[r-t] Stedman Doubles in Campanologia
mark at snowtiger.net
Wed Oct 12 22:49:22 UTC 2011
Thanks again Eddie. I've scanned p95 but can't immediately see where
symmetry is discussed in this - can you elaborate please?
The Orpheus course is interesting. What is the point of the start here?
It is not a point of symmetry; there are no calls to guide it. Why also
does he not discuss or describe the method at all, excepting the bald
statement, "One change is double, the next single, and so by turns"?
There are no references linking Orpheus to Stedman, either, that I can see.
I am drawn to the view that, whilst as you say Fabian must have
understood symmetry and its value in the construction of hunt-dominated
methods, the start for Stedman was chosen by virtue of the positioning
of the easiest or natural call for Grandsire-ringers. It's not really
clear to me that he would have considered the symmetry important. Am I
I am really trying to ascertain whether "because it is a point of
symmetry" is the correct answer to the question "why do we usually start
ringing Stedman from the middle of a quick six?". On reviewing
Campanologia, and listening to your guidance Eddie, I think, whilst
attractive, this is probably not historically correct. What do you think?
More information about the ringing-theory