Mancroft: The evidence

David Bryant djb122 at y...
Wed Feb 13 23:21:40 GMT 2002

Re. My earlier email. Here are the weights of Mancroft as received at
Taylor's and as despatched, with some commentary

As received 
at Taylor's 1924	After	Removed

1. 6-2-24	6-2-7	0-0-17
2. 6-1-20	6-1-19	0-0-1
3. 6-2-23	6-2-21	0-0-2
4. 7-2-26	7-2-1	0-0-25
5. 8-3-24	8-2-23	0-1-1
6. 9-2-13	9-2-7	0-0-6
7. 11-1-24	11-0-11	0-1-13
8. 14-0-10	13-1-26	0-2-12
9. 19-1-4	18-2-25	0-2-7
10. 21-2-20	20-3-13	0-3-7
11. 28-1-15	27-0-23	1-0-20
12. 40-2-21	37-3-15	2-3-6
6b. 10-0-0	9-3-1	0-0-27

In some cases, the 2nd and 3rd, the differences are so slight that
nothing appears to have been done - presumably these bells had already
lost their canons. In the case of the 6th, the same is probably true and
the difference is due to drilling. The treble, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th,
10th and 11th all lost what would be expected where canons were removed
but nothing else done. Likewise, the flat 6th probably had a Doncaster
Head, which would weigh about 27 lbs.

The tenor is far less clear. The amount removed seems a bit too much to
account for canons alone, even on a bell this size. Was it also tuned
slightly, and if so why it and not the others?

Any more to the point, if, as seems proven now I've looked more closely
at the evidence (and to some extent answered my own question!), the
bells were left largely untouched in 1924, why was this? Taylor's are
unlikely to have left them alone by choice, particularly at this date,
so I would think it likely that pressures from the local ringers or
church authorities is most likely the answer. More research, as they
say, is needed! The most obvious place to start is perhaps to look
closely at the tenor for evidence of tuning, and ideally to see the
correspondence between the foundry and the church.


More information about the Bell-historians mailing list