<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3c.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/loose.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><!-- Network content -->
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Philip's question begs the question which has had
recent airings in the Ringing World: what is "ringable"? and what is
complete? I was quite surprised not to see in that correspondence an
expression used by the late Bill Theobald, "inadvisable". He told me that a
number of these had received the "intermittent attention of vernacular
bellhangers" (!) down the centuries, some of which, often quite recent, was
"inadvisable". </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>So far as bell fittings go, it is very often the
headstocks and clappers which last longest. Gudgeons, bearings, wheels and
rollers often having undergone partial or total renewal, sometimes so long ago
that it is difficult to tell. I recently rang on an 18th century six with 18th
century headstocks and clappers (and I believe gudgeons and bearings) which to
my surprise had been put into good order with 19th century wheels and a great
deal of 21st century effort in their 17thC frame.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>As to complete installations it may be a red
herring to mention two which have been removed in recent years. One was
Alton Pancras (5) so memorably described by CD in Dorset I. The
other was the Town Church in St Peter Port, with the odd situation of a
1913 (French) ring of eight hung in a 1736 French bellfounder's "copy" of
traditional English bell fittings in an "after the English type" frame with
very narrow pits round the front end to take the disproportionately
small trebles. They had certainly been rung once in recent years. See my
recently published "Church Bells of the Channel Islands". Whether either was
ringable in the accepted ( ? or approved ) sense of the word is a moot
point. Sadly, Alton Pancras were taken out and rehung dead despite
strenuous efforts by Taylors to get the parish to accept a ringing scheme. The
story at St Peter Port is happier as I think most who have heard or rung on the
1994 Taylor eight will agree.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Here is a little snippet, that even bellhangers
fall into the trap. In 1930, J P Fidler was inspecting the ring of six at
Avington, Hants, for Taylors. He found four of the bells cracked the frame
apparently sound and the fittings worn out. He nevertheless had the bells pulled
up singly to check frame movement. All was well, the frame was sound. The last
bell to be tested was the third, which hung above. As before, all seemed well.
The bell was rung down and stopped. The ringer was tying the rope the canons
snapped and down came the bell just missing Jack Fidler. Clearly it can happen
to the best of us. (Avington bells were sold for scrap in the
1960's).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This doesn't pretend to answer Philip's
question!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>DLC</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=philip_denton@551DtsyHg2h4xV3Q8PRZIte0IR1iPn5i7ZSwxKXTmybVaea8l7E6K450rzQ7p8jIrsWzxO_S_u67yAKuFE-A-ZJliy3WxFVv-Sc.yahoo.invalid
href="mailto:philip_denton@DF6a2K_rjpunZpEl_uvStftQJVYLfihKUIdyNML2epFi8vHnJnJMHdFoCkOHD95MqvbnK7XrxQTxwus1uk9p.yahoo.invalid">Philip Denton</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com
href="mailto:bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 12, 2007 11:19
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [Bell Historians] Oldest
Fittings</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P>
<DIV>Does anyone know which ringable rings have the oldest fittings? When I
rang at East Carlton, Northamptonshire (3/06), I was told that the bells
(Joseph Eayre, 1755, 9 cwt ring of 6) were re-hung in the new church
tower in 1788. The Peterborough Diocesan Inventory gives the frame and
fittings as probably by Edward Arnold, 1789. They were very heavy-going to
ring! Are there many cases of older fittings in use?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>PD</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>jshe726707@aol.<WBR>com</I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"><!-- Network content -->
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<DIV><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 12/08/2007 21:46:11 GMT Daylight Time,
rodbick@googlemail.<WBR>com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Georgia color=#000000 size=2>I
remember re-hanging a bell in the 1070's and it went really badly. It
is<BR>still going and now goes as well as any other bell in the
tower.<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>I didn't appreciate that you were that venerable Rod .</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Jim</DIV></FONT>
<DIV></DIV></DIV><!--End group email --></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<P>
<HR SIZE=1>
Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. <A
href="http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTEydmViNG02BF9TAzIxMTQ3MTcxOTAEc2VjA21haWwEc2xrA3RhZ2xpbmU">Try
it now</A>.
<P></P></DIV><!--End group email --></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>