[Bell Historians] Re: bells in Canterbury during Chaucer's time?

John Camp camp at Jc1XZwVCBnKJEEm9NHuS8k0vnal9rjS46gpuGtcsbzMCHQeNN_Q2mRiLPqAEgfpaZXy3GnWj392pBG2LN1jI.yahoo.invalid
Sun Jan 28 13:39:40 GMT 2007

At 12:51 on 28 January 2007, Andrew Aspland wrote:

> No neither am I but in the French "montre" is both the verb "to show"
> and the noun "watch". Maybe watch indicates the possibility of seeing
> the time rather than the exclusion of striking a bell.

But wouldn't that apply to a clock with a face?

I wouldn't like to stick my neck out (this isn't ringing-chat), but
there's a nautical connection, both in English and in French (though
'l'officier des montres' is the navigating officer, not the officer of
the watch.) But a watch could well have been the name of the instrument
which measured the length of a (nautical) watch.

Anyway, I don't suppose there's a clear answer.

John Camp


More information about the Bell-historians mailing list