https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1i4gaaf/do_people_in_medieval_england_actually_have/
created by Less-Feature6263 on 18/01/2025 at 20:14 UTC
156 upvotes, 3 top-level comments (showing 3)
This is probably a bizarre question but I've recently watched again Disney's Robin Hood, and in one scene the guards are screaming something like "It's one o'clock and all is well".
Was this just a funny scene created by Disney, or was it an actual thing people do back then?
If not, how did they keep the time?
Comment by AutoModerator at 18/01/2025 at 20:14 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. **Please Read Our Rules[1] before you comment in this community**. Understand that rule breaking comments get removed[2].
1: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules
We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider using our Browser Extension[5], or getting the Weekly Roundup[6]. In the meantime our Bluesky[7], and Sunday Digest[8] feature excellent content that has already been written!
7: https://bsky.app/profile/askhistorians.bsky.social
9: /message/compose/?to=/r/AskHistorians
Comment by phistomefel_smeik at 19/01/2025 at 17:15 UTC*
26 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Great Question! I’ll answer within my expertise, that means I’ll focus on big cities in Switzerland for the time between 1300 and 1789, although the answer should be roughly(!) the same for English cities in the same time period. Local differences in customs were abundant, even within relatively near places, but the general, broader evolution of clock time was similar enough throughout europe that you can get an idea of how things might have been in other places aswell (see also [8] for a more general overview).
For your first question: It depends on your definition of *medieval*. In Zürich there are sources for a clear distinction between nights and days in relation to watchmen and codified law from as early as the 1330ies. In 1336, the Rat (council) of Zürich ordered, that no one was to walk around the city without light after the *”stúbgloggen”*[1] (=literally ‘(living) room bell’) rang. Additionally, the night watch had to be present by the city hall at the same signal.[1] The night was seen as something threatening, in the evening the city gates were closed – usually also accompanied by multiple bell signals – and only reopened in the morning.[2]
The night watches duty was refined in the following centuries. In Zürich from 1420 on the night watch was ordered, they *”all nacht […] vier geng tůn, […]”* which meant they had to do four rounds through the city. Already 1359 the *”Scharwächter”*, which were the patrolling watchmen, were ordered to do three rounds in summer and two in winter time.[3]
The hourly call (Stundenruf) can first be found in multiple sources from 1509, when the oaths of some city servants were renewed. Here, the whole procedure of the city councils night watch was seemingly fixed with abstract time measures (i.e. hours as opposed to concrete time measures like dusk/dawn). Not only was the start (although not the end) of the watch fixed to a clock time – 9 o’clock in the evening –, also the start of the rounds through the city was fixed at 10 o’clock:
*“[They should swear] an die wacht uff die gassen gangint, so die glogg derselben zitt zechny schlacht, und also an den X anfahen zů rueffen und darnach von derselben stund hin all stunden ze rueffen und in der stat harumb ze gond bis nach der zwoelften stund, […] und erst, so ir die zwoelffi in der nacht gerueffint, ab der wacht uff das Rathus ze gond und darvor nit. Und so der husknaecht die andern, so die nachwacht hand, uff die gassen und die wacht bescheident, se ollen dieselben och obbere urter mass harrumbgon uf der wacht, sumers zit von dem I bis nach III am morgen und die stunden all von dem I hin bis nach III rueffen; und so ir die III gere ufft handt, dann soellen dieselben uf das Rathus gon und uf dem Rathus bliben, bis man das erst zeichen zur fruemess zum Grossen Múnster verlút hat.“* [4]
Basically the first watch had to start their first round at 10 o’clock and call out the hours from the same time on out for every hour until twelve o’clock, when the second watch – called the night watch – took over. The second watch had then to call out the hours from one to three, after which they had to wait in the city council until the day was called, which was done at dawn.
This hourly call can then be traced though the time of the city until at least 1798, probably even later, although the time frame for my knowledge ends there. Casanova [2] speculates, that this night call wasn’t meant to make the city inhabitants aware of the time, but rather to convey a sense of security and represent the city authority’s presence in the night.[2: 157] It was also a measure for control – night watches were notorious for their missing sense of duty (at least if we believe contemporary sources). Not only did some of them forget to turn up, they also frequently were drunk or got drunk on duty or didn’t make their rounds as they were ordered. We know about this, because we have multiple sources about certain individuals who got severely punished and passages that got included into later oaths. Two new tower watches had the following passage included in their oath from 1523: *”Unnd wenn sy die stund verschlaffend und nit meldent sol man inen dz an irem lon abschlachen namlich für jede stund einen schilling.”* [5] Thus the different watches had to each other and had to report if they didn’t hear certain signals of other watches or towers.
This was similar in other Swiss cities. Lucerne for example the hourly call can be traced back to at least 1493, when the night watches had to ‘report the hours’. Although Lucerne was way less linear in their adoption of abstract clock hours – the final adoption of abstract time for the start of the watch came in 1593 – the hourly calls remained from the 15^(th) century on.
Comment by [deleted] at 18/01/2025 at 21:01 UTC
8 upvotes, 2 direct replies
[removed]