating others unfairly for personal gain. This seems to refer directly to cheating people out of money though deceit or unethical practices.In the modern scheme of things I would consider this any sort of cheating others for profit. So, overcharging for a service or product, misrepresenting product or any number of modern schemes that involve getting more money that the sold item or service is worth.

I have always associated "He who is Blood" to either be Horus, where blood is a reference to bloodline, or Set as the one in charge of the military. Either god would be quite appropriate as Horus is a god of vengeance and taking action against wrongs. Set on the other hand is sometimes associated with greed and deceit. Like many of these I need to do much more research on the references before I can be definitive on which god it might be.

Hey YOU! Put Those Artifacts Back.

In modern archeology there is a movement to put artifacts and bodies back where they had been found. In many cultures this is the respectful thing to do regarding religion and/or culture. Egypt and the mindset of the Ancient Egyptian puts a very different twist on the idea of returning items. Were an Ancient Egyptian to enter into this discussion they might disagree with those who want Egyptian artifacts returned to where they were found. I'll try to work through several of these arguments based solely on information we have currently about Ancient Egyptian culture and religion.

Anyone who has seen an Egyptian monument of huge stones can easily understand the Egyptians built things to last. This can also be seen reflected in their religion. Continued life after death was partially attached to the continuation of the mortal body. This was the purpose for mummification and why many dynasties of Egyptian rule had harsh and deadly punishment for tomb raiders. Preserving the body was important to religion and the very soul of a person. Through this lens of an Ancient Egyptian let us explore the idea of a mummy in a museum. A mummy in a museum is kept in a temperature and moisture controlled area. It is protected from decay and any living things which might disturb or destroy it, such as tomb robbers or rodents. A mummy in a museum can be expected to go on as long as the museum stands and is maintained. For an Egyptian this doesn't seem to be a bad plan for preserving their body into eternity. This is especially true when we consider the incidents of tomb robbing, burning mummies for fuel and grinding them up for medicines.

There are other considerations to the idea of Egyptian artifacts in a place such as a museum where they are viewed by the masses. These ideas all deal with images... one of the images itself and the other dealing with language. We'll start with the language one since it is usually easier to understand. Egyptians had magical standard that when a word was said it gave power and life to that thing. So, every time someone says King Tut his being in this world and the after world gains more power. In fact, in order to weaken others Egyptians would often attempt to erase them from the world. We see this with both Hashepsut and Ankenaten whose names were systematically carved off of stone items. An Egyptian seeing a plaque that had a king or gods name on it that was read by thousands of people every year doesn't seem too bad after all. The more we say the names of those who have passed on the more power hey maintain.

The other image related consideration is the Egyptian idea of imagery. An image was not just an image but the item itself, a manifestation in some sense of the word. For example, a statue of Ramses the Great is not just his likeness but actually the pharaoh himself standing there before us. Seeing the image of someone or some thing in a whole and healthy form also gave energy and power to them. If a statue of Anubis is standing in a great hall of a museum to be seen by thousands of people a year then he will remain a strong god. Here again an Ancient Egyptian might well agree with putting things on display.

The final question we might address from the aspects of an Ancient Egyptian is all of the replica tombs and monuments we see. What would an Egyptian thing of these? Given our past few paragraphs I think that the repetition of imagery would be something that would meet with their approval. Very often the Egyptians themselves did this very thing. The sacred texts such as the Book of the Dead are copied widely as are motifs and kings lists. Repetition ensured survival of at least one copy which was necessary.

Over all, unlike many cultures and religions, Ancient Egyptian practices might well approve of the care a museum or other qualified facility could give to their dead and artifacts. It is something to consider not only when looking at Egyptian artifacts but those of any culture. What was the standard care practices of the culture or religion and do facilities such as museums provide those requirements?