Comments on: The Right and Lawful Rood http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/right-and-lawful-rood.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=right-and-lawful-rood Thinking the unthinkable, pondering the imponderable, effing the ineffable and scruting the inscrutable Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:20:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Zyxwv99 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-37332 Zyxwv99 Sat, 10 Dec 2011 23:32:19 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/the-right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-37332 What makes you think that this was how they did things in those days? At the same time this book was written, people in that part of Europe were making precision instruments. My guess is that the also had metal rods, something like the national prototype yard-rod of Elizabethan England, accurate at least to the nearest millimeter. What makes you think that this was how they did things in those days? At the same time this book was written, people in that part of Europe were making precision instruments. My guess is that the also had metal rods, something like the national prototype yard-rod of Elizabethan England, accurate at least to the nearest millimeter.

]]> By: Rob http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1344 Rob Fri, 14 Dec 2007 22:20:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/the-right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1344 @Chris, that's my guess. I'm assuming the surveyor did not have an accurate yardstick to measure the 16 feet. So he couldn't just measure that and divide by 16. (If he had an accurate measure then this whole procedure would have been unnecessary).<br/><br/>But if measured off with a rope or a line in the dirt, he could divide by 16 by repeated folding and cutting of a rope, or repeated bisection with a compass and straightedge. @Chris, that’s my guess. I’m assuming the surveyor did not have an accurate yardstick to measure the 16 feet. So he couldn’t just measure that and divide by 16. (If he had an accurate measure then this whole procedure would have been unnecessary).

But if measured off with a rope or a line in the dirt, he could divide by 16 by repeated folding and cutting of a rope, or repeated bisection with a compass and straightedge.

]]> By: Chris Jakeman http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1343 Chris Jakeman Fri, 14 Dec 2007 19:24:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/the-right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1343 Quite fascinating.<br/><br/>And is it 16 because this is easy to divide by 2 repeatedly to find a single foot?<br/><br/>Perhaps a statistician could tell us whether 16 men is enough to give us an accurate value. Quite fascinating.

And is it 16 because this is easy to divide by 2 repeatedly to find a single foot?

Perhaps a statistician could tell us whether 16 men is enough to give us an accurate value.

]]> By: Rob http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1342 Rob Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:46:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/the-right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1342 My wife said the same thing -- why not allow women? <br/><br/>Since women's feet, on average, are smaller than men's, you would need to adjust the procedure somewhat. You would want a fixed ratio of the sexes, not a random one. So perhaps require exactly 8 men and 8 women.<br/><br/>Also, I wonder what clothing women wore to church in this town. Large dresses? Hoops? Would they be willing or even able to stand heel to toe like that? <br/><br/>Would it have been improper for an unmarried woman to participate in mixed company with the rough tradesmen? Considering the scandal caused by the introduction of the waltz centuries later, I imagine the determination of the rood would have been considered crude and rude if they mixed the sexes.<br/><br/>That said, if anyone were to measure a rood today, I would certainly encourage broader participation. My wife said the same thing — why not allow women?

Since women’s feet, on average, are smaller than men’s, you would need to adjust the procedure somewhat. You would want a fixed ratio of the sexes, not a random one. So perhaps require exactly 8 men and 8 women.

Also, I wonder what clothing women wore to church in this town. Large dresses? Hoops? Would they be willing or even able to stand heel to toe like that?

Would it have been improper for an unmarried woman to participate in mixed company with the rough tradesmen? Considering the scandal caused by the introduction of the waltz centuries later, I imagine the determination of the rood would have been considered crude and rude if they mixed the sexes.

That said, if anyone were to measure a rood today, I would certainly encourage broader participation.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1341 Anonymous Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:39:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/the-right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1341 It is good to know what you're thinking, I'm guessing that it is pretty complex in there. It is good to know what you’re thinking, I’m guessing that it is pretty complex in there.

]]> By: kozmcrae http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1340 kozmcrae Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:41:00 +0000 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/the-right-and-lawful-rood.html#comment-1340 I guess it would be too much to ask that they would include women. I guess it would be too much to ask that they would include women.

]]>