[Bell Historians] Royal, or other names

Richard Smith richard at skI6RZmFbxUG7CMS2bYL1aS_26JInXbCUJvxKn8Bv2-i2uflVRrJlrxDgJGG4G4R_n3TxKBJEb7r-W2OjPw.yahoo.invalid
Fri Aug 18 12:14:35 BST 2006

Bickerton, Roderic K (SELEX) (UK) wrote:

> I have often wondered about these names on all numbers why doubles when
> 5 is an odd number?

Originally, a doubles method was one in which two bells
swapped between adjacent rows (other than at singles or,
sometimes, 'extremes' -- the latter often just being the
lead end change, e.g. the 125 in Plain Bob Doubles).
Similarly, a triples method is one in which three bells swap
between adjacent rows.  At this time, the terms 'minor',
'major', etc., didn't really exist and Plain Bob Minor (then
known as Grandsire Bob) would have been refered to as
'doubles and triples' due to its alternating sequence of
double and triple changes.

More recently (by which I mean during the 18th century),
doubles came to mean any five bell method, and the terms
'minor', 'major', etc., came into being.  But I'm unsure
exactly where these came from and why, for example, 'minor'
refers to six bell ringing rather than (say) four bell
ringing.  And 'royal' is a complete mystery to me.



More information about the Bell-historians mailing list