Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

underboobfunk t1_iwzpc2q wrote

Reply to comment by CaptainMacMillan in A Medieval Gold Wedding Ring Found in the Mud Worth Is Thousands by max-venum

That’s typically the case with antiques.

47

eisme t1_iwzxcyy wrote

Antiques and medievel isn't the same. For instance, one would imagine a suit of armor would be more valuable than a flak jacket from WW2.

69

hotlikebea t1_ix086sq wrote

History aside, the materials and labor that go into a handmade suit of armor are much more valuable than what goes into a jacket.

22

HandsOnGeek t1_ix08zvz wrote

A flak jacket is not just a jacket. Flak is in fact the explosive shrapnel-generating anti-aircraft cannon fire that was used to defend cities from flights of bombers in World War II. A flak jacket is what you wear to protect yourself from that shrapnel.

So the flak jacket is the modernish to antique equivalent of a middle ages suit of armor.

−11

TheKingOfTCGames t1_ix0aafd wrote

and plate armor in the middle ages is basically the total sum assets of a upper middle class person.

10

big_tom t1_ix05bs1 wrote

Suits of armor are a lot less common than pieces of gold. The armor rusts away, the gold does not.

21

Swiggy1957 t1_ix1lilw wrote

Ah, but the rarity of this ring is that it is GOLD.

This was at a time when gold was, well, worth it's weight in gold. The only ones that could afford a gold ring were those of wealth: nobility, royalty, high ranking church and military members, and, of course, rich merchants. Wedding rings of that era were often made iof Iron so they wouldn't be destroyed when the lady of the house cleaned, cooked and did other various chores around the place.

6

DingyWarehouse t1_ix1vez0 wrote

>worth it's weight in gold

*its

worth its weight in gold, not "worth it is weight in gold"

−6

Swiggy1957 t1_ix2f7em wrote

Sorry, on phone and Otto Kerr-Wrecked has his hand in my comments.

9