[r-t] What IS a rotation of a method?

Simon Humphrey sh53246 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 18 22:23:50 UTC 2014

Don Morrison:
> Several people this morning have brought up different starts to Stedman as
> examples of rotations. But no one has commented on the following. Is there
> not some significant difference between simply starting in a different
> place, and a more meaningful rotation of a method?

Yes. Grandsire is asymmetrical about the treble's path, and reversing its
place notation with respect to the treble (which produces New Grandsire)
does seem a more substantial alteration than rotating it, i.e. just starting
the place notation at a different point.  This goes a long way towards
justifying New Grandsire having its own name, to my mind.
Stedman is symmetrical, and reversing its place notation produces the same
principle, so there is no case for different starts to be given different

Looking at other examples of asymmetrical methods, reversing the place
notation of Union Bob Minor produces Single Cambridge Cyclic Bob Minor.
No-one seems to have objected to these methods being given different names.
Why all the fuss about New Grandsire?


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list