OK, Tony,
Here’s another section of the CMS report which I think is wrong. I will only make reference to your claims regarding the yard in this thread - I’ll start new threads regarding mistakes about the foot & acre.
8.9 Finally, there are the cultural, heritage and identity arguments for the retention of British weights and measures. They have been part of the fabric of this country for over 2,000 years. We can go back at least to the Molmutine laws, devised and codified in around 390 B.C. by the then King of the Britons, Dyfnal Moel Myd (the laws were named after him). These laws used some of today’s measures, such as ‘feet’, ‘yards’ and ‘acres’, which go back well beyond even 390 B.C. Each free Briton was allocated five acres of land, with more acres reserved for chieftains and other community leaders.
O’Keefe’s “The Law of Weights & Measures” states (I have abridged slightly)
“King Edward I (1272–1307) was the first English king to define a system of length and area measurement. This was in a statute of 1305.
‘It is ordained that 3 grains of barley, dry and round, make an inch, 12 inches make a foot, 3 feet make an Ulna, 5 ½ Ulnae make a rod, and 40 rods in length and 4 in breadth make an acre.’
Thus for the first time a system which we today recognise and furthermore a statute reference measure was proclaimed. The word ‘Ulna' is the Latin for elbow and later it was called the yard.”
If the yard existed in 390 BC, why did Edward I not refer to it by name in his statute? Why does O’Keefe state it was only called by this name at a later date?
|