[HN Gopher] Ruth Belville, the "Greenwich Time Lady" (2022)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ruth Belville, the "Greenwich Time Lady" (2022)
        
       Author : throw0101b
       Score  : 84 points
       Date   : 2025-03-09 14:00 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (eehe.org.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (eehe.org.uk)
        
       | throw0101b wrote:
       | Also:
       | 
       | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Belville
       | 
       | * https://blog.sciencemuseum.org.uk/ruth-belville-the-greenwic...
       | 
       | Via a weblog from the Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation:
       | 
       | * https://rntfnd.org/2025/03/09/the-greenwich-time-lady-sold-t...
        
       | nhubbard wrote:
       | Fans of Tom Scott's Citation Needed, if you haven't seen this...
       | well
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzfiF9ccZvQ&list=PLrkYtXgEpu...
        
       | throwaway_ewell wrote:
       | Excited to see my village mentioned on the frontpages of HN!
        
         | eb0la wrote:
         | First time you go to London, you visit everything else; but
         | Greenwich is great. Probably because is far from city center,
         | but totally worth the visit. I guess next time I travel to
         | London I'll stay there.
        
           | Angostura wrote:
           | The fast commuter boat from Greenwich to Westminster Pier is
           | my favourite was to get into town
        
       | colesantiago wrote:
       | So is this not one of the earliest grifts?
        
         | sampullman wrote:
         | Grifting must be pre-historic.
        
           | entropicdrifter wrote:
           | Yeah, for real. They think that grifting was invented as
           | recently as 1892? That's _insane_. One of the earliest known
           | pieces of written language is some sanskrit calling one guy
           | 's limestone a ripoff. Basically a bad Yelp review. Obviously
           | you don't need reviews if everyone is honest, ergo grifting
           | most likely existed before written language
        
             | bigstrat2003 wrote:
             | > One of the earliest known pieces of written language is
             | some sanskrit calling one guy's limestone a ripoff.
             | Basically a bad Yelp review.
             | 
             | When you came, you said to me as follows: "I will give
             | Gimil-Sin (when he comes) fine quality copper ingots." You
             | left then but you did not do what you promised me. You put
             | ingots which were not good before my messenger (Sit-Sin)
             | and said: "If you want to take them, take them; if you do
             | not want to take them, go away!"
             | 
             | Tale as old as time, really.
        
               | spiritplumber wrote:
               | https://www.reddit.com/r/EaNasir/
        
         | throw0101c wrote:
         | > _So is this not one of the earliest grifts?_
         | 
         | This is one of the earliest instances of a Stratum 1 (2?) time
         | server.
        
           | bauruine wrote:
           | She set her watch to the time of the Greenwich Observatory
           | (Stratum 1) so it's Stratum 2 time server.
        
             | throw0101c wrote:
             | Would not the Observatory be Stratum 0, as it was the
             | 'atomic clock' of its day?
             | 
             | > _These are high-precision timekeeping devices such as
             | atomic clocks, GNSS (including GPS) or other radio clocks,
             | or a PTP-synchronized clock.[30] They generate a very
             | accurate pulse per second signal that triggers an interrupt
             | and timestamp on a connected computer. Stratum 0 devices
             | are also known as reference clocks. NTP servers cannot
             | advertise themselves as stratum 0. A stratum field set to 0
             | in NTP packet indicates an unspecified stratum.[5]:21_
             | 
             | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Time_Protocol#Clock
             | _st...
        
         | geodel wrote:
         | Doesn't look like to me since people are buying time even
         | today. And they feel okay about it.
        
         | AStonesThrow wrote:
         | It gives new/old meaning to the idiom "she wouldn't _give_ you
         | the time of day " because that's worth money and it's gonna
         | cost you!
         | 
         | Can I interest you in some cockles or mussels?
        
       | registeredcorn wrote:
       | >After his death John's third wife Maria Elizabeth (nee Last)
       | (1811-99), a teacher by profession, was denied a widow's pension
       | so lobbied to take over the manual distribution to provide an
       | income for herself and their baby daughter Elizabeth Ruth Naomi
       | Belville (known as Ruth).
       | 
       | It would be interesting to know if it was common practice for
       | widows to be denied pension, and if so, for what reason.
        
         | guestbest wrote:
         | I wonder how many widows were taking a pension from the late
         | John.
        
           | dwighttk wrote:
           | Good point
        
           | mytailorisrich wrote:
           | There can only be one widow, surely...
        
             | guestbest wrote:
             | He had three wives in succession. Any one or three could
             | make the claim. There was probably a limited budget that
             | had to go through a small committee to allocate the new
             | funds. After a while it runs out.
        
               | mytailorisrich wrote:
               | > _He had three wives in succession._
               | 
               | This means that the first two probably died.
               | 
               | Edit:
               | 
               | I've checked and indeed his first wife died in 1826
               | (maybe during childbirth looking at the date), his second
               | in 1851, he married his third wife that same year. Ruth
               | was actually his 7th and last child. It was the 19th
               | century. People didn't "just" divorce and people also
               | tended to die of many deceases and during childbirth.
               | 
               | > _Any one or three could make the claim._
               | 
               | Well, no. He could only be married to one at the time of
               | his death (even if the others were still alive) and so
               | only leave one widow behind to make a claim.
        
               | AStonesThrow wrote:
               | Well, yes.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alimony#England
               | Under traditional English common law, a woman gave up her
               | personal property rights on marriage (see Coverture).
               | Upon separation from marriage, the husband retained the
               | right to the wife's property, but, in exchange, had an
               | ongoing responsibility to support the wife after
               | dissolution of the marriage.[6][7] English law was
               | amended by legislation including the Married Women's
               | Property Act 1870 and Married Women's Property Act 1882
               | which reformed women's property rights relating to
               | marriage, by, for example, permitting divorced women to
               | regain the property they owned before
               | marriage.[7][26][27][28]
               | 
               | "Dissolution" is a strong word considering traditional
               | Christian beliefs, and it would seem that a man couldn't
               | simply divorce a woman and her children and wash his
               | hands of responsibilities, even if spending a year dead
               | for tax purposes.
               | 
               | Because a woman entering marriage with a dowry, with
               | property, with capital assets: those would be entrusted
               | to _the entire family_ and so the man, offspring, and
               | heirs would end up with management of whatever resulted,
               | during the marriage, after the divorce, and after his own
               | bodily death
        
         | mytailorisrich wrote:
         | I don't know but a probable answer is that she was "able-
         | bodied", pand perhaps was not destitute, as I believe widows
         | were not entitled to anything at the time simply for being a
         | widow. Pensions were only introduced in 1908.
        
         | AStonesThrow wrote:
         | I do not know whether Anglican and other churches were able to
         | provide charity such as soup kitchens or emergency food
         | distributions, but some reasons given for the New Deal in the
         | US was that many people were unwilling to accept charity from
         | churches, especially with rising sectarianism, and for that
         | same reason, charity/outreach operations had perhaps become
         | fragmented, and literally slicing up the pie smaller and
         | smaller, in terms of funding, volunteers, and coverage, for a
         | multiplicity of humanitarian non-profits.
         | 
         | Nowadays the State Governments simply fund, assist, and promote
         | those non-profits, and mental health care, etc., so American
         | taxpayers are not merely paying "church tax" but
         | synagogue/church/mosque/temple/ashram taxes, to support the
         | plurality of faith-based charities who serve the poor and
         | marginalized. And that's why the government itself can be
         | reduced in size and scope as public-private-religious
         | partnerships take up the mantle.
        
       | walrus01 wrote:
       | For those who haven't read it in detail, the history of the
       | invention and refinement of the marine chronometer is
       | fascinating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_chronometer
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison
        
         | eb0la wrote:
         | If visit Greenwich Observatory you'll see Harrison sea clocks
         | H1, H2, and H3.
         | 
         | I had the luck (and honor!) to meet a volunteer guide - Stephen
         | - that knew everything about clocks and explained it perfectly.
         | 
         | When you meet him, say hello :-). My kid barely spoke English
         | and Stephen had the patience and virtue to answer everything
         | with a smile.
         | 
         | Best guide I ever met.
        
           | bloomingeek wrote:
           | It is a wonderful place. The walk up the hill at my advance
           | age was a challenge, but well worth it!
        
       | noelwelsh wrote:
       | This seems very mundane now that a Casio F-91W can give all the
       | practical timekeeping position a person needs for the cost of a
       | meal. I found it interesting the watch she used ("Mr Arnold") was
       | some 40 years old when her father started the business and nearly
       | 150 years old when she stopped. It was made by John Arnold[1],
       | who essentially invented the accurate watch.
       | 
       | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Arnold_(watchmaker)
        
         | alex_young wrote:
         | Surely Ruth Belville was the best antiquarian horologist of her
         | or any time.
        
       | danans wrote:
       | > a teacher by profession, was denied a widow's pension so
       | lobbied to take over the manual distribution to provide an income
       | for herself and their baby daughter
       | 
       | > she retired in 1892, at age 81
       | 
       | > So Ruth was forced to move, for the last time to 57 Plough Lane
       | in Beddington. She retired in 1940 and died aged 89
       | 
       | The time synchronization story is carrying another ominous story
       | about elderly working class poverty of the gilded age.
       | 
       | Mother and daughter working until their 80s probably due to
       | necessity, and the daughter being forced out of her home shortly
       | before she died.
       | 
       | Let's not go back.
        
         | dwighttk wrote:
         | I dunno... a job where I travel and walk outside and loyal
         | customers sticking with me until I was ready to retire sounds
         | pretty nice to me
        
           | entropicdrifter wrote:
           | Nobody said you had to retire. If you want to work until your
           | 80s, have at it.
           | 
           | Just don't support a society where it's a _necessity_
        
             | dwighttk wrote:
             | _Necessity_ was merely postulated by original poster
        
               | daveguy wrote:
               | _Necessity_ was a fact in the early 1900s. So necessary
               | people had their kids work for extra income. Did you
               | never study history?
        
           | bloomingeek wrote:
           | Done! I curse you to have to work until you are in your
           | eighties. May your sore joints and muscles, sub-par wages
           | (part of the deal, you chose it!) and failing eyesight and
           | hearing be a constant companion.
           | 
           | If you're a man, don't forget your prostate, If a woman,
           | change of life issues and being a second class citizens in
           | most countries of the world.
        
             | dwighttk wrote:
             | Don't threaten me with a good time
        
             | AStonesThrow wrote:
             | A man can forget his prostate, but can a prostate ever
             | forget its man?
        
           | danans wrote:
           | Sure, it's nice to have a job like that if you get paid a
           | living wage, have a social safety net, secure housing, and no
           | dependents.
           | 
           | I have news for you: that job (and situation) didn't exist
           | then, and doesn't exist now. It briefly existed in the few
           | decades following WW2, but we have torn down much of the
           | ideology and social infrastructure that made that possible.
        
             | cjbgkagh wrote:
             | Even if such promises were made and indeed kept for some
             | people at no point that I am aware of was the situation
             | ever long term stable. AFAIK Soviet Union guaranteed
             | dignity in retirement and planned to not have to pay for it
             | through achieving a post-monetary society. The US made
             | similar guarantees and planed to out-grow the costs (i.e.
             | ponzi scheme).
        
               | danans wrote:
               | > The US made similar guarantees and planed to out-grow
               | the costs (i.e. ponzi scheme).
               | 
               | If you're referring to Social Security in the US, it's no
               | more a Ponzi scheme than your home mortgage payment is a
               | Ponzi scheme. In reality it's a progressive tax scheme to
               | prevent senior citizen poverty.
               | 
               | To make Social Security solvent, lift the cap on Social
               | Security taxes. Will the working and middle classes
               | benefit more than the wealthy who will pay more in those
               | taxes?
               | 
               | Yes, and progressive taxation to prevent abject
               | impoverishment of working and middle class seniors is a
               | good thing.
        
               | cjbgkagh wrote:
               | The US would still need to outgrow its other problems if
               | the US in general is to remain solvent. I am pretty
               | doubtful that it can.
        
               | alabastervlog wrote:
               | Yeah, the two rounds of huge tax cuts since our last
               | semi-balanced budget really screwed us. As they were
               | predicted to.
        
               | cjbgkagh wrote:
               | That and danans 'one thing' seems rather simplistic /
               | reductive. My view is the degradation of the US has been
               | many things over a long time and we're lucky things
               | lasted as long as they have been.
        
               | danans wrote:
               | > That and danans 'one thing' seems rather simplistic /
               | reductive
               | 
               | OK. Let's add some things. Free public schools,
               | subsidized public universities, subsidized public
               | vocational colleges, Medicare. All can be funded if we
               | reverse the tens of trillions of wealth that we have
               | channeled upwards with tax cuts for the wealthy and cut
               | taxes for the working class.
        
               | cjbgkagh wrote:
               | 'We'? Good luck with that. At least Tankies are honest
               | about the degree of coercion required to get a population
               | to agree on things.
        
               | alabastervlog wrote:
               | It really is mostly that, plus the wars. The first round
               | of cuts came at about the same time we started the wars,
               | LOL. The political line was that the tax cuts and (some
               | fucking how) the wars would "pay for themselves" but the
               | CBO was like "um, no, here is approximately how many
               | trillions this will add to the debt" and gee, the latter
               | turned out to be way, way closer to correct.
               | 
               | Now, of course, we also have the interest on all that new
               | debt to worry about.
               | 
               | [EDIT] To be clear, the Democrats are also to blame for
               | carrying on with the tax cuts, sometimes _actively_ ,
               | when they had opportunities to end them.
        
               | IX-103 wrote:
               | Oh, it's definitely simplistic.
               | 
               | The problem is that real wages for the average person has
               | been going down since the 1970s. Meanwhile, the
               | wealthiest people are making more and more, but that
               | extra money is not going to Social Security due to the
               | cap. Additionally, due to longer lifespans and fewer
               | children, the ratio of working to retired people went up.
               | Productivity is also up, which can easily compensate for
               | the change in workforce, but isn't enough to cover both
               | that and the shift in income to fewer, wealthier people
               | whose contributions are capped.
               | 
               | The net effect is less money going to Social Security.
               | The easy solution is to remove the cap. That's unfair for
               | the wealthy, but is a lot easier than getting fairer and
               | more equitable wages across the entire economy.
        
             | echelon wrote:
             | > It briefly existed in the few decades following WW2, but
             | we have torn down much of the ideology and social
             | infrastructure that made that possible.
             | 
             | No. Post-WWII America experienced a period of economic
             | tailwinds that will likely never exist again.
             | 
             | Europe and Asia were in shambles after the war - bombed
             | out, destroyed, male populations decimated - just as
             | America was growing to peak industrial strength. America
             | had a population boom, everything was cheap, and everyone
             | was buying American goods. America had everything it needed
             | - cheap resources, cheap land, abundant labor, and a
             | totally captive worldwide market. No country has ever had
             | every single variable flipped in their favor to such an
             | outsized degree.
             | 
             | As we reached the 70's - 90's, we started to outsource. Our
             | labor had become more expensive, but we offset this with
             | cheap imported goods. We were still extremely and
             | unilaterally wealthy.
             | 
             | Post China WTO, the wealth of America has been spent and
             | "averaged out" over dozens of post-industrial economies.
             | The market is so much larger than it was back then, and
             | America doesn't possess hegemonic, unilateral economic
             | power. Moreover, American industrial power has waned. The
             | thing we had going for us - the American knowledge worker
             | and the almighty power of the American consumer - was being
             | met with increasing competition from everywhere.
             | 
             | The industrialization "algorithm" continues on: India,
             | Vietnam, Mexico. Every country that industrializes and
             | leverages cheap labor can grow into a powerhouse in just a
             | single generation.
             | 
             | There are a lot of countries within spitting distance of
             | America, especially if you group them together into blocs.
             | The American consumer economy isn't so unique anymore, and
             | we certainly haven't been producing our own goods for a
             | long time.
             | 
             | So the wealth of the Baby Boomers and their incredible
             | economic tailwinds will not be felt again unless there's
             | some wildly new disruption to the economic order. (AGI and
             | automated manufacturing, maybe?)
             | 
             | The reality is that the American middle class will shrink
             | and people will have to work harder. The American market
             | doesn't have magical superiority anymore.
        
               | danans wrote:
               | > No. Post-WWII America experienced a period of economic
               | tailwinds that will likely never exist again.
               | 
               | The UK didn't get bombed nearly to the extent of
               | continental Europe, and it was a mature industrialized
               | society - the first one in fact - yet it also experienced
               | the post WW2 growth. Same for the the bombed-out
               | countries like Germany and France.
               | 
               | > As we reached the 70's - 90's, we started to outsource.
               | Our labor had become more expensive, but we offset this
               | with cheap imported goods. We were still extremely and
               | unilaterally wealthy.
               | 
               | The US GDP didn't stop growing then, but wealth
               | inequality vastly increased up to the present. The growth
               | in inequality is the change, not the growing GDP.
               | 
               | > Post China WTO, the wealth of America has been spent
               | and "averaged out" over dozens of post-industrial
               | economies
               | 
               | Again, US GDP has effectively increased super-linearly
               | since the 90s, even with China in the WTO. The problem is
               | the benefits - even after the cheap consumer goods - have
               | largely been realized by the wealthiest while the working
               | class have been left out to dry. If the US hadn't gutted
               | the working/middle class's jobs, assets and the public
               | infrastructure they depend on during this period, perhaps
               | we wouldn't have the instability we face now.
               | 
               | > So the wealth of the Baby Boomers and their incredible
               | economic tailwinds will not be felt again unless there's
               | some wildly new disruption to the economic order. (AGI
               | and automated manufacturing, maybe?)
               | 
               | Wealth will continue to explode as technology allows ever
               | greater efficiency and exploitation of resources.
               | 
               | > The reality is that the American middle class will
               | shrink and people will have to work harder. The American
               | market doesn't have magical superiority anymore.
               | 
               | Not if they stop fighting each other and instead fight
               | for their piece of the productivity growth.
        
           | HWR_14 wrote:
           | Except the part where you cannot save enough to retire and
           | you don't have the income to support your current lifestyle
        
       | louthy wrote:
       | > In 1833 James Pond, the Astronomer Royal, introduced the
       | Greenwich Time Ball...
       | 
       | Did he stand up and say: "My name is Pond... James Pond"?
        
         | appleorchard46 wrote:
         | While we're on the subject of names...
         | 
         | > John's third wife Maria Elizabeth (nee Last)
         | 
         | I suppose it avoids any confusion as to what her last name is.
        
           | dmurray wrote:
           | Well, her first last name was Last, but her last last name
           | was Belville.
           | 
           | And her last first name was Elizabeth, and her first first
           | name was Maria.
        
           | jvan wrote:
           | Was there a fourth wife, or was she the Last?
        
           | dmd wrote:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=het1kl-A8qw
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | A shame she wasn't doing time distribution, or you could get
           | the Last time.
        
         | mytailorisrich wrote:
         | Actually I think this is a typo, or a lapsus, and they are
         | referring to John Pond [1].
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pond
        
       | mytailorisrich wrote:
       | It's always interesting to compare pictures. The approximate
       | location of the article's picture of the Observatory Clock from
       | the 1870s:
       | 
       | https://maps.app.goo.gl/7GSD3VytQ5cJ5ayR6
       | 
       | It provides a good view of Canary Wharf's skyscrappers today.
        
       | beardyw wrote:
       | > Around 1911 she moved to Ewell Cottage, London Road, Ewell.
       | 
       | The article seemed to wander off a bit at the end. But since this
       | is from Epsom and Ewell ( nowhere near Greenwich) it now makes
       | sense.
        
       | jack_riminton wrote:
       | Seems like the red ball rising to near the top was regularly
       | missed, I reckon an appropriately placed cannon that fired 5
       | minutes before the ball dropped would've been a suitably British
       | way to warn everyone
        
         | 2b3a51 wrote:
         | http://www.bidstonlighthouse.org.uk/fifty-years-after/
         | 
         | Childhood memory: waiting for the gun to be fired.
        
         | warrenski wrote:
         | Funny you should mention a cannon, here in Cape Town the Noon
         | Gun is still fired daily at noon local time.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noon_Gun
        
       | munchler wrote:
       | > When the sun is at its highest in the sky we call it midday or
       | noon but the earth spins on a slightly inclined axis so the point
       | closest to the sun is constantly changing. This change means that
       | a person in London will have their midday at a different time to
       | a person in New York and that will be different to a person in
       | Beijing
       | 
       | This is a very misleading description. The point closest to the
       | sun would be constantly changing even if the axis of earth's spin
       | was not inclined relative to the sun.
        
         | FredPret wrote:
         | Maybe they meant changing throughout the year
        
       | gerdesj wrote:
       | In the early noughties I ended up being called in as a consultant
       | to sort out a somewhat broken Novell eDirectory. Password changes
       | working sporadically, details not propagating sometimes - you
       | probably know this story.
       | 
       | I found a NTP stratum 1 source on site that someone had bought
       | and forgotten about and the internet was available. DNS was also
       | broken for IP and IPX/SPX was a bit special. I fixed up DNS and
       | registered some host names and so on. I removed some odd routes
       | in SPX and IP. I put all partitions on the three central office
       | boxes and distributed the rest. I ran an awful lot of dsrepair
       | and watched a lot of dstrace with various flags until the red
       | turned to green. I'd get a partition into a decent state, then
       | drop the replicas and rebuild them from the first one - all lots
       | of fun.
       | 
       | Anyway, it was DNS and NTP (it always is). That isn't the real
       | punchline ...
       | 
       | The company was called First Great Western (1)! I must stress
       | this was not the time sources for their trains and operations
       | equipment which was totally separate and properly managed by
       | qualified professionals. Their general office IT needed a bit of
       | a hand.
       | 
       | So I can lay claim to bringing time to GWR, if you squint hard
       | enough! A few years later I did a similar job for ScotRail, when
       | they too still had Novell office servers. I used FGW's servers as
       | sources - it seemed appropriate 8)
       | 
       | (EDIT to add):
       | 
       | (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time - mentions GWR in
       | line 1 and links to all the other related info.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-13 23:01 UTC)