Hi Pat There are 2240 lb (avoirdupois) in a British ton!
The hundredweight was a weight fixed at 112 lb (for wool etc) in England by at least the 13th century - and the ton a weight at 20 cwt. The corresponding avoirdupois pound was fixed and in common use by at least the 14th century. Both these things happened a long time before even Columbus was a twinkle in his great-grandmother's eye. So where did the US short ton come from? There is no answer to this question in the below! Anyone who compares the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica (ie the British one) with the current one (ie the American one) is quickly going to see its historical metrology went backwards rapidly once EB went to Chicago. What is going on here? Yanks are just a clever as Brits (or just as stupid maybe) so I find this apparent general failure of historical metrological comprehension in the US kind of weird - almost sinister. best rob PS - re your second posting - this is just speculation. It fails to consider the fact that the US pound was and remains binary. If we want to discuss the origins of the western decimal weight system then the Arabs very likely reached it (by a cunning interplay of binary and sexagesimal systems) by at least 700 AD. But that is beside the point. We are dealing with modern events here - regarding US history - and can reasonably expect to get hard facts. Where are they? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat Naughtin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 10:34 AM Subject: [USMA:31895] Origin of tonnes > Dear Rob and All, > > Many years ago, I heard of a 13th Century English unit called a tun. This > was a volume unit that I understood was used to measure stored grain. I > include an item about the tun in the History item in the latest 'Metrication > matters' newsletter, see > http://www.metricationmatters.com/mm-newsletter-2005-01.html > > Wikipedia also has the following two paragraphs that I have quoted in > reverse order see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ton : > > The first paragraph suggests that originally the tunne or tonne was a > measure of volume. This fits with my story of a tun as a volume measure for > grain. > > 'The word ton or tonne is derived from the Old English tunne, and ultimately > from the Old French tonne, and referred originally to a large cask with a > capacity of 252 wine gallons (volume of about 950 litres), which holds > approximately 2100 pounds of water (a mass of 950 kilograms). Such a barrel > is still called a tun in British English, but this usage is dying out'. > > This second quote suggests that gradually the volume measure tunne was > gradually replaced by a mass measure based on how much water a tunne could > hold. > > "Both the short ton and the long ton are composed of twenty hundredweights, > each having different values for the hundredweight (100 (45 kg) and 112 > pounds (51 kg) respectively). Prior to the 15th century in England, the ton > was still composed of twenty hundredweights, but each was 108 lb (49 kg), > giving a ton of 2160 pounds (980 kg)'. > > Cheers, > > Pat Naughtin ASM (NSAA), LCAMS (USMA)* > PO Box 305, Belmont, Geelong, Australia > Phone 61 3 5241 2008 > > Pat Naughtin is the editor of the free online monthly newsletter, > 'Metrication matters'. You can subscribe by going to > http://www.metricationmatters.com and clicking on 'Newsletter'. > > * Pat is the editor of the 'Numbers and measurement' chapter of the > Australian Government Publishing Service 'Style manual � for writers, > editors and printers', he is an Accredited Speaking Member (ASM) with the > National Speakers Association of Australia, and a Lifetime Certified > Advanced Metrication Specialist (LCAMS) with the United States Metric > Association. > > > > on 2005-01-13 20.42, ewc at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Hi Bill & all > > > > you write > > > > <<You are correct in saying that you don't have specific knowledge of the > > Conf�rence G�n�rale. The people who attend the CGPM are not French academics, > > but are representatives of their respective countries. I don't believe France > > has any greater representation than any other country>> > > > > In my reasonably long experience of attending meetings I've come to the > > conclusion that who attends is pretty much irrelevant - its he who writes the > > minutes that counts. But anyhow - that issue is no going to be advanced by us > > exchanging simplistic one-liners. > > > > How about answering my earlier question - where did the US customary ton come > > from? Any 'FFU' users care to answer? > > > > rob > > > > (Robert Tye, York, UK) > >> > > > > > >
