SSTF@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world · 1 year agoWhat inaccurate historical factoid do you just go with?message-squaremessage-square75fedilinkarrow-up164
arrow-up164message-squareWhat inaccurate historical factoid do you just go with?SSTF@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world · 1 year agomessage-square75fedilink
minus-squarecontextual_somebody@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up7·1 year ago*5’6”, which was actually a little above average.
minus-squareOderus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 year agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon_complex#:~:text=He was actually 5 feet,French adopted the metric system. Both 5’7" and 5’10’ are listed here but I see no 5’6".
minus-squarecontextual_somebody@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·1 year ago1.67 Meters https://www.history.com/news/napoleon-complex-short
minus-squareOderus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·1 year agoI wonder why the height differs so much between sites?
minus-squarecontextual_somebody@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up6·1 year agoUsually I’m a huge champion of Wikipedia, but my guess is someone on Wikipedia not accurately converting between archaic French inches/metric/imperial
*5’6”, which was actually a little above average.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon_complex#:~:text=He was actually 5 feet,French adopted the metric system.
Both 5’7" and 5’10’ are listed here but I see no 5’6".
1.67 Meters
https://www.history.com/news/napoleon-complex-short
I wonder why the height differs so much between sites?
Usually I’m a huge champion of Wikipedia, but my guess is someone on Wikipedia not accurately converting between archaic French inches/metric/imperial