[Bell Historians] Yorkshire Tails
c.j.pickford at t...
Thu Jun 5 10:06:45 BST 2003
I fear that the good Rev. Dr. Camp hasn't done enough ringing on bumpy thre=
es and semi-ringables still hung for deadrope ringing. Really, not understa=
nding the difference between deadrope and hung dead! If he were to try dea=
drope ringing, he'd quickly discover that a salley at handstroke isn't much=
use or really necessary - 'cos there ain't no handstroke to speak of. Mig=
ht be glad of a tuft at backstroke though - hence Anne's point, which to me=
seems a fair question to pose.
While on the round-up, I thought it a bit of a pity JC didn't pick up a bit=
more on the significance of the Leeds handbells and the legal issues (gris=
t to his mill) of alienated church property
Beecham's at St.Helen's - I failed to say - are Taylor bells of 1887/8.
----- Original Message -----=20
From: A Willis=20
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com=20
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 9:46 AM
Subject: RE: [Bell Historians] re;Yorkshire Tails
Sorry to bring this up again, but I think that there is a slight misund=
erstanding in this week's e-list round-up in the Ringing World, with a refe=
rence to bells 'hung dead'. (If this is an editorial slip, my apologies).
When I suggested that Yorkshire Tails dated from the days of dead-rope =
ringing, I was assuming that, as the garter hole was above the headstock at=
that time, only a 'back-stroke' pull was required. Hence the need for som=
ething more comfortable to pull on at the end of the rope, the knob at the =
end providing something to pull against.=20=20
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20
This message was sent to you via the Bell Historians' Mailing List. To un=
subscribe from the list send an email to bellhistorians-unsubscribe at yahoogr=
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.=20
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Bell-historians