[Bell Historians] One N or two?

[David Cawley]

One N or two?Canons

I tried to persuade Paul Cattermole to use one 'n' but was not sufficiently eminent!

Apparently it is something to do with the resemblance to the boss on the end of a cannon. And bellfounders often cast guns - in fact JT&Co have done a couple only recently. However there are numerous instances of both uses right back to the 17th century. 

An eminent bellfounder once told me that the single 'n' had something to do with senior clergy: as crooked as the loops on top of a bell. On thjat, I couldn't possibly comment.

But what has been good enough for four generations of the two present bellfoundries ought to be good enough for the junior branch at TESCO!  

DLC
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Andrew Higson 
  To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:21 PM
  Subject: [Bell Historians] One N or two?


  One of the discrepancies that has occurred since our merger is one of spelling. The Taylor side has always spelt "canons" with one N, however David Marshall is insistent that there are two but, whilst it is true he has been around longer than the rest of us, we remain unswayed and unconvinced.

  However, looking on an on line dictionary his version would seem to be correct. 

  Then again, looking at all the eminent publications of recent years, one N seems to be the normal spelling. Messers Dalton, Dawson, Eisel, Jennings, Ketteringham, Pickford and Sharpe to mention but a few fall into this camp.

  Paul Cattermole is the exception that I came across, siding with DJM. 

  Is this a question without satisfactory answer or can anyone be definitive? 

  Cheers 

  Andrew Higson 
  Bellmaster 
  Taylors Eayre and Smith 

              
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20060914/1bef05d9/attachment.html>