------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C5DA4C.DA3FA160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I refrained from commenting in response to earlier postings, as I haven't a= ctually been up the Abbey tower. But I do have some second-hand reports fro= m Alan Glover and Christopher Dalton, and since the discussion is rumbling = on I'll step in with "their information" on which this posting is based.=20 The bells weren't rehung for chiming by Taylors as Richard suggests (and as= ADH's posting also shows) - although the bells were "put in order" at that= date and still ringable after 1885. The work of rehanging them for chiming= was done in 1909, probably by Greenleaf & Tristram of Hereford whose propo= sal (with plan) of 24 April 1909 survives in the parish records.=20 The bells were rehung from new elm stocks in a new pitch pine frame, with a= n Ellacombe apparatus. The stocks have gudgeons and bearings "to allow of m= ovement from the striking of the chime hammers" but these aren't ringing fi= ttings. The frame has pits (two rows of four) which are too short to allow = the bells to be rung.=20=20 Hope this clarifies regarding date and how they are hung CP ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Richard Offen=20 To: bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com=20 Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 2:49 PM Subject: [Bell Historians] Re: Shrewsbury Abbey --- In bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Chester" wrote: > > Can anyone put the "Nabbers" out of their misery? Were these bells=20 > rehung for chiming or are they really unringable with an ellacombe? >=20 > Mike > They were hung dead from beams by J T & Co at the end of the 19th=20 century and are chimed by means of an Ellacombe apparatus. There were several peals rung on the bells during the eighteenth=20 century, but one only has to look at the tower today, which is more=20 window than wall, to realise that it probably always lacked the=20 stability required for full circle ringing. Sam is right by the way, it is dedicated to Holy Cross as all adicts of=20 Brother Cadfael will tell you! Richard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS=20 a.. Visit your group "bellhistorians" on the web. =20=20=20=20=20=20 b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: bellhistorians-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com =20=20=20=20=20=20 c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Servic= e.=20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C5DA4C.DA3FA160 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I refrained from commenting in response to= earlier=20 postings, as I haven't actually been up the Abbey tower. But I do have some= =20 second-hand reports from Alan Glover and Christopher Dalton, and since the= =20 discussion is rumbling on I'll step in with "their information" on whi= ch=20 this posting is based.

The bells weren't rehung for chiming by Ta= ylors as=20 Richard suggests (and as ADH's posting also shows) - although the bells wer= e=20 "put in order" at that date and still ringable after 1885. The work of reha= nging=20 them for chiming was done in 1909, probably by Greenleaf & Tristram of= =20 Hereford whose proposal (with plan) of 24 April 1909 survives in the parish= =20 records.

The bells were rehung from new elm stocks = in a new=20 pitch pine frame, with an Ellacombe apparatus. The stocks have gudgeons and= =20 bearings "to allow of movement from the striking of the chime hammers" but= =20 these aren't ringing fittings. The frame has pits (two = rows=20 of four) which are too short to allow the bells to be rung.

Hope this clarifies regarding date and how= they are=20 hung

----- Original Message -----

Fro= m:=20 Richard Offen<= /A>=20

To: bellhistorians@yahoogroups= .com=20

Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 = 2:49=20 PM

Subject: [Bell Historians] Re: Shr= ewsbury=20 Abbey

--- In bellhistorians@yahoogroups= .com,=20 "Mike Chester" <mike@m...>=20 wrote: > > Can anyone put the "Nabbers" out of their misery?&= nbsp;=20 Were these bells > rehung for chiming or are they really unringabl= e=20 with an ellacombe? > > Mike > They were hung de= ad=20 from beams by J T & Co at the end of the 19th century and are chi= med=20 by means of an Ellacombe apparatus. There were several peals rung = on=20 the bells during the eighteenth century, but one only has to look at = the=20 tower today, which is more window than wall, to realise that it proba= bly=20 always lacked the stability required for full circle ringing. = Sam=20 is right by the way, it is dedicated to Holy Cross as all adicts of=20 Brother Cadfael will tell you! Richard ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C5DA4C.DA3FA160--