[Bell Historians] Early handbell ringing

[Edward W Martin]

--- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "Edward W Martin" <edwardwmartin at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, Richard Smith <richard@> wrote:
> > Do we have any actual evidence that people only (typically) 
> > rang one handbell each in the 18th century?  Or are we 
> > simply assuming that because there is no evidence of ringing 
> > two bells each it didn't happen?  I agree that it's logical 
> > to assume only one bell in the absense of evidence to 
> > contrary.
> > 
> 
> 
> Yes, I do assume only one man per bell in early days. At the moment I can't find earliest references for ringing, two – in- hand.
> 
> Eddie Martin

Hello Richard
My note books etc are still in a chaotic shambles even after 18 months since we moved to England from Annapo;is USA. However, I have just come across the following note that I made (from where I don't recall, but possibly the Bell News)
"The first handbell peal ever rung with bells retained in hand, copied from an old manuscript book originally belonging to William Booth" (I never knew a William Booth, so I presume this is all from Bell News or wherever!!!)
"On Wed. evening, Oct. 30th 1811, was rung a peal of 8 handbells at the house of William Booth, Bailey Lane Sheffield. A complete peal of Oxford Treble Bob Major, 5088 Changes in 2 hours and 34 minutes by the following Artists viz:-
Treble & 2 William Hudson, 3 & 4 William Booth, 5 & 6 Henery (sic) Grayson, 7 & Tenor George Hudson."