Woodhall Lane Mystery Stone.

mcnab · Post by **mcnab** » Thu 27 Nov, 2008 8:51 pm

Si wrote: Whatever this feature is, a well-head/spring or mounting-block, I'm sure the actual stone was not made for this purpose and had a previous use. Pure conjecture, I know, but have a look at the scribble above. The "mystery stone" could have been the top stone of an ornamental gatepost. This explains all the carved features on it: the circle retains the base of a finial or ball, the groove helps hold the stones together, and the chamfered edge is the corner. Perhaps it came from Mr Peckover's mansion?OK - shoot me down in flames!!! Dunno, if a mason fits a finial in a recess, water would get in, freeze and crack the joint, Iron pins are more likely, also the vee would be more likely used in a vertical joint than a horizontal one. Maybe the stone is a boundary stone? The vee accurately marking the boundary (perhaps due to a dispute like encroachment of the road on anothers land) and the round recess formerly housing a metal plaque stating the facts? Maybe the centre or one side of the wall of the wall itself is the boundary now which is why the wall wraps round the stone?

Si · Post by Si » Fri 28 Nov, 2008 8:40 am

I think you're right about the stone not being part of a gate/corner post, mcnab. A bit of whimsy on my part. Some sort of boundary marker crossed my mind, too. However, the groove isn't a V but a U and about two inches across. I've seen masonry with this type of joint before (Fountain's Abbey warming-house fireplace lintel, for example) but you're right, this is also vertical. If the circle held a plaque, why is it on the opposite side, and if the stone was turned 90 degrees so that the groove showed the boundary perpendicular to the road, the plaque would be facing the wall and hidden? It would be awkward to read even in it's present position, if the groove was marking a boundary parallel with the road. I don't think the wall was built to go around the already existing stone, because that would mean it was previously underground! -that side of the road (and therefore the walled enclosure,) is cut out of the sloping ground surface - the level of the field is about five feet higher than the road on that side, but level with the road on the opposite side. I still think it's most likely a piece of random masonry re-used for something. Who knows?

Uno Hoo · Post by **Uno Hoo** » Sat 29 Nov, 2008 12:19 pm

At the moment I can't shed any further light, but Dad says he'll speak again to the woman who declared it to be a mounting block. She's a member of Pudsey Civic Society, so may well be able to pursue it further. I'm not in favour of the mounting block myself, and tend to lean towards the boundary theory. Trouble is, every time I go past now, I look at it, as does my wife, and the intrigue increases. Interesting!

mcnab · Post by **mcnab** » Sat 29 Nov, 2008 8:49 pm

It's bugging me now, and I've never seen it! I'm clutching at straws!Could the u groove have housed a 2" pipe like a fire hydrant or standpipe, the dish housing a tap or id plaque? Somewhere for a steam bus or steam rollers/traction engines to top up?You can tell a lot about dressed stone by the way they are bedded, the grain of the stone is normally laid as it would have come out of the ground, is there excessive weathering that could indicate if this stone is on it's side or laid as intended?sundial?Milestone?

Si · Post by Si » Mon 01 Dec, 2008 8:47 am

Hi Uno, yes, I think it's too elaborate (and impractical) to be a mounting-block. There are lots of things it could be, but nothing stands out as obvious.Hi Mcnab, you're right about how masonry is laid. The stone is made of sandstone, like a very fine grained millstone-grit, but I couldn't tell you which way the bedding-planes run (unlike the wall behind it.) I can't tell by looking at the pictures on page 1 either, so I'll go and have another look and report back!

Uno Hoo · Post by **Uno Hoo** » Tue 17 Feb, 2009 10:08 pm

Had a look at a reproduction 1915 OS Map of Farsley last weekend. Site of Mystery Stone is marked "Pump", so looks like Steve Jones was on to something after all. It's a much more interesting prospect than a mounting block.

Si · Post by Si » Wed 18 Feb, 2009 9:08 am

Uno Hoo wrote: Had a look at a reproduction 1915 OS Map of Farsley last weekend. Site of Mystery Stone is marked "Pump", so looks like Steve Jones was on to something after all. It's a much more interesting prospect than a mounting block. That's great, Uno. The stone must cap the pump. It's either part of the original structure, or from elsewhere. Either way, it appears to have been re-used as a capping stone. Thanks!A pump seems to fit all the criteria: well built and maintained, possibly on the edge of the water-table (marshy patch in field behind, and wall-drain opposite,) a small settlement nearby, etc.

Uno Hoo · Post by **Uno Hoo** » Wed 18 Feb, 2009 11:41 am

Thanks, Si.Looks like we can put this one to bed now?I'll tell the local historians.UH

Si · Post by Si » Wed 18 Feb, 2009 5:22 pm

Uno Hoo wrote: Thanks, Si.Looks like we can put this one to bed now?I'll tell the local historians.UH Yup. Solved at last!

Steve Jones · Post by **Steve Jones** » Wed 18 Feb, 2009 8:40 pm

oh ye of little faith <G>!thanks Una, actually though pumps were a later replacement for weels so i would check the earlier maps as one with a well head this size should have been a named well. OS stopped naming all wells after the 1890 edition and just carry major sites nowadays for names which is a nuisance when trying to track holy wells as I know from experience.