[Bell Historians] Obscure questions of the week

[David Bryant]

John Adams wrote:

> I have seen a lot of newer ones that are hung for slow swinging, tucked up
> in their headstocks. Sometimes can be rung full circle, but all depends on
> the roping arrangement.
>
> I assume the thoery is that it makes them easier to chime

That would seem a logical reason for it, particularly where large bells are
concerned. Our tenor, for instance, will only chime in the bottom with three
or four on it and if pulled up wrong doesn't strike until it's half way up.
Great Peter, on the other hand, can easily be swung by one person, and the
clapper strikes on the right side (i.e. the leading edge) without the bell
being checked. Taylor's obviously realised this early on, as the single bell
at Richard's Castle is well tucked up - a sort of full-circle slow-swinger.
Is the Southport bell similarly tucked up, I wonder? As you say, it depends
on the roping as to whether slow-swingers will go all the way up. If the
garter hole is in the ringing position and there is a pulley box then it
probably will. Many slow swingers (e.g. Great Peter) have the garter hole at
the top of the wheel which means that they probably can't be rung full
circle (although I've never tried it in this case!)

I think the advantage, as regards non-ringers, of slow-swinging bells is
that they will strike on the right side just by being swung, whereas ringing
bells generally need to be checked to make them sound. Slow swingers are
also less potentially dangerous than ringing bells.

David