Was Belfry Reform necessary?

Giles Blundell GRBlundell at MwqYXdgEYYWv3E8EH3UL7Hcv9OWNyh1tJi0y7JK95CdheYRgGTquyD4QCc5lxZvaPOol9_6L-J1G41AF.yahoo.invalid
Thu Mar 9 15:39:16 GMT 2006

We're currently 125 years or so on from belfry reform and the foundation of most of the big territorial  associations. But a friend of mine asked for an opinion on whether Belfry Reform was really needed back then. And from the position of having read history a while back, but with no knowledge of this issue, I think he could have a point.

History, as we all have noticed, is invariably and inevitably written by the winners. That applies as much to social history as it does to political.

Even from my position of ignorance, I can make a case that the winners in Belfry Reform were the clergy, who increased their control over church buildings. And most of the contemporary accounts, I would surmise, were written by the clergy. But is there independent, unbiassed evidence to support there having been a need for Belfry Reform?


Giles Blundell


More information about the Bell-historians mailing list