[Bell Historians] More bells?

[Roderic Bickerton]

I maintain a web page of proposed changes to rings,
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rodbic/
It floats around 150 towers.
Looking through it will show that augmentations exceed new rings or
recovered long term unringable ones by a large ratio.
The list has a natural bias toward new rings, because these tend to be
longer duration projects than augmentations, and therefore are on the list
longer.


-----Original Message-----
From: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of John Camp
Sent: 12 February 2008 19:57
To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Bell Historians] More bells?

My late father's booklet 'Discovering Bells and Bellringing' will be
in need of further revision before too long. I am contemplating a
chapter about recent developments in ringing. One obvious topic is
the increasing number of augmentations over, say, the past 25 years. 
A 12 in every village, practically.

Has anyone any thoughts on why this is so? Is it that there is more
money around, or that the technology has made augmentations easier, or
what? Or maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree and there haven't been
as many augmentations as I imagine. Has there been an overall
increase in the number of rings of bells? The 3&4-bell list complains
about losses in that category.

And what about new rings outside the UK? Quite a few. And
mini-rings. Why have the numbers increased enormously? Is it that,
once one person's done it, others realise that it isn't as difficult
as it looked?

Any ideas on these matters gratefully received.

John Camp



 


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.2/1273 - Release Date: 2/12/2008
09:31



No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.2/1273 - Release Date: 2/12/2008
09:31