[Bell Historians] Tower Classification required

[alan Buswell aaj.buswell@gmail.com [bellhistorians]]

Both the Ringing World and Dove say that these publications are for 'Church
Bell Ringers'. In my annual Q.P. reports is a list of towers that lead
their county. Some have been in this position for a number of years. Not
included in these records until last year were quarters rung on mini rings.
Quarters on these may be a growing trend. Presumably they are secular as
they are not church bells and could also be a  leading tower. Is this fair
for church towers who, hopefully, try to be at the top?
If these rings are grouped together, then other secular and purpose built
private buildings should be included. So returning to my my original
question - what is a secular tower? Oxford has been mentioned as having a
number of towers in private ownership - what of others?

AAJB

On 15 April 2016 at 18:06, Richard Smith richard at ex-parrot.com
[bellhistorians] <bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> Dickon Love asked:
>
> > Alan, do you know what the word "secular" means?
>
> Alan Taylor wrote:
>
> > To me, it would depend on why the bells had been hung in
> > whatever place.
>
> Does that mean that most rings of bells installed between
> about 1600 and 1850 are secular? Perhaps so. It all
> depends why list is being created which Alan Buswell seems
> curiously reticent to reveal. Until we know that, we may as
> well be debating a list of frabjous towers or uffish bells.
>
> RAS
>
> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20160416/69753623/attachment.html>