Which of them had the biggest feet?
2006-12-29 11:42:15 · 8 answers · asked by the7thseal 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Hmm... tough one: I would assume it was Wallace, he was known to be a giant of a man; his sword alone measuring 5 foot 6 inches with a weight of 60 pounds whereas Charles Darwin was a rather short, stocky man.
My bet is on Wallace!
2006-12-29 11:48:24 · answer #1 · answered by Nicholas N 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
According to the site below Darwin was 5"11 1/2 inches tall weighed 148 pounds. The other site I found says that many historical sources have William Wallace standing at 6"6, although, I could not find an exact reference on the size of his feet, but since he was bigger, the odds are in his favour that his feet were bigger as well. So, I'll say Wallace.
2006-12-29 14:04:06 · answer #2 · answered by Cactus Dan 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
William Wallace was said to be 6 foot 7 inch tall, so I'd guess William Wallace did as there's not much chance Darwin was as tall.
2006-12-29 11:48:31 · answer #3 · answered by Groucho Returns 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wallace in a straight fight but if it was chess, Darwin. Table tennis, you'd go for Darwin.
2006-12-29 11:47:29 · answer #4 · answered by Robb the B.D.C. 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would say the short guy Darwin, John Wayne was tall and he had very small feet.
2006-12-29 13:42:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The size of the man doesn't determin the size of his feet.I am 5ft 10 with size 11 shoe, where as my fishing pal is over 6ft and has size 9 shoe. But the size of the feet is supposed to determin the size of the man(hood)????
2006-12-29 22:11:35 · answer #6 · answered by alex winefly 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm thinking William Wallace did. lol :-)
2006-12-29 11:53:00 · answer #7 · answered by Butterscotch 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I say Darwin, he had the biggest balls atleast, and you know what they say....big feet....
2006-12-29 11:46:35 · answer #8 · answered by mcCody-g 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋