|
|
 |
King Chamber-COFFER |
by David Bowman
|
|
|
Before we can deduce the nature of composition we have to find out what kind of measurement system the architect used. A correct system of measures is checked when the whole numbers of the composition are obtained, that is why the system was used in the first place, to rationalize the composition, and enable construction of vast monuments. This rationalization was for an ancient architect, who comprehended the universe in a completely different manner than we do, a great reward, since he could mimic nature through symbolic language that was thought to represent it best. For the ancients there were no apparent separation between art, science, and religion - it was one single 'magickal' universe that interweaved the three into one.
The coffer in the King's Chamber has been most carefully measured by Petrie, since much was expected to be learned from the dimensions and relations between them. There are many theories about the nature of the composition of the coffer but none seems to explain the measured design entirely. Different interpretations are tolerated mostly by the unevenness of the artefact. Also, it seems that a new fraction of the royal cubit is introduced, one third of the royal cubit. This fraction used as a module is not present in the dimensions of the pyramid or the King's Chamber, but it explains why the outer length of the coffer doesn't fit the royal cubit exactly. The outer length 89.62 is 13/3 of a royal cubit discovered in the dimensions of the King's Chamber. Outer breadth 38.50 is repeating 13 modules of the length, but this time the dimension equals 13 palms. These two dimensions are in ratio 7/3. It seems that number 13 is very important since it predominates the composition, and it also resembles the 13 common cubits discovered in the height of the King's Chamber. Another dimension that represents a multiple of a module of 1/3 of a royal cubit is the inner height 34.42 which is 5/3 of a royal cubit. The outer height of the coffer is a very clean 2 royal cubits, whereas the rest of the dimensions seem to be expressed in palms since the dimensions are smaller and need finer fraction of the royal cubit.
| dimension |
b.inch |
cm |
royal c. |
palm |
digit |
| outer width |
38.5 |
97.8 |
|
13 |
52 |
| outer length |
89.62 |
227.6 |
13/3 |
(30) |
(121) |
| floor diag. |
97.54 |
247.8 |
|
33 |
132 |
| outer height |
41.31 |
104.9 |
2 |
14 |
56 |
| inner width |
26.81 |
68.1 |
|
9 |
36 |
| inner length |
78.06 |
198.3 |
|
|
|
| inner height |
34.42 |
87.4 |
5/3 |
(11) |
(46) |
| outer cubic diag. |
105.93 |
269.1 |
|
36 = 6 cc |
144 |
| inner cubic diag. |
89.43 |
227.1 |
13/3 |
(30) |
(121) |
The outer width and length are in ratio 7 : 3, which can be expressed in another manner as a square of 3 units aligned with the Pythagorean triangle 3-4-5. The module that fits 3 and 7 times in the width and length of the coffer is as represented on the illustration is 13/3 of a palm or a seventh of 13/3 of a royal cubit. This module is dividing the royal cubit according to the Golden Section's ratio 1.618:
royal cubit : module = 1.618
The composition of the coffer reveals a few striking peculiarities. The volume of the hollowing of the coffer equals precisely a cube having for a side 41.31, which is the same as the outer height of 2 royal cubits, or 14 palms. Another perfection is reflected in the inner cubical diagonal which is the same as the outer length of the coffer, 13/3 of a royal cubit. If the dimensions of the coffer are taken from the table, the volume of the coffer is in royal cubits: 13/3 x 2 x 13/7 = 16.095 which is very close to 16 cubical royal cubits. The empty space of the coffer is calculated according to the measurments approximatly half of the whole volume thus eguating the volume of mas with 'volume of emptiness'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
