Content
Early Seeds of Collective Security
In Anglo-Saxon England, for instance, the concept of mutual pledging was central. Communities were organised into groups called ‘tithings’ (typically ten families). If someone within the tithing broke the law, the others were responsible for bringing them to justice. Failure to do so could result in collective punishment. This system, known as ‘frankpledge’ after the Norman Conquest, relied heavily on community self-policing. Above the tithing was the ‘hundred’, and the ‘shire reeve’ (the origin of the word ‘sheriff’) was the king’s representative responsible for overseeing law and order within a shire or county, often summoning citizens into a posse comitatus (power of the county) to pursue criminals. This wasn’t policing as we know it – reactive, investigative, preventative. It was largely about raising the ‘hue and cry’. If a crime occurred, witnesses were expected to shout and alert others, and all able-bodied men were obligated to join the pursuit. Justice was often swift and public, relying more on communal knowledge and immediate response than on methodical investigation.The Rise of the Watchmen
As towns grew larger and more anonymous during the Middle Ages and into the early modern period, the collective responsibility model started to fray. The Statute of Winchester in 1285 in England formalized the ‘Watch and Ward’ system. Towns were required to maintain a night watch, typically composed of ordinary citizens serving compulsory (and often unpaid) duty. These watchmen patrolled the streets after dark, looking for fires, suspicious activity, and enforcing curfews. They carried lanterns and staffs, calling out the time and ensuring gates were locked. However, these early watch systems were notoriously inefficient. Often staffed by unwilling conscripts, the elderly, or those simply looking to avoid trouble, they gained a reputation for being ineffective, prone to sleeping on duty, or easily bribed. Think of Shakespeare’s Dogberry and Verges in ‘Much Ado About Nothing’ – bumbling, incompetent figures meant to represent the watchmen of the era. While they provided a minimal presence, they were hardly a deterrent to determined criminals in increasingly complex urban environments. Alongside the watch, other figures emerged. Parish constables, often appointed annually, had local law enforcement duties during the day, serving warrants and dealing with minor offenses. Thief-takers operated on a more entrepreneurial basis, essentially private citizens paid by victims or authorities to capture criminals and recover stolen property – a system ripe for corruption, as figures like the infamous Jonathan Wild demonstrated in 18th century London, playing both sides as a supposed law enforcer and a criminal mastermind.The Birth of Professional Policing
The real revolution in policing began in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, driven by the massive social upheaval of the Industrial Revolution. Cities like London and Paris swelled with populations disconnected from traditional community structures. Poverty, overcrowding, and social unrest grew, overwhelming the old parish constable and watch systems. The existing methods were simply inadequate for managing large, anonymous, and often volatile urban populations. Early experiments hinted at a new direction. In London, the Fielding brothers, Henry (a novelist and magistrate) and Sir John, established the Bow Street Runners around 1749. Initially a small group of dedicated officers attached to the Bow Street Magistrates’ Court, they were more proactive and investigative than the parish constables, circulating descriptions of wanted persons and actively pursuing criminals. While not a city-wide force, they represented a step towards professionalization. Paris had already moved towards a more centralized system earlier. King Louis XIV created the position of lieutenant général de police in 1667, establishing a uniformed force with broad powers over crime, public health, and order in the city. This French model, with its emphasis on state control and preventative surveillance, influenced thinking elsewhere but also generated suspicion, particularly in England, where fears of government oppression and standing armies were strong.Peel’s Principles and the ‘Bobbies’
The watershed moment arguably arrived in 1829 with the establishment of the London Metropolitan Police Force, championed by Home Secretary Sir Robert Peel. This was a radical departure. It aimed to be a preventative force, not just reactive. Officers, nicknamed ‘Bobbies’ or ‘Peelers’ after their founder, were uniformed (in blue, deliberately distinct from the red military uniforms), unarmed (carrying only a truncheon), and centrally controlled. Their primary objective, as outlined in Peel’s principles, was the prevention of crime and disorder.The London Metropolitan Police Act of 1829, spearheaded by Sir Robert Peel, created the first modern, professional, and centrally organised police force. Its core mission was focused on preventing crime through visible patrols rather than solely reacting to it. This model, emphasizing public approval and minimal use of force, became highly influential globally. The officers became known colloquially as Bobbies.Peel emphasised that the police were citizens in uniform, exercising powers on behalf of their fellow citizens, and that their effectiveness depended on public approval. This concept of ‘policing by consent’ was fundamental. The ‘Met’ provided a template that would be adapted, debated, and implemented across the globe.
Policing Takes Root in America
Across the Atlantic, the development of policing followed a different trajectory, heavily influenced by regional differences. In the North, early colonial settlements largely mirrored the English watch-and-ward and constable systems. As cities like Boston, New York, and Philadelphia grew, they established their own watchmen and, eventually, organised police departments in the mid-19th century, often spurred by riots and increasing urban disorder. Boston created a formal department in 1838, followed by New York in 1845. These early American forces often faced challenges with political interference, corruption, and establishing legitimacy. Uniforms were sometimes resisted initially, both by officers and the public. Unlike the London model, American police were typically armed from an earlier stage, reflecting a different societal context and the prevalence of firearms. In the Southern states, however, a distinct and troubling form of law enforcement emerged much earlier: the slave patrols. Dating back to the early 1700s, these patrols were explicitly tasked with controlling the enslaved population, preventing uprisings, enforcing curfew restrictions, and capturing runaways. Composed of white citizens, often on a rotating basis, they had broad powers to stop, search, and discipline enslaved people. Historians widely acknowledge these patrols as a significant precursor to modern policing in the South, embedding principles of surveillance and control directed at a specific population group. The American West developed its own unique forms of law enforcement, shaped by the frontier environment. County sheriffs and town marshals were often elected officials responsible for vast territories with limited resources. Posse comitatus remained relevant, and private agencies like the Pinkertons also played a significant role, sometimes acting as industrial security or pursuing outlaws across state lines.Towards Modern Forces
The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw further professionalization and technological integration. The adoption of standardized uniforms became widespread. Innovations like the police telegraph, call boxes, and eventually patrol cars began to change the nature of police work, increasing response times but potentially distancing officers from the communities they patrolled on foot. Fingerprinting, forensic science, and formal training academies gradually became standard elements of policing. Key Developments Included:- Formal training academies replacing ad-hoc instruction.
- Adoption of civil service reforms to reduce political patronage in hiring and promotion.
- Integration of early communication technologies (telegraph, telephone).
- Beginnings of forensic science application (fingerprinting, ballistics).
- Introduction of motorised patrols.
