[Bell Historians] Navestock, Essex

[oliver Lee]

It's not a problem Chelmsford is only an Hour's bus ride for me and I would be more then happy to see what the record office have to say about them, I have always taken something of a passing interest in these bells too especially as it is one of the only towers within the Brentwood area that I haven't had the pleasure of ringing at. I am also one of the Volunteer researchers at my local museum so I am quite used to helping people with enquiries so like I say it won't be any skin off my nose at all.
Regards
Oliver lee
P/s I would also recommend talking to David Sloman, he was bell advisor to the EACR at the time of the 1982 work and I'd imagine he's probably got a lot of information about the both the old frame and the bells themselves.


________________________________
From: Bell-historians <bell-historians-bounces at lists.ringingworld.co.uk> on behalf of Richard Smith via Bell-historians <bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2026 09:52
To: bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk <bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk>
Cc: Richard Smith <richard at ex-parrot.com>
Subject: Re: [Bell Historians] Navestock, Essex


On Thu 17/09/2026 21:52, Oliver Lee via Bell-historians wrote:

> According to a 1458 Inventory (also in Deedes and Walters) the tower had
> a ring of three and a Sanctus bell so I'd imagine they were probably
> made into four in 1637 when the present 3^rd  and tenor were cast before
> being augmented to five in 1862 by Mears,

You may be right, but without further supporting evidence, this is very
much a guess.  It's not unusual for bells to be recast and rural rings
of five were common long before 1862.  Similarly, rings of four were
common long before 1637.  This date, when we know Miles Graye cast two
bells for Navestock, coincides with when five-bell ringing was really
catching on, and we see lots of augmentations to five at this sort of
time.  How do we know Graye didn't cast three bells, one of which needed
recasting in 1862?  I'm not saying this was the case, but it seems
another plausible possibility.

It's fine for historians to say they don't know, and this is generally
preferable to weaving a narrative out of minimal information, as that
then risks becoming accepted as the truth without further critical analysis.

In this particular case, there are at least three places we could look
for further evidence.  The Whitechapel daybook for 1862 may mention
whether or not an old treble was traded in.  The frame that was removed
in 1981 may have been described in enough detail to know whether it had
five pits before 1862.  The churchwardens' accounts and vestry minutes
exist for the period leading up to the 1862 work, and will likely have
entries for the 1862 work and earlier expenses which may indicate how
many bells there were.

Of course I'm not suggesting that anyone here should go out and look at
these records for me, simply because I'm curious about them.   But there
are enough people on this list who do this type of research that it
seemed worth asking whether anyone had found any additional evidence.

RAS

_______________________________________________
Bell-historians mailing list
Bell-historians at lists.ringingworld.co.uk
https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ringingworld.co.uk%2Flistinfo%2Fbell-historians&data=05%7C02%7C%7Ccdd488354dbe47edfb8308df15622ca5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C639253183539163592%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=c8HWXn3warduLiLf7SFVCykXjvENxbfdhAPEIifXbKU%3D&reserved=0<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/20260918/43be26ef/attachment.htm>