A very old Establishment down the Skulls head yard (Part 1)

[LS1]

Looking on leodis I'm sure there a buildings nearby that had in the past associations with the knights Templar, what with having the cross on the building itself. I think these were down Nelson Street which was where Eastgate is now. I can't see any evedence of a cross on the skulls building, but I still just don't buy the soldiers death theory. I'm sure there is a much more mundane explaination as is often the case with things like this.

[String o' beads]

LS1 wrote: I'm sure there is a much more mundane explaination as is often the case with things like this. I agree. Looking at them, they appear to be the type of ornamentation used in church architecture around the eaves or at the top of columns. Or possibly they were carved to adorn a double gravestone after some tragic event. So I reckon that they were just salvaged as a curiosity when some edifice was demolished or removed. And why they were on this particular wall? What if one of the demolition workers had found the plaque and brought it into the inn with him when he had a flagon or three after work? Worker: 'Forsooth and lawks-a-mussy. What shall I do with this then lads? Seems a shame to chuck it out.'? Innkeeper: 'Tell you what, I'll stick it on ye wall over ye stables out o' t'road. Giz it 'ere.' Sorted.    

[cnosni]

Geordie-exile wrote: LS1 wrote: I'm sure there is a much more mundane explaination as is often the case with things like this. I agree. Looking at them, they appear to be the type of ornamentation used in church architecture around the eaves or at the top of columns. Or possibly they were carved to adorn a double gravestone after some tragic event. So I reckon that they were just salvaged as a curiosity when some edifice was demolished or removed. And why they were on this particular wall? What if one of the demolition workers had found the plaque and brought it into the inn with him when he had a flagon or three after work? Worker: 'Forsooth and lawks-a-mussy. What shall I do with this then lads? Seems a shame to chuck it out.'? Innkeeper: 'Tell you what, I'll stick it on ye wall over ye stables out o' t'road. Giz it 'ere.' Sorted.     Thats probably exactly what happened.There were a number of buildings in Leeds town that belonged to the Templar estate.These buildings displayed the Templar Cross on the outside,this not only clearly displayed who owned the building but also brought a benefit of the occupier in that they could grind their own corn to make flour,whereas all the inhabitants of Leeds HAD to use the Kings Mill,and pay to do so.I suppose you could call it a bread tax.Believe it or not this was still the case until 1839,when the council bought the feudal rights,at a cost of £13,000,which finally meant that householders no longer had to bring their corn to be ground at the mill

[Si]

Si wrote: What if: The story of the soldiers was already local folklore (facts lost - nothing written down) around the time of the demolition of the parish church, some years after the event. Some of the more interesting stonework is being auctioned off. The landlord of the nearby Crown and Fleece sees the skulls going for a song at the auction, and buys them to put up on the pub as a curiosity? Although this story answers most of our questions, there is a flaw: why didn't he put them on the front of the pub? A similar version to Geordie-Exile's story (two posts above) of possible events from April '08.        

[cnosni]

Si wrote: Si wrote: What if: The story of the soldiers was already local folklore (facts lost - nothing written down) around the time of the demolition of the parish church, some years after the event. Some of the more interesting stonework is being auctioned off. The landlord of the nearby Crown and Fleece sees the skulls going for a song at the auction, and buys them to put up on the pub as a curiosity? Although this story answers most of our questions, there is a flaw: why didn't he put them on the front of the pub? A similar version to Geordie-Exile's story (two posts above) of possible events from April '08.         Well the pub would have already have been built ( early to mid Georgian) and looking at the PRESENT stable hayloft we reckoned that it was either very late Georgian,more likely early Victorian/just pre Victorian.But ,as you say,why on the stable.why not even inside the pub,there is a reason why its on the stable. The actual passing of ownership of skulls to the landlord could well have been made in exchange for a few pints for a worker on the site of the building of the market.

[chameleon]

Here is an image of the area from 1931 - not sure if it will tell anything new but it's a different view so worth having in the collection.

[String o' beads]

Si wrote: Si wrote: What if: The story of the soldiers was already local folklore (facts lost - nothing written down) around the time of the demolition of the parish church, some years after the event. Some of the more interesting stonework is being auctioned off. The landlord of the nearby Crown and Fleece sees the skulls going for a song at the auction, and buys them to put up on the pub as a curiosity? Although this story answers most of our questions, there is a flaw: why didn't he put them on the front of the pub? A similar version to Geordie-Exile's story (two posts above) of possible events from April '08.         Great minds Si! This thread is so long now there's always a danger of repeating stuff.    

[cnosni]

chameleon wrote: Here is an image of the area from 1931 - not sure if it will tell anything new but it's a different view so worth having in the collection. Now then,am i looking at the wrong building here ORdoes the roof of the Crown and Fleece,at the rear,extend over the yard and somehow meet up with the building (old stables) directly behind it??

[chameleon]

cnosni wrote: chameleon wrote: Here is an image of the area from 1931 - not sure if it will tell anything new but it's a different view so worth having in the collection. Now then,am i looking at the wrong building here ORdoes the roof of the Crown and Fleece,at the rear,extend over the yard and somehow meet up with the building (old stables) directly behind it?? Happy New Year Chris (so far the Gods seem to still be on my side btw).Yes when I first saw it, it looked different to what I'd seen before, but then, there have been so many pictures, drawings and maps - difficult to remenber every detail! But I do think this is different. Not sure if there are other pictures included, I'll take some time to look again

[cnosni]

chameleon wrote: cnosni wrote: chameleon wrote: Here is an image of the area from 1931 - not sure if it will tell anything new but it's a different view so worth having in the collection. Now then,am i looking at the wrong building here ORdoes the roof of the Crown and Fleece,at the rear,extend over the yard and somehow meet up with the building (old stables) directly behind it?? Happy New Year Chris (so far the Gods seem to still be on my side btw).Yes when I first saw it, it looked different to what I'd seen before, but then, there have been so many pictures, drawings and maps - difficult to remenber every detail! But I do think this is different. Not sure if there are other pictures included, I'll take some time to look again Glad to see your spelling is just about back on line Steve.This is 1931,when it was still a pub and before Dysons took over.Perhaps this section of the yard was covered,providing a shelter for the horses,whereas the brick building with the skulls was indeed just the hayloft alone.This would account for the clear lack in size of the brick building to accomadate more than one horse.But that doesnt appear to be the case on the 1884 map,it shows it as being open to the elements.But i wonder if the cover at that time was more of a shanty affair and perhaps didnt waarant inclusion on the map.