THE PERFECT CUBIT . . . MASONIC LEGEND OR FABLE
This Short Talk Bulletin has been adapted from a
paper delivered to the Virginia College of The
Societus Rosicruciana in Civitatibus I Fedratus by
Most Worshipful Brother Lloyd U. Jefferson, P.G.M. (Virginia) . We thank
him
for sharing it with us.
Masonry, the more it is examined, the more
beautiful it becomes. This paper, however imperfect, is an attempt to explore the origin of
the Perfect Cubit. May it induce others having
more extensive means of information and time
for elaborate research to accept the challenge.
Admittedly, the existence of a "Perfect Cubit"
has neither historical authority nor logical
possibility to support it. It is commonly believed that the origin of Masonry took place at the
building of Solomon's Temple and that King
Solomon was the first Grand Master, and
Hiram of Tyre and Hiram Abif were his
Wardens .
Dr. James Anderson accepts this legend in
the second edition of his "Constitutions"' when
he says that King Solomon was Grand Master
of all Masons at Jerusalem; Hiram, King of
Tyre, was Grand Master at Tyre, and Hiram
Abif, in Solomon's absence, filled the chair as
Deputy Grand Master, and, in his presence was
Senior Grand Warden.
Moreover, Reverend George Oliver in "Antiquities of Masonry said these periods occupy a space of three thousand years. They are
selected for illustration, because it is generally
believed that Masonry took its rise at the
building of King Solomon's Temple.
It is said that Solomon recruited over one
hundred and fifty thousand stone masons,
hewers of timber, artificers of precious metals,
laborers and overseers from all over the land,
many speaking in strange tongues, making
communication difficult. Chapter 2, Second
Book of Chronicles relates how Solomon
numbered all the strangers who were in the
Land of Israel, after the numbering wherewith
David, his father, had numbered them, and
they were found an hundred and fifty thousand
and three thousand of them to be bearers of
burdens and fourscore thousand to be hewers in
the mountain, and three thousand and six hundred overseers to set the people at work.
We must reflect on the monumental task
that was Solomon's to meld such a huge body
of workmen, sorting out their various talents
and abilities, and organizing them into an effective and harmonious work force to commence
building the Temple.
Yet, perhaps Solomon's greatest problem was the lack of a uniform measure of
length by which the stones, timbers and other materials could be joined with
accuracy. He spoke of the cubit, which was used as a measure of length by the
Hebrews, Egyptians, and Babylonians, being the distance from the elbow to the extremity
of the middle finger or approximately eighteen
inches. Understandably, the cubit would vary
by the physical size of the workman or
overseer, and thus precluding the use of an exact measure. World Book Encyclopedia states
that generally the cubit was the length of a
man's forearm from his elbow to the tip of the
middle finger. The cubit of the Ancient Egyptians was about 21 inches long. That
of the Ancient Romans was 17.5 inches. The Jewish cubit
was 22 inches
Coil in his Masonic Encyclopedia says the
cubit was a measure used by the Hebrews, the
exact length of which has been the subject of
much uncertainty and dispute. The majority
opinion is that it is the length of the forearm
and hand from the elbow to the extremity of the
middle finger or approximately 18 inches. The
Egyptian Royal cubit was 20.67 inches; and the
Roman Attic cubit was 17.57 inches.
Marsengill, Editor (The Philalethes Society) said, "According to Bishop
Cumberland, the Hebrew cubit was 21 inches but according to all other
authorities, it was approximately 18 inches. Two kinds of cubits were known: the
Sacred (36 inches) and the Profane (18 inches).
The measurements given in the Bible about
Solomon's Temple are all based on the Profane
or common cubit."
Mackey's Revised Encyclopedia refers to
Hastings Dictionary of The Bible (page 967),
"We have at present no means of ascertaining
the exact dimensions of the Hebrews' ordinary
and Royal cubits. The balance of evidence is
certainly in favor of a fairly close approximation to the Egyptian system."
The Maryland Master Mason Handbook
declares that it is of great interest that archaeological research has revealed that in
Solomon's day there were three different
cubits: a Land cubit which was used for plotting the layout of the Temple's courts and the
surrounding terrace, which had a length of
about 17.6 inches; a Building cubit used in the
erection of buildings was about 14.4 inches;
and a Gold cubit used in the construction of the
gold and silver vessels and decorative work
which was equal to about 10.8 inches. All these
three are found to be multiples of the basic
palm breadth of 3.6 inches which was used by
the Babylonians and also the Hebrews.
Amid all of this confusion about a unit of measure, especially finding one
which was uniform and dependable, it is claimed the Ancient workmen of the Temple fashioned a rope
of human hair which was knotted at three, five,
and seven cubits. The human hair was chosen
because it was unaffected by heat or cold, and
thus maintained a constant length. He called
this, "The Perfect Cubit," which enabled the
workmen to join the stones, timbers and other
materials with accuracy.
Worshipful Brother Lawrence J. Chisholm,
Worshipful Master of Joppa Lodge No. 35 in
The District of Columbia, authored a weights
and measure section of the Encyclopedia
Britannica in 1976, in which he included these
historical comments regarding the cubit.
''Although there is evidence that many early civilizations devised standards
of measurements and some tools for measuring, the Egyptian cubit is generally
recognized as having been the most ubiquitous standard of linear measurement in
the very ancient world. Devised about 3000 B. C., it was based on the length of
the arm from the elbow to the extended finger tips and was standardized by a
royal master cubit of black granite, against which all the cubit sticks in use
in Egypt were measured at regular intervals.
The royal cubit (20.62 inches, 524
millimeters) was subdivided in an extraordinarily complicated way. The basic subunit was the
digit, doubtlessly a finger's breadth, of which
there were 28 in the royal cubit. Four digits,
equalled a palm, five a hand. Twelve digits, or
three palms, equalled one small span. Fourteen
digits, or one-half a cubit, equalled a large
span. Sixteen digits or four palms, made one
t'ser. Twenty digits, or five palms, were a small
cubit.
The digit was in turn subdivided. The 141h digit on a cubit stick was marked
off into 16 equal parts. The next digit was divided into 15 parts, and so on, to
the 28th digit which was divided into two equal parts. Thus, measurement could be made to digit fractions with any
denominator from 2 through 16. The smallest
division, 1/16 of a digit, was equal to 1/148 part
of a royal cubit.
The accuracy of the cubit stick is attested by
the dimensions of the Great Pyramid of Gizeh;
although thousands were employed in building
it, its sides vary no more than 0.05 percent from
the mean length of 9,069.45 inches (230.364
meters) about 4 1/2 inches in 755 feet"
In Oliver's Antiquities he said: "The structure thus begun, according to a plan given to
Solomon by David, his father, upon the Arc of
Alliance, every energy was used to render it a
perfect specimen of art. Every stone, every
piece of timber, was carved, marked, and
numbered in the quarry and the forest; and
nothing remained for the workmen at
Jerusalem but to join the materials with precision, on a reference to the marks and numbers,
This was effected without the use of' either axe,
hammer, or metal tool; so that nothing was
heard at Zion, save harmony and peace." It is
a real testimonial to the Ancient Craftsmen that
the parts could be so shaped at great distance
and fit as they were intended. It is assumed this
was due in part to the use of the perfect cubit.
Upon the significance of the three knots in
the perfect Cubit . . . three, five and seven.
Mackey in his history (Volume l) referred to
the symbolic character of those sacred numbers
in the teaching of the Ancient Art and Science
. . . three, five, and seven. In the same spirit of
symbolic reference, the steps of the winding
stairs leading to the middle chamber were divided into a series of three, five, and seven.
At the onset of this paper, it was stated that the existence of a "Perfect
Cubit" has no historical authority. Again, Mackey in Volume One (p. 9) states
for a faithful and thorough inquiry of the history of Freemasonry, carefully
separate the two periods into which it may be
naturally divided,'
The Historic, and
The Prehistoric.
The Historic is the period within which we have genuine documents in
reference to the existence of the Order.
The Prehistoric is the period within which
we have no such records and where we have to
depend wholly upon legends and traditions.
In the preface of Mackey's History (Page
VII) Robert Ingham Clegg reflected that
Brother Mackey . . . pointed out that the very
age of the Masonic institution had tended to
confuse mere traditions or legends with the
authentic truths of history, and he welcomed
light from all directions but carefully applied
critical standards to the source and standing of
the information that came his way. By no
means was he ready to reject a Masonic legend
as fable.
It is left to the Masonic scholars and prominent historians to determine whether "The
Perfect Cubit" is a Masonic legend or fable.
back to top | 
