The distinctive point
One candidate unit, one declared allowance
The converter uses a proposed 0.43545 metre cubit, reported in a 2025 review of Angkor Wat research. Its ±0.05 metre allowance is selected by this site to signal uncertainty; it is not a survey error supplied by the study.
Basis: architecture-inferred. Check the record source.
The candidate reported in the review
Svamivastu and Maleesee's literature review attributes the 0.43545 metre value to Eleanor Mannikka's trial-based division of architectural axes and circumferences at Angkor Wat. This is a secondary report of her reconstruction. It does not by itself establish an inscriptionally defined unit or a magnitude shared by other buildings.1
How this site models it
The converter retains 0.43545 metre as an explicit comparison input. Its low-confidence category and allowance of plus or minus 0.05 metre are site judgements, not a statistical confidence interval or uncertainty quoted from Mannikka. Use the value to reproduce this candidate reading; its final decimals do not imply archaeological precision.
What not to infer
A unit chosen by trial against many dimensions can reward the pattern the researcher hoped to find. Stronger arguments would connect the magnitude to inscriptions, tools, repeated construction modules, or independent buildings. The converter therefore distinguishes the arithmetic of the 0.43545 m model from the unresolved historical question of how consistently that hat was realised.
Angkor Wat: testing proportions separately
The Angkor Wat study compares a different proposed module of 2.75 metres with enclosure counts. It distinguishes two exact gallery ratios from four approximate comparisons. The ratios themselves cannot independently establish the length of either proposed unit.
Open the full Angkor Wat dossier.
Values in the site matrix
| Standard | Representative | Site allowance | Region | Period | Site category |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Khmer hat (Angkor Wat reconstruction) | 0.43545 m | ±0.05 m | Angkor Cambodia | Reign of Suryavarman II in the early 12th century CE | low |
Sources and Further Reading
- Vacharee Svamivastu and Komsan Maleesee, The Geometrical Relationship Between Ancient Hindu Technical Treatises and the Planning and Organization of Angkor Wat, Buildings 15 (2025), 1210, p. 4: secondary account of Mannikka's trial-based candidate. Read the study. CC BY 4.0. Converter factor, allowance and confidence category: site matrix; the allowance is site-selected.