Measurements in the Bible Biblical Units of Measurements and Chronology of the Bible

Measurements in the Bible
Biblical Units of Measurements and Chronology of the Bible

Contents
1 Biblical and Talmudic units of measurement 1
1.1 Length and distance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 Discrepancies of ell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.2 Talmudic additions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Volume and capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3.1 Dry measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3.2 Liquid measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3.3 Talmudic additions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 Weight and coins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.5 Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5.1 Year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5.2 Week . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5.3 Day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.6 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.8 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.9 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2 Hand (unit) 7
2.1 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.1 Ancient Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.2 Biblical use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2.3 Britain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.3 Use in measuring horses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.4 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Span (unit) 10
3.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2 Size of the span . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2.1 English usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
i

ii CONTENTS
3.2.2 Arabic usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2.3 Slavic usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2.4 African usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2.5 Hungarian usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2.6 Asian usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2.7 Mongolian usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.2.8 Portuguese usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.3 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4 Cubit 12
4.1 Etymology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.2 Ancient Egyptian royal cubit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.3 The Sumerian or Nippur cubit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.4 Biblical cubit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.5 Ancient Greece . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.6 Ancient Rome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.7 Other systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.8 Cubit arm in heraldry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.9 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.10 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.11 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.12 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5 Stadion (unit) 15
5.1 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6 Mile 16
6.1 Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.2 Historical miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2.1 Roman mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2.2 Italian mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2.3 Arabic mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2.4 British and Irish miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2.5 Other historical miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.3 International mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.4 US survey mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.5 Nautical mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.5.1 Related nautical units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.6 Geographical mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

CONTENTS iii
6.7 Grid system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.8 Metric mile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.9 Comparison table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.10 Idioms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.11 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.12 Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.13 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.13.1 Citations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.13.2 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.14 Further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
7 Chronology of the Bible 25
7.1 Chronologies prior to canonization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
7.2 Masoretic table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.3 Samaritan Pentateuch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.4 Septuagint (LXX) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.5 Post-Biblical theological chronologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.5.1 Second Temple and Rabbinic traditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7.5.2 Christian chronologies from Eusebius to Ussher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.5.3 Correlation of historical evidence and the Israelite kings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.6 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
7.7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.8 Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7.9 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.9.1 Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.9.2 Images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.9.3 Content license . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Chapter 1
Biblical and Talmudic units of
measurement
Biblical and Talmudic units of measurement, such as
the Omer, used primarily by ancient Israelites, appear fre-
quently within the Hebrew Bible as well as in later Judaic
scripture, such as the Mishnah and Talmud. These units
of measurement are still an important part of Jewish life
today. There is much debate within Judaism, as well as
by outside scholars, about the exact relationship between
measurements in the system and those in other measure-
ment systems, such as the International Standard Units
system used in almost all parts of world except the USA,
and in modern scientific writing. Classical statements,
such as that an Etzba was seven barleycorns laid side by
side, or that a Log was equal to six medium-sized eggs,
are so indefinite and vague as to be nearly useless. Never-
theless, the entire system of measurement corresponds al-
most exactly with the Babylonian system, and in all proba-
bility the Israelite measurement system was derived from
the Babylonian, with some lesser level of influence from
the Egyptian system.[1]
It may therefore be assumed that
the relationship between the Israelite measurements and
SI units is the same as the relationship between the Baby-
lonian system and SI Units.[1]
Note: The listed measurements of this system range from
the lowest to highest acceptable halachic value, in terms
of conversion to either metric or Imperial units.
1.1 Length and distance
The original measures of length were clearly derived from
the human body — the finger, hand, arm, span, foot, and
pace — but since these measures differ between individu-
als, they are reduced to a certain standard for general use.
The Israelite system thus used divisions of the finger-
breadth (Hebrew: ‫,אצבע‬ Etzba; plural etzba'ot), palm
(Hebrew: ‫,טפח‬ Tefah/Tefach; plural Tefahim/Tefachim),
span (Hebrew: ‫,זרת‬ Zeret), ell (Hebrew: ‫,אמה‬ Amah,
plural Amot), mile (Hebrew: ‫,מיל‬ Mil; plural milin), and
parsa (Hebrew: ‫,פרסה‬ Parasa). The latter two are loan
words into the Hebrew language, and borrowed measure-
ments - the Latin mille, and Iranian parasang, respec-
tively; both were units of itinerant distance, and thus var-
ied according to terrain and stride length, and, in the case
of the parasang, also on the speed of travel.
The Israelite measurements were related as follows:
• 1 palm (Tefach) = 4 finger-breadths (Etzba'ot)
• 1 span (Zeret) = 3 palms (Tefahim)
• 1 ell (Amah) = 2 spans (Zeret)
• 1 mil (Mil) = 2000 ells (Amot)
• 1 parasang (Parasa) = 4 mils (Milin)
1.1.1 Discrepancies of ell
For more details on this topic, see ell.
The biblical ell is closely related to the cubit, but two
different factors are given in the Bible; Ezekiel’s mea-
surements imply that the ell was equal to 1 cubit plus 1
palm (Tefah),[2][3]
while elsewhere in the Bible, the ell is
equated with 1 cubit exactly. Ezekiel’s ell, by which he
gave measurements in his guided vision through a future
Jerusalem Temple, is thus one sixth larger than the stan-
dard ell, for which an explanation seems to be suggested
by the Book of Chronicles; the Chronicler writes that
Solomon’s Temple was built according to “cubits follow-
ing the first measure”,[4]
suggesting that over the course
of time the original ell was supplanted by a smaller one.[1]
The Egyptians also used two different ells, one of which
— the royal ell — was a sixth larger than the common
ell;[1]
this royal measurement was the earlier of the two
in Egyptian use, and the one which the Pyramids of the
3rd and 4th Dynasties seem to be measured in integer
multiples of.[5]
The smaller of the Egyptian ells measured 450 mm, but
the standard Babylonian ell, cast in stone on one of the
statues of King Gudea, was 495 mm, and the larger Egyp-
tian ell was between 525 and 528 mm.[1]
The Books of
Samuel portray the Temple as having a Phoenician archi-
tect, and in Phoenicia it was the Babylonian ell which was
1

2 CHAPTER 1. BIBLICAL AND TALMUDIC UNITS OF MEASUREMENT
used to measure the size of parts of ships.[1]
Thus scholars
are uncertain whether the standard Biblical ell would have
been 525 or 495 mm, but are fairly certain that it was one
of these two figures.[1]
From these figures for the size of
a Biblical ell, that of the basic unit — the finger-breadth
(Etzba) — can be calculated to be either 22 or 21 mm;
Rav Chayim No'eh approximates at either 20 mm, or ac-
cording to Talmudic scholar Chazon Ish, 24 mm. The
mile (Mil) is thus about 1050 or 990 m — approximately
1 km, and significantly shorter than the modern statute or
land mile of 5280 feet or 1760 yards (approximately 1.6
km).
The precise width of the etzba (finger) has been a sub-
ject of controversy among halakhic authorities. The best
known is that of the Rav Chayim No'eh and Chazon Ish.
See also Rabbi Chaim P. Benish’s “Midos V'Shiurei
Torah” where he brings an alternative view in understand-
ing the Rambam and therefore suggests that the etsba, ac-
cording to the Rambam, is 1.9–1.92 cm (0.748–0.756 in).
This would affect the other measurements in the follow-
ing ways: Tefah 7.6–7.68 cm (2.99–3.02 in); Zeret 22.8–
23.04 cm (8.98–9.07 in); Amah 45.6–46.08 cm (17.95–
18.14 in).
Alternatively, according to some early authorities a zeret
is two tefahim instead of three.
1.1.2 Talmudic additions
To the somewhat simple system of distance, the Talmud
adds a few more units, namely the double palm (Hebrew:
‫,חסיט‬ hasit), the pace (Hebrew: ‫,פסיעה‬ pesiah), the cord
(Hebrew: ‫,חבל‬ hebel), the stadium (Hebrew: ‫,ריס‬ ris),
the day’s journey (Hebrew:‫יום‬ ‫,דרך‬ derekh yom), and
an undetermined quantity named the garmida (Hebrew:
‫.)גרמידא‬ The stadium appears to have been adopted from
Persia, while the double palm seems to have been derived
from the Greek dichas.[1]
The relationship between four
of these additional units and the earlier system is as fol-
lows:
• 1 double palm (hasit) = 2 palms (tefah)
• 1 pace (pesiah) = 1 ell (amah)
• 1 stadium (ris) = 1600 palms (2/15 mile) (tefah)
• 1 day’s journey (derekh yom) = 10 parasangs
(parasa)
The other two additional units are more ambiguous. The
garmida is mentioned repeatedly but without its size be-
ing indicated; it is even sometimes treated as an area,[6]
and as a volume.[7]
The cord is given two different defi-
nitions; in the Mishnah it is 50 ells,[8]
but in the Gemara
it is only 4 ells.[9]
1.2 Area
The Israelite system of measuring area was fairly infor-
mal; the biblical text merely measures areas by describ-
ing how much land could be sown with a certain volume
measure of seed, for example the amount of land able to
be sown with 2 seahs of barley.[10]
The closest thing to a
formal area unit was the yoke (Hebrew semed)[11]
(some-
times translated as acre), which referred to the amount
of land that a pair of yoked oxen could plough in a single
day; in Mesopotamia the standard estimate for this was
6480 square cubits, which is roughly equal to a third of
an acre.[5]
“Searah” (Hebrew ) - (pl. searot) hair, square 1/36 of a
giris
“Adashah” (Hebrew ) - (pl. adashot) lentils, 1/9 of a giris
“Geris” (Hebrew ) - (pl. ) split bean, a circle with a di-
ameter of about 20mm
“Amah al amah” (Hebrew ) - (pl. ) square cubit 2,304
cm2
to 3,318 cm2
“Beit rova” (Hebrew ) - (pl. ) space for sowing ¼ of a kav
24m2
to 34.56m2
“Beit seah” (Hebrew ) - (pl. ) space for sowing a seah
576 m2
to 829.4m2
“Beit kor” (Hebrew ) - (pl. ) space for sowing a kor
17,280m2
to 24,883m2
1.3 Volume and capacity
The Israelite system of powder/liquid volume measure-
ments corresponds exactly with the Babylonian system.
Unlike the Egyptian system, which has units for multi-
ples of 1, 10, 20, 40, 80, and 160 of the base unit, the
Babylonian system is founded on multiples of 6 and 10,
namely units of 1, 12, 24, 60, 72 (60 plus 12), 120, and
720.[1]
The basic unit was the mina, which was defined
as 1 sixtieth of a maris, which itself was the quantity of
water equal in weight to a light royal talent; the maris was
thus equal to about 30.3 litres, and hence the mina is equal
to about 0.505 litres.[1]
In the Israelite system, the term
log is used in place of the Babylonian mina but the mea-
surement is otherwise the same.[1]
Although they both use the log as the basic unit, the Is-
raelites differentiated their systems of volume measure
between dry and liquid states.
1.3.1 Dry measure
For dry measurements, the smallest unit was the egg (He-
brew: Bezah), then came the Log (‫,)לג‬ Kav (‫,)קב‬ Se'ah
(‫,)סאה‬ Ephah (‫,)איפה‬ Letek (‫,)לתך‬ and Kor (‫.)כור‬ The
Letek is mentioned only once in the masoretic text, and

1.4. WEIGHT AND COINS 3
the Septuagint translates it by the Greek term nebeloinou,
meaning wine-skin. These measurements were related as
follows:
• 6 Eggs (Bezah) = 1 Log
• 4 Log = 1 Kav
• 6 Kav = 1 Se'ah
• 3 Se'ah = 1 Ephah
• 5 Ephah = 1 Letek
• 2 Letek = 1 Kor
The smaller unit the Ke'zayit is, by different sources, con-
sidered equal to 1/2 a bezah, 1/3 of a bezah, or not di-
rectly related to the other units of volume.
The Omer, which the Torah mentions as being equal to
one tenth of an Ephah,[12]
is an awkward fit into this sys-
tem (it constitutes 1.8 Kabs and 0.3 Se'ah), and it is evi-
dent that it wasn't originally present, but is instead a result
of decimalisation, perhaps under the influence of Egypt
or Assyria, which both had decimal systems.[1][13]
In the
Torah, it is the Priestly Code which refers to the Omer,
rather than to the Se'ah or Kav;[1]
textual scholars view
the Priestly Code as one of the later sources of the Torah,
dating from a period when Egypt and Assyria had much
more direct influence over Israel.[14]
However, the Omer
is mentioned as a tenth of an ephah in Exodus 16:36, be-
fore the Priestly code.
According to Ezekiel 45:11 both the ephah and the bath
were one tenth an omer (‫הומר‬ HOMeR). Boadt notes the
word homer comes from the Hebrew for an “ass.” “It is
one ass-load.”[15]
Use of the Omer to collect manna is explained by
Egyptian influence.
1.3.2 Liquid measure
For liquid measure, the main units were the Log, Hin, and
Bath, related as follows:
• 1 Hin = 12 Logs
• 1 Bath = 6 Hin
The Bath, equal to 72 Logs, is thus the liquid equivalent
of the Ephah, also equal to 72 Logs. The liquid equivalent
of the omer, which appears without a special name, only
being described as the tenth part of a bath,[16]
is as much
of an awkward fit as the omer itself, and is only mentioned
by Ezekiel and the Priestly Code; scholars attribute the
same explanation to it as with the Omer — that it arose as
a result of decimalisation.[1]
The Omer is mentioned as
a tenth of an ephah in Exodus 16:36, before the Priestly
code.
According to Herbert G. May, chief editor of two classic
Bible-related reference books, the bath may be archaeo-
logically determined to have been about 5.75 gallons (22
liters) from a study of jar remains marked 'bath' and 'royal
bath' from Tell Beir Mirsim.[17]
1.3.3 Talmudic additions
In Talmudic times many more measures of capacity were
used, mostly of foreign origin, especially from Persia and
Greece, which had both held dominance over Judea by
the time the Talmud came to be created. The defini-
tions for many of these are disputed. Those that were
certain (disputed) fractions of the Kab include, in increas-
ing order of size, ukla (‫,)עוכלא‬ tuman (‫,)תומן‬ and kapiza
(‫.)קפיזא‬ Those that were larger, in increasing order of
size, included the modius (‫,)מודיא‬ geriwa (geriwa), garab
(‫.)גרב‬ Of unidentified size were the ardaba (‫,)אדרב‬ the
kuna (‫,)כונא‬ and the qometz (‫;)קמץ‬ the latter two of these
were said to equate to a handful.
1.4 Weight and coins
The Babylonian system, which the Israelites followed,
measured weight with units of the talent, mina, shekel
(Hebrew: ‫,)שקל‬ and giru, related to one another as fol-
lows:
• 1 shekel = 24 giru
• 1 mina = 60 shekels
• 1 talent = 60 mina
In the Israelite system, the ratio of the giru to the shekel
was altered, and the talent, mina, and giru, later went by
the names kikkar (‫,)ככר‬ litra, and gerah (‫,)גרה‬ respec-
tively; litra is a loan word from Latin - libra, meaning
pound.[5]
The Israelite system was thus as follows:
• 1 shekel = 20 gerah
• 1 litra = 60 shekels
• 1 kikkar = 60 litra
There were, however, different versions of the tal-
ent/kikkar in use; a royal and a common version. In addi-
tion, each of these forms had a heavy and a light version,
with the heavy version being exactly twice the weight of
the lighter form; the light royal talent was often repre-
sented in the form of a duck, while the heavy royal talent
often took the form of a lion. The mina for the heavy
royal talent weighed 1.01 kg, while that for the heavy
common talent weighed only 0.9824 kg; accordingly, the
heavy common shekel would be about 16 g.[1]
According
to Josephus, it was the heavy common talent, and its mina

and shekel, that was the normal measure of weight in Syria
and Judea;[18]
Josephus also mentions an additional unit
– the bekah – which was exactly half a shekel.
Gradually, the system was reformed, perhaps under the
inﬂuence of Egypt, so that a mina was worth only 50
shekels rather than 60; to achieve this, the shekel re-
mained the same weight, while the weight of the stan-
dard mina was reduced. Moses mandated that the stan-
dard coinage would be in single shekels of silver; thus
each shekel coin would constitute about 0.51 troy ounces
of pure silver. In Judea, the Biblical shekel was ini-
tially worth about 3⅓ denarii, but over time the measure-
ment had enlarged so that it would be worth exactly four
denarii.[1]
• “Pruta” (pl. prutot) - a copper coin (Hebrew ‫פרוטה‬
prutah) - 0.022 g
• “Issar” (pl. issarim) - a Roman copper coin (As) -
0.177 g
• “Pundion” (pl. pundionim) - a Roman copper coin
(Dupondius) - 0.35 g
• “Ma'ah” (pl. ma'ot = “money”) - a silver coin, (He-
brew gerah) - 0.7 g
In Hebrew it is called a Gerah (as in twenty
gerah is a Shekel, Exodus); (litt. grain; also
gram derives from it).
• “Dinar” (pl. Dinarim) - a Roman silver coin
(Denarius (pl. denarii, (Hebrew Zuz, pl. zuzim) -
4.25 g
In Hebrew, a silver Dinar was called a “Zuz” to
avoid confusion with the gold Dinar.
• “Shekel” (pl. shkalim) - a Jewish silver coin (Shekel,
(Hebrew ‫)שקל‬ - 14 g
Moses instituted it as the standard coinage.
From 8.5 to 16 grams (Chazon Ish) or .51 troy
ounces of pure silver.
• Main article: Shekel
• “Sela” (pl. selo'im) - a silver coin (Tetradrachm) -
17 g (a sela equals two shekel).
The Thaler, Taler and ﬁnally the Dollar derive
from it.
• Dinar (pl. dinarim or dinerei) - a Roman gold coin
(Aureus) (Hebrew “Dinerei zahav”) - 8 g of gold
(106.25 g in silver)
• “Minah” (pl. ) - a silver coin - 425 g - equivalent
with maneh which is 100 zuzim.
• “Kikar” (pl. kikarim) - as a gold weight, equivalent
to a talent of gold - 3000 shekel
1.5 Time
1.5.1 Year
Main article: Hebrew calendar
The Hebrew calendar is a lunar calendar synchronised
with the seasons by intercalation, i.e. a lunisolar calendar.
There are thus 12 ordinary months plus an extra month
that is added in (intercalated) every few years. Some
months vary in length by a day, as well. The months orig-
inally had very descriptive names, such as Ziv (meaning
light) and Ethanim (meaning strong, perhaps in the sense
of strong rain - i.e. monsoon), with Canaanite origins, but
after the Babylonian captivity, the names were changed to
the ones used by the Babylonians. With the Babylonian
naming, the intercalary month has no special name of its
own, and is merely referred to as Adar I, the following
month being Adar/Adar II (in the Babylonian calendar,
it was Adar II that was considered to be the intercalary
month).
1.5.2 Week
The Israelite month was clearly broken up into weeks,
since the Genesis creation (and biblical references to
Shabbat) describe a seven-day week. The seven-day cy-
cle is not seen as a cycle in nature and is rather a custom
biblically originating from Genesis 1:3-2:3.
The modern Hebrew calendar follows a seven-day weekly
cycle, which runs concurrently but independently of the
monthly and annual cycles. The origin of Hebrew seven
day week and the Sabbath, as well as the true meaning
of the name, is uncertain. The earliest Biblical passages
which mention it (Exodus. 20 v. 10; and 24 v. 21; Deut.
5. v. 14; Amos 8 v. 5) presuppose its previous exis-
tence, and analysis of all the references to it in the canon
makes it plain that its observance was neither general nor
altogether spontaneous in either pre-exilic or post-exilic
Israel. It was probably originally connected in some man-
ner with the cult of the moon, as indeed is suggested by
the frequent mention of Sabbath and New-Moon festivals
in the same sentence (Isa. 1 v. 13; Amos 8 v. 5; H Kings
6 v. 23).
The names for the days of the week are simply the day
number within the week. In Hebrew, these names may
be abbreviated using the numerical value of the Hebrew
letters, for example “Day 1, or Yom Rishon”.

1.7. REFERENCES 5
1.5.3 Day
In addition to “tomorrow” (machar) and “yesterday” (et-
mol), the Israelite vocabulary also contained a distinct
word for two days ago (shilshom). Maḥaratayim (“the
day after tomorrow”), is a dual form of machar, liter-
ally “two tomorrows”. In the Bible, the day is divided
up vaguely, with descriptions such as midnight, and half-
night.[19][20][21]
Nevertheless, it is clear that the day was
considered to start at dusk.
By Talmudic times, the Babylonian system of dividing
up the day (from sunset to sunrise, and sunrise to sunset),
into hours (Hebrew: ‫,שעה‬ sha'ah), parts (Hebrew: ‫,חלק‬
heleq, plural halaqim), and moments (Hebrew: ‫,רגע‬
rega, plural rega'im), had been adopted; the relationship
of these units was:
• 1 part (heleq) = 76 moments (rega'im) (each mo-
ment, rega, is 0.04386 of a second; 22.8 rega'im is
1 second)
• 1 hour (sha'ah) = 1080 parts (halaqim) (each heleq
is 3⅓ seconds)
• 1 day = 24 hours (sha'ah)
To complicate matters, Halakha states that there is always
12 hours between sunrise and sunset, so these measure-
ments are averages. For example, in the summer, a day
time hour is much longer than a night time hour.
1.6 See also
• Bible code, a purported set of secret messages en-
coded within the Torah.
• Chol HaMoed, the intermediate days during
Passover and Sukkot.
• Chronology of the Bible
• Counting of the Omer
• Gematria, Jewish system of assigning numerical
value to a word or phrase.
• Hebrew calendar
• Hebrew numerals
• Jewish and Israeli holidays 2000–2050
• Lag BaOmer, 33rd day of counting the Omer.
• Notarikon, a method of deriving a word by using
each of its initial letters.
• Sephirot, the 10 attributes/emanations found in
Kabbalah.
• Signiﬁcance of numbers in Judaism
• Weekly Torah portion, division of the Torah into 54
portions.
1.7 References
• This article incorporates text from a publication
now in the public domain: Easton, Matthew George
(1897). "article name needed
". Easton’s Bible Dictionary
(New and revised ed.). T. Nelson and Sons.
• This article incorporates text from a publication now
in the public domain: “Weights and Measures”.
Jewish Encyclopedia. 1901–1906.
[1] Jewish Encyclopedia
[2] Ezekiel 40:5
[3] Ezekiel 43:13
[4] 2 Chronicles 3:3
[5] Peake’s commentary on the Bible
[6] Baba Batra, 27a
[7] Erubin, 14b
[8] Erubin, 5:4
[9] Erubin, 58b
[10] 1 Kings 18:32
[11] Isaiah 5:10
[12] Exodus 16:36
[13] Cheyne and Black, Encyclopedia Biblica
[14] Richard Elliott Friedman, Who wrote the Bible?
[15] The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, Brown, Fitzmyer,
and Murphy, Printice Hall, 1990 ISMN 0-12-614934, p.
327
[16] Ezekiel 45:14
[17] The Interpreter’s Bible, Buttrick ed., Abingden Press,
Nashville, 1956, volume VI, p. 317 (p155 in the Inter-
net Archive copy of the text)
[18] Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, volume 14, 106
[19] Exodus 12:29
[20] Judges 16:3
[21] Psalms 119:62)
1.8 Further reading
• Frank, Rabbi Yitzḥak (1991). The Practical Talmud
Dictionary. Jerusalem, Israel: The Ariel Institute.
ISBN 978-0-87306-588-7.

1.9 External links
• Jewish Encyclopedia: Weights and Measures
• Ka-Zait
• Summary table of Biblical & Talmudic units of
measurement by Ronnie Figdor

Chapter 2
Hand (unit)
For other uses, see hand (disambiguation).
For the handbreadth or handsbreadth, see Palm (length).
The hand is a non-SI unit of measurement of length stan-
The hand (2) and palm (3) measurements shown, among others,
on a human hand
dardized to 4 inches (101.6 mm). It is used to measure the
height of horses in some English-speaking countries, in-
cluding Australia,[1]
Canada, the Republic of Ireland, the
United Kingdom and the United States.[2]
With origins in
ancient Egypt, it was originally based on the breadth of
a human hand. The adoption of the international inch in
1959 allowed for a standardized imperial form and a met-
ric conversion. It may be abbreviated to “h” or “hh”.[3]
Although measurements between whole hands are usu-
ally expressed in what appears to be decimal format, the
subdivision of the hand is not decimal but is in base 4,
so subdivisions after the radix point are in quarters of a
hand, which are inches.[2]
Thus, 62 inches is fifteen and
a half hands, or 15.2 hh (normally said as “fifteen-two”,
or occasionally in full as “fifteen hands two inches”)[2]
2.1 Terminology
“Hands” may be abbreviated to “h”, or “hh”. The “hh”
form is sometimes interpreted as standing for “hands
high.”[4][5][6]
When spoken aloud, hands are stated by
numbers, 15.0 is “fifteen hands”, 15.2 is alternately
“fifteen-two” or “fifteen hands, two inches,” and so
on.[5][6][7]
To convert inches to hands, the number in inches is di-
vided by four, then the remainder is added after the radix
point. Thus, a horse that measures 60 inches is 15 hands
high (15 x 4 = 60) and a horse halfway between 15 and
16 hands is 15.2 hands, or 62 inches tall (15 x 4 + 2 =
62)[5][7]
Because the subdivision of a hand is a base 4
system, a horse 64 inches high is 16.0 hands high, not
15.4.[2]
A designation of “15.5 hands” is not halfway be-
tween 15 and 16 hands, but rather reads 15 hands and
five inches, an impossibility in a base 4 radix numbering
system, where a hand is four inches.[8]
2.2 History
2.2.1 Ancient Egypt
Main article: Ancient Egyptian units of measurement
The hand, sometimes also called a handbreadth or hands-
Detail of the cubit rod in the Museo Egizio of Turin, showing
digit, palm, hand and fist lengths
breadth, is an anthropic unit, originally based on the
7

8 CHAPTER 2. HAND (UNIT)
breadth of a male human hand, either with or without the
thumb,[2]
or on the height of a clenched fist.[9]
On surviving Ancient Egyptian cubit-rods, the royal cu-
bit is divided into seven palms of four digits or fingers
each.[10]
Five digits are equal to a hand, with thumb; and
six to a closed fist.[11]
The royal cubit measured approxi-
mately 525 mm,[12]
so the length of the ancient Egyptian
hand was about 94 mm.
2.2.2 Biblical use
In Biblical exegesis the hand measurement, as for ex-
ample in the Vision of the Temple, Authorized Ver-
sion Ezekiel 40:43, is usually taken to be palm or hand-
breadth, and in modern translations may be rendered as
“handbreadth”[13]
or “three inches”.[14]
2.2.3 Britain
Main article: English units
The hand is a traditional unit in Britain.[2]
It was stan-
dardised at four inches by a statute of King Henry VIII
in 1541,[15]
but some confusion between the various
types of hand measurement, and particularly between the
hand and the handsbreadth, appears to have persisted.
Phillips’s dictionary of 1706 gives four inches for the
length of the handful or hand, and three inches for the
handsbreadth;[16]
Mortimer gives the same, three inches
for the Hand’s-breadth, and four for the “Handful, or sim-
ply, Hand”,[15]
but adds “The hand among horse-dealers,
&c. is four-fingers’ breadth, being the fist clenched,
whereby the height of a horse is measured”, thus equat-
ing “hand” with both the palm and the fist. Similarly,
Wright’s 1831 translation of Buffon mentions “A hand
breadth (palmus), the breadth of the four fingers of the
hand, or three inches”,[17]
but the Encyclopædia Perthen-
sis of 1816 gives under Palm (4): “A hand, or measure of
lengths comprising three inches”.[18]
2.3 Use in measuring horses
Today the hand is used to measure the height of horses,[2]
ponies, and other equines. It is used in the U.S., and also
in some other nations that use the metric system, such as
Canada, Ireland and the UK. In other parts of the world,
including continental Europe, and in FEI-regulated inter-
national competition, horses are measured in metric units,
usually metres or centimetres. In South Africa, measure-
ments may be given in both hands and centimetres.[2]
while in Australia, the equestrian regulations stipulate
that both measurements are to be given.[19]
In those countries where hands are the usual unit for mea-
suring horse height, inches rather than hands are com-
monly used in the measurement of miniature horses,
miniature ponies,[20]
miniature mules,[21]
donkeys,[22]
and Shetland ponies.[23]
A horse is measured from the ground to the top of the
highest non-variable point of the skeleton, the withers.[2]
For official measurement, the spinous process of the fifth
thoracic vertebra may be identified by palpation, and
marked if necessary.[24]
Miniature horses, but not minia-
ture ponies, are measured at the base of the last true hairs
of the mane rather than at the withers.[20]
For international competition regulated by the Fédération
Equestre Internationale (FEI) and for USEF competition
in the US, a horse can be measured with shoes on or off.
In the United Kingdom, official measurement of horses
is overseen by the Joint Measurement Board (JMB). For
JMB purposes, the shoes must be removed and the hooves
correctly prepared for shoeing prior to measurement.[24]
2.4 See also
• Anthropic units
• List of horse breeds
• List of unusual units of measurement
• Pony
• Span (unit)
2.5 References
[1] “Equestrian Australia Measuring Rules Effective 1 July
2008” (PDF). http://www.equestrian.org.au/''. Equestrian
Australia Limited. 2008. Retrieved 17 August 2014.
[2] “The “Hand” Measurement for Horses”. Ministry of Agri-
culture, Food and Rural Affairs, Ontario, Canada. Re-
trieved June 2011.
[3] Brander, Michael (1971). The Complete Guide to Horse-
manship. London: A & C Black. p. 444. ISBN 0-7136-
1701-2. p.409
[4] How big is a hand?
[5] Hand Conversion
[6] How to Measure a Horse | Horse Height and Weight
[7] Shlei, “Just how tall is a hand?" Measuring Equines, The
American Donkey and Mule Society, accessdate = 2007-
05-19
[8] Measure Horse Height Accurately
[9] Good, J.M., O. Gregory, N. Bosworth (1813). Pantologia:
A new cyclopaedia, comprehending a complete series of es-
says, treatises, and systems, alphabetically arranged; with
a general dictionary of arts, sciences and words, the whole
presenting a distinct survey of human genius, learning and

2.5. REFERENCES 9
industry; illustrated with engravings, those on history being
from original drawings by Edwards and others. London:
Kearsley. “Hand (2)"
[10] Selin, Helaine, ed. (1997). Encyclopaedia of the History
of Science, Technology and Medicine in non-Western Cul-
tures. Dordrecht: Kluwer. ISBN 978-0-7923-4066-9.
[11] Clagett, Marshall (1999). Ancient Egyptian Science, A
Source Book. Volume 3: Ancient Egyptian Mathemat-
ics. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. ISBN
978-0-87169-232-0.
[12] Lepsius, Richard (1865). Die altaegyptische Elle und ihre
Eintheilung (in German). Berlin: Dümmler.
[13] Ezekiel 40:43 New International Version
[14] Ezekiel 40:43 New Century Version
[15] Mortimer, Thomas (1810). A general dictionary of com-
merce, trade, and manufactures: exhibiting their present
state in every part of the world; and carefully comp. from
the latest and best authorities. London: R. Phillips.
[16] Phillips, Edward, John Kersey (ed.) (1706) The new
world of words: or, Universal English dictionary. Con-
taining an account of the original or proper sense, and
various significations of all hard words derived from other
languages. Together with a brief and plain explication of
all terms relating to any of the arts and sciences; to which
is added, the interpretation of proper names The sixth edi-
tion, revised ... With the addition of near twenty thousand
words London
[17] Le Clerc, George Louis, Comte de Buffon (1831). A nat-
ural history of the globe: of man, of beasts, birds, fishes,
reptiles, insects and plants Volume 5. John Wright (trans.).
Boston; Philadelphia: Gray and Bowen; Thomas Desilver,
Jr.
[18] [n.a.] (1816). Encyclopædia Perthensis; or Universal Dic-
tionary of the Arts, Sciences, Literature, etc., intended to
supersede the use of other books of reference, Volume 16.
[19] “Equestrian Australia Measuring Rules Effective 1 July
2008” (PDF). http://www.equestrian.org.au/''. Equestrian
Australia Limited. 2008. Retrieved 17 August 2014.
[20] “Show Rules. Standards of Excellence: Miniature &
Small Horse”. Australian Miniature Horse & Pony Reg-
istry. Retrieved July 2011.
[21] “About Miniature Mules”. The American Miniature Mule
Society. Retrieved July 2011.
[22] “The Donkey”. Government of Alberta: Agriculture and
Rural Development. Retrieved July 2011.
[23] Edwards, Elwyn Hartley (1994). The Encyclopedia of the
Horse (1st ed.). London: Dorling Kindersley. ISBN 0-
7513-0115-9. p.176
[24] “JMB measurement”. The Joint Measurement Board. Re-
trieved June 2011.

Chapter 3
Span (unit)
Some hand-based measurements, including the great span (4)
A span is the distance measured by a human hand, from
the tip of the thumb to the tip of the little finger. In
ancient times, a span was considered to be half a cubit.
Sometimes the distinction is made between the great
span (thumb to little finger) and little span (index fin-
ger to little finger).[1][2]
3.1 History
Ancient Greek texts show that the span was used as a fixed
measure in ancient Greece since at least archaic period.
The word spithame (Greek: "σπιθαμή"), “span”,[3]
is at-
tested in the work of Herodotus[4]
in the 5th century BC;
however, the span was used in Greece long before that,
since the word trispithamos (Greek: "τρισπίθαμος"),
“three spans long”,[5]
occurs as early as the 8th century
BC in Hesiod.[6]
3.2 Size of the span
3.2.1 English usage
See also: English unit
1 span = 9 inches[7]
= 0.2286 m
3.2.2 Arabic usage
In Arabic, the analogue of the great span is the šibr
(‫.)شبر‬ It is used in Modern Standard Arabic and
classical Arabic, as well as in modern-day dialects.
3.2.3 Slavic usage
In Slavic languages, the analogue of the span is various
words derived from Proto-Slavic *pędь (Bulgarian педя,
Polish piędź, Russian пядь, Slovenian ped, etc.). In vari-
ous Slavic languages it is the distance from the tip of the
thumb to the tip of the little finger or index finger. For ex-
ample, Slovenian velika ped = great span (23 cm), mala
ped = little span (9.5 cm); Russian piad = 4 vershoks =
17.8 cm. See Obsolete Russian weights and measures.
3.2.4 African usage
In Swahili, the equivalent of the great span (thumb to little
finger) is the shubiri or shibiri while the little span (thumb
to forefinger) is the morita or futuri.[8]
3.2.5 Hungarian usage
In Hungarian, the span, or arasz, is occasionally used as
an informal measure and occurs in two varieties: mea-
sured between the tips of the extended thumb and index
finger, it is kis arasz (the “small arasz”); between the tips
of the thumb and little finger, it is nagy arasz (the “large
10

3.5. REFERENCES 11
arasz”). The term "arasz,” used by itself without a modi-
fier, is usually understood as referring to the “large arasz,”
i.e., to the “span.”
3.2.6 Asian usage
In Hindi-Urdu and other languages of Northern India
and Pakistan, the span is commonly used as an infor-
mal measure and called bālisht (Urdu: ‫,بالشت‬ Hindi:
बालिश्त).[9]
In Malay, it is called “jengkal”.
In Nepal, where this method of measurement is still used
in informal context, a span is called Bhitta.
In Tamil, it is called "saaN".
3.2.7 Mongolian usage
It’s commonly used as traditional and informal measure.
In Mongolia, the span is called as tuu (төө). Depending
on the use of index or middle finger and the placement of
the thumb, the span is named differently as tuu (төө) and
mukhar tuu (мухар төө) etc.
3.2.8 Portuguese usage
Main article: Portuguese customary units
The old Portuguese customary unit analogue to the span
was the palmo de craveira or simply palmo.
1 palmo de craveira = 8 polegadas (Portuguese inches)
[10]
= 1/5 varas (Portuguese yards) [10]
= 0.22 m [10]
3.3 See also
• Anthropic units
• Hand (unit)
• List of unusual units of measurement
• Units of measure
3.4 Notes
[1] Edwin Pliny Seaver (1895). New Franklin arithmetic: Sec-
ond book. Butler, Sheldon & co. p. 384. Retrieved 27
January 2012.
[2] Daniel O'Sullivan (1872). The principles of arithmetic.
Thom. p. 69. Retrieved 27 January 2012.
[3] σπιθαμή, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-
English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
[4] Herodotus, The Histories, 2.106, on Perseus Digital Li-
brary
[5] τρισπίθαμος, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A
Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus Digital Library
[6] Hesiod, Works and Days, 426, on Perseus Digital Library
[7] Isaiah Steen (1846). A treatise on mental arithmetic, in
theory and practice. p. 9. Retrieved 27 January 2012.
[8] Arthur Cornwallis Madan (1903). Swahili-English dictio-
nary. Clarendon press. p. 78. Retrieved 27 January 2012.
[9] Norman Lockyer, “Nature,” Nature Publishing Group,
Macmillan Journals Ltd., 1922.
[10] Emilio Achilles Monteverde (1861). Manual Encyclope-
dico para Uzo das Escolas de Instrucção Primaria. Im-
prensa Nacional, Lisboa.
3.5 References
• Lyle V. Jones. 1971. “The Nature of Measure-
ment.” In: Robert L. Thorndike (ed.), Educational
Measurement. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American
Council on Education, pp. 335–355.

Chapter 4
Cubit
For other uses, see Cubit (disambiguation).
The cubit is an ancient unit based on the forearm length
Egyptian cubit rod in the Liverpool World Museum
Cubit rod of Maya, 1336-1327 BC (Eighteenth Dynasty)
from the middle finger tip to the elbow bottom. Lengths
ranged between 38 to 51.8 cm (15.0 to 20.4 in) during
the ancient Egyptian to Roman empires. Cubits of vari-
ous lengths were employed in many parts of the world in
antiquity, during the Middle Ages and as recently as Early
Modern Times. The term is still used in hedge laying, the
length of the forearm being frequently used to determine
the interval between stakes placed within the hedge.[1]
4.1 Etymology
The English word “cubit” comes from the Latin noun cu-
bitum “elbow”, from the verb cubo, cubare, cubui, cubi-
tum “to lie down”,[2]
from which also comes the adjective
"recumbent".[3]
4.2 Ancient Egyptian royal cubit
The Ancient Egyptian royal cubit (meh niswt) is the ear-
liest attested standard measure. Cubit rods were used for
the measurement of length. A number of these rods have
survived: two are known from the tomb of Maya, the trea-
surer of Tutankhamun, in Saqqara; another was found in
the tomb of Kha (TT8) in Thebes. Fourteen such rods,
including one double cubit rod, were described and com-
pared by Lepsius in 1865.[4]
These cubit rods range from
523 to 529 mm (20.6 to 20.8 in) in length, and are divided
into seven palms; each palm is divided into four fingers
and the fingers are further subdivided.[5][4][6]
Cubit rod from the Turin Museum.
Early evidence for the use of this royal cubit comes from
the early dynastic period: on the Palermo stone, the flood
level of the Nile river during the reign of the Pharaoh
Djer is given as measuring 6 cubits and 1 palm.[5]
Use of
the royal cubit is also known from Old Kingdom archi-
tecture, from at least as early as the construction of the
Step Pyramid of Djoser in around 2,700 BC.[7]
4.3 The Sumerian or Nippur cubit
The Nippur cubit-rod in the Archeological Museum of Istanbul,
Turkey
In 1916, during the last years of the Ottoman Empire and
in the middle of World War I, the German assyriologist
12

4.10. REFERENCES 13
Eckhard Unger found a copper-alloy bar while excavat-
ing at Nippur. The bar dates from c. 2650 BC and Unger
claimed it was used as a measurement standard. This ir-
regularly formed and irregularly marked graduated rule
supposedly deﬁned the Sumerian cubit as about 518.6
mm (20.42 in).[8]
4.4 Biblical cubit
The Near Eastern or Biblical cubit is usually estimated as
approximately 46 cm (18 in).[9]
4.5 Ancient Greece
The ancient Greek cubit, called a pēchys (πῆχυς), mea-
sured approximately 462.4 mm (18.20 in). The short
forearm cubit from the wrist to the elbow, called the
pygmē (πυγμή), measured approximately 345.4 mm
(13.60 in).[10]
4.6 Ancient Rome
In ancient Rome, according to Vitruvius, a cubit was
equal to 1 1/2 Roman feet or 6 palm width -which is 443.8
mm (17.47 in).[11]
4.7 Other systems
Other measurements based on the length of the fore-
arm include some lengths of ell, the Chinese chi, the
Japanese shaku, the Indian hasta, the Thai sok, the Tamil
"(Mulzham)", the unit of measurement and the Khmer
hat.
4.8 Cubit arm in heraldry
A cubit arm in heraldry may be dexter or sinister. It may
be vested (with a sleeve) and may be shown in various
positions, most commonly erect, but also fesswise (hori-
zontal), bendwise (diagonal) and is often shown grasping
objects.[12]
It is most often used erect as a crest, for ex-
ample by the families of Poyntz of Iron Acton, Rolle of
Stevenstone and Turton.
4.9 See also
• Ancient Egyptian units of measurement
• Ancient Mesopotamian units of measurement
A heraldic cubit arm, dexter, vested and erect
• Biblical and Talmudic units of measurement
• History of measurement
• List of obsolete units of measurement
• Qubit
• System of measurement
• Units of measurement
4.10 References
[1] Hart, Sarah. “The Green Man”. http://www.
shropshirehedgelaying.co.uk/''. Oliver Liebscher.
Retrieved 29 October 2014.
[2] Cassell’s Latin Dictionary
[3] Oxford English Dictionary, Second edition, 1989; online
version September 2011. s.v. "cubit"
[4] Richard Lepsius (1865). Die altaegyptische Elle und ihre
Eintheilung (in German). Berlin: Dümmler. p. 14–18.
[5] Marshall Clagett (1999). Ancient Egyptian science, a
Source Book. Volume Three: Ancient Egyptian Mathemat-
ics. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. ISBN
978-0-87169-232-0. p.
[6] Arnold Dieter (1991). Building in Egypt: pharaonic stone
masonry. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-
19-506350-9. p.251.

14 CHAPTER 4. CUBIT
[7] Jean Philippe Lauer (1931). "Étude sur Quelques Mon-
uments de la IIIe
Dynastie (Pyramide à Degrés de
Saqqarah)". Annales du Service des Antiquités de L'Egypte
IFAO 31:60 p. 59
[8] Acta praehistorica et archaeologica Volumes 7–8.
Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und
Urgeschichte; Ibero-Amerikanisches Institut (Berlin,
Germany); Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz.
Berlin: Bruno Hessling Verlag, 1976. p. 49.
[9] W. Gunther Plaut, Bernard J. Bamberger, William
W. Hallo (eds.) (1981). The Torah. New York:
Union of American Hebrew Congregations. ISBN
9780807400555. Footnote to Gen. 6:15: “ﬁguring a cubit
to be about 18 inches”
[10] Anastylosis at Machaerus, Biblical Archeology Re-
view,Jan/Feb 2015, Vol. 41, No. 1, p. 56.
[11] H. Arthur Klein (1974). The Science of Measure-
ment: A Historical Survey. New York: Dover. ISBN
9780486258393. p. 68.
[12] Allcock, Hubert (2003). Heraldic design : its origins, an-
cient forms, and modern usage, with over 500 illustra-
tions. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications. p. 24. ISBN
048642975X.
4.11 Bibliography
• Arnold, Dieter (2003). The Encyclopaedia of An-
cient Egyptian Architecture. Taurus. ISBN 1-86064-
465-1.
• Petrie, Sir Flinders (1881). Pyramids and Temples
of Gizeh.
• Stone, Mark H., “The Cubit: A History and Mea-
surement Commentary”, Journal of Anthropology
doi:10.1155/2014/489757, 2014
4.12 External links
• Media related to Cubit arms at Wikimedia Com-
mons
• The dictionary deﬁnition of cubit at Wiktionary

Chapter 5
Stadion (unit)
“Stadia (unit of length)" redirects here. For the land
surveyor’s device, see Stadia rod. For other uses, see
Stadion (disambiguation).
The stadion (Greek: στάδιον;[1]
Latin: stadium), for-
merly also anglicized as stade, was an ancient Greek unit
of length, based on the length of a typical sports stadium
of the time. According to Herodotus, one stadion was
equal to 600 Greek feet (pous). However, the length of
the foot varied in diﬀerent parts of the Greek world, and
the length of the stadion has been the subject of argument
and hypothesis for hundreds of years.[2][3]
Various hypo-
thetical equivalent lengths have been proposed, and some
have been named.[4]
Among them are:
An empirical determination of the length of the sta-
dion was made by Lev Vasilevich Firsov, who compared
81 distances given by Eratosthenes and Strabo with the
straight-line distances measured by modern methods, and
averaged the results. He obtained a result of about 157.7
m.[2]
Which measure of the stadion is used can aﬀect the in-
terpretation of ancient texts. For example, the error
in the calculation of the circumference of the Earth by
Eratosthenes[9]
or Posidonius is dependent on which stade
is chosen to be appropriate.
5.1 See also
• Ancient Egyptian units of measurement
• Ancient Greek units of measurement#Length
• Stadia (disambiguation)
• Stadium (disambiguation)
5.2 References
[1] Στάδιον, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-
English Lexicon, on Perseus
[2] Donald Engels (1985). The Length of Eratosthenes’
Stade. American Journal of Philology 106 (3): 298–311.
doi:10.2307/295030 (subscription required).
[3] J. L. Berggren, Alexander Jones (2000). Ptolemy’s Ge-
ography: An Annotated Translation of the Theoretical
Chapters. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN
9780691010427.
[4] Edward Gulbekian (1987). The Origin and Value of the
Stadion Unit used by Eratosthenes in the Third Century
BC. Archive for History of Exact Sciences 37 (4): 359–
363. doi:10.1007/BF00417008. (subscription required).
[5] Hoyle, Fred Astronomy, Rathbone Books Limited, Lon-
don 1962 LC 62-14108
[6] C.F. Lehmann-Haupt (1929) “Stadion"; in August
Friedrich von Pauly (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der
classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart: Metzler;
cited in: Edward Gulbekian (1987). The Origin and Value
of the Stadion Unit used by Eratosthenes in the Third Cen-
tury BC. Archive for History of Exact Sciences 37 (4):
359–363. doi:10.1007/BF00417008. (subscription re-
quired).
[7] Otto Cuntz (1923). Die Geographie des Ptolemaeus: Gal-
liae, Germania, Raetia, Noricum, Pannoniae, Illyricum,
Italia (in German). Berlin: Weidmann. Cited by: Ed-
ward Gulbekian (1987). The Origin and Value of the Sta-
dion Unit used by Eratosthenes in the Third Century BC.
Archive for History of Exact Sciences 37 (4): 359–363.
doi:10.1007/BF00417008. (subscription required).
[8] D.R. Dicks (1960). The Geographical Fragments of Hip-
parchus. Edited with an Introduction and Commentary.
London: Athlone Press. Cited in: J. L. Berggren, Alexan-
der Jones (2000). Ptolemy’s Geography: An Anno-
tated Translation of the Theoretical Chapters. Princeton:
Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780691010427.
[9] Walkup, Newlyn (2005). “Eratosthenes and the Mystery
of the Stades”. The MAA Mathematical Sciences Digital
Library. Retrieved 2008-07-29.
15

Chapter 6
Mile
“Miles” redirects here. For other uses, see Mile (disam-
biguation) and Miles (disambiguation).
The mile is an English unit of length equal to 1,760
A milestone in Westminster showing the distance from
Knightsbridge to Hounslow and Hyde Park Corner in miles.
yards (1,610 m) and standardised as exactly 1.609344
kilometres by international agreement in 1959.
With qualifiers, “mile” is also used to describe or translate
a wide range of units derived from or roughly equivalent
to the Roman mile, such as the nautical mile (now 1.852
km exactly), the Italian mile (roughly 1.852 km), and the
Chinese mile (now 500 m exactly). The Romans divided
their mile into 5,000 feet but the greater importance of
furlongs in pre-modern England meant that the statute
mile was made equivalent to 5,280 feet or 1,760 yards
in 1593. This form of the mile then spread to the British-
colonized nations who continue to employ the mile. The
US Geological Survey now employs the metre for offi-
cial purposes but legacy data from its 1927 geodetic da-
tum has meant that a separate US survey mile (6336/₃₉₃₇
km) continues to see some use. While most countries
replaced the mile with the kilometre when switching to
the International System of Units, the international mile
continues to be used in some countries, such as Liberia,
Myanmar, the United Kingdom, the United States, and a
number of countries with less than a million inhabitants,
most of which are UK or US territories, or have close
historical ties with the UK or US.
The mile was usually abbreviated m. in the past but is
now written as mi. to avoid confusion with the SI metre.
Derived units such as miles per hour and miles per gallon,
however, continue to be universally abbreviated as mph,
mpg, and so on.
6.1 Name
The modern English word mile derives from Middle En-
glish myl and Old English mīl, which was cognate with all
other Germanic terms for “miles”. These derived from
apocopated forms of the Latin mīlia or mīllia, the plu-
ral of mīle or mīlle,[n 1]
literally “thousand” but used as
a clipped form of mīlle passus or passuum, the Roman
mile of one thousand paces.[1]
The present international mile is usually what is under-
stood by the unqualified term “mile”. When this distance
needs to be distinguished from the nautical mile, the in-
ternational mile may also be described as a “land mile”
or “statute mile”.[2]
In British English, the "statute mile"
may refer to the present international miles or to any other
form of English mile since the 1593 Act of Parliament
which set it as a distance of 1,760 yards. Under American
law, however, the “statute mile” refers to the US survey
mile.[3]
Foreign and historical units translated into En-
glish as miles usually employ a qualifier to describe the
kind of mile being used but this may be omitted if it
is obvious from the context, such as a discussion of the
2nd-century Antonine Itinerary describing its distances
in terms of “miles” rather than “Roman miles”.
The mile has been variously abbreviated—with and with-
out a trailing period—as m, M, ml, and mi. The
American National Institute of Standards and Technol-
16

6.2. HISTORICAL MILES 17
ogy now uses and recommends mi in order to avoid con-
fusion with the SI metre (m) and millilitre (mL).[4]
De-
rived units such as miles per hour and miles per gallon,
however, continue to be abbreviated in the United States,
United Kingdom, and Canada as mph, mpg, etc. rather
than mi/h or mi/gal.
6.2 Historical miles
The remains of the Golden Milestone, the zero mile marker of the
Roman road network, in the Roman Forum.
6.2.1 Roman mile
The Roman mile (mille passus, lit. “thousand-pace";
abbr. m.p.; also mille passuum[n 2]
and mille) consisted of
a thousand paces of two steps each. The ancient Romans,
marching their armies through uncharted territory, would
often push a carved stick in the ground after each 1000
paces. Well fed and harshly driven Roman legionaries
in good weather thus created longer miles. The distance
was indirectly standardised by Agrippa's establishment of
a standard Roman foot (Agrippa’s own) in 29 BC,[6]
and
the definition of a pace as 5 feet. An Imperial Roman
mile thus denoted 5,000 Roman feet. Surveyors and spe-
cialized equipment such as the decempeda and dioptra
then spread its use.[7]
In modern times, Agrippa’s Impe-
rial Roman mile was empirically estimated to have been
about 1,481 metres (4,851 English feet or 1,617 English
yards) in length.[8]
In Hellenic areas of the Empire, the
Roman mile (Greek: μίλιον, mílion) was used beside the
native Greek units as equivalent to 8 stadia of 600 Greek
feet. The mílion continued to be used as a Byzantine unit
and was also used as the name of the zero mile marker
for the Byzantine Empire, the Milion, located at the head
of the Mese near Hagia Sophia.
The Roman mile also spread throughout Europe, with its
local variations giving rise to the different units below.
6.2.2 Italian mile
The Italian mile (miglio, pl. miglia) was traditionally
considered a direct continuation of the Roman mile,
equal to 1000 paces,[9]
although its absolute value over
time or between regions could vary greatly.[10]
It was of-
ten used in international contexts from the Middle Ages
into the 17th century[9]
and is thus also known as the “geo-
graphical mile”,[11]
although the geographical mile is now
a separate standard unit.
6.2.3 Arabic mile
Main article: Arabic mile
The Arabic mile (‫,الميل‬ al-mīl) was not the common
Arabic unit of length; instead, Arabs and Persians tra-
ditionally used the longer parasang or “Arabic league".
The Arabic mile was, however, used by medieval geog-
raphers and scientists and constituted a kind of precur-
sor to the nautical or geographical mile. It extended the
Roman mile to fit an astronomical approximation of 1
arcminute of latitude measured directly north-and-south
along a meridian. Although the precise value of the
approximation remains disputed, it was somewhere be-
tween 1.8 and 2.0 km.
6.2.4 British and Irish miles
English mile
See also: yard
The "old English mile" of the medieval and early mod-
ern periods varied but seems to have measured about 1.3
international miles (1.9 km).[12]
The English long contin-
ued the Roman computations of the mile as 5000 feet,
1000 paces, or 8 longer divisions, which they equated
with their "furrow's length” or furlong.[13]
The origins of English units are “extremely vague and
uncertain”,[14]
but seem to have been a combination of
the Roman system with native British and Germanic sys-
tems both derived from multiples of the barleycorn.[n 3]
Probably by the reign of Edgar in the 10th century, the
nominal prototype physical standard of English length
was an arm-length iron bar (a yardstick) held by the king
at Winchester;[15][17]
the foot was then ⅓ of its length.
Henry I was said to have made a new standard in 1101
based on his own arm.[14]
Following the issuance of the
Magna Carta, the barons of Parliament directed John and
his son to keep the king's standard measure (Mensura Do-
mini Regis) and weight at the Exchequer,[14]
which there-
after verified local standards until its abolishment in the
19th century. New brass standards are known to have
been constructed under Henry VII and Elizabeth I.[18]

18 CHAPTER 6. MILE
Arnold’s c. 1500 Customs of London recorded a mile
shorter than previous ones, coming to 0.947 international
miles or 1.524 km.[13]
The English statute mile was established by a Weights
and Measures Act of Parliament in 1593 during the reign
of Queen Elizabeth I. The act on the Composition of
Yards and Perches had shortened the length of the foot
and its associated measures, causing the two methods of
determining the mile to diverge.[19]
Owing to the impor-
tance of the surveyor’s rod in deeds and surveying un-
dertaken under Henry VIII,[20]
decreasing the length of
the rod by 1
⁄11 would have amounted to a significant
tax increase. Parliament instead opted to maintain the
mile of 8 furlongs (which were derived from the rod)
and to increase the number of feet per mile from the old
Roman value.[21]
The applicable passage of the statute
reads: “A Mile ſhall contain eight Furlongs, every Fur-
long forty Poles,[n 4]
and every Pole ſhall contain ſixteen
Foot and an half.”[22]
The statute mile therefore contained
5,280 feet or 1,760 yards.[13]
The distance was not uni-
formly adopted. Robert Morden had multiple scales on
his 17th-century maps which included continuing local
values: his map of Hampshire, for example, bore two dif-
ferent “miles” with a ratio of 1 : 1.23[24]
and his map of
Dorset had three scales with a ratio of 1 : 1.23 : 1.41.[25]
In both cases, the traditional local units remained longer
than the statute mile.
Welsh mile
The Welsh mile (milltir or milldir) was 3 miles and 1470
yards long (6.17 km). It comprised 9000 paces (cam),
each of 3 Welsh feet (troedfedd) of 9 inches,[26]
usually
reckoned as equivalent to the English inch. Along with
other Welsh units, it was said to have been codified un-
der Dyfnwal the Bald and Silent and retained unchanged
by Hywel the Good.[27]
Along with other Welsh units, it
was discontinued following the conquest of Wales by the
English under Edward I in the 13th century.
Scots mile
The Scots mile was longer than the English mile,[29]
as
mentioned by Robert Burns in the first verse of his poem
"Tam o' Shanter". It comprised 8 (Scots) furlongs divided
into 320 falls or faws (Scots rods).[30]
It varied from place
to place but the most accepted equivalencies are 1,976
Imperial yards or 1.81 km.[13][31]
It was legally abolished three times: first by an 1685 act
of the Scottish Parliament,[32]
again by the 1707 Treaty
of Union with England,[33]
and finally by the Weights and
Measures Act 1824.[29]
It had continued in use as a cus-
tomary unit through the 18th century but had become ob-
solete by its final abolition.
Edinburgh's "Royal Mile"—running from the castle to Holyrood
Abbey—is roughly a Scots mile long.[28]
Irish mile
Main article: Irish mile
The Irish mile (míle or míle Gaelach) measured 2240
yards: approximately 1.62 statute miles or 2.048
kilometres.[34]
It was used in Ireland from the 16th cen-
tury plantations until the 19th century, with residual use
into the 20th century. The units were based on "English
measure" but used a linear perch measuring 7 yards (6.4
m) as opposed to the English rod of 5.5 yards (5.0 m).
6.2.5 Other historical miles
• The German mile (Meile) was 24,000 German feet.
The standardised Austrian mile used in southern
Germany and the Austrian Empire was 7.586 km;
the Prussian mile used in northern Germany was
7.5325 km. Following its standardisation by Ole
Rømer in the late 17th century, the Danish mile
(mil) was precisely equal to the Prussian mile and
likewise divided into 24,000 feet.[35]
These were
sometimes treated as equivalent to 7.5 km. Earlier
values had varied: the Sjællandske miil, for instance,
had been 11.13 km. The Germans also used a longer
version of the geographical mile.
• The Hungarian mile (mérföld or magyar mérföld)
varied from 8.3790 km to 8.9374 km before being
standardised as 8.3536 km.
• The Scandinavian mile (mil) remains in common
use in Norway and Sweden, where it has meant pre-
cisely 10 km since metrication occurred in 1889.[35]
It is used in informal situations and in measure-
ments of fuel consumption, which are often given
as litres per mil. In formal situations (such as offi-
cial road signs) and where confusion may occur with
international miles, it is avoided in favour of kilome-
tres. The Swedish mile formerly varied by province

6.3. INTERNATIONAL MILE 19
Various historic miles and leagues from an 1848 German text-
book, given in feet, metres, and fractions of a meridian
from 6–14.485 km. It was standardised in 1649 as
36,000 Swedish feet or 10.687 km.[35]
Prior to met-
rication, the Norwegian mile had been 11.298 km.
(The traditional Finnish peninkulma was translated
as mil in Swedish and also set equal to 10 km dur-
ing metrication in 1887, but is much less commonly
used.)
• The Portuguese mile (milha) used in Portugal and
Brazil was 2.0873 km prior to metrication.[36]
• The Russian mile (миля or русская миля,
russkaya milya) was 7.468 km, divided into 7 versts.
• The Croatian mile (hrvatska milja), first devised
by the Jesuit Stjepan Glavač on a 1673 map, is the
length of an arc of the equator subtended by 1/₁₀° or
11.13 km exactly.[37]
The previous Croatian mile,
now known as the "ban mile” (banska milja), had
been the Austrian mile given above.[38]
6.3 International mile
The international mile is precisely equal to 1.609 344
km.[39]
It was established as part of the 1959 international
yard and pound agreement reached by the United States,
the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand,
and South Africa,[41]
which resolved small but measur-
able differences that had arisen from separate physical
standards each country had maintained for the yard.[42]
As with the earlier statute mile, it continues to comprise
1760 yards or 5280 feet.
The old Imperial value of the yard was used in converting
measurements to metric values in India in a 1976 Act of
the Indian Parliament.[43]
However, the current National
Topographic Database of the Survey of India is based on
the metric WGS-84 datum,[44]
which is also used by the
Global Positioning System.
The difference from the previous standards was 2 ppm,
or about 3.2 millimeters (⅛ inch) per mile. The U.S.
standard was slightly longer and the old Imperial stan-
dards had been slightly shorter than the international mile.
When the international mile was introduced in English-
speaking countries, the basic geodetic datum in America
was the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27). This
had been constructed by triangulation based on the defi-
nition of the foot in the Mendenhall Order of 1893, with 1
foot = 1200
⁄3937 metres and the definition was retained for
data derived from NAD27, but renamed the U.S. survey
foot to distinguish it from the international foot.[45][n 5]
The exact length of the land mile varied slightly among
English-speaking countries until the international yard
and pound agreement in 1959 established the yard as ex-
actly 0.9144 metres, giving a mile exactly 1609.344 me-
tres. The U.S. adopted this international mile for most
purposes, but retained the pre-1959 mile for some land-
survey data, terming it the U. S. survey mile. In the United
States, statute mile normally refers to the survey mile,[46]
about 3.219 mm (1
⁄8 inch) longer than the international
mile (the international mile is exactly 0.0002% less than
the U.S. survey mile).

20 CHAPTER 6. MILE
While most countries replaced the mile with the
kilometre when switching to the International System
of Units, the international mile continues to be used in
some countries such as Liberia, Myanmar,[47]
the United
Kingdom[48]
and the United States.[49]
It is furthermore
used in a number of countries with vastly less than a
million inhabitants, most of which are UK or US ter-
ritories, or have close historical ties with the UK or
US: Am. Samoa,[50]
Bahamas,[51]
Belize,[52]
British Vir-
gin Islands,[53]
Cayman Islands,[54]
Dominica,[54]
Falk-
land Islands,[55]
Grenada,[56]
Guam,[57]
The N. Mar-
iana Islands,[58]
Samoa,[59]
St. Lucia,[60]
St. Vin-
cent & The Grenadines,[61]
St. Helena,[62]
St. Kitts
& Nevis,[63]
the Turks & Caicos Islands,[64]
and the
U.S. Virgin Islands.[65]
The mile is even encountered in
Canada, though this is predominantly in rail transport and
horse racing, as the roadways have been metricated since
1977.[66][67][68][69][70]
6.4 US survey mile
The U.S. survey mile is 5280 survey feet, or about
1609.347 218 694 metres.[71]
In the U.S., statute mile
formally refers to the survey mile,[3]
but for most pur-
poses, the difference between the survey mile and the in-
ternational mile is insignificant—one international mile is
exactly 0.999 998 of a U.S survey mile—so statute mile
can be used for either. But in some cases, such as in the
U.S. State Plane Coordinate Systems (SPCSs), which can
stretch over hundreds of miles,[72]
the accumulated dif-
ference can be significant, so it is important to note that
the reference is to the U.S. survey mile.
The US redefined its yard in 1893, but this resulted
in U.S. and Imperial measures of distance having very
slightly different lengths.
The North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83), which
replaced the NAD27, is defined in meters. State Plane
Coordinate Systems were then updated, but the National
Geodetic Survey left individual states to decide which (if
any) definition of the foot they would use. All State Plane
Coordinate Systems are defined in meters, and 42 of the
50 states only use the metre-based State Plane Coordinate
Systems. However, eight states also have State Plane Co-
ordinate Systems defined in feet, seven of them in U.S.
Survey feet and one in international feet.[72]
State legisla-
tion in the U.S. is important for determining which con-
version factor from the metric datum is to be used for
land surveying and real estate transactions, even though
the difference (2 ppm) is hardly significant, given the pre-
cision of normal surveying measurements over short dis-
tances (usually much less than a mile). Twenty-four states
have legislated that surveying measures be based on the
U.S. survey foot, eight have legislated that they be based
on the international foot, and eighteen have not specified
which conversion factor to use.[72]
6.5 Nautical mile
β
BA
C
α
b
a
c
On the utility of the nautical mile
Each circle shown is a great circle– the analog of a line in spher-
ical trigonometry– and hence the shortest path connecting two
points on the globular surface. Meridians are great circles that
pass through the poles.
Main article: Nautical mile
The nautical mile was originally defined as one minute of
arc along a meridian of the Earth.[73]
Navigators use di-
viders to step off the distance between two points on the
navigational chart, then place the open dividers against
the minutes-of-latitude scale at the edge of the chart, and
read off the distance in nautical miles.[74]
The Earth is not
perfectly spherical but an oblate spheroid, so the length of
a minute of latitude increases by 1% from the equator to
the poles. Using the WGS84 ellipsoid, the commonly ac-
cepted Earth model for many purposes today, one minute
of latitude at the WGS84 equator is 6,046 feet and at the
poles is 6,107.5 feet. The average is about 6,076 feet
(about 1,852 metres or 1.15 statute miles).
In the United States the nautical mile was defined in the
19th century as 6,080.2 feet (1,853.249 m), whereas in
the United Kingdom, the Admiralty nautical mile was de-
fined as 6,080 feet (1,853.184 m) and was about one
minute of latitude in the latitudes of the south of the
UK. Other nations had different definitions of the nauti-
cal mile, but it is now internationally defined to be exactly
1,852 metres.[75]
6.5.1 Related nautical units
The nautical mile per hour is known as the knot. Nautical
miles and knots are almost universally used for aeronauti-
cal and maritime navigation, because of their relationship
with degrees and minutes of latitude and the convenience

6.10. IDIOMS 21
of using the latitude scale on a map for distance measur-
ing.
The data mile is used in radar-related subjects and is equal
to 6,000 feet (1.8288 kilometres).[76]
The radar mile is a
unit of time (in the same way that the light year is a unit of
distance), equal to the time required for a radar pulse to
travel a distance of two miles (one mile each way). Thus,
the radar statute mile is 10.8 μs and the radar nautical
mile is 12.4 μs.[77]
6.6 Geographical mile
Main article: Geographical mile
The geographical mile is based upon the length of a
meridian of latitude. The German geographical mile
(geographische Meile) was previously 1/₁₅° of latitude
(7.4127 km).[78]
6.7 Grid system
Cities in the continental United States often have streets
laid out by miles. Detroit, Indianapolis, Chicago,
Phoenix, Philadelphia, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, and
Miami, are several examples. Typically the largest streets
are about a mile apart, with others at half-mile and
quarter-mile intervals. In the Manhattan borough of New
York City “streets” are close to 20 per mile, while the
major numbered “avenues” are about six per mile. (Cen-
terline to centerline, 42nd St to 22nd St is supposed to be
5250 feet while 42nd to 62nd is supposed to be 5276 ft 8
in.)
6.8 Metric mile
Main article: Metric mile
The informal term "metric mile" is used in sports such
as track and field athletics and speed skating to denote a
distance of 1,500 metres (4,921 ft). In United States high
school competition, the term is sometimes used for a race
of 1,600 metres (5,249 ft).[79]
6.9 Comparison table
A comparison of the different lengths for a “mile”, in dif-
ferent countries and at different times in history, is given
in the table below. Leagues are also included in this list
because, in terms of length, they fall in between the short
West European miles and the long North, Central and
Eastern European miles.
Similar units:
• 1066.8 m – verst, see also Obsolete Russian units of
measurement
6.10 Idioms
Even in English-speaking countries that have moved from
the Imperial to the metric system (for example, Australia,
Canada, and New Zealand), the mile is still used in a va-
riety of idioms. These include:
• A country mile is used colloquially to denote a very
long distance.
• “A miss is as good as a mile” (failure by a narrow
margin is no better than any other failure)
• “Give him an inch and he'll take a mile” – a corrup-
tion of “Give him an inch and he'll take an ell" [85][86]
(the person in question will become greedy if shown
generosity)
• “Missed by a mile” (missed by a wide margin)
• “Go a mile a minute” (move very quickly)
• “Talk a mile a minute” (speak at a rapid rate)
• “To go the extra mile” (to put in extra effort)
• “Miles away” (lost in thought, or daydreaming)
• "Milestone" (an event indicating significant progress)
6.11 See also
6.12 Notes
[1] Scandinavian miles probably derived from Middle Low
German, while the terms in Romance languages devel-
oped variously from the singular and plural Latin forms.[1]
[2] A partitive genitive construction literally meaning “one
thousand of paces”.[5]
[3] The c. 1300 Composition of Yards and Perches, a statute
of uncertain date usually reckoned as an enactment of
Edward I[15]
or II,[14]
notionally continued to derive En-
glish units from three barleycorns “dry and round” to the
inch[15]
and this statute remained in force until the 1824
Weights and Measures Act establishing the Imperial sys-
tem. In practice, official measures were verified using the
standards at the Exchequer or simply ignored.[16]
[4] “Pole” being another name for the rod.
[5] When reading the document it helps to bear in mind that
999 998 = 3937 × 254.

22 CHAPTER 6. MILE
6.13 References
6.13.1 Citations
[1] OED (2002), “mile, n.¹".
[2] AHD (2006), “mile, 1”.
[3] Thompson (2008), B.6..
[4] Butcher (2014), p. C-16.
[5] Lease (1905), p. 211.
[6] Soren (1999), p. 184.
[7] Shuttleworth.
[8] Smith (1875), p. 171.
[9] 1.
[10] Zupko (1981), “Miglio”.
[11] 2.
[12] Andrews (2003), p. 70.
[13] Klein (1988), p. 69.
[14] Chisholm (1864), p. 8.
[15] NPL.
[16] Chisholm (1864), p. 37.
[17] Chisolm (1864), p. 8.
[18] Chisholm (1864), p. 4.
[19] Zupko (1977), pp. 10–11, 20–21.
[20] Burke (1978), Ch. 9.
[21] Adams (1990).
[22] Act 35 Eliz. I cap. 6, s. 8.[23]
[23] Statutes at large from the first year of King Edward the
fourth to the end of the reign of Queen Elizabeth. Vol. II.
1763. p. 676. Retrieved 29 November 2011.
[24] Norgate (1998).
[25] Morden (1695).
[26] Owen (1841), Book II, Ch. XVII, §5.
[27] Owen (1841), Book II, Ch. XVII, §2.
[28] Edinburgh 2000 visitors’ guide. Collins. 1999. p. 31.
ISBN 978-0-004-49017-5.
[29] “mile”. Dictionary of the Scottish Language – Scottish Na-
tional Dictionary.
[30] “fall, faw”. Dictionary of the Scottish Language –
Dictionary of the Older Scottish Tongue.
[31] James A. H. Murray, ed. (1908). “mile”. A New Dictio-
nary of English on Historical Principles. Vol. 6, part 2:
M. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 436.
[32] "Act for a standard of miles" (June 16, 1685). APS viii:
494, c.59. RPS 1685/4/83.
[33] Union with England Act 1707 (c. 7), art. 17.
[34] Rowlett (2005), “Irish mile”.
[35] Rowlett (2005), “mil 4”.
[36] Rowlett (2005), “milha”.
[37] (Croatian) “Centuries of Natural Science in Croatia : The-
ory and Application”. Kartografija i putopisi.
[38] (Croatian) Vijenac Mrvice s banskoga stola
[39] 1,760 yards × 0.9144 m/yard.[40]
[40] “Schedule I, Part VI”, Weights & Measures Act of 1985.
[41] Barbrow (1976), pp. 16–17, 20.
[42] Bigg (1964).
[43] Schedule to the Standards of Weights and Measures Act,
1976.
[44] Survey of India, "National Map Policy – 2005".
[45] Astin (1959).
[46] Convert mile [statute] to mile [statute, US] “1 metre is
equal to 0.000 621 371 192 237 mile [statute], or 0.000
621 369 949 495 mile [statute, US]. ... The U.S. statute
mile (or survey mile) is defined by the survey foot. This
is different from the international statute mile, which is
defined as exactly 1609.344 meters. The U.S. statute
mile is defined as 5280 U.S. survey feet, which is around
1609.347 219 meters.”
[47] File:Naypyitaw Tollbooth.jpg
[48] “Speed limits”. UK Metric Association. Retrieved 23 Jan-
uary 2014.
[49] Maximum posted speed limits (US) IIHS. Retrieved 14
September 2011
[50] Hayner, Jeff (2012-11-29). “ASAA planning 1.2 mile
swim in Pago Pago harbor”. Samoa News. Retrieved
2014-01-18.
[51] “The Nassau Guardian”. The Nassau Guardian. 2012-08-
29. Retrieved 2014-01-18.
[52] Jerome Williams (2013-08-30). “Pawpa Brown Race re-
sults”. Amandala.com.bz. Retrieved 2014-01-18.
[53] “Mt. bikers compete in Anegada”. Bvibeacon.com.
2013-05-08. Retrieved 2014-01-18.
[54] “Paddling 300 miles for NCVO”. Compasscayman.com.
2013-06-04. Retrieved 2014-01-18.
[55] “Bronze medal for Falklands football at Island Games in
Bermuda”. Penguin-news.com. 2013-07-24. Retrieved
2014-01-18.
[56] “Find the culprit!!!". Spicegrenada.com. Retrieved 2014-
01-18.

6.13. REFERENCES 23
[57] “Navy evacuates patient from cruise ship 50 miles off
Guam”. guampdn.com. 2013-03-09. Retrieved 2014-
01-18.
[58] IP&E launches Lucky 7 Mile Advantage promotion "...
through Sept. 9, 2013”
[59] When you need to go “Dear Editor, I’m deeply concerned
about the lack of public toilets around the coast ...”
[60] “The Voice – The national newspaper of St. Lucia since
1885”. Thevoiceslu.com. 2008-02-08. Retrieved 2014-
01-18.
[61] “Peace Corps Volunteer runs 49 miles from Petit Bordel
to Georgetown”. Searchlight.vc. 2011-12-16. Retrieved
2014-01-18.
[62] “And I would walk 50 miles...”. Sthelenaonline.org.
2012-10-07. Retrieved 2014-01-18.
[63] “104 Square Miles, but is it ours?". The St. Kitts-Nevis
Observer. 2012-09-28. Retrieved 2014-01-18.
[64] “Provo has a new club”. Suntci.com. 2009-07-15. Re-
trieved 2014-01-18.
[65] AARON GRAY (Daily News Staff) (2012-02-27).
“Butler outduels archrival to win 8 Tuff Miles”. Virgin
Islands Daily News. Retrieved 2014-01-18.
[66] Weights and Measures Act, accessed February 2012, Act
current to 2012-01-18. Canadian units (5) The Canadian
units of measurement are as set out and defined in Schedule
II, and the symbols and abbreviations therefor are as added
pursuant to subparagraph 6(1)(b)(ii).
[67] Weights and Measures Act
[68] Transportation Safety Board of Canada, accessed Febru-
ary 2012, Rail Report – 2010 – Report Number R10E0096.
Other Factual Information (See Figure 1). 2. Assignment
602 travelled approximately 12 car lengths into track VC-
64 and at a speed of 9 mph struck a stationary cut of
46 empty cars (with the air brakes applied) that had been
placed in the track about 2½ hours earlier. Canadian rail-
ways have not been metricated and therefore continue to
measure trackage in miles and speed in miles per hour.
[69] Hastings Racecourse Fact Book Like Canadian railways,
Canadian race tracks etc, have not been metricated and
continue to measure distance in miles, furlongs, and yards
(see page 18 of the fact book).
[70] Environment Canada, accessed February 2012. Environ-
ment Canada (Canada’s government sanctioned weather
bureau), unlike Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology etc, of-
fers an imperial option alongside the metric. This is in full
compliance with Canadian law and would not otherwise
be available if the mile (and indeed all other imperial mea-
surements) did not still have legal recognition in Canada.
[71] .
[72] U.S. National Geodetic Survey (n.d.). “Frequently Asked
Questions about the National Geodetic Survey”. Re-
trieved May 16, 2009. |contribution= ignored (help)
[73] Maloney (1978), p. 34.
[74] Maloney (1978), pp. 34–35.
[75] International Bureau of Weights and Measures (2006),
The International System of Units (SI) (PDF) (8th ed.), p.
127, ISBN 92-822-2213-6.
[76] Rowlett (2005), “data mile”.
[77] Rowlett (2005), “radar mile”.
[78] Rowlett (2005), “meile”.
[79] Rowlett (2005), “mile”.
[80] Leopold Carl Bleibtreu: Handbuch der Münz-, Maß- und
Gewichtskunde und des Wechsel-Staatspapier-, Bank- und
Aktienwesens europäischer und außereuropäischer Länder
und Städte. Verlag von J. Engelhorn, Stuttgart, 1863, p.
332
[81] Pre-metric units of length
[82] Helmut Kahnt (1986), BI-Lexikon Alte Maße, Münzen
und Gewichte, Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut,
p. 380
[83] IKAR-Altkartendatenbank der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin,
Kartenabteilung.
[84] http://dexonline.ro/definitie/mil%C4%83
[85] Concise Oxford English Dictionary (5th edition; 1964).
Oxford University Press.
[86] John Heywood (1562). The proverbs, epigrams, and mis-
cellanies of John Heywood ... Print. for subscribers, by
the Early English Drama Society. pp. 95–. Retrieved 1
December 2011.
6.13.2 Bibliography
• Adams, Cecil (1990), “What’s the origin of miles
and yards?", The Straight Dope, Chicago: Sun-
Times Media, retrieved 6 April 2015.
• The American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language, 4th ed., Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.,
2006 [Originally published 2001], ISBN 978-0-
618-70172-8.
• Andrews, J.H. (15 September 2003), “Sir Richard
Bingham and the Mapping of Western Ireland”
(PDF), Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol.
103C, No. 3, Dublin: Royal Irish Academy.
• Astin, A.V.; et al. (June 25, 1959), “Doc. 59-5442:
Refinement of values for the yard and the pound”
(PDF), Washington: National Bureau of Standards.
• Barbrow, Louis E.; et al. (1976), Weights and Mea-
sures Standards of the United States—A Brief His-
tory, National Institute of Standards and Technol-
ogy.

24 CHAPTER 6. MILE
• Bigg, P.H.; et al. (1964), “The United Kingdom
Standards of the Yard in Terms of the Metre”,
British Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 15, No. 3,
pp. 291–300, doi:10.1088/0508-3443/15/3/308 .
• Burke, James (1978), Connections, Little, Brown, &
Co., ISBN 0-316-11685-8.
• Butcher, Tina, ed. (2014), “Appendix C”, NIST
Handbook 44: Specifications, Tolerances, and Other
Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring
Devices.
• Klein, Herbert Arthur (1988) [Originally published
1974], The Science of Measurement: A Historical
Survey, New York: Dover Publications (Previously
published by Simon & Schuster as The World of
Measurements: Masterpieces, Mysteries and Muddles
of Metrology).
• Livy (1905), Lease, Emory Bair, ed., Ab Urbe Con-
dita, Vol. I, XXI, & XXII, New York: University
Publishing.
• Maloney, Elbert S. (1978), Dutton’s Navigation and
Piloting, 13th ed., Annapolis: Naval Institute Press.
• Morden, Robert (1695), “Dorsetshire”, retrieved 17
August 2011.
• “History of Length Measurement”, Factsheets, Ted-
dington: National Physical Laboratory.
• Norgate, Martin; et al. (1998), Old Hampshire
Mapped (Hampshire County Council), ISBN 1-
85975-134-2, retrieved 17 August 2011 Missing or
empty |title= (help); |contribution= ignored (help).
• Owen, Aneurin, ed. (1841), “The Venedotian
Code”, Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales; Com-
prising Laws Supposed to be Enacted by Howel the
Good, Modified by Subsequent Regulations under
the Native Princes prior to the Conquest by Edward
the First: And Anomalous Laws, Consisting Princi-
pally of Institutions which by the Statute of Ruddlan
were Admitted to Continue in Force: With an English
Translation of the Welsh Text, to which are Added
A few Latin Transcripts, Containing Digests of the
Welsh Laws, Principally of the Dimetian Code, Lon-
don: Commissioners on the Public Records of the
Kingdom. (Welsh) & (English)
• Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed., Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2002.
• Rowlett, Russ (2005), How Many? A Dictionary of
Units of Measurement, Chapel Hill: University of
North Carolina, retrieved 10 November 2007.
• Shuttleworth, M., Building Roman roads, Experi-
ment Resources, retrieved 2 May 2011.
• Smith, William, ed. (1875), Dictionary of Greek
and Roman Antiquities, London: John Murray.
• Soren, D.; et al. (1999), “A Roman villa and a
late Roman infant cemetery : excavation at Poggio
Gramignano, Lugnano in Teverina”, Bibliotheca Ar-
chaeologica (No. 23), Rome: L'Erma di Bretschnei-
der.
• Thompson, Ambler; et al. (2008), Special Publica-
tion 811: Guide for the Use of the International Sys-
tem of Units (SI) (PDF), Gaithersburg: National In-
stitute of Standards and Technology.
• Zupko, Ronald Edward (1977), British weights &
measures: a history from antiquity to the seventeenth
century, University of Wisconsin Press, ISBN 978-
0-299-07340-4, retrieved 26 November 2011.
• Zupko, Ronald Edward (1981), Italian Weights and
Measures from the Middle Ages to the Nineteenth
Century, Philadelphia: American Philosophical So-
ciety, ISBN 0-87169-145-0.
6.14 Further reading
• NIST staff, NIST General Tables of Units of Mea-
surement, United States National Institute of Stan-
dards and Technology, retrieved July 2013
• “Tafel zur Vergleichung und Bestimmung der Wege-
maasse”, Naturhistorische und chemischtechnische
Notizen nach den neuesten Erfahrungen zur Nutzan-
wendung für Gewerbe, Fabrikwesen und Land-
wirthschaft, Expedition der Medicinischen Cen-
tralzeitung, 1856, pp. 320–326 (Item notes:
Sammlung5-6 (1856–57) Original from Harvard
University Digitized 9 January 2008)
• Smits, Jan (5 February 2013) [1996], Mathematical
data for bibliographic descriptions of cartographic
materials and spatial data, Personal page on the
Koninklijke Bibliotheek website, retrieved August
2013
• Wigglesworth Clarke, Frank (1875), Weights, mea-
sures, and money, of all nations, p. 91

Chapter 7
Chronology of the Bible
This article deals with the chronology of the
Hebrew Bible (or Christian Old Testament). For
material on the Christian New Testament, see
Chronology of Jesus, Historical reliability of the
Acts of the Apostles, and Timeline of Chris-
tianity. For a historical look at the Bible see
Historicity of the Bible. For the composition of
the various books of the Bible, see Dating the
Bible.
Creation of Adam (Michelangelo)
Sistine Chapel
The chronology of the Bible is the elaborate system of
life-spans, “generations,” and other means by which the
passage of events is measured over the 4,000 years be-
tween the Creation of the world and the re-dedication of
the Temple in 164 BCE.[1]
It is theological, not histor-
ical in the modern sense,[2]
and functions as an implied
prophecy whose key lies in the identification of the final
event.[3]
The passage of time from the Creation to the Exodus
is measured by adding the ages of the Patriarchs at the
birth of their firstborn sons, later through express state-
ments, and later still by the synchronised reigns of the
kings of Israel and Judah.[4]
The Exodus takes place in
the year 2666 AM, exactly two thirds of the way through
the four thousand years, the Temple is commenced 480
years, or 12 generations of 40 years each, after that, and
430 years pass between the building of the Temple and
its destruction.[4]
The 50 years between the destruction
of the Temple and the “Decree of Cyrus” and end of the
Exile, added to the 430 years for which the Temple stood,
produces another symmetrical period of 480 years,[5]
and
the 374 years between the re-dedication of the Temple
by the Maccabees and the Edict of Cyrus completes the
4,000 years.[6]
As recently as the 18th century, scholars of the stature
of Isaac Newton believed that the date of Creation was
knowable from the Bible.[7]
Today, the Genesis ac-
count of Creation has long since vanished from serious
cosmology, the Patriarchs and Exodus are no longer in-
cluded in most serious histories of ancient Israel,[8]
and
it is almost universally accepted that Joshua and Judges
have little historical value.[9]
Even the monarchy is ques-
tioned, and although scholars continue to advance propos-
als for reconciling the chronology of the Books of Kings,
there is “little consensus on acceptable methods of deal-
ing with conflicting data.”[8][10]
7.1 Chronologies prior to canon-
ization
During the centuries that Biblical texts developed, the-
ological chronologies emerged at different composition
stages, though scholars have advanced various theories to
identify these stages and their schematizations of time.
These chronologies include:
• A “Progenitor” chronology that placed Abraham’s
birth at 1,600 AM and the foundation of the Temple
at 2,800. This chronology was proposed by Alfred
Jepsen by melding time periods in the Samaritan and
Masoretic recensions.[11]
• Distinct chronologies can be inferred from the
Priestly source (of the Pentateuch), along with
priestly authors of later Biblical books,[12]
and the
Deuteronomistic history, which purports to chroni-
cle the reigns of the kings of Judah and Israel (with
some significant historical corroboration, see below
and History of ancient Israel and Judah).
25

26 CHAPTER 7. CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE
• The Nehemiah chronology, which was devised to
show 3,500 years from creation to Nehemiah’s mis-
sion. Northcote says that this chronology was “prob-
ably composed by Levites in Jerusalem not long af-
ter Nehemiah’s mission, perhaps sometime late in
the fifth century BCE (i.e. nearing 400 BCE).”[13]
Bousset (1900) apparently sees this schematization,
too, but calls it Proto-MT.[13]
• A proto-Masoretic chronology, shaped by jubilees,
with an overall literary showing of 3,480 years from
creation to the 2nd Temple finished, per B.W. Bous-
set (1900), and which had the first Temple at 3,000
years.
• The Saros chronology that reflected 3,600 years
leading up to the first Temple and 4080 years from
creation to the completion of the Second Temple fin-
ished. This scheme served as “the basis for the later
LXX chronology and pre-SP Samaritan Pentateuch
chronologies.”[14]
7.2 Masoretic table
(The following table is derived from Thomas L. Thomp-
son, The Mythic Past;[15]
notes within the table as cited)
While difficulties with Biblical texts make it impossible
to reach sure conclusions about their chronology, per-
haps the most widely held hypothesis is that the Masoretic
text embodies an overall scheme of 4,000 years (a “great
year”) taking the re-dedication of the Temple by the Mac-
cabees in 164 BCE as its end-point.[5]
Two motives may
have led to this: first, there was a common idea at the time
of the Maccabees that human history followed the plan of
a divine “week” of seven “days” each lasting a thousand
years;[16]
and second, a 4,000 year history – even longer
in the Septuagint version – would establish the antiquity
of the Jews against their pagan neighbours.[17]
7.3 Samaritan Pentateuch
In the Samaritan Pentateuch, 'the genealogies and nar-
ratives were shaped to ensure a chronology of 3000
years from creation to the Israelite settlement of Canaan.
Northcote reports this as the “Proto-SP chronology,” as
designated by John Skinner (1910), and he speculates that
this chronology may have been extended to put the re-
building of the Second Temple at an even 3,900 AM, af-
ter three 1,300 year phases.
7.4 Septuagint (LXX)
The Israeliate chronology extends 4,777 years from cre-
ation to the finishing of the Second Temple, as witnessed
in the Codex Alexandrinus manuscript. This calcula-
tion only emerges by supplementing LXX with the MT’s
chronology of kings. There were at least 3 variations of
LXX chronology; Eusebius used one variation, now fa-
vored by Hughes and others. Northcote asserts that the
LXX calendrical pattern was meant to demonstrate that
there were 5,000 years from creation to a contemporane-
ous Ptolemaic Egypt, circa 300 BCE.[33]
7.5 Post-Biblical theological
chronologies
Solomon Dedicates the Temple (James Tissot)
7.5.1 Second Temple and Rabbinic tradi-
tions
The first notable attempt to turn Biblical texts into a the-
ological chronology was the 2nd century BCE Book of
Jubilees; beginning with the Creation, it measures time
in years, “weeks” of years (groups of seven years), and
jubilees (sevens of sevens), so that the interval from Cre-
ation to the settlement of Canaan, for example, is exactly
fifty jubilees (2450 years).[34]
More significant, and still in common use among Jews,
was the Seder Olam Rabbah (“Great Order of the
World”), a work tracing the history of the world and the
Jews from Creation to the 2nd century CE.[35][36]
It al-
lows 410 years for the duration of the First Temple, 70
years from its destruction to the Second Temple, and 420

7.6. SEE ALSO 27
years for the duration of the Second Temple, making a
total of 900 years for the two temples.[37]
This schematic
approach to numbers accounts for its most remarkable
feature, the fact that it shortens the entire Persian Empire
from over two centuries to just 52 years, mirroring the 52
years it gives to the Babylonian exile.[38]
7.5.2 Christian chronologies from Euse-
bius to Ussher
The early Church Father Eusebius (c.260-340), attempt-
ing to place Christ in the chronology, put his birth in 5199
AM, and this became the accepted date for the Western
Church.[39]
As the year 6000 AM (800 CE) approached
there was increasing fear that the end of the world was
nigh, until the Venerable Bede then made his own cal-
culations and found that Christ’s birth took place in 3592
AM.[39]
Martin Luther (1483-1586) placed the Apostolic
Council of Acts 15 in the year 4000 AM, believing this
marked the moment when the Mosaic Law was abolished
and the new age of grace began.[40]
This was widely ac-
cepted among European Protestants, but in the English-
speaking world Archibishop James Ussher (1581-1656)
switched the focus back to the birth of Christ, which he
found had occurred in 4000 AM, equivalent, he believed,
to 4 BCE, and thus arrived at 4004 BCE as the date of
Creation. Ussher was not the first to reach this result, but
his chronology was so detailed that his dates were incor-
porated into the margins of English Bibles for the next
two hundred years.[41]
7.5.3 Correlation of historical evidence
and the Israelite kings
The Maccabees (Wojciech Stattler)
(For detailed reconstructions of the chronology of the He-
brew kings, see Kings of Judah)
The chronology of the monarchy, unlike that of earlier
periods, can be checked against non-Biblical sources and
seems to be correct in general terms.[29]
This raises the
prospect that the Books of Kings, linking the Hebrew
kings by accession and length of reign (“king X of Ju-
dah came to the throne in the nth year of king Y of Israel
and ruled n years”), can be used to reconstruct a chronol-
ogy for the monarchy, but the task has in fact proven in-
tractably difficult.[42]
The problem is that the books con-
tain numerous contradictions: to take just one example,
since Rehoboam of Judah and Jeroboam of Israel began
to rule at the same time (1 Kings 12), and since Ahaziah
of Judah and Joram of Israel were killed at the same time
(1 Kings 9:24, 27), the same amount of time should have
elapsed in both kingdoms, but the count shows 95 years
passing in Judah and 98 in Israel.[43]
In short, "[t]he data
concerning the synchronisms appeared in hopeless con-
tradiction with the data as to the lengths of reigns.”[44]
Possibly the most widely followed attempt to reconcile
the contradictions has been that proposed by Edwin R.
Thiele in his The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings
(three editions between 1951 and 1983), but his work has
been widely criticised for, among other things, introduc-
ing “innumerable” co-regencies, constructing a “complex
system of calendars”, and using “unique” patterns of cal-
culation; as a result his following is largely among schol-
ars “committed ... to a doctrine of scripture’s absolute
harmony” (the criticism is to be found in Brevard Childs'
Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture).[45]
The
weaknesses in Thiele’s work have led subsequent scholars
to continue to propose chronologies, but, in the words of a
recent commentary on Kings, there is “little consensus on
acceptable methods of dealing with conflicting data.”[10]
7.6 See also
• Anno Mundi
• Biblical cosmology
• Chronology of the Ancient Orient
• Chronology of Babylonia and Assyria
• Dating creation
• Development of the Hebrew Bible canon
• Development of the Old Testament canon
• Development of the New Testament canon
• History of ancient Israel and Judah
• Intertestamental period
• Kings of Judah
• Missing years (Jewish calendar)
• Samaritan Pentateuch
• Universal history
• Ussher chronology

Measurements in the Bible Biblical Units of Measurements and Chronology of the Bible

Measurements in the Bible Biblical Units of Measurements and Chronology of the Bible

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Sister Lara

More from Sister Lara (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Measurements in the Bible Biblical Units of Measurements and Chronology of the Bible