Thanks for the kind words. I took another look at the Stecchini link and also the following one about the origin of the English foot, and as much as I like Stecchini, I remain troubled by his insistence that the primary Egyptian measures are exactly .3 m for the foot, .45 m for the cubit and .525 m for the royal cubit. It makes me wonder if he was a little bit too metric. Also it makes me think his cubit is too long for early Egypt.
Try this: Take 20.625 inches for the royal cubit and divide it by 28. This gives a royal cubit digit instead of a remen digit, which I am not especially fond of. Then multiply the digit value by 16 to get the length of the Egyptian foot (again a bit longer than the foot from the remen digit and a bit longer than the Roman foot, which I am also not especially fond of), then multiply this foot value by 56/55. How many inches? Hint: no hair.
16/28 x 56/55 = 32/55 :: 32 RC = 55 ft.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 21-Dec-19 06:47 by Jim Alison.