[Bell Historians] Peal discrepancy

[Erin Caters]

But the Rugby Advertiser cutting provided by Gareth would seem to indicate
February is correct.

Sue M

On Thu, 10 Sept 2026 at 16:51, Graham John via Bell-historians <
bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk> wrote:

> Sue Marsden wrote:
>
>> I've just added a peal board photo to BellBoard for St Andrew's Rugby.
>>> The peal board gives the date as Saturday February 18th 1911, and
>>> Belll News 1509:678 (Mar4th)  and Felstead give it as Wednesday January
>>> 18th 1911. Has this been noticed before and if so which has been accepted
>>> as the correct date?
>>> https://bb.ringingworld.co.uk/view.php?id=2007214
>>>
>>
> The Bell News peal report was printed in the 4 March 1911 edition. Looking
> at all the other peals reported in that issue, they are from the same week
> as 18 January, which aligns with the Wednesday date given in Bell News p678
> and in Felstead.
>
> By contrast, peals rung on Saturday 18 February do not appear in Bell News
> until three weeks later, in the 25 March edition. While that isn’t absolute
> proof, the reporting pattern strongly supports the January 18th date over
> what is shown on the peal board.
>
> For the opposite to be the case, Bell News would have needed to expedite
> the type-setting of the (mis-dated) peal report by three weeks to print it
> alongside peals of a similar date. That seems unlikely.
>
> Graham
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20260910/dfd199ca/attachment.htm>