[Bell Historians] Tetbury, Gloucestershire

[MATTHEW HIGBY]

Surely they have been rehung since then…. That’s pre-ball bearings. M

Sent from my iPhone

> On 22 Feb 2022, at 10:32, Phil Watts via Bell-historians <bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> 
> Highgrove, Doughton (pronounced “Dufton” by some locally), mentioned in the text as the home of the Yatman family who commissioned the new tower in 1890-91, is of course Highgrove House, now the country home of the Prince of Wales.
>  
> Phil
>  
>  
>  
> From: Bell-historians <bell-historians-bounces at lists.ringingworld.co.uk> On Behalf Of c.j.pickford.t21--- via Bell-historians
> Sent: 22 February 2022 10:07
> To: Bell Historians Mailing List <bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk>
> Cc: c.j.pickford.t21 at btinternet.com
> Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Tetbury, Gloucestershire
>  
> Thanks Ken. I hadn't ventured beyond the photo page. Clearly a Gillett installation, completed in 1893. No, they wouldn't have taken the bells away for tuning at that date (not until about 1907).
> I did find that the work done in 1965 was authorised by Archdeacon's Certificate (not a full faculty) so must have been fairly limited
> Chris
> 
> Sent from my Huawei phone
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Tetbury, Gloucestershire
> From: Ken Webb 
> To: bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk
> CC:
> 
> The link from the photo provided by Bill states G&J were paid £200 for the bell work in the 1890's (& carried out work re the clock etc.)
> 
> Have-you-heard-the-bells.pdf (tetburychurch.co.uk)
> 
> Were they machine tuning bells then?
> 
> Ken
> 
> On 22/02/2022 07:25, bill at hibberts.co.uk wrote:
> These bells are described in Church Bells of Gloucestershire as ‘seven largest bells maiden bells, treble with skirting’, and the back 7 (Rudhall 1722) are marked as historically important, presumably because they are maiden. I was looking at the nominal figures of these bells as part of a project I am doing, and wonder whether in fact the back 7 have been tuned.
> 
>  
> 
> Arguments in favour of tuning are:
> 
> The back 7 nominal frequencies are correct to within 3.5 cents of a temperament favoured by Taylors from the 1890s on
> The bells hang in a frame which is probably Taylors 1891
> The bell in this photograph https://tetburychurch.co.uk/have-you-heard-the-church-bells-yet-this-year-or-the-church-clock-striking-out-the-passing-of-time/ may have a band of tuning just below the clapper scar
>  
> 
> Arguments against tuning are:
> 
> The treble is stretched by 35 cents (but perhaps wasn’t tuned if it had previously been skirted?)
> The information in CBOG, arising from a visit on 20/8/1979 by Mary Bliss and AJC (Tony Cox?).
>  
> 
> I think the bells weren’t tuned when worked on by Taylors in 1965, as the tuning marks would have been relatively fresh in 1979.
> 
>  
> 
> Does anyone have any better knowledge of this?
> 
>  
> 
> Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> Bill H
> 
>  
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Bell-historians mailing list
> Bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk
> https://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/listinfo/bell-historians
> _______________________________________________
> Bell-historians mailing list
> Bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk
> https://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/listinfo/bell-historians
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20220222/81dc08b6/attachment.htm>