How Many Feet Is 3000 Cubits? The 165 New Answer

abstract

Historical dimensions for the cubit are provided by scripture and pyramid documentation. Additional Middle Eastern dimensions are found in other early documents. Two main dimensions emerge from the story of the Elle. The first is the anthropological or short cubit and the second is the architectural or long cubit. The wide geographical area and long chronological period suggest that the dimensions of the cubit varied over time and geographical area. Greek and Roman conquests led to standardization. A study by Francis Galton, which is based on his investigations into anthropometry, provides newer dimensions. The subjects for Galton’s study and those of several other researchers lacked adequate sample descriptions to establish a satisfactory ulna/forearm dimension. Given the decline of the yardstick in today’s world, this finding is not surprising. Contemporary measurements from military and civilian anthropometry for the forearm and hand allow comparison to the ancient unit. Although there does not seem to be an urgent need for a forearm-hand/cubit measurement, the half-yard or half-meter unit appears to be a useful unit that could find more application.

1 Introduction

If we know anything about the cubit today, it probably comes from an acquaintance with the Hebrew Scriptures and/or the Old and New Testaments. People have heard or read about the dimensions of Noah’s Ark or Solomon’s Temple. Acquaintance with Egyptian history may have brought some awareness of the dimensions of pyramids and temples. The cubit was a common unit in the early East. It continues in some places today, but has been replaced less prominently by modern units. The early use of the cubit throughout the Middle East showed different dimensions for this unit. Some variants can be better checked using Bible passages. Other variants can also be found in numerous secular documents, but these are less well known and less accessible than the Scriptures.

The English word elle (′kyü-bǝt) seems to be derived from the Latin cubitum for elbow. It was πήχυς (pay′-kus) in Greek. The ulna is based on a human trait – the length of the forearm from the tip of the middle finger to the end of the elbow. Many definitions seem to agree on this aspect of unity, but there is no universal standard as there are many ways to determine a cubit. It can be measured from the elbow to the base of the hand, from the elbow to a distance between the extended thumb and little finger, or from the elbow to the tip of the middle finger. These alternative descriptions further complicate the determination of a specific unit of measurement, the cubit. In the following, the latter description, elbow to the tip of the middle finger, designates the common unit.

The human figure (typically male) was the basis for many dimensions. As an example, the foot is recognized immediately [1]. Onyx (nail) is less common, but onyx remains a medical term. The Old English ynche, ynch, unce or inch was a thumb’s breadth. The anthropomorphic basis of many standards supports the statement “man is the measure of all things” attributed to Protagoras after Plato in Theaetetus [2]. No wonder the cubit was initially used for measurement as it is ubiquitously available for use. We always own unity. Human figure entities are arbitrary but universal, particularly effective through their bodily reference, which provides an immediately accessible raw scale.

The cubit forms a comfortable middle unit between foot and yard. The English yard could be thought of as a double cubit measuring 12 palms, about 90 cm or 36 inches measured from the middle of a man’s body to the fingertips of an outstretched arm [3]. This is a useful method of extending the body held with a cloth in the center to an outstretched hand (two cubits) or across the body to both outstretched hands (four cubits, as given in Exodus 26:1-2, 7-8). to eat. The English cubit is a larger variant of the cubit, consisting of 15 palms, 114 cm, or 45 inches. It roughly corresponds to the cloth size of early Scotlands. A man’s stride, defined as left-to-right steps, produces a double cubit, or about a yard [1].

The dimensions in Table 1 give the (approximate) relative lengths for meters, yards, cubits and feet.

meter yard cubit foot

The cubit was a basic unit in early Israel and the surrounding Middle Eastern countries. It is אטה in Hebrew (pronounced am-mah′) which can be interpreted as “the mother of the arm” or origin, i.e. the forearm/cubit. Selected biblical references [4] for the cubit include these five well-known choices. (1) And God said to Noah: I have determined to put an end to all flesh; for the earth is full of power through them; Behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Make yourself an ark out of gopher wood; Make rooms in the ark and cover them with pitch inside and out. This is how you shall do it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. (Genesis 6:13-15 RSV) (2) They shall make an ark of acacia wood; Its length shall be two and a half cubits, its breadth a cubit and a half, and its height a cubit and a half. And you shall overlay it with pure gold, inside and out you shall overlay it, and you shall make a band of gold all around it. (Exodus 25:10-11 RSV)(3)And he made the court; for the south side the curtains of the court were of fine twined linen, a hundred cubits; their pillars were twenty and their bases twenty of bronze, but the hooks of the pillars and their ledges were of silver. And for the north side a hundred cubits, its pillars twenty, its bases twenty of bronze, but the hooks of the pillars and their bands were of silver. And for the west side there were curtains of fifty cubits, their pillars ten, and their bases ten; the hooks of the pillars and their fillets were of silver. And fifty cubits for the eastern front. (Exodus 38:9-13)(4) And Saul and the men of Israel were gathered, and encamped in the valley of Elah, and arrayed themselves in battle line against the Philistines. And the Philistines stood on the mountain on one side, and Israel stood on the mountain on the other side, with a valley between them. And there came out of the Philistine camp a warrior named Goliath from Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. (1 Samuel 17:2-4 LB)(5)In the four hundred and eightieth year after the people of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Siw, the second month he began the house to build the Lord. The house that King Solomon built for the Lord was sixty cubits long, twenty cubits wide, and thirty cubits high. (1 Kings 6:1-2 RSV)

The cubit determined a measure of many aspects of life in biblical history. The journey of a Sabbath day measured 2,000 cubits (Exodus 16:29). This statue forbade a travel restriction on the Sabbath. The distance between the Ark of the Covenant and the camp of the Israelites during the Exodus is estimated at about 914 meters, 1,000 yards, or 2,000 cubits [5].

Biblical quotations and historical archeology indicate that there was more than one standard cubit length in Israel. In 2 Chronicles 3:3 the quote may imply Ellen of the old standard. Ezekiel 40:5; 43:13 can indicate the cubit plus a hand. Archaeological evidence from Israel [6] suggests that 52.5 cm = 20.67 and 45 cm = 17.71 represent the long and short cubits of that time and place. For some scholars, the Egyptian cubit was the standard measure of length in Biblical times. Biblical sojourn/exodus, war and trade are likely reasons this length was used elsewhere.

The Tabernacle, Solomon’s Temple, and many other structures are described in cubits in the Bible. These also occur with two different cubit measurements, the long or royal (architectural) cubit and the short (anthropological) cubit. Scholars have used various means to determine the length of these cubits with some success. The long cubit is about 52.5 centimeters and the short cubit about 45 centimeters [4, 5].

The Israelite long cubit corresponds to the Egyptian cubit of 7 hands with 6 hands for the shorter one. Eerdman’s Dictionary of the Bible [7, page 1373] states: “…Archaeology and literature indicate an average length of the common cubit of 44.5 cm (17.5 inches).” This citation also gives a range of 42 -48 cm (17-19 inches) for the cubit. The range is an important parameter because it indicates the variation that will affect that measure. Variation indicates multiple influences.

The English usage of elle is difficult to determine. The exact length of this measurement depends on whether it is the full length from the elbow to the tip of the longest finger, or one of the alternatives previously described. Some scholars suggest that the longer dimension was the original cubit, which was 20.24 inches for the common cubit and 21.88 inches for the sacred cubit, or one standard cubit from the elbow to the end of the middle finger (20′) and one Ulna of the lower forearm makes from the elbow to the heel of the hand (12″). These are the same measurements for Egyptian measurements according to Easton’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary [9]. The Interpreter’s Bible [10, page 154] gives the Common Scale length as 444.25 mm or 17.49 inches and Ezekiel’s Scale as 518.29 mm or 20.405 inches for the two cubit lengths. Inasmuch as the Romans colonized England, the aforementioned shorter cubit may have been the standard.

A rod or staff is called גמד (gomedh) in Judges 3:16, meaning a cut or something cut off. The LXX (Septuagint) and Vulgate give “span,” which is defined in the Hebrew Scriptures or Old Testament as a measure of distance (the forearm cubit), approximately 18 inches (nearly 0.5 meters). Among the several cubits mentioned is a man’s cubit, or common cubit in Deut. 3:11 and the legal cubit or sanctuary cubit described in Ezra 40:5 [6].

Barrios [5] gives a summary of linear Hebrew measurements (see Table 2).

Measure Common standard of Ezekiel Standard millimeters inches millimeters inches cubits 444.25 17.49 518.29 20.405 wingspan 222.12 8.745 259.14 10.202 palms 74.04 2.91 74.04 2.91 fingers 18.51 0.72 18 .51 0.72

Barrois [5] states that the dimension of the cubit can only be determined by deduction and not directly from conflicting information. He reports that the aqueduct of Hezekiah was 1,200 cubits long according to the inscription from Siloam. Its length is given as 5333.1 meters or 1,749 feet. Absolute certainty about the length of a cubit cannot be ascertained, and there is much disagreement about this length, causing much objection and debate. Some writers make the cubit eighteen inches, and others twenty, twenty-one inches, or more. This appears to be of vital importance to those attempting to determine the exact modern equivalent of measurements from Scripture. Taking 21 inches for the cubit, the ark that Noah built would be 525 feet long, 87 feet 6 inches wide, and 52 feet 6 inches high. Using the standard 20′ cubits and 9′′ wingspan, Goliath’s height would be 6 cubits plus a wingspan of about 10 feet and 9 inches. With a cubit of 18”, he is 9 feet 9 inches tall. The Septuagint, LXX, suggests 4 cubits plus a span, or a more modest 6 feet 9 inches. Depending on which dimension is selected, there are many implications [7]. The story requires young David to kill a giant and not just a taller than average man! Likewise, for many other dimensions and descriptions found in early writing, the larger the dimensions, the better the story. Sacred dimensions require solemn, awe-inspiring dimensions, but this thwarts precise determination.

Rabbi David ben Zimra (1461–1571) claimed that the Foundation Stone and Holy of Holies are in the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount. This view is widely accepted, but with disagreements about the precise location known as the “central location theory,” some of these differences result from strong disagreements about the dimension of the cubit. Kaufman [11] argues against the “central position theory” and defends a cubit measuring 0.437 meters (1.43 feet). David [12] argues for a temple cubit of 0.56 meters (1.84 feet).

Differences in the length of the cubit arise from different historical times and geographic locations in Biblical times. These very long periods of time and different geographic locations make it frustrating to determine a more accurate cubit length. Israel’s location between Egypt and Mesopotamia suggests that many influences came into play in this well-traveled area over the course of hundreds and hundreds of years. These influences likely contributed to the different dimensions encountered over this long period of time. Stories, myths and dramas add their share.

The earliest written mention of the cubit is in the Epic of Gilgamesh. The incomplete text survives in twelve tablets written in Akkadian found at Nineveh in the library of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria (669–630? BC). Other fragments from 1800 BC. contain parts of the text, and more fragments mentioning this epic have been found from the 2nd millennium B.C. found. The yardstick is specifically mentioned in the text when a flood is described as remarkably similar to and older than the flood mentioned in Genesis. Evidently, the cubit was an early and important Near Eastern unit fundamental to the transmission of linear measurements, as shown in Tables 2, 3, and 4.

Great Pyramid of Giza, Khufu Second Khafra granite temple Third Pyramid of Menkaura Peribolus Walls Great Pyramid of Dahshur (?) Pyramid of Saqqara Pepi Fourth to Sixth Dynasty, Middle Ages

Egyptian common cubit 18.24 in. Egyptian royal cubit 20.64 in. Great Assyrian cubit 25.26 in. Beládi cubit 21.88 in. Black cubit 20.28 in

2. Egypt

The Egyptian hieroglyph for the cubit shows the symbol of a forearm. However, the Egyptian cubit was longer than a typical forearm. It seems to have consisted of 7 palms, each with 4 fingers in a total of 28 parts and was about 52.3-52.4 cm long according to Arnold [13].

The earliest attested standard measure comes from the pyramids of the Old Kingdom in Egypt. It was the royal cubit (mahe). The royal cubit was 523–525 mm (20.6–20.64 in) long and divided into 7 palms, each with 4 digits, giving a total of 28-part measure. The royal cubit is known from Old Kingdom architecture, dating at least as early as the construction of the step pyramid by Djoser around 2,700 BC. [13–15].

Petrie [15] begins chapter XX as follows. Cubit and Digit font values.

The measurements listed on the previous pages provide material for an exact determination of the Egyptian cubit. From such a set of exact measurements, not only can the earliest value of the cubit be ascertained, but also the extent of its variations as used by different architects.

Petrie’s methods and insights are described so clearly and concisely that they can best be quoted as follows.

The King’s Chamber in the Great Pyramid is undoubtedly the most important source for the value of the common cubit; this is the most accurately processed, best preserved, and most accurately measured of any data known.

If we arrange the examples chronologically, the yardstick used was as given in Table 3.

Petrie writes the following.

For the yardstick I had derived ([16, page 50]) from a body of material, good, bad and indifferent, 20-64.02 as the best result I could get; about a dozen of the actually known cubits make 20–65 01; and now we find from the earliest monuments that the cubit first used is 20-62, and the mean from the seven buildings named is 20-63 b 0.02-. … Altogether we can assume 20- as the original value and assume that it has slightly increased on average over time due to repeated copying. (pages 178-179).

3. Greek and Roman comparisons

In the writings of Eratosthenes, the Greek σχο νος (schoe′nus) was 12,000 royal cubits with an assumed length of 0.525 metres. The Stade was 300 royal cubits or 157.5 meters or 516.73 feet long. Eratosthenes gave 250,000 stages for the circumference of the earth. Strabo and Pliny gave 252,000 stages for the circumference and 700 stages for a degree [13, 17]. According to Arnold [13] and Gillings [17], accounts of Egyptian construction show only a 0.04 inch difference between the cubits of the Snefru and Khufu pyramids.

Lelgemann [18, 19] reports on the examination of almost 870 metrological rulers, the lengths of which represent 30 different units. He argues for the earliest unit, the Nippur cubit, at 518.5 mm. Lelgemann gives the ancient stadium = 600 feet and gives the stadium at Olympia as 192.27 metres, which he believes is based on the remen or ancient Egyptian trading cubit derived from the Egyptian royal cubit (523.75mm) and the ancient Trading cubit = 448.9 mm is derived.

Nichholson [20] in Men and Measures devoted a chapter to the story of Elle. His summary (page 30) gave comparative lengths of five cubits, as shown in Table 4.

Nichholson proposes a long history of the cubit predating the time of the Great Pyramid of Kufu c. 2600 BC He claims a measure of 500 ordinary cubits for the base side, which is only six inches different from the Flinders Petrie base measure. He puts the date of the royal cubit at around 4000 BC. BC. The great Assyrian cubit is dated c. 700 BC The Beládic ell is dated c. 300 BC Chr. Nichholson states that the Black Cubit was fully realized in about the ninth century of this era, suggesting a parallel with the growth and spread of Islam. While his measurements for these variants of the cubit agree with some of the other estimates in this paper, there are serious questions about the chronological order associated with these variants. Nichholson offers no evidence or support for this sequence. His estimates of the common and royal cubits agree with other estimates, but the other values ​​are less consistent.

4. Greek/Roman period

The Greek π χυς (pay′-kus) was a 24-digit cubit. The Cyrenaica cubit measured approximately 463.1mm, with the middle cubit measuring approximately 474.2mm, making them approximately 25/24 and 16/15 Roman cubits. Other Greek cubits based on different numeral measures from other Greek city-states were also used. The Greek 40-digit measure seems to correspond to the Latin gradus, step, or half a step [21].

It shows that the Greeks and Romans inherited the foot from the Egyptians. The Roman foot was divided into both 12 unciae (inches) and 16 digits. The uncia was a twelfth part of the Roman foot or pes measuring 11.6 inches. An uncia was 2.46 cm or 0.97 inches tall. The Cubitas corresponded to 24 digiti or 17.4 inches. The Romans also introduced their mile of 1000 paces, or double strides, with the pace being equal to five Roman feet. The Roman mile of 5000 feet was introduced in England during the occupation. Queen Elizabeth, who reigned from 1558 to 1603, changed the legal mile to 5280 feet or 8 furlongs, with a furlong being 40 rods of 5.5 yards each. The furlong continues today as a common unit in horse racing.

The introduction of the yard as a unit of length came later, but its origin is not clearly known. Some believe that the origin was the double cubit. Whatever its origin, the early yard was divided by the binary method into 2, 4, 8, and 16 parts, called the half yard, span, finger, and nail. The yard is sometimes associated with the “girdle” or circumference of a person’s waist, or the distance from the tip of the nose to the end of the thumb on Henry I’s body. Units were often “standardized” by reference to a. royal form.

The distance from the thumb to the extended finger to the elbow is a cubit, sometimes called the “natural cubit,” of about 1.5 feet. This standard appears to have been used in both the Roman system of measurement and various Greek systems. The Roman ulna, a four-foot-long cubit (about 120 cm), was common in the empire. This length is the measurement from a man’s waist to the fingers of the outstretched opposite arm. The Roman cubitus is a six-palm cubit of about 444.5 mm about 17.49 inches [17].

5. Other dimensions of the Middle East

Various cubits and variations of the cubit were recorded over time and in the geographical areas of the Middle East: 6 palms = 24 digits, i.e. ~45.0 cm or 18 inches (1.50 feet); 7 palms = 28 digits, that is ~ 52.5 cm or 21 inches (1.75 feet); 8 palms = 32 digits, i. H. ~60.0 cm or 24 in (2.00 ft); and 9 palms = 36 digits, i.e. ~67.5 cm or 27 inches (2.25 feet)[1]. Oates [22, page 186] writes of Mesopotamian archeology: “Measurements of length were based on the cubit or ‘elbow’ (very approximately 0.5 m).”

The Stories of Herodotus [23, p. 21] describe the walls surrounding the city of Babylon as “fifty royal cubits wide and two hundred high (the royal cubit is three inches longer than the common cubit)”. A note accompanying the text gives the information given in parentheses, and the end note gives these values ​​as “extraordinarily high,” raising questions as to the height of these walls, which would be well over three hundred feet if a royal cubit of twenty inches is implied, or 100 meters if the royal cubit is 50 cm long. For comparison, the great Cheops pyramid is originally given as 146.59 meters [24, page 895]. Herodotus’ credibility has often been questioned, and these dimensions may also be suspect or subject to the same exaggerations found elsewhere in his accounts.

In 1916, during the last years of the Ottoman Empire and during the First World War, the German Assyriologist Eckhard Unger found during excavations in Nippur from ca. He claimed it was a standard of measurement. This staff, irregularly shaped and irregularly marked, is said to be about 518.5 mm or 20.4 inches a Sumerian cubit. From the 2nd millennium BC A 30-digit cubit with a digit length of about 17.28 mm (just over 0.68 inch) has been identified around 400 BC. The Arabic Hashimi cubit of about 650.2 mm (25.6 in) measures two French feet. Since the established ratio between French and English feet is about 16 to 15, the ratios are as follows: 5 Hashimi cubits ≈ 10 French feet ≈ 128 English inches. The length of 256 Roman cubits and the length of 175 Hashimi cubits are also almost equivalent [16].

The Guard Elle (Arabic) measured about 555.6 mm; 5/4 of the Roman cubit result in 96 cubits ≈ 120 Roman cubits ≈ 175 English feet. The Arabic zero cubit (or black cubit) measured about 540.2 mm. Hence 28 Greek numerals of Cyrenaica cubit 25/24 of a Roman foot or 308.7 mm and 175 Roman cubits 144 black cubits. The Mesopotamian cubit measured about 533.4 mm, 6/5 Roman cubits, which corresponds to 20 Mesopotamian cubits ≈ 24 Roman cubits ≈ 35 English feet. The Babylonian cubit (or Lagash’s cubit) measured about 496.1 mm. There was a Babylonian trade cubit that was nine-tenths the normal cubit, or 446.5 mm. The Babylonian cubit is 15/16 of the royal cubit, making 160 Babylonian trade cubits ≈ 144 Babylonian cubits ≈ 135 Egyptian royal cubits. The Pergamon cubit 520.9 mm corresponded to 75/64 of the Roman cubit. The Salamis cubit 484.0 mm corresponded to 98/90 of the Roman cubit. The Persian cubit of about 500.1 mm corresponded to 9/8 of the Roman cubit and 9/10 of the quail. Further expansion of the geographic area yields even more names and values ​​for the cubit [16, 18, 19, 25, 26].

From the Encyclopedia Britannica [24] section on weights and measures in Volume 23, the unit specifications for the Middle Eastern cubit are given in Table 5.

Egypt Digit, Zebo 1/28 royal cubit 0.737′′ 18.7 mm palm, sheep 1/7 2.947′′ 75 mm royal foot 2/3 13.95′′ 254 mm royal cubit unit 20.62 524 Ater, Skhoine 12,000 royal cubits 3.9 miles 6.3 km Hebrew finger, Esba 1/24 cubit 0.74″ 19 mm palm, Tefah 4 fingers, 1/6 cubit 2.9″ 75 mm span, Zeret 3 palms, 1/ 2 cubits 8.8′′ 225 mm Royal cubits 7/6 Standard cubits 20.7 525 mm Tempo 2 cubits 35.4′′ 900 mm Stadium 360 cubits 528′′ 162 meters Greek palm 4 fingers 3.0′′ 77 mm wingspan 12 fingers 9.1” 231 ell 24 fingers 18.2′ 463 mm Stade 604 meters

From a table in A.E. Berriman’s Historical Metrology [8] we find his summary of cubit standards in Table 6.

yards inches meters Roman 17.48 0.444 Egyptian (short) 17.72 0.450 Greek 18.23 0.463 Assyrian 19.45 0.494 Sumerian 19.76 0.502 Egyptian (royal) 20.62 0.524 Talmudic 21.85 0.524 Palestinian 0.524

Assuming that the values ​​in Berriman’s table are reasonable estimates, the descriptive statistics from the data in Table 7 provide a summary of these different dimensions.

Inch Meter Mean 20.04 0.51 Median 19.61 0.50 Standard Deviation 2.57 0.07 Range 7.76 0.20 Minimum 17.48 0.44 Maximum 25.24 0.64

The estimates in Berriman’s table for Greek and Roman cubits agree fairly well with the Egyptian short cubit, suggesting an average of about 18 inches. This dimension is about two inches shorter than the overall mean in Table 7. The total range of values ​​is about eight inches from 17.5 to 25. The different origins for these dates and earlier values ​​suggest considering a family of cubits composed of many geographic areas have been aggregated many different times, rather than considering these differences as suspects of a precise dimension. Such variants may not be simple differences or differences around a precise entity, but rather a composite of dimensions accumulated over a large chronological period from many geographic locations that cannot be unraveled. These multiple dimensions suggest local applications and not just differences relative to a single standard, frustrating greater accuracy.

A rounded figure of 18″ seems common for this period. The Hellenistic cubit appears consistent with what has been identified as a short cubit. The standardization of the cubit began during Hellenism, coinciding with Alexander’s conquests in the Middle East. Its standardization was probably greatly increased under the Roman Empire through the influences of war, travel, and trade. These influences helped bring the cubit into a more standardized unit. Roman engineers in viaduct, bridge and road construction brought standardization throughout the empire.

Cubits were used from ancient times to the Middle Ages and are still used today in some parts of the East. In less industrialized countries, the use prevailed to measure textiles by the span of the arms with subdivisions of the hand and the cubit.

Moving on to Da Vinci (1452–1519) we have his specifications and comments on Vitruvius Pollio (1st century BC) for the human figure and its dimensions [1]. They can be summed up as fractions of a 6-foot man, as shown in Table 8.

Unit inch fingers 0.75 palm 3 feet 12 cubits 18 height 72 pace 72

Figure 1 shows the famous image associated with these dimensions. The given unit shows another example of the dimension of the cubit [1].

Leonardo da Vinci’s figure of Vitruvian Man shows nine historical units of measurement: the cubit, the span, the cubit, the Flemish cubit, the English cubit, the French cubit, the fathom, the hand and the foot. The units shown are shown with their historical ratios. In this figure, the cubit is 25% of the 6 foot individual and is approximately 18 inches long. We are reminded once again of the importance of the human figure in determining units of measurement.

Another example from this period comes from the autobiography [27] by Benvenuto Cellini (1500–1571). In describing his casting of Medusa, Cellini’s narrative uses ells to illustrate length as casually as we would use feet or yards. Zumindest in diesem Kontext, wenn nicht in anderen, scheint die Elle allgemein gebräuchlich zu sein. Wie verallgemeinert eine Ellendimension in dieser Zeitperiode vorherrschte, ist nicht genau bekannt. Zur Zeit der Französischen Revolution hatte das Komitee für Maße und Gewichte neben anderen Maßen die Elle zugunsten des metrischen Systems aufgegeben.

6. Die menschliche Elle

Die Geschichte der Metrologie liefert interessante Daten zu den unterschiedlichen Dimensionen der Elle. Die Metrologie nutzte zuerst die menschliche Figur, um Dimensionen festzulegen. Die Geschichte bis zu diesem Punkt legt nahe, dass ein Wert von etwa 17-18′′ durchschnittlich und am häufigsten vorkommt.

Sir Francis Galton (1822–1911) bietet Daten aus den von ihm durchgeführten Untersuchungen an. Galton verdient Anerkennung als einer der ersten forschenden Anthropometristen. Er war ein Wissenschaftler, der einige der ersten Wetterkarten zur Aufzeichnung von Luftdruckänderungen [28] und Strategien zur Kategorisierung von Fingerabdrücken [29] produzierte. Galton zeichnet sich durch seine Untersuchungen aus, an denen Tausende von Probanden beteiligt sind. Einige Untersuchungen wurden auf der Internationalen Gesundheitsausstellung in London, die 1884-85 stattfand, und an anderen Orten vor Ort durchgeführt. Galton hatte zuvor eine Analyse berühmter Familien angestellt, aus der er Hereditary Genius [30] und später Natural Inheritance [31] zusammenstellte. Er interessierte sich lebenslang für die Bestimmung der körperlichen und geistigen Eigenschaften von Personengruppen.

Galton sammelte nicht nur Daten aus seinem Labor über menschliche Probanden, er untersuchte auch statistische Techniken zur Analyse von Tabellen, Grafiken und Diagrammen von Daten. Damit schuf er die Ursprünge dessen, was heute als Korrelations- und Regressionsanalyse anerkannt wird. Die Korrelation wurde formaler von Pearson [32] als Produkt-Moment-Korrelationskoeffizient entwickelt. Es ist das bekannteste und meistgenutzte statistische Verfahren unserer Zeit geworden. Andere Statistiker, insbesondere Sir Ronald Fisher [33–35] und Tukey [36], haben den Korrelationskoeffizienten wegen seines Missbrauchs aufgrund vereinfachender Anwendungen und zweifelhafter Interpretationen kritisiert. Dennoch bleibt der Korrelationskoeffizient eine beliebte Analysetechnik. Pearson [37] produzierte auch drei Bände über das Leben, die Briefe und die Werke von Galton.

Galtons Daten für die Elle seiner Zeit sind in Tabelle 9 aufgeführt. Sie wurden Stigler [38, Seite 319] The History of Statistics entnommen. Seine ursprüngliche Quelle ist Galton [39], dessen Untersuchung Daten liefert, die vor etwa 130 Jahren über den Unterarm oder die Elle gesammelt wurden. Stigler [38, Seite 319] gab an, dass drei von Galtons Zeilensummen falsch summiert wurden. Diese Summen wurden in Tabelle 9 korrigiert.

Statur in Zoll Unter 16,5 Unter 17 Unter 17,5 Unter 18 Unter 18,5 Unter 19 Unter 19,5 Über 19,5 71+ 0 0 0 1 3 4 15 7 30 70 0 0 0 1 5 13 11 0 30 69 0 1 1 2 25 15 6 0 50 68 0 1 3 7 14 7 4 2 38 67 0 1 7 15 28 8 2 0 61 66 0 1 7 18 15 6 0 0 47 65 0 4 10 12 8 2 0 0 36 64 0 5 11 2 3 0 0 0 21 −64 9 12 10 3 1 0 0 0 35 Gesamt 9 25 49 61 102 55 38 9 348 Zoll 16,5 17 17,5 18 18,5 19 19,5 19,5 Häufigkeit 9 25 49 61 102 55 38 9

Figure 2 summarizes the relative frequency of forearm/cubit lengths from Galton’s data on 348 subjects given in Table 9.

Figure 2 indicates the modal category of forearm/cubit measures for Galton’s sample was 18.5 inches. The frequency distribution of forearm measurements is somewhat balanced. This might be expected given that these measures would be determined by chance through heredity. This was Galton’s viewpoint and emphasis. Consequently, his attention derived from this data and other data moved his interest to eugenics. Many other English scientists and statisticians shared this interest; Fisher, Pearson, Haldane, Cattell, and others [40]. Galton (and the others) received considerable criticism for taking this position. However, it was as a scientist and compiler of human data that led Galton to draw his inferences. His pronouncements [30, 31, 41] concerning eugenics do not smack of a political or personal agenda. One may disagree, but it is important to understand that Galton’s work was focused upon data and methodology as the basis for forming his conclusions.

The mean for the Galton sample of 348 persons in Table 9 was almost 18 inches bringing estimates of a center location (i.e., mode, median, and mean) in sync with an approximate normal distribution as shown in Table 10.

Millimeters Inches Mean 67.06609 17.83621 Standard error 0.126798 0.042699 Median 67 18 Mode 67 18 Standard deviation 2.365384 0.796541 Sample variance 5.595043 0.634478 Kurtosis −0.9142 −0.42833 Skewness −0.09243 −0.16653 Range 8 3.5 Minimum 63 16 Maximum 71 19.5 Sum 23339 6207 Count 348 348

From Galton’s data summarized in Figure 2 and Tables 9 and 10 about 2% had forearms at 16.5′′ or less and 2% had forearms greater than 19.5′′. Approximately 63% or 218 persons and close to two-thirds of the 348 person sample are within one-half inch + or − the mean of 18.3 inches or almost 18.5′′ if rounded off. About 95% vary less than an inch above and below the mean estimate. Rounding from these frequencies makes these values approximate, but they still provide a generally useful summary from his sample. Skewness and kurtosis appear as minimal influences on the distribution further confirming a balanced distribution.

Figure 3 provides a three-dimensional view of Galton’s data. It usefully shows the clustering of values along the center diagonal from the upper left to lower right. Galton’s figures were not shown as three-dimensional, but he recorded the frequencies at each intersection of his two-way table which were used to produce this three-dimensional figure. Pondering his data gave rise to Galton’s work on association/correlation for which the word regression has now evolved being derived from his efforts to interpret what this and other data express. See Stigler [38] for more details on Galton’s analytic methods. These matters are not directly connected to the issues of cubit length and therefore not discussed here. However, the relationship of cubit to stature is useful and it can be compared to Da Vinci’s estimate.

Stigler [38, page 319] indicated “Galton’s ad hoc semigraphical approach gave the correlation value .” This was Galton’s approach prior to the Pearson product moment correlation which when calculated for his data gave .

Figure 4 is a plot of data from Table 9 with a linear regression line and showing the variation in forearm/cubit at each level of stature. It is very important to note the wide variation of left cubit measures (vertical) for each indication of stature (horizontal). Individual differences in the cubit/forearm are clearly evident at each point of stature thwarting anything more specific than a generalized indication for the forearm/cubit from Galton’s data. The shared variance between stature and cubit is about 57% suggesting these two variables are related but not completely.

Several questions emanate from Galton’s data regarding forearm length or the cubit.(1)How representative is this sample of the general population?(2)How much change, if any, in human dimensions has occurred from ancient times and over the one hundred plus years from Galton’s sample to the present day?(3)Is there any gender difference or other sources of influence and bias?

From what we know of Galton’s methods there appears no indication of outright bias. Stigler [38] in chapters 8, 9, and 10 of his book raised no questions when describing Galton’s data and methods for analysing data. Galton’s samples were large and often in the thousands. This cubit sample is moderate in scope. Galton was aware of gender differences and utilized 1.08 as a correction factor for male/female differences [38].

However, there is little information regarding sample representation. It appears that Galton was generally fastidious in his investigations. He utilized gatherings of the general population from which to procure his samples and make his measurements. Given that right handedness predominates, Galton measured the left hand to avoid what might result from possible environmental influences upon the mostly dominant right hand. Volunteering could be a potential source of bias, but volunteering probably allowed a larger sample of individuals. He paid individuals a modest amount to participate not unlike what is sometimes done today.

Johnsonet al. [42] reviewed and reanalyzed Galton’s original data. They report on mean scores, correlations of the measures with age, correlations among measures, occupational differences in scores, and sibling correlations. A correlation of cubit/forearm to stature indicated the former was about 25–27% of stature. Nothing further is added to a knowledge of forearm/cubit dinemsion by their work.

Relevance of the forearm/cubit length in more recent times comes from anthropometric dimensions utilized in industrial psychology and applications to the clothing industry. Data from Mech [43] gives more recent data of human dimensions including the forearm. Forearm lengths reported for percentiles 5, 50, and 95 are given in Table 11.

Percentile 5 50 95 Male 440 475 516 Female 400 430 460

These percentiles are from an unidentified British sample ages 19 to 65. Lacking more information one can only compare and contrast these dimensions to previous samples discussed earlier. These males had a median cubit measure of 475 mm or ~18.7 inches. Females measured a slightly shorter median measure of 430 mm or ~16.9 inches. Mech [43] indicated a median value close to that given in Table 9 for Galton’s data or ~18.7 to ~18.3.

The Lean Manufacturing Strategy reports a forearm mean = 18.9′, standard deviation = 0.81′, minimum = 15.4′, and maximum = 22.1′ based on data from McCormick [45]. Nothing further is given regarding this sample and its characteristics.

There are numerous sites and organizations providing carefully determined dimensions for the human body. However, these dimensions are developed to serve the clothing industry and furniture design adding nothing to a knowledge of the contemporary forearm/cubit dimension [46].

The anthropometry database ANSUR [47] obtained from http://www.openlab.psu.edu/ gives a table of percentiles for the horizontal measure made “from the back of the elbow to the tip of the middle finger with the hand extended,” that is, cubit. The sample was comprised of unidentified male army recruits.

The ANSUR data sample [47] in Table 12 provides descriptive statistics for the right male forearm plus extended hand in millimeters. The mean for this quite large contemporary sample is about one inch greater than the short cubit reported much earlier. So is the median although the mode is slightly less. The sample appears reasonably balanced, but the variation indicated by the standard error, standard deviation, and range show this human dimension to vary. Variation has been encountered before in the reporting of earlier samples.

(a) 1st 2.5th 5th 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th 95th 97.5th 99th 435 442 448 455 468 483 499 515 523 532 542 (b) Mean 484.04 (19.05 inches) Standard error 0.55 Median 483 (19.01 inches) Mode 472 (18.58 inches) Standard deviation 23.32 Sample variance 544.09 Kurtosis 0.43 Skewness 0.22 Range 192 Minimum 386 Maximum 578 Count 1774

7. Discussion

The varied dimensions for the historical cubit of ancient times and places speak to a variation in the dimension itself. Two major units predominate; one estimate centers around 18 inches and the other around 20 inches. There are other variations, some smaller and some much greater. There is too wide a geographical area and too great a chronological time period to consider any of these latter variations normative. Each variant was more likely to be locally relevant rather than widely prominent. Only in the Greek and Roman empires through war, trade, and construction did these values coalesce to somewhat of a standard.

How has the human physique changed over time? Roche [48] reported that rates of growth during childhood have increased considerably during the past 50–100 years. He indicated increases in rates of growth and maturation for all developed nations, but not evident in many other countries. There were recorded increases in length at birth in Italy and France, but little change in the United States. An increase in childhood stature was given for about 1.5 cm/decade for 12-year-old children. The increase in stature for youth was about 0.4 cm/decade in most developed countries. The changes in body proportions during recent decades were reported as less marked than those in body size. Leg length increased more than stature in men but not in women. Roach further indicated that changes in nutrition alone could not account for the trends which exceed the original socioeconomic differentials. In the United States, Roach reported there have been per capita increases in the intake of protein and fat from animal sources, decreases in carbohydrates and fat from vegetable sources, and some changes in caloric intake. It is not clear that these changes constitute better nutrition stimulating growth. The trends could reflect environmental improvements, specifically changes in health practices and living conditions leading to improvements for mortality rates and life expectancy [44]. Nutrition varies even in developed countries. Roche [48] reported genetic factors play a small role in causing trends. However, the data speaks to considerable variation among contemporary samples as also noted in Galton’s data.

Overall, it seems unwise to be overly fastidious about any contemporary value for the cubit when such samples are vaguely described. For any comparison of contemporary dimensions reported there are few characteristics given by which to judge sample representation. The contemporary estimates appear somewhat close together and suggest at least for these samples no great change has occurred over the years, but we cannot be sure lacking valid data. Without more sample definition, any fastidious analysis appears unwarranted. The Galton values are likely to have been local and relevant to a British sample. Nowadays samples are more likely to reflect the role of immigration with whatever additional effects this might bring to bear on determining national human dimensions. In general, Europeans are taller than Asian/Middle East peoples and Americans are taller than Europeans. These are generalizations from gross estimates. Komlos and Baten [49] have made a comprehensive analysis of stature over centuries. The striking feature of their tables is the intravariation of values for each time period. Individual variation was also observed in Galton’s data. However, systematic sampling and sample details must accompany any data before estimates can be more than gross general indications.

A variety of circumstances address the cubit, but most of them offer little specific information beyond what has already been presented. These biased sites typically serve some agenda, often religious or personal. Overall, even these sites typically report the two major dimensions for the cubit at 18 inches or 20 inches.

The cubit as a dimension remains useful. We take the cubit (hand and foot) wherever we travel. Knowing personal dimensions can sometimes prove useful for making quick albeit gross estimates. The 18′′ ruler is a very handy device whenever measures just beyond a foot ruler are required, especially when it is necessary to draw straight lines for a length just beyond twelve inches. Tape measures are a boon, but not for drawing lines.

It appears that we might content ourselves with a cubit length of 18 inches as a somewhat consistent dimension for the cubit. Even as the foot evolved from a specific albeit arbitrary personage, any assemblage of them leads to an abstract dimension, so the cubit could justify more application as a 0.5 yard and/or a 0.5 meter. Further prominence of either or both these units might prove more useful than first surmised.

conflict of interest

The author declares that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Goliath, the giant felled by King David in the Hebrew Bible, is described as staggering in size.

But that number may not have been a true physical measure, but rather a metaphor, coming from the width of his hometown’s city walls, new research suggests. This does not reveal whether other aspects of the story are true – for example, whether Goliath was a giant or whether his unequal fight took place with David.

“We’re not trying to make a statement about the accuracy of the story,” said Jeffrey Chadwick, Jerusalem Center professor of archeology and Middle Eastern studies at Brigham Young University, in a paper he presented at the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR). ) virtual annual meeting on November 19th. “The problem is the metric,” he said, “where does it come from, where could it have been obtained?”

Related: Biblical Battles: 12 Ancient Wars from the Bible

Old Metrics

The lower northern city wall in the ancient city of Gath was about 2.38 meters wide. This is equivalent to four cubits and a span—the same height that Goliath, according to some biblical texts, once was. (Image credit: Aren Maeir, 2019)

(opens in new tab)

Some ancient texts say that Goliath stood at “four cubits and a span” – which, according to Chadwick, is about 7.80 feet (2.38 meters) – while other ancient texts claim that he was “six cubits and a span” tall – a measurement equivalent to about 11.35 feet (3.46 m). That would certainly have been an impressive height, as the tallest recorded person of modern times was Robert Wadlow, who stood at an impressive 2.72 m (8 ft 11 in) according to Guinness World Records.

But how much these “cubits” and “spans” are in modern measurements is a source of debate among scholars. These measurements likely varied throughout the ancient world. Chadwick has studied ancient architectural sites throughout ancient Israel, measuring the remains of numerous structures and noting measurements that appear to be commonly used. His research shows that a “cubit” in the region was 1.77 feet (54 centimeters) and a wingspan was 0.72 feet (22 cm). He prepares his metrical research for publication.

Hometown measurement

The site of Gath (also known as Tell es-Safi) can be seen from afar here. According to the Hebrew Bible, it was the hometown of Goliath. (Image credit: Jeff Chadwick)

(opens in new tab)

Chadwick is part of a team excavating Gath (aka Tell es-Safi), a Philistine city where, according to the Hebrew Bible, Goliath grew up.

Related: 7 Biblical Artifacts That Will Likely Never Be Found

Recently, the team excavated a fortification wall found in the northern part of the lower city. The wall was built in the 10th century BC. It was built around 1000 B.C., a time “when the Philistines controlled the city since it served as their capital,” Chadwick told Live Science. “The stone wall foundations were exactly eight feet wide at any point along the 130 feet of their line uncovered by our excavation—four cubits and a span,” Chadwick said. He determined that the wall was possibly 7 m high.

In his ASOR presentation, Chadwick suggested that biblical writers may have obtained Goliath’s height from the breadth of Gath’s northern lower city wall. He noted that Goliath is the only person whose exact height is recorded in the Bible. “No one else’s height is recorded as an actual metric,” Chadwick said.

Given that the Bible authors probably did not have access to Goliath’s body, the question remains as to how the Biblical authors got Goliath’s size of “four cubits and a span.”

It is possible, then, that the authors “metaphorically described the Champion [Goliath] as comparable to the size and strength of the walled city of the Philistine capital – a metric that would have survived for many centuries and by those familiar with Gath.” , would have been known,” Chadwick said.

Live Science contacted several experts unaffiliated with the research for their opinions on Chadwick’s theory. At the time of publication, no one was able to reply. The excavations at Gath are being led by Aren Maeir, a professor of archeology at Bar Ilan University in Israel.

Originally published on Live Science.

The Oxford Biblical Studies Online and Oxford Islamic Studies Online have retired. Content previously purchased from Oxford Biblical Studies Online or Oxford Islamic Studies Online has now been moved to Oxford Reference, Oxford Handbooks Online, Oxford Scholarship Online or What Everyone Needs to Know®. Visit the Subscriber Services page for information on how to continue viewing articles.

: a distance of 2000 cubits that a Jew may, by rabbinic law, travel on the Sabbath from the walled boundaries of a town or city

: a distance of 2000 cubits that a Jew may, by rabbinic law, travel on the Sabbath from the walled boundaries of a town or city

: a distance of 2000 cubits that a Jew may, by rabbinic law, travel on the Sabbath from the walled boundaries of a town or city

love words?

You must – there are over 200,000 words in our free online dictionary, but you’re looking for one that’s only in the Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary.

Start your free trial today and get unlimited access to America’s largest dictionary with:

More than 250,000 words not in our free dictionary

Extended definitions, etymologies and usage notes

Advanced search functions

Ad-free!

The ultimate fate of the Ark of the Covenant is unclear. Jewish tradition claims that the ark was destroyed during the Babylonian sack of Jerusalem in 586 BC. BC disappeared. Archaeologists believe there are no reliable records of the Ark’s whereabouts after this date. Nevertheless, there are many theories and claims about the later location of the ark. Learn more.

What happened to the Ark of the Covenant?

Jewish and Christian scriptures dictate that the Ark of the Covenant may only be carried by Levites, who formed the ancient Jewish priestly class. They must carry the ark using two wooden poles inserted through rings on its sides, as touching the ark itself will result in death at God’s hand. According to 2 Samuel, the Levite Uzzah touched the ark with his hand to steady it, and God killed him instantly.

Who may touch the Ark of the Covenant?

According to Jewish and Christian tradition, ancient Israelites carried the Ark of the Covenant through the wilderness and occasionally into battle. Under King David, the Ark of the Covenant was buried in the city of Jerusalem. Sometime in the 10th century B.C. King Solomon built the Temple of Jerusalem, and the Ark of the Covenant was placed in the innermost Holy of Holies of the Temple, the Holy of Holies (in Hebrew Qodesh Ha-qadashim). This room was only accessible to the Israelite high priest and only once a year, on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement.

What historical role did the Ark of the Covenant play?

The Ark of the Covenant is a gilded wooden box which, according to Jewish and Christian tradition, houses the two tablets containing the Ten Commandments given by God to Moses.

What is the Ark of the Covenant?

Ark of the Covenant, Hebrew Aron Ha-berit, in Judaism and Christianity the richly decorated, gilded wooden chest that in biblical times contained the two tablets of the law given to Moses by God. The Ark of the Covenant rested in the Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle of the ancient Temple of Jerusalem and was only seen by the High Priest of the Israelites on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement.

Ark of the Covenant Transport of the Ark of the Covenant, gilt brass relief, Sainte-Marie Cathedral, Auch, France. Vasil

The Levites (priestly officials) carried the Ark of the Covenant with them during the Hebrew wanderings in the wilderness. After the conquest of Canaan, the Promised Land, the Ark of the Covenant was in Shiloh, but was carried into battle by the Israelites from time to time. Brought to Jerusalem by King David, it was finally placed in the Temple by King Solomon. The ultimate fate of the ark is unknown.

For centuries, the most common image of Jesus Christ, at least in Western cultures, has been that of a bearded, fair-skinned male with long, wavy, light brown or blond hair and (often) blue eyes. But the Bible does not describe Jesus physically, and all the evidence we have suggests that he probably looked very different from how he was long portrayed.

What Does the Bible Say?

The Bible offers few references to the physical appearance of Christ. Most of what we know about Jesus comes from the first four books of the New Testament, the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. According to the Gospels, Jesus was a Jewish man, born in Bethlehem in the first century AD and raised in the city of Nazareth in Galilee (formerly Palestine, now northern Israel).

We know that Jesus was about 30 years old when he began his ministry (Luke 3:23), but the Bible tells us practically nothing about what he looked like—except that he didn’t stand out in any special way. When Jesus was arrested before he was crucified in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:47-56), Judas Iscariot had to point his soldiers among the disciples to Jesus—presumably because they all seemed alike.

WATCH: Jesus: His Life in the HISTORY Vault

Godong/UIG via Getty Images

For many scholars, Revelation 1:14-15 provides an indication that Jesus’ skin was a darker shade and that his hair was woolly. The hair on his head, it is said, “was white as white wool, white as snow.

“We don’t know what [Jesus] looked like, but if everything we know about him is true, he was a Palestinian Jew living in the Galilee in the first century,” says Robert Cargill, assistant professor of classics and religious studies at the University of Iowa and editor of the Biblical Archeology Review. “So he would have looked like a first-century Palestinian Jew. He would have looked like a Jewish Galilean.”

READ MORE: Who Wrote the Bible?

How have depictions of Jesus changed over the centuries?

Some of the earliest known artistic depictions of Jesus date from the mid-third century AD, more than two centuries after his death. These are the paintings in the ancient catacombs of St. Domitilla in Rome, first discovered around 400 years ago. The paintings reflect one of the most common images of Jesus of the time and show Jesus as the Good Shepherd, a young, short-haired, beardless man with a lamb around his shoulders.

The restored fresco shows Jesus and his apostles in the Roman catacomb of Santa Domitilla. Andreas Solaro/AFP/Getty Images

Another rare early portrait of Jesus was discovered in 2018 on the walls of a ruined church in southern Israel. Painted in the sixth century AD, it is the earliest known image of Christ found in Israel, and shows him with shorter, curly hair, a depiction that was common in the eastern region of the Byzantine Empire – particularly Egypt and Syria-Palestine region – but disappeared from later Byzantine art.

READ MORE: Does this 1,500-year-old painting show what Jesus looked like?

The long-haired, bearded image of Jesus, which emerged from the 4th century AD, was heavily influenced by depictions of Greek and Roman gods, particularly the almighty Greek god Zeus. At this point, Jesus began to appear in a long robe, seated on a throne (as in the 5th-century mosaic on the altar of the church of Santa Pudenziana in Rome), sometimes with a halo around his head.

“The purpose of these images was never to show Jesus as a man, but to provide theological clues as to who Jesus was as Christ (King, Judge) and Divine Son,” Joan Taylor, Professor of Christian Origins and Second Temple Judaism at King’s College London , wrote in The Irish Times. “They have evolved over time into the standard ‘Jesus’ that we recognize.”

Of course, not all images of Jesus correspond to the dominant image of him portrayed in Western art. In fact, many different cultures around the world have depicted him as one of their own, at least visually. “Cultures tend to portray prominent religious figures as looking like the dominant racial identity,” Cargill explains.

READ MORE: The Bible says Jesus was real. What other evidence is there?

What is the Shroud of Turin?

Of the many possible relics that have surfaced in association with Jesus over the centuries, one of the best known is the Shroud of Turin, which surfaced in 1354. Believers argued that after his crucifixion, Jesus was wrapped in the piece of linen that the shroud bears the clear image of his face. But many experts have dismissed the shroud as a fake, and the Vatican itself describes it as an “icon” rather than a relic.

A negative image of the Shroud of Turin. Art Images/Heritage Images/Getty Images

“The Shroud of Turin has been exposed as a medieval forgery a couple of times,” says Cargill. “It is part of a larger phenomenon that has existed since Jesus himself, namely, trying to acquire objects and, when they cannot be acquired, making objects that are part of Jesus’ body, life and ministry – for both purposes his existence and to legitimize the claims made about him or, in some cases, to harness his miraculous powers.”

READ MORE: Shroud of Turin is not Jesus’ shroud, claims Forensic Study

What research and science can tell us about Jesus

In 2001, retired medical artist Richard Neave led a team of Israeli and British forensic anthropologists and computer programmers to create a new image of Jesus based on a first-century AD Israeli skull, using computer modeling and their knowledge of what Jewish people are based looked back then. Although no one claims that it is an exact reconstruction of what Jesus himself actually looked like, scholars consider this image—about 5 feet tall, with darker skin, dark eyes, and shorter, curly hair—to be more accurate than many artistic depictions of the Son From God.

In her 2018 book What Did Jesus Look Like?, Taylor used archaeological remains, historical texts, and ancient Egyptian funerary art to conclude that Jesus, like most people in Judea and Egypt at the time, was most likely brown eyes and dark brown to black hair and olive skin. He may have stood about 5 feet 5 inches. (166 cm) tall, the average height of men at the time.

While Cargill agrees that these more recent images of Jesus — including darker, perhaps curly hair, darker skin, and dark eyes — are probably closer to the truth, he emphasizes that we can never really know for sure what Jesus looked like.

“What did the Jewish Galileans look like 2,000 years ago?” he asks. “That’s the question. You probably didn’t have blue eyes or blonde hair.”

First man and prophet in Islam

Adam (Arabic: آدم, romanized: ʾĀdam) is said to have been the first human on earth and the first prophet (Arabic: نبي, nabī) of Islam.[1] Adam’s role as the father of mankind is held in awe by Muslims. Muslims also refer to his wife Hawā (Arabic: حواء, Eva) as “the mother of mankind”.[2] Muslims consider Adam to be the first Muslim since the Qur’an states that all prophets preached the same faith of Islam (Arabic: إسلام‎, submission to God).[3]

An overview of the creation[ edit ]

Adam honored by angels – Persian miniature (c.1560)

The Qur’an and Hadith give the same account of the creation of Adam. Synthesizing the Qur’an with Sunni Hadith can lead to the following report. According to the Qur’an, when God told the angels that He would put a successor on earth, they wondered if man would cause bloodshed and harm, but He told them that He knew what they did not know.[4] He created Adam from mud or clay and breathed life into him. Hadith adds that he was called Adam after the clay of which he was made, or the skin (adim) of the earth.

According to the Qur’an, God commands the angels to prostrate themselves before Adam, upon which all of them obeyed except Iblis who claimed, “I am better than him. You created me from fire while you created him from mud.”[5]

Traditionally, Sunni scholars say that while Adam was sleeping, God took a rib from him and created Eve from it. However, this also counts as “from the Israelites”. While the creation of Adam and Eve is mentioned in the Qur’an, the exact method of creation is not specified.[6] The Qur’an then says that God commanded Adam and Eve not to eat from a tree in the garden, but Satan was able to persuade them to taste it. Then they began to cover themselves, knowing now that they were naked.[7] For this, God banished Adam and Eve to earth; Non-canonical Sunni hadith say that fruits turned into thorns and pregnancy became dangerous. Non-canonical Sunni hadith also say that Adam and Eve were thrown far apart so they had to seek each other out and eventually met at Mount Arafat.[6]

In Islamic theology, it is not believed that Adam’s sin is borne by all of his children.[8] Hadith saying that when he was on earth, God taught him how to plant seeds and bake bread. This was to be the way of all the children of Adam.[9] Adam lived about 1000 years, although this has been a topic of debate.[9]

Commenting on whether Adam was first or Eve, Islamic scholar Sayyid Mumtaz Ali says: “The fact that Adam was created first is nothing but childish. First of all, we are tempted to say that this is because it was unacceptable to God that a woman should be left without a partner for even a second. Therefore, He first created Adam for their sake. But actually the belief that Adam was created first and then Eve came is part of the Christian and Jewish belief. This is not part of the Islamic faith at all. There is no mention in the Qur’an of who was created first, Adam or Eve.”[10]

Meaning of Adam[ edit ]

According to disputed hadiths, mankind learned everything from Adam. He was the first to learn to plant, harvest, and bake, and he was the first to be taught penance and proper burial.[6] It is also said by some scholars that God also revealed to Adam the various dietary restrictions and the alphabet.[9] He was made the first prophet and is said to have been taught 21 scrolls and able to write them himself.[9]

Adam was also created from earth. It is known that the earth produces crops, nourishes animals, and provides shelter, among other things. The earth is very important to humanity, so its creation makes it very diverse.[7] According to some hadiths, the different races of people are even due to the different colors of soil used in the creation of Adam. The soil also contributed to the idea that there are good people, bad people and everything in between in the world.[11] Adam is an important figure in many other religions besides Islam, especially the Abrahamic religions.[12] The story of Adam varies slightly between religions but manages to maintain a general theme and structure.[12]

The story of angels prostrating to Adam led to various debates as to whether humans or angels were superior. Angels bowing to Adam are mentioned as evidence of man’s superiority over angels. Others hold that prostration did not imply such a thing, but was merely a command or test for the angels.[13] A position found particularly among Mu’tazilites and some Asharites holds that angels are superior due to their lack of urges and desires.[14] Maturidism generally does not believe that any of these creatures is superior to the other and that the obedience of angels and prophets derives from their virtues and insight into God’s dealings, not from their pristine purity.[15]

In the Qur’anic version of Adam’s fall, Satan enticed them with promises of becoming immortal angels. Al-Qushayri comments 7:20 that Adam desired an angelic state without passion, avoiding the fate of death.[16]

Descendants of Adam[ edit ]

Although it is debatable, it has been said that Eve went through 120 pregnancies with Adam, each of which consisted of a pair of twins: a boy and a girl.[9] In some other traditions, their first child was a single-born girl named ʿAnāq.[17] According to several sources, God took all of Adam’s seed off his back while they were still in heaven. He asked each of them, “Am I not your Lord?” as read in verse 7:172 and all answered yes.[9] For this reason it is believed that all human beings are born with an innate knowledge of God. The most famous children of Adam are Cain and Abel. Both brothers were asked to offer individual sacrifices to God. God accepted Abel’s sacrifice because of Abel’s righteousness, and Cain, out of jealousy, threw a stone at Abel, leading to the first murder in human history: Cain’s murder of Abel.[9] When Adam grieved his son, he preached to his other children about God and faith in him.[11] As Adam’s death approached, he appointed his son Seth as his successor.[11]

Adam in the Quran[edit]

The story of Adam and creation runs throughout the Qur’an. There are references in chapters: 2, 4, 5, 20, 21, 38 and others. In the Qur’anic narrative, God created mankind from clay (Q3:59),[18] molded them into a form, and then commanded the angels to bow down (submit) to Adam. Iblis refused out of pride (Q15:26-32)[19] and was banished from Jannah (paradise).

According to the Qur’an, God had already decided before creating Adam that mankind (Adam and his descendants) would be put on earth. Islam ascribes mankind’s life on earth not as a punishment but as part of God’s plan.

“‘Truly I will put mankind upon the earth, generation after generation.’ They (the angels) said: ‘Will you put in them those who wreak havoc in it and shed blood, while we (the angels) give you praise and thanksgiving and sanctify you?’ God said, ‘I know what you don’t know.’”

God then teaches Adam the names of all things and gathers the angels before Adam to show them that Adam has more than they know, particularly Adam’s high intellectual capacity:

“And he taught Adam the names – all of them. Then he showed them to the angels and said: “Tell me the names of these, if you are truthful.” They said: “Glory to you (said the angels), we have no knowledge except what you have taught us: In truth it is You who are perfect in knowledge and wisdom.” He said, “O Adam! Tell them their names.” When He had told them, God said (to the angels): “Did I not tell you that I know the mysteries of heaven and earth, and I know what you reveal and what you hide? ”

God commands the angels to bow down to Adam. All obey except Iblis who feels made of fire should not bow to Adam who was made of earth. His disobedience to God’s command, followed by his pride, caused him to fall into God’s favor:

“And behold, We said to the angels: ‘Bow down to Adam,’ and they bow down. Not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: he was of those who reject the faith (those who disobey).” (2:34)

Later, God places Adam and Eve in the garden and tells them that they are free to enjoy its fruit, except not to approach a certain tree: (2:35)

“We said, ‘O Adam! live you and your wife in the garden; and eat of the bounty in it as (where and when) you will; but do not approach that tree, lest you run into mischief and transgression.”

Satan then tempts Adam and Eve to eat the fruit of the tree: (2:36)

“Then Satan let them slip out of (the garden) and brought them out of the state (of bliss) in which they had been towards others. On earth will be your dwelling place and your livelihood—for a time.”

Adam and Eve feel great remorse for their actions, but God turns to Adam in mercy and comforts him: (2:37)

“Then Adam learned inspirational words from his Lord, and his Lord turned to him;

God then informs Adam that God will send His guidance to Adam and his descendants: (2:38)

“We said, ‘Everyone come down from this place (the Garden), for whenever guidance comes to you from Me and whoever follows My guidance, there will be no fear upon them, nor will they be sad.’

In the Garden of Eden, Satan (often identified as Iblis) lures Adam and Eve into disobeying God by tasting the fruit of the forbidden tree. God, send Adam and Eve out to the rest of the earth.[20][21]

The Koran also describes the two sons of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel.[22][23]

Adam in hadith[ edit ]

A hadith from Sahih al-Bukhari narrated by Abu Hurairah states that Adam was created 60 cubits (about 30 meters) tall and that the people of Paradise will look like Adam. Human height has since decreased.[24]

The Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Allah created Adam sixty cubits (about 30 meters) high. When He created him, He said (to him), “Go and greet that company of angels that are sitting there, and hear what they want to say to you in reply, for that will be your greeting and the greeting of your posterity.” Adam (went and) said: ‘As-Salamu alaikum (peace be upon you).’ They replied: ‘As Salamu-‘Alaika wa Rahmatullah (peace and mercy of Allah be upon you). So they ‘Wa Rahmatullah’ increased the creation of Adams (offspring) (i.e. the stature of people is continuously decreasing) up to the present time.”

See also[edit]

Notes [edit]

How big should Noah’s ark have been? Wouldn’t it be possible to fit two specimens of each type on a huge cruise ship like the Oasis of the Seas?

how to measure size Attempting to draw any comparisons to a mythical Noah’s Ark is virtually impossible. Not only is the required cubic capacity unquantifiable, but the logistics of keeping each of the creature pairs alive and well seems to have been sidelined in the equation.

It would have been impossible to create a habitat compatible with each creature’s original home. for example, bamboo plantations for the pandas, eucalyptus groves for the koala bears, ice floes for the penguins and polar bears, pools for the freshwater creatures that are at risk of flooding, and the filter and pump systems needed to maintain hygiene standards. Isolation would have been vital if all more aggressive creatures hadn’t suddenly been endowed with docility.

The herbivores would have needed a huge storage area for their dried grasses; The carnivores, if not adjusted as above, would have wreaked havoc on their neighbors and thus required a supply of fresh meat from an unspecified source.

All in all, it’s best to keep the story in its mythical cocoon cloaked in blind religious belief.

Jack Hill, St Albans, Herts

The dimensions of Noah’s ark in Genesis chapter 6 are given in cubits (about 18-22 inches): length 300 cubits, width 50 cubits, and height 30 cubits. Taking the lower cubit, this gives dimensions in feet of 450 x 75 x 45, which compares to 850 x 92 x 64 for the Titanic. The ark was built in six months by 600-year-old Noah and his three sons. Whether he employed other labor (to be drowned) and how he obtained the necessary supplies of gopher wood and pitch is not recorded. But there would have been plenty of room for animals and feed for the limited number of local species.

Gavin Ross, Harpenden, Herts

Very very big.

JBowers

How was it that King Hamlet’s brother Claudius succeeded him to the throne when he died and not his son, Prince Hamlet?

Claudius planned his coup carefully. He waited till young Hamlet was in Wittenberg; he had already got Polonius (and presumably the other electors as well) on his side and wooed Gertrud. When Prince Hamlet returned to Denmark, it was a fait accompli.

Claudius’ justifications probably ran along these lines: his experienced political acumen versus his nephew’s lack of experience; the Norwegian threat, which requires a sure pair of hands; the unlikelihood that Gertrude would have any more children, meaning Hamlet’s heir was only postponed as he would almost certainly be Claudius’ eventual heir.

CatieG

Yes, there is no reason to assume that every throne of the day automatically passed to the eldest son upon the death of his parents. Shortly before Shakespeare was born, Edward VI. attempted to wrest the throne from his half-sisters Mary and Elizabeth, and he failed only because the nobility did not cooperate. In King John, set in an earlier time, Richard leaves his throne to his brother John rather than his child nephew Arthur; The nobles join in and John duly ascends to the throne and keeps it.

smug

Like yoga, has Pilates been practiced for thousands of years?

Pontius Pilates, the Roman governor who washed his hands from Jesus, invented his fitness program 2,000 years ago, so it’s likely his methods will be practiced for centuries to come. Count Otto von Pressup is also likely to have become immortal through his invention of physical training.

Avenue31

I thought it was Captain Sparrow who invented the exercise program in Pilates of the Caribbean.

Well

Answer more questions about…

How do you get rid of unwanted calls?

Were there jumping dinosaurs?

ETHICAL PUZZLES

How long is a biblical cubit? THE cubit is the distance between the elbow and the tip of the middle finger. Most modern translations of the Bible replace modern units. For example, the New English Bible converts Deuteronomy 3:11’s “nine cubits” (the length of the coffin of the giant king Og) to “almost 14 feet,” while the Good News Bible converts it to “four meters.” What a pity to drop the old word! The question remains as to what actual length was used. One calculation is based on the fact that the Siloam Aqueduct was 1,200 cubits long “in round numbers.” Its actual length is 1,750 feet, which is 1,193 cubits by 44.7 cm (17.6 in). In the building of Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem (II Chronicles 3:3), however, “cubits of the first measure” are mentioned. This may refer to the 52.4 cm (20.63 inch) Egyptian cubit or to the Deuteronomy cubit. Michael L. Cox, Nuneaton, Warwicks.

Add your answer

Life-size Noah’s Ark opens amid a tide of skepticism

Enlarge Image Toggle Caption Ashley Westerman/NPR Ashley Westerman/NPR

Built in the rolling hills of northern Kentucky, a replica of Noah’s Ark is literally of biblical proportions. The wooden structure is seven stories high and 1 1/2 soccer fields long.

“The Bible states that the original ark was 300 cubits long, using the Hebrew royal cubit, which by today’s calculations is 510 feet,” says Mark Looey, co-founder of Answers in Genesis, the Christian ministry that runs the attraction has built. It is the same group that opened the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky in 2007, which promotes a literal interpretation of the Bible and other teachings: that planet Earth is only 6,000 years old and man lived side by side with dinosaurs.

The Ark attraction has been mired in controversy for years, and while Answers in Genesis promises jobs and more tourism in a region in dire need of an economic boost, it’s been a pretty mixed blessing for many who live there.

‘After the Flash and Bang’

The Ark offers three decks of exhibits so sophisticated you might think you’ve stepped into Disney World.

However, there are no live animals on the ark. “There’s a zoo for them back there,” says Looey. Instead, the ark will be filled with lifelike animal models — including dinosaurs and a pair of unicorns — designed by many of the people who also made exhibits for the Creation Museum.

The ark doesn’t float either. Ken Ham, President and CEO of Answers in Genesis and Ark Encounter, says it wasn’t built to swim. “We built it as a reminder, a reminder of God’s Word and the account of Noah and the Flood,” he says.

Religion Noah’s Ark in Kentucky meets controversy Noah’s Ark in Kentucky meets controversy Listen · 3:21 3:21

It cost $100 million to build and is expected to attract up to 2 million visitors a year and millions in tourism revenue, according to an independent study by the ministry. Looey says they have already hired over 300 people and hundreds more jobs are on the way when the other phases – including a walled city and a replica Tower of Babel – are complete.

Many in Williamstown, Kentucky, the small town just across Interstate 75 from the attraction, are waiting with bated breath for the grand opening. The town — the rural seat of Grant County, Kentucky — has a population of about 4,000. It’s a mid-range sleeper community right between Cincinnati and Lexington, Kentucky.

Williamstown Mayor Rick Skinner, an avid supporter of the attraction, says the city has already upgraded its electricity supply and built a new water treatment plant. The city center is also getting a facelift. Many new stores have opened on Main Street, while others are undergoing renovations. Before news of the Ark encounter hit town, the old brick buildings that lined Main Street were mostly empty.

Enlarge Image Toggle Caption Ashley Westerman/NPR Ashley Westerman/NPR

Local attorney Bill Adkins says when the recession hit Williamstown, it hit it hard. He remembers sitting in foreclosure settlements almost every week.

According to the study cited by Answers in Genesis, the Ark’s economic impact will be approximately $4 billion over the next decade. But Adkins is skeptical.

“We haven’t seen the hotels, we haven’t seen the restaurants that come in to support this attraction,” he says. “I think a lot of people are waiting to invest because they want to see if after the bang and bang of the opening, what happens next.”

Answers in Genesis point to the success of the Creation Museum as evidence of the Ark’s potential. The ministry says the museum has 300,000 visitors a year and that its generated revenue has exceeded expectations, although they would not give figures.

Then there are controversies surrounding the project, provoking a debate about the separation of church and state. The state withdrew tax incentives it had given Answers in Genesis, in part because the department refused to promise it would not discriminate on the basis of religion when hiring. The state said the project has evolved from a tourist attraction into an extension of the ministry.

The tax breaks were later reinstated after Answers in Genesis sued in federal court and won.

Adkins is uneasy about up to $18 million worth of tax breaks the department is getting from the state. Answers in Genesis is considered a tax-exempt church, and critics of the Ark project have said tax breaks amount to “double dipping.”

Enlarge Image Toggle Caption Ashley Westerman/NPR Ashley Westerman/NPR

He also just doesn’t like the fact that applicants have to adhere to the ministry’s rigid moral standards and beliefs.

“The fact that you have to submit to your own convictions in order to correspond to those of an employer,” he says, “that strikes me as very intrusive and very depressing.

A federal judge ruled earlier this year that Answers in Genesis, as a religious group, has the right to restrict its hiring.

Resident Jay Novarra is upset with local leaders. In addition to providing free land for the project, Williamstown Answers also gave $62 million in bonds to Genesis. The ministry says the city won’t be on the hook for these.

As a farmer, Novarra is concerned about rising water prices as the city also supplies water to the Ark.

“We have a lot of people who farm for a living, and you start increasing the price we have to pay to grow our food, then you definitely affect farmers,” she says. “And I have to ask myself: What’s in it for the farmer?”

Mayor Skinner says there is no contingency plan. They put all their eggs in one basket – similar to Noah.

Oh my…

The parameters measure and unit were specified in an invalid combination. Please click here to return to the home page.

ETHICAL PUZZLES

How long is a biblical cubit? THE cubit is the distance between the elbow and the tip of the middle finger. Most modern translations of the Bible replace modern units. For example, the New English Bible converts Deuteronomy 3:11’s “nine cubits” (the length of the coffin of the giant king Og) to “almost 14 feet,” while the Good News Bible converts it to “four meters.” What a pity to drop the old word! The question remains as to what actual length was used. One calculation is based on the fact that the Siloam Aqueduct was 1,200 cubits long “in round numbers.” Its actual length is 1,750 feet, which is 1,193 cubits by 44.7 cm (17.6 in). In the building of Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem (II Chronicles 3:3), however, “cubits of the first measure” are mentioned. This may refer to the 52.4 cm (20.63 inch) Egyptian cubit or to the Deuteronomy cubit. Michael L. Cox, Nuneaton, Warwicks.

Add your answer

Life-size Noah’s Ark opens amid a tide of skepticism

Enlarge Image Toggle Caption Ashley Westerman/NPR Ashley Westerman/NPR

Built in the rolling hills of northern Kentucky, a replica of Noah’s Ark is literally of biblical proportions. The wooden structure is seven stories high and 1 1/2 soccer fields long.

“The Bible states that the original ark was 300 cubits long, using the Hebrew royal cubit, which by today’s calculations is 510 feet,” says Mark Looey, co-founder of Answers in Genesis, the Christian ministry that runs the attraction has built. It is the same group that opened the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky in 2007, which promotes a literal interpretation of the Bible and other teachings: that planet Earth is only 6,000 years old and man lived side by side with dinosaurs.

The Ark attraction has been mired in controversy for years, and while Answers in Genesis promises jobs and more tourism in a region in dire need of an economic boost, it’s been a pretty mixed blessing for many who live there.

‘After the Flash and Bang’

The Ark offers three decks of exhibits so sophisticated you might think you’ve stepped into Disney World.

However, there are no live animals on the ark. “There’s a zoo for them back there,” says Looey. Instead, the ark will be filled with lifelike animal models — including dinosaurs and a pair of unicorns — designed by many of the people who also made exhibits for the Creation Museum.

The ark doesn’t float either. Ken Ham, President and CEO of Answers in Genesis and Ark Encounter, says it wasn’t built to swim. “We built it as a reminder, a reminder of God’s Word and the account of Noah and the Flood,” he says.

Religion Noah’s Ark in Kentucky meets controversy Noah’s Ark in Kentucky meets controversy Listen · 3:21 3:21

It cost $100 million to build and is expected to attract up to 2 million visitors a year and millions in tourism revenue, according to an independent study by the ministry. Looey says they have already hired over 300 people and hundreds more jobs are on the way when the other phases – including a walled city and a replica Tower of Babel – are complete.

Many in Williamstown, Kentucky, the small town just across Interstate 75 from the attraction, are waiting with bated breath for the grand opening. The town — the rural seat of Grant County, Kentucky — has a population of about 4,000. It’s a mid-range sleeper community right between Cincinnati and Lexington, Kentucky.

Williamstown Mayor Rick Skinner, an avid supporter of the attraction, says the city has already upgraded its electricity supply and built a new water treatment plant. The city center is also getting a facelift. Many new stores have opened on Main Street, while others are undergoing renovations. Before news of the Ark encounter hit town, the old brick buildings that lined Main Street were mostly empty.

Enlarge Image Toggle Caption Ashley Westerman/NPR Ashley Westerman/NPR

Local attorney Bill Adkins says when the recession hit Williamstown, it hit it hard. He remembers sitting in foreclosure settlements almost every week.

According to the study cited by Answers in Genesis, the Ark’s economic impact will be approximately $4 billion over the next decade. But Adkins is skeptical.

“We haven’t seen the hotels, we haven’t seen the restaurants that come in to support this attraction,” he says. “I think a lot of people are waiting to invest because they want to see if after the bang and bang of the opening, what happens next.”

Answers in Genesis point to the success of the Creation Museum as evidence of the Ark’s potential. The ministry says the museum has 300,000 visitors a year and that its generated revenue has exceeded expectations, although they would not give figures.

Then there are controversies surrounding the project, provoking a debate about the separation of church and state. The state withdrew tax incentives it had given Answers in Genesis, in part because the department refused to promise it would not discriminate on the basis of religion when hiring. The state said the project has evolved from a tourist attraction into an extension of the ministry.

The tax breaks were later reinstated after Answers in Genesis sued in federal court and won.

Adkins is uneasy about up to $18 million worth of tax breaks the department is getting from the state. Answers in Genesis is considered a tax-exempt church, and critics of the Ark project have said tax breaks amount to “double dipping.”

Enlarge Image Toggle Caption Ashley Westerman/NPR Ashley Westerman/NPR

He also just doesn’t like the fact that applicants have to adhere to the ministry’s rigid moral standards and beliefs.

“The fact that you have to submit to your own convictions in order to correspond to those of an employer,” he says, “that strikes me as very intrusive and very depressing.

A federal judge ruled earlier this year that Answers in Genesis, as a religious group, has the right to restrict its hiring.

Resident Jay Novarra is upset with local leaders. In addition to providing free land for the project, Williamstown Answers also gave $62 million in bonds to Genesis. The ministry says the city won’t be on the hook for these.

As a farmer, Novarra is concerned about rising water prices as the city also supplies water to the Ark.

“We have a lot of people who farm for a living, and you start increasing the price we have to pay to grow our food, then you definitely affect farmers,” she says. “And I have to ask myself: What’s in it for the farmer?”

Mayor Skinner says there is no contingency plan. They put all their eggs in one basket – similar to Noah.

Oh my…

The parameters measure and unit were specified in an invalid combination. Please click here to return to the home page.

How do I convert cubits to inches?

1 cot = 17.52 inches

1 cubit equals 17.52 inches

1 baby bed is equal to 17.52 inches

1 inch is equal to 1 divided by 17.52 cubits

1 inch = 1/17.52 cot