inaccuracies in RCHM publications

[David Bryant]

I'm sure many will be aware that the RCHM inventories often contain brief
details of bells, which are not noted for their accuracy. I've just been
compiling details of a York ring of three which is now no longer in
existence. The relevant RCHM volume gives details, and cites Poppleton's
West Riding paper as their reference. However, comparing the two reveals
that (a) they have got the bells in the wrong order, (b) they have copied
the inscriptions of two out of the three incorrectly and (c) they have
missed the date off of one inscription, and copied it incorrectly on
another. Poppleton is very clearly and logically set out, so I can't really
see any excuse at all. I think we should expect a better standard of
research from an official research body such as the RCHM (which,
incidentally, is now a part of English Heritage).

David