Timeline for Could someone who sent a letter in 19th century London expect a reply within 2 hours?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 24, 2017 at 18:11 | comment | added | JDługosz | @JanDvorak because you’re going through a pile of business, not dropping everything do deliver one note. | |
| May 24, 2017 at 12:45 | comment | added | Graham | @JanDvorak Most people using the post back then would have had servants to carry out menial tasks like that. And post carried an element of formality. Walking round implies that you are sufficiently close as to expect to be allowed an audience without notice. In Victorian times, that's a very close friend. | |
| May 24, 2017 at 9:53 | comment | added | John Dvorak | @JDługosz why not walk there personally in that case? | |
| May 23, 2017 at 20:51 | comment | added | JDługosz | If you were coresponding with someone on the same street, in the days before telephone, you would send a private runner, not use the post. | |
| May 23, 2017 at 16:46 | comment | added | supercat | Do you know if the Post Office discouraged or forbade any sort of gratuities? If it didn't, I would think it plausible that some people could get extremely good mail service. If a postman delivers one side of all the roads in his route in one direction, and then does the other side going in the reverse direction, and Y was "downstream" of X in the forward direction, X might send a letter to Y and have it delivered in the same cycle. Y might then offer an incentive for the postman to cross the street to receive a reply while delivering the opposite side's mail. | |
| May 23, 2017 at 15:01 | history | answered | Laurel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |