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 

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?


More information about the Bell-historians mailing list