[Bell Historians] Bells ascribed hitherto to John Walgrave

[David Sloman]

Dickon's email requires some clarification. I have not done any original research on London Medieval Bell Founders, in order to do so one would need to be latin scholar, and one with a great deal of patience to be able to translate any medieval documentation that survives.

Bell Historians of the era of Walters made many assumptions with regard to allocating known bells to founders. The procedure seems to have been assessing the age of a group of bells cast by the same founder, based on the lettering and other marks, if any, and looking at the known founders mentioned in records for this period and taking a stab in the dark. In this way, for instance, many bells are described as being by Robert Burford and William Burford. I don't think there is any proof at all that connects this group of bells with the Burfords but this is the best guess that has been made so far. Really these bells should be recorded as "Ascribed to" rather than cast by.

With regard to John Walgrave, as far as I know, he is only mentioned in records as a servant of William Dawe, which would place him at the end of the 14th or early 15th century.

George Elphick in his Sussex Bell and Belfries sets out a good case for the bells with the Balcombe "Walgrave" shield to have been cast towards the end of the 15th century and hence not by John Walgrave but by another founder with the initials JW

Up until recently Dove entries have recorded bells as Balcombe Shield and by John Walgrave, these bells are all by the same founder, probably not John Walgrave.

I hope that I have interpreted George Elphick's researches correctly. Any further views on the subject of Medieval Bell Founders would be welcome.

DS

---- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dickon Love 
  To: bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2011 10:36 PM
  Subject: [Bell Historians] Bells ascribed hitherto to John Walgrave


    
  Dear Bell Historians,

  I received a note from Dovemaster, John Baldwin, last month that I think
  will be of wider interested to the bell historian community. It concerns
  some research made by David Sloman casting doubt on bells normally ascribed
  to John Walgrave. The resolution in this correspondence was to rather
  denote these bells as "Balcombe Shield". I wonder if anyone has any
  comment?

  DrL

  -----Original Message-----

  JB to DS

  David - I cannot say whether 'it is accepted' or not: all that I can do is
  record what people tell me from their position of knowledge. What I CAN do
  (and already have done) is to try to make sure there are enough comments and
  warnings in the pNBR database for me to be alerted should anyone try to
  indicate that a bell should henceforth be assigned to John Walgrave. .....
  I'll now alert the contributors for the other 'Walgrave' ascriptions that
  the date shown (early C15th) is now amended to late C15th and that they are
  now being shown as Balcombe shield bells.

  John 

  -----Original Message-----
  DS to JB

  John,

  Thank you for your email. I hope that it is now accepted that all these 
  bells are Balcombe Shield. It will certainly erase the anomaly that we have
  at the moment, i.e all the bells recorded as Balcombe Shield and John 
  Walgrave are undoubtedly by the same founder. I promise to field any 
  complaints that arise from the changes made.

  Best wishes,

  David.

  ----- Original Message ----- 

  JB to DS

  > David - I do not pretend to be a bell historian but merely am trying 
  > to record and make available more readily via the pNBR what others 
  > have documented, in this case the tower itself and Deedes & Walters, 
  > the latter clearly stating (in my copy) the bell being the work of 
  > John Walgrave.
  >
  > I take it that YOU are contending that the founder should now be 
  > amended to
  > London ('Balcombe shield') in this case, as should also the founder of 
  > all other bells so shown within the pNBR, namely: 3/6 and 4/6 at 
  > Ightham, Kent;
  > 6/6 at Angersleigh, Som; 3/4 at Donhead St Andrew, Wilts; 4/4 at 
  > Adisham, Kent and I will so amend them - but, if there is any comeback 
  > from people who 'think they know better' I will not keep amending them 
  > while other theories are put forward and/or knocked down, but rather 
  > leave them simply as London ('Balcombe shield') UFN. (Details of all 
  > such changes are kept on
  > file, as I am sure you are aware.) I am fully aware that this 
  > question of founder ascription is not an exact science but, in order 
  > to make progress here, SOMEONE (in this case I sense YOU have made it 
  > 'your issue' now that GPE is no longer with us to do so) has to 'take 
  > ownership' of it, otherwise
  > the concept of showing a founder for a bell of that age is effectively 
  > meaningless. I will make a database note to myself therefore to refer 
  > any questioner to you.
  >
  > Hope that meets (even exceeds!) what you had intended in the sending 
  > of your e-mail.
  >
  > So:
  > ------------------
  > 5: founder amended
  > (and similarly for the other bells mentioned above)
  > ------------------
  >
  > John
  >
  > -----Original Message-----

  DS to JB

  > John,
  >
  > Philip Denton mentioned to me today, the tenor bell at Margaretting, 
  > being ascribed to John Walgrave. John Walgrave is mentioned in records 
  > as being a
  > servant of William Dawe and being active c1408. Bell historians 
  > ascribed bells with the I.W shield to Walgrave. However George Elphick 
  > disputes this
  > on the basis of date and chronology of other founders in same line and
  puts 
  > a date for I.W shield bells as 1487-1500 and called these bells 
  > Balcombe Shield Bells. Hence all bells ascribed to John Walgrave are 
  > Balcombe Shield
  > Bells. There is no evidence to suggest that John Walgrave as a servant 
  > of William Dawe was a founder at all.
  >
  > Regards,
  >
  > David.



             
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20111212/2f713660/attachment.html>