charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1"=
>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Must be brief - I'm supposed to be working=
to meet=20
a deadline! - but I'd like to just add a couple of points (apart from point=
ing=20
out that Giles has mistaken me for Chris Dalton)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I did take the point made by Giles, even t=
hough it=20
may not have been clear in my answer, and I agree with him that this is not=
hing=20
about history proper (i.e. interpretation, use of evidence to make sense of=
=20
things). It's simply about documenting or recording what exists and here (t=
o=20
repeat what I said) the only significance of a weight is as one element in =
a=20
range of physical data about a bell. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Others (Mark Regan, for one) have already =
made the=20
point on this list that Bell History is a misnomer for what we do when we r=
ecord=20
and document the contents of our belfries. But the fact that it isn't "hist=
ory"=20
doesn't make the activity any less valid. We need an accurate record of wha=
t=20
exists, and the Woodchurch debate sits very comfortably in this context as =
we're=20
trying to establish what is the "correct" weight (not necessarily an accura=
te=20
one - even though this is the ideal)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Andrew Bull has helpfully stated that the =
key thing=20
about recorded weights is that they represent an actual weighing on scales =
-=20
never mind the issue of accuracy for a moment - at a particular point in ti=
me.=20
For me, there are a couple of main points:</FONT></DIV>
<UL>
<LI><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If a weight is quoted, I want to know the=
=20
source</FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If several weights are quoted at differen=
t=20
periods, then I want to know which is which (i.e. what weight was "curren=
t" at=20
what date)</FONT></LI>
<LI><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If a discrepancy is found, then I want to=
try and=20
establish the correct information by checking at source (and in the major=
ity=20
of cases this produced definitive answers, at least with regard to "recor=
ded"=20
weights)</FONT></LI></UL>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>On Woodchurch, it's clear that there are t=
wo=20
possible recorded weights - both reliable in their way (and if the bell&nbs=
p;was=20
weighed again, the result would probably be neither 4-0-3 or 3-3-27, of cou=
rse).=20
As I've said, I hope that Whitechapel can clarify. It may turn out to be a=
=20
simple error in that the wrong weight was entered in the book - but there m=
ay be=20
another explanation. Nigel?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Chris Pickford</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>