[r-t] Early peals of Cambridge Maximus

[Philip Earis]

I was interested to see a recent peal of Cambridge Maximus rung at Redcliffe, marking the 100th anniversary of the first peal of it on the bells (this was also only the 6th ever peal in the method) - http://bb.ringingworld.co.uk/view.php?id=273006

What I found especially notable was the original composition that was rung - a 10 course block by H Law James.  Instead of being the tired and uninspired arrangement (keeping the 6th home, for example) I'd have naively assumed, it actually has really a rather fresh and neat feel to it (especially after the opening three courses) with plenty of little-bell courses: 

==
5280 Cambridge Surprise Maximus
Composed by H Law James
M  W  H    23456
   -       52436
2     -    56234
   -       35264
-     -    42563
   -       64523
-     -    35426
   -  3    23456
G&B composition 915, First Rung 18/1/1913, Redcliffe.
Originally attributed to W Pye (G&B composition record), however recorded in the peal records and on the tower peal board as H Law James.
==

It almost feels contemporary. So where did things all go wrong? What caused people to bash out (and ring) surprise max compositional monstrosities with gruelling "combination courses ends", etc? How come 50,60,70,80+ years on people ended up ringing things like (to pick one of a plethora of typical mediocrities) this? 

5042 Cambridge Surprise Maximus
23456   M   W   H
34256           2
26543   -   -   2
43265   2   -   3
62534   -   -  
(32456) -   s      



DISCLAIMER:

This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of the addressee only and may contain confidential, privileged or copyright material. It may not be relied upon or disclosed to any other person without the consent of the RSC. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. Any advice given by the RSC has been carefully formulated but is necessarily based on the information available, and the RSC cannot be held responsible for accuracy or completeness. In this respect, the RSC owes no duty of care and shall not be liable for any resulting damage or loss. The RSC acknowledges that a disclaimer cannot restrict liability at law for personal injury or death arising through a finding of negligence. The RSC does not warrant that its emails or attachments are Virus-free: Please rely on your own screening. The Royal Society of Chemistry is a charity, registered in England and Wales, number 207890 - Registered office: Thomas Graham House, Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 0WF