Cutting off Canons
Richard Offen
richard.offen at o...
Sat Aug 7 09:19:58 BST 2004
Now back in the UK, I am slowly ploughing through the two month's
Ringing Worlds that have accumulated whilst I've been away.
I was interested to read the account of the recent restoration at St
Thomas' Salisbury - congratulations to the local band for achieving
this.
I was however intrigued by the report that a compromise was reached
and that the front four bells retain their canons and the back ones
have been removed. As I understand it from the article, English
Heritage and the Council for the Care of Churches considered the ring
important because the front seven were by the same founder (John
Wells) and advocated the retention of the canons for this reason.
So why allow a compromise where only four bells retain their
canons? Either the bells were actually important enough to merit
the retention of ALL canons, or they were not of any great
significance and therefore the removal of all the canons would have
been permissible. This half-way house seems to be making a nonsense
of the whole issue!
Or does the RW article only reflect part of the story?
What do others think/know?
Richard
More information about the Bell-historians
mailing list