Hi all,
I read an article recently that said that the Dodekaschoinos proved that ancient Egyptians did not and could not accurately measure the length of Egypt or the size of the earth. I did a some research and found that this sentiment, usually by implication, is a popular opinion, with the notable exception of Kurt Sethe. I believe that the Dodekaschoinos has been seriously mischaracterized, possibly for the purpose of obtaining this implication. There are a lot of moving parts in this story and I have already pared down 30 pages of quotes and notes to about 6 pages, that I have added to my remen article. I do not have it in me to abbreviate it anymore, so I am posting what I added to my article below. If you want to read if in my article, it is pp. 32-37.
[home.hiwaay.net]
According to Petrie, the Pelasgic foot was equal to the Roman foot of 16 Egyptian digits, or 4/5 of a remen. The Attic foot was based on 1/6 of 100 Egyptian digits, or 5/6 of a remen. The ratio between the Roman foot and the Greek foot is 24/25 (4/5 × 6/5 = 24/25) , and the ratio between the 625 feet in the Roman stadium and the 600 feet in the Greek stadium is 25/24. Berriman stated that the Roman stadium and the Greek stadium both equal 500 remen, and 5000 remen = 10 Roman stadiums = 10 Greek stadiums = one minute of latitude. [95]
ACTS 27:28 “And sounded and found it twenty fathoms: and when they had gone a little further, they sounded again and found it fifteen fathoms.” The Book of Acts was written in Koine Greek, based mainly on Attic and Ionic speech forms. [96] Fathom is translated from the Greek orguia. A fathom is presently defined as six English feet, although a previous British Admiralty definition was 1/100 of a cable, or 1/1000 of a nautical mile,[97] equal to 100 ancient Egyptian digits, or one orguia, or six Attic feet, or five remen, or 1/1000of a minute of latitude. 10 stades, or 1000 fathoms, or 6,000 Attic feet, or 100,000 digits, is equal to one minute of latitude.
HERODOTUS 2.149 states: “One hundred fathoms equals a furlong of six hundred feet, the fathom being measured as six feet or four cubits, the feet being four palms each, and the cubits six.” During the lifetime of Herodotus, Egypt was under Persian control. This may explain why Herodotus related the length of the Egyptian schoinos to the Persian parasang, and may explain the length of 12,000 royal cubits for the late period Egyptian schoinos. HERODOTUS 2.6 states the Persian parasang was 30 furlongs, although Herodotus understood the relation between the Egyptian schoinos and the Persian parasang to be two to one, rather than the understanding of other ancient and modern sources, that the relation between the two is one to one.
The schoinos of 12,000 Greek cubits, or 400 Greek cubits times 30, is equal to one league, or three minutes of latitude. The length of the Persian parasang was 12,000 cubits, or 30 stadia of 400 royal cubits, although the Persian royal cubit was longer than the Greek cubit. According to Petrie, the length of the ancient Babylonian digit was .73 inches, the same as the Egyptian, Greek and Roman digit, and the length of the Babylonian royal cubit was 20.6 inches,[98] the same or very nearly the same as the early Egyptian royal cubit. Based on more recent studies of ancient cubit rods, Rolf Rottlander and Lelgemann gave 20.4 inches, equal to 28 digits, for the Nippur cubit. [99]
STRABO 17.1.24 states: “Artemidorus says that the navigation up the river from Alexandria to the vertex of the Delta is 28 schoeni, which amount to 840 stadia, reckoning the schoenus at 30 stadia. In sailing up from Pelusium to the same vertex of the Delta, is a distance, he says, of 25 schoeni, or 750 stadia.” This is a correct measure of the distance from the apex of the Delta to Pelusium and it is the same distance given by Herodotus from Heliopolis to the sea, in schoinos. However, the measure given by Herodotus of 25 schoinos times 60, or 1500 stadia, from Heliopolis, extends nearly 100 miles into the Mediterranean Sea.
In 1882, Freidrich Hultsch stated: “Herodotus, through a misunderstanding, doubled the value of the schoinos to 60 stadiums.” [100] In 1901, Kurt Sethe compared several of the schoinos measures of Herodotus to the actual distances between the given locations in Egypt, and found that the number of stades required to match the distances on the ground was between 30 and 40 stades per schoinos. According to Sethe, Herodotus erred in assigning 60 stadia to the Egyptian schoinos. [101]
The distances given by Herodotus are sometimes in schoinos, sometimes in furlongs (stades), and sometimes both. Where both measures are given, the number of schoinos, times 60, is the number of furlongs. In cases where the distance is given only in furlongs, the distances in furlongs, divided by 60, produce whole numbers of schoinos. This indicates that Herodotus started with what he described as the Egyptian schoinos, then multiplied by 60 for the measures in furlongs.
In 2003, Peter Thonemann described a Hellenistic distance marker from Ephesus and three Hellenistic distance markers known from Macedonia, “all of them with distances divisible by 10 stades.” Thonemann proposed the designation of ‘decastadion,’ compared to previous designations of ‘milestone’ or ‘stadion-stone.’ Thonemann stated: “This dating (Hellenistic period) is certainly correct, on grounds of lettering, the absence of any mention of Roman authorities, and the use of stades rather than miles to measure distance.” [102] The decastadium equals one minute of latitude, or one nautical mile, or 1852 m, or 6076 feet. The Roman mile equals 1000 paces of five feet each. The Roman stade of 625 feet × 8 = 5000 Roman feet = 4/5 of a nautical mile. The Greek stades are the same length as the length Roman stade and also equal one eighth of a Roman mile.
In 1822, John Murray stated: “In the Itinerary of Antonius, the places, and their interjacent distances are stated as follows: Casium to Pentaschoenum - 20 M.P. (mille passus or Roman mile), Pentashoenum to Pelusium - 20 M.P. STRABO 16.2.28, in placing Casium at three hundred stades from Pelusium, differs not much from the 40 M.P. of the Itenerary, or the ten schoenes indicated by the word Pentaschoenum, midway.” [103] The distances from the Antonine Itenerary and from Strabo, indicate 40 Roman miles equals 10 schoinos; and 300 stades equals 40 Roman miles; thus 30 stades equals four Roman miles equals one schoinos.
PLINY 5.11 gives 30 stadia for the schoenus. PLINY 12.30 states, “the length of the schoenus, according to the estimate of Eratosthenes, is forty stadia; some persons, however, have estimated the schoenus at no more than thirty-two stadia.” A schoinos of 32 Greek or Roman stadia produces a schoinos equal to four Roman miles (8 × 4). A schoinos of 30 stadia of 400 royal cubits or Eratosthenes’ schoinos of 40 stadia of 300 royal cubits, is slightly longer: 12,000 × 20.62 inches = 20,620 English feet (Egyptian schoinos). 6076 × 4/5 × 4 = 19,443 English feet (4 Roman miles).
Despite the evidence of the Egyptian schoinos of 12,000 cubits, a schoinos of 60 stades, or 24,000 cubits, sometimes rounded down to 20,000 royal cubits, and sometimes equated with the length of the itr, is attributed to Herodotus and asserted as evidence that ancient measures of Egypt, in itr and schoinos, are too long to be meridian measures. Also asserted as evidence of a long schoinos is the statement of Herodotus about Egypt’s southern border area, the Dodekaschoinos.
HERODOTUS 2.29 states: “I went myself as an eyewitness as far as the city of Elephantine and from that point onwards I gathered knowledge by report.” Herodotus relates that the first cataract is bounded by the island of Elephantine at the lower end and by the island of Tachompso at the upper end; that the island of Tachompso is occupied one-half by Egyptians and one-half by Ethiopians; and that the distance from Elephantine to Tachompso is 12 schoinos.
STRABO 17.1.49 states: “A little above the cataract is Philae, a common settlement like Elephantine, of Ethiopians and Egyptians, and equal in size.” Taharqa reigned during the 25th dynasty, from 690-664 BC. “The known history of Philae does not carry one back to a period earlier than the Ethiopian dynasty, the alter of Taharka being the oldest monument on the island.” [104] “On one face of the alter is an inscription of Tirhaqa: Beloved of Amun of Taqempso.” [105] Amasis II (570-526 BC) rededicated the temple on Philae to the cult of Isis. Nectanebo I (380-362 BC) expanded the temple of Isis on Philae and it was further expanded by Ptolemy II Philadelphius. [106]
During the reign of Ptolemy V (204-180 BC), the Famine Stela was inscribed on the island of Sehel, in the vicinity of Elephantine. The inscription claims to be a copy of an Old Kingdom decree, donating the southern border area to Khnum. The claim of Old Kingdom authority for the donation to Khnum is disputed. Dating the description and boundaries given in the Famine Stela to the Old Kingdom is also disputed. The inscription contains mixed hieroglyphic forms, including itr, rather than the late period ar, or schoinos. The Famine Stela states:
“Its water rages on its south for an itr, a wall against the Nubians each day. There is a mountain massif in its eastern region, with precious stones and quarry stones of all kinds; likewise tall plants and flowers of all kinds that exist between Elephantine and Bigah, and are there on the east and the west; the stones that are there, lying in the borderland, those on the shores of Elephantine’s canal, those in Elephantine, those in the east and west, and those in the river. A royal offering to Khnum, lord of the cataract region and chief of Nubia: In return for what you have done for me, I offer you Manu as western border, Bakhu as eastern border, from Elephantine to Tachompso, being twelve itr on the east and west.” [107]
Maspero stated: “Their earliest horizon was limited. Their gaze might wander westward over the ravine-furrowed plains on the Libyan desert without reaching that fabled land of Manu where the sun set every evening, but looking eastward from the valley, they could see the peak of Bakhu, which marked the limit of accessible regions. Long after the Egyptians had broken through, the names of those places which had as it were marked out their frontiers, continued to be associated in their minds with the idea of the cardinal points. Bakhu and Manu were still the most frequent expressions for the extreme East and West.” [108]
“The decree of Ptolemy VI Philometer, inscribed in the Temple of Isis on Philae in 157 BC, stated: Twelve schoinos from Tachompso to Syene on the west bank and twelve schoinos on the east bank, making together twenty-four schoinos, to Isis, with all their fields, ponds, islands, stones, plants, trees, flocks, cattle, fish, birds, oils, and all things which exist there.” [109]
“The temple at Pselcis (modern Dakkeh) is stated by its hieroglyphic inscriptions to have been built by (Meroitic king) Ergamenes, yet on the same temple we find reliefs added by Ptolemy IV Philopator (221-204 BC). The temple at Pselcis also contains the hieroglyphic statement of Ergamenes that Isis had given to him the Land of the Twelve Ar, from Syene to Tachompso. On Philae, Ergamenes had himself represented on the walls as Pharaoh, yet in close neighborhood to representations of Ptolemy IV in the same character.” [110]
Griffith stated: “On the temple of Dakka is an inscription of a very late period by ‘the agent of Isis in Philae and of the foreigners of Tacompso, chief of the region of thirty, scribe of the king of Cush,’ etc. The ‘region of thirty’ may represent the triacontaschoenus, or district of thirty schoeni, of which there are a few records. In it a certain Boethus founded two cities named after Philometer and his wife Cleopatra, according to an inscription which probably came from Philae; and Cornelius Gallus, after his conquest of the Thebais, having passed the cataract and met the ambassadors of the Ethiopians, appointed an (agent?) for the triacontaschoenus. PTOLEMY 4.7.10 appears to place the district beyond the second cataract on the west of the Nile; but he may be wrong, and it would not be surprising to find that it either included, or lay immediately south of, the Dodecaschoenus.” [111]
Griffith stated: “So far as we know, no Ptolemaic or Roman ruler had his name inscribed on any building in Nubia south of the Dodecashoenus. The earliest of the Ptolemies whose name is found south of Philae is Philopater at Dakkeh. South of the Dodecaschoenus we have only a few records of Cyrenaean Greeks in the temple built by Hatsheput at Buhen opposite Wadi Halfa. From this place Professor Sayce published two graffiti of Cyrenaeans, attributing them to the second or third century BC; and in 1912 the present writer removed into the temple for safety an inscribed sandstone slab, perhaps a grave-stone. Mr. M. N. Tod assigns the lettering to the period from the fourth to the second century BC.” [112]
Following the Roman conquest of Egypt in 30 BC, and an unsuccessful attack by the kingdom of Meroe on the first cataract region in 23 BC, the northern border of Meroe and the southern border of Roman Egypt was established at Maharraqa. Dieter Arnold stated: “The Roman presence was manifested at the southern border at Maharraqa (Hiera Sycaminos) by a temple dedicated to Isis and Serapis that cannot be securely dated because it was neither completed nor inscribed. However, since temple building in Nubia declined after the reign of Augustus, one might date the Maharraqa temple to this period (19 BC - 14 AD).” [113]
“A few sculptures and hieroglyphic inscriptions from the south wall of the temple at Maharraqa were observed by Burckhardt and recorded by Lepsius and Erbkam, showing that Isis and Osiris of Philae ‘in Kem-so’ were here worshiped. The only date preserved is in a Greek graffito, of year 21 Thoth 12 of Trajan, i.e. 9 Sept. 117 AD, actually a month after the death of Trajan.” [114]
PLINY 6.35 gives long lists of towns south of Syene (Elephantine) from accounts of Bion and Juba. The names and locations of virtually all of the towns are unknown, but Tacompsos is listed above the cataract on the east side of the river by Juba, and Tacompsos is listed above the cataract on both the east and west sides of the river by Bion. PLINY 6.35 states that persons sent by Emperor Nero determined that the distance from Syene to Hiera Sycaminos was 54 miles. PTOLEMY 4.7.10 lists five sites under the heading of the Dodecashoenus: 1-After the lesser cataract; 2-Hiera Sycaminos; 3-Philae; 4-Metacompso; 5-in which region on the west bank of the river is Pselcis.
The opinion that Maharraqa is Tachompso is based on the Roman establishment of Maharraqa as the southern limit of the Egyptian border in 23 BC, and the inscription that mentions Kem-so in the subsequently constructed Roman temple at Maharraqa, and the subsequent listing in Ptolemy’s Geography of Hiera Sycaminos in the Dodekaschoinos. This opinion is often accompanied by a statement that Maharraqa is 75 miles or 120 km away from Elephantine, and that 120 km/12 schoinos = 10 km per schoinos.
It has also been suggested that Derar is Tachompso. In 1907, Weigall stated: “It has been pointed out that Derar is probably to be identified with the ancient Tachompso. In the temple of Dakkeh, Ergamenes states that he ruled the land from Aswan to Takompso, and it seems that this island was, at various periods, the limit of the Egyptian or Lower Nubian dominions.” [115] In 1976, Alan Lloyd stated: “The meaning of Tachompso is obscure. The exact location has given rise to some controversy.” Nonetheless, Lloyd concluded that “Djerar was identical with Tachompso.” Lloyd acknowledged that “Griffith objects to the identification of Djerar with Tachompso because Djerar was a shifting island without any antiquities.” [116]
Due to the late establishment of Maharraqa as the southern border, and because Maharraqa is not an island, it has also been suggested that Tachompso was extended, approximately five miles south, from Derar to Maharraqa. It is generally acknowledged that the region of the first cataract, from Elephantine to Philae, is the traditional border of Egypt, but Philae as Tachompso has been rejected because the distance from Elephantine to Philae is much less than 12 schoinos.
In 1901, Sethe wrote an article about the Dodekaschoinos in response to the assertion of Maharraqa, and/or Derar, as Tachompso. He was not yet aware of the inscription at Maharraqa that mentioned Kem-so, or the inscription at Philae on the alter of Taharqa, that had not yet been discovered. Sethe concluded that Tachompso was the island of Philae. He believed that this was the only conclusion that was consistent with the statements of Herodotus, the statements in the Famine Stela, and the statements by Bion and Juba, that Tachompso was at the head of the first cataract. Sethe pointed out that the first cataract area, from Elephantine to Bigah, was Egypt’s traditional border, and he pointed out that even though this was a border area, as opposed to a borderline, it was an east-west border, marking the southern limit of Egypt, and the northern limit of Ethiopia. Sethe associated the 12 schoinos with the eastern and western boundaries of the Dodekaschoinos and stated that the four day estimate given by Herodotus to traverse the cataract was based on a misunderstanding by Herodotus that 12 schoinos was a north-south measure of distance up the river, rather than an east-west measure of 12 schoinos from the river to the eastern and western boundaries. Sethe also stated that if 12 schoinos was intended to express a distance along the river, then Maharraqa was too far from Elephantine to be 12 schoinos in general, and too far from Elephantine to be 12 schoinos of Herodotus in particular, based on Sethe’s comparisons of other distances given in schoinos by Herodotus and the actual distances between known Egyptian localities. Sethe added that if 12 schoinos was a measure along the river, then it would be contradictory to conclude that the distance from Elephantine to Derar and the distance from Elephantine to Maharraqa were both 12 schoinos. [117]
After learning of the inscription at Maharraqa that mentions Kem-so, Sethe wrote another article about the Dodekaschoinos in 1904, that has been described as abandoning or renouncing his first article. Sethe acknowledged that the mention of Kem-so identified Maharraqa as the southern boundary of the Dodekaschoinos, at least as early as the time of the inscription, but he repeated that this would be difficult to reconcile with the older statements that identified Philae as Tachompso. In 1906, James Breasted stated: “According to an inscription in Maharraka, found by Sethe in one of Lepsius’ notebooks, Takompso must be at least as far south as the former town, so that Sethe’s ably defended thesis confining the dodekaschoinos to the cataract between Assuan and Philae is thus disproved for the Greco-Roman age at least, and probably also for the earlier time.” [118] Sethe concluded his 1904 article by saying “The question of expansion of the Dodekaschoinos in GrecoRoman times is decided in favor, but must remain open for older times until further notice.” [119]
In 1930, after Griffith discovered the inscription ‘Beloved of Amen of Taqempso’ on Philae, Griffith stated: “The presence here of the remarkable name Taqempso is enough to revive Sethe’s theory (in his Dodekaschoinos) that the island Tachompso in HERODOTUS II 29, is Philae. The evidence is clear in inscriptions of Ptolemaic and Roman date and in the geographical work of Ptolemy that Kem-so was in the neighborhood of Maharraqa; its temple lies 113 kilometres above Philae on the western mainland, dedicated to Isis and forming the southern boundary of the Dodecaschoenus. Its name, probably non-Egyptian, is essentially the same as that on the Tirhaqa monument, although the phonetic renderings of it are very different. Probably then in Tirhaqa’s time Philae was Tachompso. Herodotus virtually puts Tachompso at the head both of the First Cataract and of the Twelve Schoeni, in two contradictory situations. Thus it would seem that the name had already moved southward by 450 BC, perhaps under Persian influence, but the tradition of its earlier position still survived to confuse the old historian and through him the lexicographers.” [120]
David Klotz stated: “The installation of Persian garrisons at Elephantine and Syene (during the first Persian period 535-402 BC) reflects the continued engagement with Egypt’s southern frontier. However, the pottery from the second cataract fort at Doginari, previously ascribed to the Saite-Persian period (Heidorn 1991, 1992), has more recently been dated to dynasties 25-26 (Heidorn 2013), and thus no longer confirms Achaemenid domination south of Elephantine.” [121]
The opinion that Tachompso had already moved south when Herodotus made his statement in 450 BC is not supported by any remains concerning Tachompso or the Dodekaschoinos and is contradicted by the Famine Stela and by the later statements of Bion and Juba, placing Tachompso at the head of the first cataract. The opinion that Herodotus was wrong about the southern limit of the Dodekaschoinos at the head of the first cataract is based on the opinion that Herodotus was right about 12 schoinos being a north-south measure along the river.
The Famine Stela, the inscription of Ergamenes at Dakka, and Philometer’s decree all give 12 schoinos on the east side of the river and 12 schoinos on the west side of the river. The Famine Stela and the decree of Philometer both give extensive descriptions of the east-west area of the Dodekaschoinos, including the river, fields, quarries, mines and the desert. The Famine Stela gives Manu and Bakhu as the east-west extent of the border area, but these are symbolic boundaries of uncertain distance from the river, and they are not mentioned in Philometer’s decree. Instead, Ptolemy VI gives twelve schoinos from Tachompso to Syene on the west side of the river and twelve schoinos on the east side of the river, making together twenty-four schoinos. This is a complete and coherent definition of the north-south boundary, from Tachompso to Syene, and of the east-west boundary, of 12 schoinos on the east side of the river and 12 schoinos on the west side of the river, making together 24 schoinos. The statement of 12 + 12 = 24 schoinos as a north-south measure, or a river measure, makes Ptolemy’s decree incomplete and incoherent.
The mentions of the triacontaschoinos give no indication of north-south or east-west borders. The Greek graffiti found at Buhen, consisting of unknown Greek names, makes no mention of the triacontaschoinos. Buhen has been identified as the southern border due to the distance from Buhen to Elephantine, of approximately two and a half times the distance from Elephantine to Maharraqa. Giving 30 schoinos from Elephantine to Buhen gives 12 schoinos from Elephantine to Maharraqa. The undefined area of the triacontachoinos does not support the conclusion that the distance from Elephantine to Maharraqa is 12 schoinos. The inscriptions indicate that 12 schoinos was an eastwest measure, which it would have to be, with the north-south limits of the ancient Egyptian border area between Elephantine and Philae. Not having traveled south of Elephantine, Herodotus erred in giving the measure of 12 schoinos as the length of the first cataract. The error of Herodotus, applied to the distance from Elephantine to the southern border established by Rome at Maharraqa, has no bearing on the length of the ancient Egyptian itr, or ar, or schoinos.
In 1882, Hultsch stated: “The fortieth of the schoinos is the Eratosthenian stadium of 300 royal cubits, or 157.5 meters.” [122] In 1957, Ivor Thomas stated: “Heron of Alexandria (Dioptra 36), STRABO II.5.7 and Theon of Smyrna (ed. Hiller 124, 10-12), give Eratosthenes’ measurement as 252000 stades, against the 250000 of Cleomedes. ‘The reason of the discrepancy is not known; it is possible that Eratosthenes corrected 250000 to 252000 for some reason, perhaps in order to get a figure divisible by 60 and, incidentally, a round number of 700 stades for one degree. If PLINY XII.13.53 is right in saying that Eratosthenes made 40 stades equal to the Egyptian schoinos at 12000 royal cubits of .525 meters, we get 300 such cubits, or 157.5 meters, i.e., 516.73 feet, as the length of the stade. On this basis 252000 stades works out to 24662 miles, and the diameter of the earth to about 7850 miles, only about 50 miles shorter than the true polar diameter, a surprisingly close approximation,however much it owes to happy accidents in the calculation.’ (Heath -1921, H.G.M. II.107)” [123]
1n 1851, Alexandre Vincent edited the posthumous publication of Studies of Fragments of Hero of Alexandria - or - On the Egyptian Measurement System, by Jean-Antoine Letronne. Citing Letronne, Vincent stated:
“It is clear throughout his thesis, Monsieur Letronne was convinced that the Egyptian soil had been measured according to a triangular principle from very ancient days. These measurements had enabled Egyptians to know with extreme precision, the dimensions of all things. According to his conclusions, Letronne was further convinced that the stadion used by Eratosthenes, and defined as contained 700 times in the degree of latitude, essentially belonged to and originated from Egypt.”
“A vast number of distances were transmitted to us by geographers and historians in antiquity who did not themselves verify those distances. Throughout antiquity, historians and travelers alike have almost never taken different units of measurement into account when traveling across foreign lands. They simply wrote down distances they were told in each one of those countries, without bothering about the actual unit used for those measurements. That is how we quickly realize that the word stade was simply a Greek word here applied to an Asian measurement. Consequently, geographic distances defined in Asia by ancient scholars had actually rarely been measured in Greek stades, but rather in that particular nation’s unit of measurement. If we focus on Greece, Italy, and a few parts of Asia Minor, we may recognize distances expressed in Greek stades, but as soon as we travel to other nations in Asia, or to Egypt, we face seemingly insurmountable obstacles. More specifically, it is very difficult to establish the basis on which geographers from the School of Alexandria created their units of measurement. Today, we realize that all of their measurements were incorrect, even in places they knew well. However, their errors are so significant, that we cannot blame them on the basis of ignorance. Rather, we may be the ignorant ones, because we do not know what units of measurement were actually used to express those distances.” [124]
Surveys of the cultivable fields of Egypt are well documented because they were required throughout Egyptian history, due to the annual changes in the Nile Valley caused by the inundation. An accurate survey to determine the length of Egypt, or the size of the earth, would only have to be done once, for so long as the results of the survey were preserved, by means such as the sacred cubit rods, and the inscriptions on the cubits rods and in the temples, giving 106 itr for the meridian length of Egypt, divided into 20 itr for lower Egypt and 86 itr for upper Egypt.
Herodotus gave 132 schoinos for the length of Egypt and stated that his measures were confirmed by the Egyptian Oracle of Ammon. Taken as measures of latitude and longitude, his measures are correct, based on the Egyptian schoinos of 12,000 royal cubits. His measures and his division of upper and lower Egypt are also the same as the ancient Egyptian itr measures from the Karnak cubit rods, the White Chapel, Edfu, and the Tanis papyrus, with the conversion of the ancient Egyptian itr of 15,000 royal cubits to the late period Egyptian schoinos of 12,000 royal cubits.
Eratosthenes gave 5000 stadia for the distance from Alexandria to Syene as 1/50th of the meridian circumference, giving 250,000 stadia for the circumference, or 694.4 stadia per degree. His statement of 5000 stadia for the NS distance from Alexandria to Syene is correct. His statement of 5300 stadia for the length of Egypt from Syene to the sea is also correct, and it is also the same as the ancient Egyptian statement of 106 itr for the length of Egypt from Elephantine to the sea. According to Heron of Alexandria, Theon of Symrna and Strabo, Eratosthenes and Hipparchus gave 252,000 stadia for the circumference, or 700 stadia per degree. As an artifact of the sq. rt. 2 relation between the royal cubit and the remen, 14.14 itr is equal to one degree of latitude, and each itr contains 50 stadia, giving 707 stadia per degree (14.14 × 50 = 707). The difference between 700 and 707 stades per degree is the cause of the one percent error in the calculations of Eratosthenes.
Herodotus, Eratosthenes and Strabo may not have been aware of the geographic basis and relations between the digit, the remen, the royal cubit, the Greek foot and the Roman foot. However, the archaeological and textual evidence from throughout ancient Egyptian history, and the textual evidence from these Greek and Roman authors, support a conclusion that the correspondence between the length of the remen and the royal cubit, and the meridian length of Egypt and the earth, was known to their creators.
95. A. Berriman, Historical Metrology (1953) p. 17
96. V. Bubenik, A History of Ancient Greek (2007) p. 342
97. D. Fenna, Oxford Dictionary of Weights, Measures and Units (2002) pp. 88, 35, 53
98. W. Petrie, Inductive Metrology (1877) pp. 65-66
99. D. Lelgemann, Ancient Nonmetric Length Units, Ordo Et Mensura IX (2005) p.7
100. F. Hultsch, Greek and Roman Metrology (1882) p. 58
101. K. Sethe, Dodekaschoinos, UGAAe II.III (1901) pp. 59-94
102. P. Thonemann, Hellenistic Inscriptions from Lydia , EA 36 (2003) p. 95
103. J. Burckhardt, Travels in Syria and the Holy Land (1822) p. viii
104. A. Weigall, Antiquities of Lower Nubia (1907) p. 38
105. F. Griffith, Four Granite Stands at Philae, BIFAO 30 (1930) p. 128
106. D. Arnold, Temples of the Last Pharoahs (1999) pp. 88, 119-122
107. M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. III (2006) pp 97- 100
108. G. Maspero Dawn of Civilization (1894) pp 44-45
109. L. Torok, Between Two Worlds (2008) p. 400
110. E. Bevan, A History of Egypt under the Ptolemaic Dynasty (1927) p. 246
111. F. Griffith, Merotic Inscriptions (1912) p. 25
112. F. Griffith, Oxford Excavations in Nubia (1924) pp. 117-118
113. D. Arnold, Temples of the Last Pharoahs (1999) p. 244
114. F. Griffith, Demotic Graffiti of the Dodecashoenus, Vol. 2 (1937) p. 15
115. A. Weigall, Antiquities of Lower Nubia (1907) p. 92-93
116. A. Lloyd, Herodutus Book II (1976) p. 118
117. K. Sethe, Dodekaschoinos UGAAe II.III (1901) pp. 59-94
118. J. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt, Vol. IV (1906) p. 85
119. K. Sethe, Schoinos and Dodekaschoinos ZAS 41 (1904) pp. 58-62
120. F. Griffith, Four Granite Stands at Philae, BIFAO 30 (1930) p. 129
121. D. Klotz, Persian Period, UEE 1 (2015) p. 3
122. F. Hultsch, Greek and Roman Metrology (1882) p. 61
123. I. Thomas, History of Greek Mathematics, Volume II (1957) p. 273
124. J. Letronne, On the Egyptian Measurement System (1851), pp. 3-9
I read an article recently that said that the Dodekaschoinos proved that ancient Egyptians did not and could not accurately measure the length of Egypt or the size of the earth. I did a some research and found that this sentiment, usually by implication, is a popular opinion, with the notable exception of Kurt Sethe. I believe that the Dodekaschoinos has been seriously mischaracterized, possibly for the purpose of obtaining this implication. There are a lot of moving parts in this story and I have already pared down 30 pages of quotes and notes to about 6 pages, that I have added to my remen article. I do not have it in me to abbreviate it anymore, so I am posting what I added to my article below. If you want to read if in my article, it is pp. 32-37.
[home.hiwaay.net]
According to Petrie, the Pelasgic foot was equal to the Roman foot of 16 Egyptian digits, or 4/5 of a remen. The Attic foot was based on 1/6 of 100 Egyptian digits, or 5/6 of a remen. The ratio between the Roman foot and the Greek foot is 24/25 (4/5 × 6/5 = 24/25) , and the ratio between the 625 feet in the Roman stadium and the 600 feet in the Greek stadium is 25/24. Berriman stated that the Roman stadium and the Greek stadium both equal 500 remen, and 5000 remen = 10 Roman stadiums = 10 Greek stadiums = one minute of latitude. [95]
ACTS 27:28 “And sounded and found it twenty fathoms: and when they had gone a little further, they sounded again and found it fifteen fathoms.” The Book of Acts was written in Koine Greek, based mainly on Attic and Ionic speech forms. [96] Fathom is translated from the Greek orguia. A fathom is presently defined as six English feet, although a previous British Admiralty definition was 1/100 of a cable, or 1/1000 of a nautical mile,[97] equal to 100 ancient Egyptian digits, or one orguia, or six Attic feet, or five remen, or 1/1000of a minute of latitude. 10 stades, or 1000 fathoms, or 6,000 Attic feet, or 100,000 digits, is equal to one minute of latitude.
HERODOTUS 2.149 states: “One hundred fathoms equals a furlong of six hundred feet, the fathom being measured as six feet or four cubits, the feet being four palms each, and the cubits six.” During the lifetime of Herodotus, Egypt was under Persian control. This may explain why Herodotus related the length of the Egyptian schoinos to the Persian parasang, and may explain the length of 12,000 royal cubits for the late period Egyptian schoinos. HERODOTUS 2.6 states the Persian parasang was 30 furlongs, although Herodotus understood the relation between the Egyptian schoinos and the Persian parasang to be two to one, rather than the understanding of other ancient and modern sources, that the relation between the two is one to one.
The schoinos of 12,000 Greek cubits, or 400 Greek cubits times 30, is equal to one league, or three minutes of latitude. The length of the Persian parasang was 12,000 cubits, or 30 stadia of 400 royal cubits, although the Persian royal cubit was longer than the Greek cubit. According to Petrie, the length of the ancient Babylonian digit was .73 inches, the same as the Egyptian, Greek and Roman digit, and the length of the Babylonian royal cubit was 20.6 inches,[98] the same or very nearly the same as the early Egyptian royal cubit. Based on more recent studies of ancient cubit rods, Rolf Rottlander and Lelgemann gave 20.4 inches, equal to 28 digits, for the Nippur cubit. [99]
STRABO 17.1.24 states: “Artemidorus says that the navigation up the river from Alexandria to the vertex of the Delta is 28 schoeni, which amount to 840 stadia, reckoning the schoenus at 30 stadia. In sailing up from Pelusium to the same vertex of the Delta, is a distance, he says, of 25 schoeni, or 750 stadia.” This is a correct measure of the distance from the apex of the Delta to Pelusium and it is the same distance given by Herodotus from Heliopolis to the sea, in schoinos. However, the measure given by Herodotus of 25 schoinos times 60, or 1500 stadia, from Heliopolis, extends nearly 100 miles into the Mediterranean Sea.
In 1882, Freidrich Hultsch stated: “Herodotus, through a misunderstanding, doubled the value of the schoinos to 60 stadiums.” [100] In 1901, Kurt Sethe compared several of the schoinos measures of Herodotus to the actual distances between the given locations in Egypt, and found that the number of stades required to match the distances on the ground was between 30 and 40 stades per schoinos. According to Sethe, Herodotus erred in assigning 60 stadia to the Egyptian schoinos. [101]
The distances given by Herodotus are sometimes in schoinos, sometimes in furlongs (stades), and sometimes both. Where both measures are given, the number of schoinos, times 60, is the number of furlongs. In cases where the distance is given only in furlongs, the distances in furlongs, divided by 60, produce whole numbers of schoinos. This indicates that Herodotus started with what he described as the Egyptian schoinos, then multiplied by 60 for the measures in furlongs.
In 2003, Peter Thonemann described a Hellenistic distance marker from Ephesus and three Hellenistic distance markers known from Macedonia, “all of them with distances divisible by 10 stades.” Thonemann proposed the designation of ‘decastadion,’ compared to previous designations of ‘milestone’ or ‘stadion-stone.’ Thonemann stated: “This dating (Hellenistic period) is certainly correct, on grounds of lettering, the absence of any mention of Roman authorities, and the use of stades rather than miles to measure distance.” [102] The decastadium equals one minute of latitude, or one nautical mile, or 1852 m, or 6076 feet. The Roman mile equals 1000 paces of five feet each. The Roman stade of 625 feet × 8 = 5000 Roman feet = 4/5 of a nautical mile. The Greek stades are the same length as the length Roman stade and also equal one eighth of a Roman mile.
In 1822, John Murray stated: “In the Itinerary of Antonius, the places, and their interjacent distances are stated as follows: Casium to Pentaschoenum - 20 M.P. (mille passus or Roman mile), Pentashoenum to Pelusium - 20 M.P. STRABO 16.2.28, in placing Casium at three hundred stades from Pelusium, differs not much from the 40 M.P. of the Itenerary, or the ten schoenes indicated by the word Pentaschoenum, midway.” [103] The distances from the Antonine Itenerary and from Strabo, indicate 40 Roman miles equals 10 schoinos; and 300 stades equals 40 Roman miles; thus 30 stades equals four Roman miles equals one schoinos.
PLINY 5.11 gives 30 stadia for the schoenus. PLINY 12.30 states, “the length of the schoenus, according to the estimate of Eratosthenes, is forty stadia; some persons, however, have estimated the schoenus at no more than thirty-two stadia.” A schoinos of 32 Greek or Roman stadia produces a schoinos equal to four Roman miles (8 × 4). A schoinos of 30 stadia of 400 royal cubits or Eratosthenes’ schoinos of 40 stadia of 300 royal cubits, is slightly longer: 12,000 × 20.62 inches = 20,620 English feet (Egyptian schoinos). 6076 × 4/5 × 4 = 19,443 English feet (4 Roman miles).
Despite the evidence of the Egyptian schoinos of 12,000 cubits, a schoinos of 60 stades, or 24,000 cubits, sometimes rounded down to 20,000 royal cubits, and sometimes equated with the length of the itr, is attributed to Herodotus and asserted as evidence that ancient measures of Egypt, in itr and schoinos, are too long to be meridian measures. Also asserted as evidence of a long schoinos is the statement of Herodotus about Egypt’s southern border area, the Dodekaschoinos.
HERODOTUS 2.29 states: “I went myself as an eyewitness as far as the city of Elephantine and from that point onwards I gathered knowledge by report.” Herodotus relates that the first cataract is bounded by the island of Elephantine at the lower end and by the island of Tachompso at the upper end; that the island of Tachompso is occupied one-half by Egyptians and one-half by Ethiopians; and that the distance from Elephantine to Tachompso is 12 schoinos.
STRABO 17.1.49 states: “A little above the cataract is Philae, a common settlement like Elephantine, of Ethiopians and Egyptians, and equal in size.” Taharqa reigned during the 25th dynasty, from 690-664 BC. “The known history of Philae does not carry one back to a period earlier than the Ethiopian dynasty, the alter of Taharka being the oldest monument on the island.” [104] “On one face of the alter is an inscription of Tirhaqa: Beloved of Amun of Taqempso.” [105] Amasis II (570-526 BC) rededicated the temple on Philae to the cult of Isis. Nectanebo I (380-362 BC) expanded the temple of Isis on Philae and it was further expanded by Ptolemy II Philadelphius. [106]
During the reign of Ptolemy V (204-180 BC), the Famine Stela was inscribed on the island of Sehel, in the vicinity of Elephantine. The inscription claims to be a copy of an Old Kingdom decree, donating the southern border area to Khnum. The claim of Old Kingdom authority for the donation to Khnum is disputed. Dating the description and boundaries given in the Famine Stela to the Old Kingdom is also disputed. The inscription contains mixed hieroglyphic forms, including itr, rather than the late period ar, or schoinos. The Famine Stela states:
“Its water rages on its south for an itr, a wall against the Nubians each day. There is a mountain massif in its eastern region, with precious stones and quarry stones of all kinds; likewise tall plants and flowers of all kinds that exist between Elephantine and Bigah, and are there on the east and the west; the stones that are there, lying in the borderland, those on the shores of Elephantine’s canal, those in Elephantine, those in the east and west, and those in the river. A royal offering to Khnum, lord of the cataract region and chief of Nubia: In return for what you have done for me, I offer you Manu as western border, Bakhu as eastern border, from Elephantine to Tachompso, being twelve itr on the east and west.” [107]
Maspero stated: “Their earliest horizon was limited. Their gaze might wander westward over the ravine-furrowed plains on the Libyan desert without reaching that fabled land of Manu where the sun set every evening, but looking eastward from the valley, they could see the peak of Bakhu, which marked the limit of accessible regions. Long after the Egyptians had broken through, the names of those places which had as it were marked out their frontiers, continued to be associated in their minds with the idea of the cardinal points. Bakhu and Manu were still the most frequent expressions for the extreme East and West.” [108]
“The decree of Ptolemy VI Philometer, inscribed in the Temple of Isis on Philae in 157 BC, stated: Twelve schoinos from Tachompso to Syene on the west bank and twelve schoinos on the east bank, making together twenty-four schoinos, to Isis, with all their fields, ponds, islands, stones, plants, trees, flocks, cattle, fish, birds, oils, and all things which exist there.” [109]
“The temple at Pselcis (modern Dakkeh) is stated by its hieroglyphic inscriptions to have been built by (Meroitic king) Ergamenes, yet on the same temple we find reliefs added by Ptolemy IV Philopator (221-204 BC). The temple at Pselcis also contains the hieroglyphic statement of Ergamenes that Isis had given to him the Land of the Twelve Ar, from Syene to Tachompso. On Philae, Ergamenes had himself represented on the walls as Pharaoh, yet in close neighborhood to representations of Ptolemy IV in the same character.” [110]
Griffith stated: “On the temple of Dakka is an inscription of a very late period by ‘the agent of Isis in Philae and of the foreigners of Tacompso, chief of the region of thirty, scribe of the king of Cush,’ etc. The ‘region of thirty’ may represent the triacontaschoenus, or district of thirty schoeni, of which there are a few records. In it a certain Boethus founded two cities named after Philometer and his wife Cleopatra, according to an inscription which probably came from Philae; and Cornelius Gallus, after his conquest of the Thebais, having passed the cataract and met the ambassadors of the Ethiopians, appointed an (agent?) for the triacontaschoenus. PTOLEMY 4.7.10 appears to place the district beyond the second cataract on the west of the Nile; but he may be wrong, and it would not be surprising to find that it either included, or lay immediately south of, the Dodecaschoenus.” [111]
Griffith stated: “So far as we know, no Ptolemaic or Roman ruler had his name inscribed on any building in Nubia south of the Dodecashoenus. The earliest of the Ptolemies whose name is found south of Philae is Philopater at Dakkeh. South of the Dodecaschoenus we have only a few records of Cyrenaean Greeks in the temple built by Hatsheput at Buhen opposite Wadi Halfa. From this place Professor Sayce published two graffiti of Cyrenaeans, attributing them to the second or third century BC; and in 1912 the present writer removed into the temple for safety an inscribed sandstone slab, perhaps a grave-stone. Mr. M. N. Tod assigns the lettering to the period from the fourth to the second century BC.” [112]
Following the Roman conquest of Egypt in 30 BC, and an unsuccessful attack by the kingdom of Meroe on the first cataract region in 23 BC, the northern border of Meroe and the southern border of Roman Egypt was established at Maharraqa. Dieter Arnold stated: “The Roman presence was manifested at the southern border at Maharraqa (Hiera Sycaminos) by a temple dedicated to Isis and Serapis that cannot be securely dated because it was neither completed nor inscribed. However, since temple building in Nubia declined after the reign of Augustus, one might date the Maharraqa temple to this period (19 BC - 14 AD).” [113]
“A few sculptures and hieroglyphic inscriptions from the south wall of the temple at Maharraqa were observed by Burckhardt and recorded by Lepsius and Erbkam, showing that Isis and Osiris of Philae ‘in Kem-so’ were here worshiped. The only date preserved is in a Greek graffito, of year 21 Thoth 12 of Trajan, i.e. 9 Sept. 117 AD, actually a month after the death of Trajan.” [114]
PLINY 6.35 gives long lists of towns south of Syene (Elephantine) from accounts of Bion and Juba. The names and locations of virtually all of the towns are unknown, but Tacompsos is listed above the cataract on the east side of the river by Juba, and Tacompsos is listed above the cataract on both the east and west sides of the river by Bion. PLINY 6.35 states that persons sent by Emperor Nero determined that the distance from Syene to Hiera Sycaminos was 54 miles. PTOLEMY 4.7.10 lists five sites under the heading of the Dodecashoenus: 1-After the lesser cataract; 2-Hiera Sycaminos; 3-Philae; 4-Metacompso; 5-in which region on the west bank of the river is Pselcis.
The opinion that Maharraqa is Tachompso is based on the Roman establishment of Maharraqa as the southern limit of the Egyptian border in 23 BC, and the inscription that mentions Kem-so in the subsequently constructed Roman temple at Maharraqa, and the subsequent listing in Ptolemy’s Geography of Hiera Sycaminos in the Dodekaschoinos. This opinion is often accompanied by a statement that Maharraqa is 75 miles or 120 km away from Elephantine, and that 120 km/12 schoinos = 10 km per schoinos.
It has also been suggested that Derar is Tachompso. In 1907, Weigall stated: “It has been pointed out that Derar is probably to be identified with the ancient Tachompso. In the temple of Dakkeh, Ergamenes states that he ruled the land from Aswan to Takompso, and it seems that this island was, at various periods, the limit of the Egyptian or Lower Nubian dominions.” [115] In 1976, Alan Lloyd stated: “The meaning of Tachompso is obscure. The exact location has given rise to some controversy.” Nonetheless, Lloyd concluded that “Djerar was identical with Tachompso.” Lloyd acknowledged that “Griffith objects to the identification of Djerar with Tachompso because Djerar was a shifting island without any antiquities.” [116]
Due to the late establishment of Maharraqa as the southern border, and because Maharraqa is not an island, it has also been suggested that Tachompso was extended, approximately five miles south, from Derar to Maharraqa. It is generally acknowledged that the region of the first cataract, from Elephantine to Philae, is the traditional border of Egypt, but Philae as Tachompso has been rejected because the distance from Elephantine to Philae is much less than 12 schoinos.
In 1901, Sethe wrote an article about the Dodekaschoinos in response to the assertion of Maharraqa, and/or Derar, as Tachompso. He was not yet aware of the inscription at Maharraqa that mentioned Kem-so, or the inscription at Philae on the alter of Taharqa, that had not yet been discovered. Sethe concluded that Tachompso was the island of Philae. He believed that this was the only conclusion that was consistent with the statements of Herodotus, the statements in the Famine Stela, and the statements by Bion and Juba, that Tachompso was at the head of the first cataract. Sethe pointed out that the first cataract area, from Elephantine to Bigah, was Egypt’s traditional border, and he pointed out that even though this was a border area, as opposed to a borderline, it was an east-west border, marking the southern limit of Egypt, and the northern limit of Ethiopia. Sethe associated the 12 schoinos with the eastern and western boundaries of the Dodekaschoinos and stated that the four day estimate given by Herodotus to traverse the cataract was based on a misunderstanding by Herodotus that 12 schoinos was a north-south measure of distance up the river, rather than an east-west measure of 12 schoinos from the river to the eastern and western boundaries. Sethe also stated that if 12 schoinos was intended to express a distance along the river, then Maharraqa was too far from Elephantine to be 12 schoinos in general, and too far from Elephantine to be 12 schoinos of Herodotus in particular, based on Sethe’s comparisons of other distances given in schoinos by Herodotus and the actual distances between known Egyptian localities. Sethe added that if 12 schoinos was a measure along the river, then it would be contradictory to conclude that the distance from Elephantine to Derar and the distance from Elephantine to Maharraqa were both 12 schoinos. [117]
After learning of the inscription at Maharraqa that mentions Kem-so, Sethe wrote another article about the Dodekaschoinos in 1904, that has been described as abandoning or renouncing his first article. Sethe acknowledged that the mention of Kem-so identified Maharraqa as the southern boundary of the Dodekaschoinos, at least as early as the time of the inscription, but he repeated that this would be difficult to reconcile with the older statements that identified Philae as Tachompso. In 1906, James Breasted stated: “According to an inscription in Maharraka, found by Sethe in one of Lepsius’ notebooks, Takompso must be at least as far south as the former town, so that Sethe’s ably defended thesis confining the dodekaschoinos to the cataract between Assuan and Philae is thus disproved for the Greco-Roman age at least, and probably also for the earlier time.” [118] Sethe concluded his 1904 article by saying “The question of expansion of the Dodekaschoinos in GrecoRoman times is decided in favor, but must remain open for older times until further notice.” [119]
In 1930, after Griffith discovered the inscription ‘Beloved of Amen of Taqempso’ on Philae, Griffith stated: “The presence here of the remarkable name Taqempso is enough to revive Sethe’s theory (in his Dodekaschoinos) that the island Tachompso in HERODOTUS II 29, is Philae. The evidence is clear in inscriptions of Ptolemaic and Roman date and in the geographical work of Ptolemy that Kem-so was in the neighborhood of Maharraqa; its temple lies 113 kilometres above Philae on the western mainland, dedicated to Isis and forming the southern boundary of the Dodecaschoenus. Its name, probably non-Egyptian, is essentially the same as that on the Tirhaqa monument, although the phonetic renderings of it are very different. Probably then in Tirhaqa’s time Philae was Tachompso. Herodotus virtually puts Tachompso at the head both of the First Cataract and of the Twelve Schoeni, in two contradictory situations. Thus it would seem that the name had already moved southward by 450 BC, perhaps under Persian influence, but the tradition of its earlier position still survived to confuse the old historian and through him the lexicographers.” [120]
David Klotz stated: “The installation of Persian garrisons at Elephantine and Syene (during the first Persian period 535-402 BC) reflects the continued engagement with Egypt’s southern frontier. However, the pottery from the second cataract fort at Doginari, previously ascribed to the Saite-Persian period (Heidorn 1991, 1992), has more recently been dated to dynasties 25-26 (Heidorn 2013), and thus no longer confirms Achaemenid domination south of Elephantine.” [121]
The opinion that Tachompso had already moved south when Herodotus made his statement in 450 BC is not supported by any remains concerning Tachompso or the Dodekaschoinos and is contradicted by the Famine Stela and by the later statements of Bion and Juba, placing Tachompso at the head of the first cataract. The opinion that Herodotus was wrong about the southern limit of the Dodekaschoinos at the head of the first cataract is based on the opinion that Herodotus was right about 12 schoinos being a north-south measure along the river.
The Famine Stela, the inscription of Ergamenes at Dakka, and Philometer’s decree all give 12 schoinos on the east side of the river and 12 schoinos on the west side of the river. The Famine Stela and the decree of Philometer both give extensive descriptions of the east-west area of the Dodekaschoinos, including the river, fields, quarries, mines and the desert. The Famine Stela gives Manu and Bakhu as the east-west extent of the border area, but these are symbolic boundaries of uncertain distance from the river, and they are not mentioned in Philometer’s decree. Instead, Ptolemy VI gives twelve schoinos from Tachompso to Syene on the west side of the river and twelve schoinos on the east side of the river, making together twenty-four schoinos. This is a complete and coherent definition of the north-south boundary, from Tachompso to Syene, and of the east-west boundary, of 12 schoinos on the east side of the river and 12 schoinos on the west side of the river, making together 24 schoinos. The statement of 12 + 12 = 24 schoinos as a north-south measure, or a river measure, makes Ptolemy’s decree incomplete and incoherent.
The mentions of the triacontaschoinos give no indication of north-south or east-west borders. The Greek graffiti found at Buhen, consisting of unknown Greek names, makes no mention of the triacontaschoinos. Buhen has been identified as the southern border due to the distance from Buhen to Elephantine, of approximately two and a half times the distance from Elephantine to Maharraqa. Giving 30 schoinos from Elephantine to Buhen gives 12 schoinos from Elephantine to Maharraqa. The undefined area of the triacontachoinos does not support the conclusion that the distance from Elephantine to Maharraqa is 12 schoinos. The inscriptions indicate that 12 schoinos was an eastwest measure, which it would have to be, with the north-south limits of the ancient Egyptian border area between Elephantine and Philae. Not having traveled south of Elephantine, Herodotus erred in giving the measure of 12 schoinos as the length of the first cataract. The error of Herodotus, applied to the distance from Elephantine to the southern border established by Rome at Maharraqa, has no bearing on the length of the ancient Egyptian itr, or ar, or schoinos.
In 1882, Hultsch stated: “The fortieth of the schoinos is the Eratosthenian stadium of 300 royal cubits, or 157.5 meters.” [122] In 1957, Ivor Thomas stated: “Heron of Alexandria (Dioptra 36), STRABO II.5.7 and Theon of Smyrna (ed. Hiller 124, 10-12), give Eratosthenes’ measurement as 252000 stades, against the 250000 of Cleomedes. ‘The reason of the discrepancy is not known; it is possible that Eratosthenes corrected 250000 to 252000 for some reason, perhaps in order to get a figure divisible by 60 and, incidentally, a round number of 700 stades for one degree. If PLINY XII.13.53 is right in saying that Eratosthenes made 40 stades equal to the Egyptian schoinos at 12000 royal cubits of .525 meters, we get 300 such cubits, or 157.5 meters, i.e., 516.73 feet, as the length of the stade. On this basis 252000 stades works out to 24662 miles, and the diameter of the earth to about 7850 miles, only about 50 miles shorter than the true polar diameter, a surprisingly close approximation,however much it owes to happy accidents in the calculation.’ (Heath -1921, H.G.M. II.107)” [123]
1n 1851, Alexandre Vincent edited the posthumous publication of Studies of Fragments of Hero of Alexandria - or - On the Egyptian Measurement System, by Jean-Antoine Letronne. Citing Letronne, Vincent stated:
“It is clear throughout his thesis, Monsieur Letronne was convinced that the Egyptian soil had been measured according to a triangular principle from very ancient days. These measurements had enabled Egyptians to know with extreme precision, the dimensions of all things. According to his conclusions, Letronne was further convinced that the stadion used by Eratosthenes, and defined as contained 700 times in the degree of latitude, essentially belonged to and originated from Egypt.”
“A vast number of distances were transmitted to us by geographers and historians in antiquity who did not themselves verify those distances. Throughout antiquity, historians and travelers alike have almost never taken different units of measurement into account when traveling across foreign lands. They simply wrote down distances they were told in each one of those countries, without bothering about the actual unit used for those measurements. That is how we quickly realize that the word stade was simply a Greek word here applied to an Asian measurement. Consequently, geographic distances defined in Asia by ancient scholars had actually rarely been measured in Greek stades, but rather in that particular nation’s unit of measurement. If we focus on Greece, Italy, and a few parts of Asia Minor, we may recognize distances expressed in Greek stades, but as soon as we travel to other nations in Asia, or to Egypt, we face seemingly insurmountable obstacles. More specifically, it is very difficult to establish the basis on which geographers from the School of Alexandria created their units of measurement. Today, we realize that all of their measurements were incorrect, even in places they knew well. However, their errors are so significant, that we cannot blame them on the basis of ignorance. Rather, we may be the ignorant ones, because we do not know what units of measurement were actually used to express those distances.” [124]
Surveys of the cultivable fields of Egypt are well documented because they were required throughout Egyptian history, due to the annual changes in the Nile Valley caused by the inundation. An accurate survey to determine the length of Egypt, or the size of the earth, would only have to be done once, for so long as the results of the survey were preserved, by means such as the sacred cubit rods, and the inscriptions on the cubits rods and in the temples, giving 106 itr for the meridian length of Egypt, divided into 20 itr for lower Egypt and 86 itr for upper Egypt.
Herodotus gave 132 schoinos for the length of Egypt and stated that his measures were confirmed by the Egyptian Oracle of Ammon. Taken as measures of latitude and longitude, his measures are correct, based on the Egyptian schoinos of 12,000 royal cubits. His measures and his division of upper and lower Egypt are also the same as the ancient Egyptian itr measures from the Karnak cubit rods, the White Chapel, Edfu, and the Tanis papyrus, with the conversion of the ancient Egyptian itr of 15,000 royal cubits to the late period Egyptian schoinos of 12,000 royal cubits.
Eratosthenes gave 5000 stadia for the distance from Alexandria to Syene as 1/50th of the meridian circumference, giving 250,000 stadia for the circumference, or 694.4 stadia per degree. His statement of 5000 stadia for the NS distance from Alexandria to Syene is correct. His statement of 5300 stadia for the length of Egypt from Syene to the sea is also correct, and it is also the same as the ancient Egyptian statement of 106 itr for the length of Egypt from Elephantine to the sea. According to Heron of Alexandria, Theon of Symrna and Strabo, Eratosthenes and Hipparchus gave 252,000 stadia for the circumference, or 700 stadia per degree. As an artifact of the sq. rt. 2 relation between the royal cubit and the remen, 14.14 itr is equal to one degree of latitude, and each itr contains 50 stadia, giving 707 stadia per degree (14.14 × 50 = 707). The difference between 700 and 707 stades per degree is the cause of the one percent error in the calculations of Eratosthenes.
Herodotus, Eratosthenes and Strabo may not have been aware of the geographic basis and relations between the digit, the remen, the royal cubit, the Greek foot and the Roman foot. However, the archaeological and textual evidence from throughout ancient Egyptian history, and the textual evidence from these Greek and Roman authors, support a conclusion that the correspondence between the length of the remen and the royal cubit, and the meridian length of Egypt and the earth, was known to their creators.
95. A. Berriman, Historical Metrology (1953) p. 17
96. V. Bubenik, A History of Ancient Greek (2007) p. 342
97. D. Fenna, Oxford Dictionary of Weights, Measures and Units (2002) pp. 88, 35, 53
98. W. Petrie, Inductive Metrology (1877) pp. 65-66
99. D. Lelgemann, Ancient Nonmetric Length Units, Ordo Et Mensura IX (2005) p.7
100. F. Hultsch, Greek and Roman Metrology (1882) p. 58
101. K. Sethe, Dodekaschoinos, UGAAe II.III (1901) pp. 59-94
102. P. Thonemann, Hellenistic Inscriptions from Lydia , EA 36 (2003) p. 95
103. J. Burckhardt, Travels in Syria and the Holy Land (1822) p. viii
104. A. Weigall, Antiquities of Lower Nubia (1907) p. 38
105. F. Griffith, Four Granite Stands at Philae, BIFAO 30 (1930) p. 128
106. D. Arnold, Temples of the Last Pharoahs (1999) pp. 88, 119-122
107. M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. III (2006) pp 97- 100
108. G. Maspero Dawn of Civilization (1894) pp 44-45
109. L. Torok, Between Two Worlds (2008) p. 400
110. E. Bevan, A History of Egypt under the Ptolemaic Dynasty (1927) p. 246
111. F. Griffith, Merotic Inscriptions (1912) p. 25
112. F. Griffith, Oxford Excavations in Nubia (1924) pp. 117-118
113. D. Arnold, Temples of the Last Pharoahs (1999) p. 244
114. F. Griffith, Demotic Graffiti of the Dodecashoenus, Vol. 2 (1937) p. 15
115. A. Weigall, Antiquities of Lower Nubia (1907) p. 92-93
116. A. Lloyd, Herodutus Book II (1976) p. 118
117. K. Sethe, Dodekaschoinos UGAAe II.III (1901) pp. 59-94
118. J. Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt, Vol. IV (1906) p. 85
119. K. Sethe, Schoinos and Dodekaschoinos ZAS 41 (1904) pp. 58-62
120. F. Griffith, Four Granite Stands at Philae, BIFAO 30 (1930) p. 129
121. D. Klotz, Persian Period, UEE 1 (2015) p. 3
122. F. Hultsch, Greek and Roman Metrology (1882) p. 61
123. I. Thomas, History of Greek Mathematics, Volume II (1957) p. 273
124. J. Letronne, On the Egyptian Measurement System (1851), pp. 3-9