[Bell Historians] systems of weighing
edward martin
edward.w.martin at -0z_xmIpkoFGaMKqC3GaPWnep7nVxI9w-Dhr-Efmsy5Q74p6fqB8Hi3Ruir95qlDNnvdnFeJbEYLKKVaxceF1rI1.yahoo.invalid
Mon Mar 5 04:29:16 GMT 2007
Oh yes, I believe it goes back as far as 13th century
The basic uniot is really the stone thus you must have cwt = 112 lbs ie:
1 ton = 20 cwt
1 cwt = 4 quarters
1 quarter = 2 stone
1 stone = 14 lbs
mew
On 04/03/07, David Bagley <david at AJEqiuanvJM0-DbRWxFvIREpY-4XXQk6NyahCLYzNychJMciyjU6j4Gs7UFv4IIEXd-cYEe2B2Kz35YDhUbc.yahoo.invalid> wrote:
>
> We all know that the weight of bells is given in cwt-qtrs-lbs, but was
> this
> system ever used for giving the weight of other objects?
>
> I only ask as I watched a program on the salvage of the "Queen Anne's
> Revenge" on the telly last night. A canon with the numbers "1730" on it
> was
> recovered from the wreck which went down in 1718, so 1730 couldn't be a
> date. It was suggested that 1730 was actually 17-3-0, ie 1988lb, and it
> seemed to weigh just under 2000lb using the on gauge they were using.
>
> Does anybody know if the cwt-qtrs-lbs was ever used elsewhere?
>
> David
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20070304/354a3893/attachment.html>
More information about the Bell-historians
mailing list