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.

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.

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.