[Bell Historians] Fw: Re: Oldest Change Ringing bell

[David Cawley]

1. Snargate, Kent. (Also St Dunstan). As Richard says, the bell is the earlier of the two medieval bells in this ex-ring of three on which we have both rung. I wouldn't go as far as to compare the treble with the well-known Caversfield bell (to which David also referred; in passing, it was removed from the ring in 1927 and hung with its JT 1874 fittings in a light frame in the church). The Snargate treble bell is more of the shape of the much-illustrated Enborne, Berks or Sarnesfield, Herefs, bells (see CB Herefs pp 444ff); in other words we've passed from the archaic to the early medieval form. Sharpe, op cit pp449ff gives some pretty sound reasons for fairly precise dating bells of this shape, and his conclusions seem to be largely based on Elphick's work, which ought to be good enough for anyone.

2. I am (I rather regret to say) responsible for assigning to Snargate tenor to W le Belyetere of Canterbury; I did so largely on the grounds of shape, the lettering being quite different to that on W le B's other bells, and very rough. Indeed it is so rough that my great hero Stahlschmidt (CB Kent 1887), who I suspect never saw the bells, placed the tenor as the earliest bell on the grounds of lettering. That on the earlier treble is fine, and that on the tenor rough. Clouston came down with Richard and me to see these bells and agreed on the dating, although he was reluctant specifically to assign the tenor to W le Belyetere.

3. The latter reinforces a point which has been made before, especially I think by Chris Pickford, that to assign unattributed bells to anyone without the proper evidence is a risky undertaking. One can say that "The shape of the bell resemebles that of bells attributed to.....(or by)" or that the lettering is like that used by....,or believed to be that of....etc. With dating by shape, I think we are on firmer ground. Fred himself said however that care must be exercised when we come to the archaic-style bells, particularly in remote locations where old techniques may have hung on longer.

4. Going back to Snargate, they are not now a ringing peal as Richard says - WBF rehung them in 1969 in the old frame for swing chiming. The two old bells did not leave the tower, which both pre-date. The frame would now need strengthening for regular ringing purposes and the bells require wheels in place of levers. Details

Treble, c1280-1300: 30 1/8" C# 5 1/2-cwt/. Inscr (fine lettering) + A V E . M A R I A
2nd (by J & C Hodson, 1673) 33" B 6 1/2-cwt
Tenor, c1325-1350: 35 5/8" A 8 1/2-cwt. Inscr (poor lettering) + S A N C T E D V N S T A N E (the S's are reversed and only the upright of the D has come out). 

5. While referring to Sharpe I looked at the entries for his 13th & early 14th-century bells. The following were classed as early 14th century bells, in rings: Aston Ingham - 4th of six ("14th century"). I doubt it being early 14th century. Byford - 2nd of three ("of early 14th century shape"). Unringable. Preston-on-Wye: presumably the treble of four is somewhere in the augmented ring; Sharpe says it "may be identified by its shape and design as an early fourteenth bell" (with a beautiful illustration by CD). Very much like the Canterbury bell referred to previously. 

DLC


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Richard Offen 
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 5:50 PM
Subject: [Bell Historians] Fw: Re: Oldest Change Ringing bell


--- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "djb122uk" <david at b...> wrote:
> 
> > You can usually get a pretty good idea of date of a bell from the 
> > profile.
> 
> To some extent, but surely not accurately enough to be able to say 
> with anything approaching certainty that any given bell is the 
oldest 
> hung for change ringing, unless there are any of really antiquated 
> shape in rings of 3 or the like. The exampe which immediately 
springs 
> to mind is the disused bell at Caversfield, which was the treble of 
a 
> ringable three until the mid C20.
> 
> David

Over to the real experts on this one, but I would have thought that 
with all the work done by the likes of Ranald Clouston and George 
Elphick, to name but two, it has become a pretty precise art/science.

The bell I was thinking of, the treble of the three at Snargate on 
Romney Marsh, is certainly more like the shape of the Caversfield 
bell that that of the fifth at St Dunstan's Canterbury - the tenor at 
Snargate is by the same founder as the St Dunstan's bell, so 
comparisons of shape are easy. 

Also, as the bell founder for Snargate tenor and St Dunstans fifth 
has been identified, we can give a fairly precise range of dates when 
the bells could have been cast. Surely that is accurate enough for 
the purposes of this little excercise?

R




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bellhistorians/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
bellhistorians-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]