Dear Daniel,

As I understand the history, and from his writings, it is clear that
Flinders Petrie was very much aware of the metric system and its decimal
simplicity. However, he chose to use inches only, and to borrow the idea of
decimals from the metric system by using decimal fractions for lengths
shorter than one inch. He did not use feet and yards to measure the old
measure. 

So why did he use inches? This may simply have been due to the accurate
rulers that were available to him. I am reminded of the original surveyors
of India who wanted to do their survey in metres but the only accurate
measuring chain available to them was based on feet -- from memory it was a
builders chain with 100 one-foot links. As a result the Indian sub-continent
is still saddled with a mixture of old feet and new metric measures. Maybe
our Indian friends can help us with more detailed information on this.

Cheers,

Pat Naughtin
Geelong, Australia
61 3 5241 2008
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.metricationmatters.com

This email and its attachments are for the sole use of the addressee and may
contain information that is confidential and/or legally privileged. This
email and its attachments are subject to copyright and should not be partly
or wholly reproduced without the consent of the copyright owner. Any
unauthorised use of disclosure of this email or its attachments is
prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please immediately delete it
from your system and notify the sender by return email.


on 2005-06-04 09.19, Daniel at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Did he use the metre as the base to compare all of the various old measures
> or did he use the then present English system?
> 
> Dan
> 
>> 
>> In the late 19th century, a metrologist, William Matthew Flinders Petrie
>> (known as Flinders Petrie or W. M. F. P) measured the lengths of fathoms,
>> rods, chains, and miles all over England and Europe carefully checking
>> their
>> lengths. He found that the length of the official armstretch or fathom was
>> exactly the same in England, as it was in Scandinavia, early Holland, and
>> Germany. These official fathoms were all very close to 2 metres in length.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe when the French invented the metric system, they were aware of the
> pre-Roman English units and how superior they were to the Roman that they
> based their new system on something ancient.  Maybe metric isn't really new
> at all, just a resurrection of a more superior older system.
> 
> 
> 
>>>  Apparently, it wasn't until the introduction of the French foot (the
>>> foot
>>> that is still used in England) in about 1066 that the measurement methods
>>> of
>>> England fell into almost complete disarray.
> 

Reply via email to