[Bell Historians] Upper Clacton missing peal

Ted Steele teds.bells@tesco.net [bellhistorians] bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com
Fri Dec 8 18:41:27 GMT 2017

On 08/12/2017 15:05, 'Dickon Love' dickon at lovesguide.com 
[bellhistorians] wrote:
> I was in the Library this week and found the peal. Attached is a 
> photograph of the relevant page.

Thank you Dickon, I appreciate your help. This rather interestingly 
gives rise to a further question. I have a record gleaned from the 
January 24th 1874 issue of Church Bells which reports a peal rung on 
"Monday the 6th inst." which conventionally means 6th January. But I 
wonder if it is actually a late report of the October peal as the 
details are in every respect identical, but 6th January 1874 was not a 
Monday; (October 6th was). Felstead has the source of the October peal 
as "CY; BL 11.x.73" (I couldn't find it in BL) and the January one as 
"CB iv.91". I suspect that Felstead may have the same peal recorded 
twice here; the anomaly not having been noticed due to the different 
sources and late publishing in CB. Does my reasoning seem appropriate?


Posted by: Ted Steele <teds.bells at tesco.net>


Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    bellhistorians-digest at yahoogroups.com 
    bellhistorians-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    bellhistorians-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:

More information about the Bell-historians mailing list