[Bell Historians] Russell of Wootton

Bickerton, Roderic K (SELEX) (UK) roderic.bickerton at KUJSCVUTIjCFbqMFYz3ma-AShPB_yj3JoXOxz3-XETFMU1jQQu3FZkifGDMLTJsSn1PNE6jsrSGrEL_u41IVr-EJYRzgyO61uxc.yahoo.invalid
Wed Aug 30 08:47:53 BST 2006

Destruction of tradition and our ringing heritage, there would appear to
have been a ring of 5 hear since 1637 and there is every indication from
frame cut outs showing that bells were swinging above frame high from
very hung out fittings, and having been rehung more than once prior the
1857 rehang. It would seem likely that they have been ringing bells for
most of the history of change ringing. Is this a good place to end
ringing permanently and hang dead?
It happens to be a large and growing parish.
Personally I agree regarding augmentation to 6, but that is a different

>> There is real danger of conservation stopping them ever again being
>> rung, but hung dead in the old frame, once the headstocks become
>> dangerous.

What's wrong with them being hung dead in the old frame?

Why do we have this modern-day obsession that everything HAS to be hung
for change ringing and be of six or more bells? It seems to me that we
are hard pressed to find sufficient ringers to man the towers we already
have, without compounding the problem by adding more!


This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.


More information about the Bell-historians mailing list