[Bell Historians] Gloucester Cathedral

[David Bryant]

>As has so often been the case, I think you'll find they were retained
>because of lack of funds to do anything else.   I also seem to remember
>Gilbert Turlow telling me that the Cathedrals Advisory Committee
>desired them to be retained.

Given that this was a big-budget project (the iroko frame alone must have 
cost a fortune) I find this difficult to believe. Of the five old bells 
still on the ring, the 9th, 10th and 11th are of historical significance and 
had to be retained. The 8th (John Rudhall) is of no great note, neither is 
the Abel Rudhall tenor (although it could be argued that they had some 
significance due to the Rudhalls being local founders). Even if these five 
were all retained, there would have been nothing to prevent them being hung 
dead or put on display - it a project of this magnitude, the difference in 
cost would not have been that significant.

I think it is more a case that it was one of a number of over-conservative 
projects which took place at around this time with disappointing results. 
The other obvious example is Durham Cathedral.

More recent high-profile jobs, such as Carlisle, have been more sensible. 
There, the five old bells were hung dead and a complete new ring installed. 
The end result is good.

David