Coal Mining in East Leeds

[chameleon]

Phill_dvsn wrote: There still is the small feeder stream into Wyke beck running through the woods parallel to Easterly road, It crosses under Wetherby road near it's junction with Easterly road. It stays in the open for a bit, then it seems to run underground at some point (It's very overgrown around there) But i have noticed several strange looking raised manhole covers around those woods before. There is something substantial under there before the farm at the top of Easterley road.             We looked at these up the thread Phill and certainly they contribute to 'the flow' in some way and quite possibly in a different way to their present contribution to Wyke Beck.On ran across from Monkswood, another parallel to Wetherby Road and it seems a third running more or less through the farm.Looking further back, one of these could have been derived from Keswick Beck where it splits close to Collingham. It does look as though even now as though this could have been of some consequence in terms of volume. I twouldn't be a surprise to find that these had been 'converted' to piped top-water sewers as the area was developed and this would add to the volume passing through.As Parksider suggest, the contours around the beck may have changed over time but I'm sceptical over this being overly significant.I suppose the question now is, was a feed taken from one of these streams at a higher level and 'cross country'? But if this were so, why do we see no evidence on the old maps?

[The Parksider]

chameleon wrote: As Parksider suggest, the contours around the beck may have changed over time but I'm sceptical over this being overly significant. You old septic you.If you look at the stretch of the wyke beck between Foundry Lane and York Road, on the east side it rises up quite sharply.The idea is that years ago the east side of the beck was roughly the same as that from foundry lane all the way up to Roundhay.Now how the lie of the land changed over the years becomes the question (groundworks for the estate), but you may admit that the bit between foundry lane and York road is different??

[chameleon]

The Parksider wrote: chameleon wrote: As Parksider suggest, the contours around the beck may have changed over time but I'm sceptical over this being overly significant. You old septic you.If you look at the stretch of the wyke beck between Foundry Lane and York Road, on the east side it rises up quite sharply.The idea is that years ago the east side of the beck was roughly the same as that from foundry lane all the way up to Roundhay.Now how the lie of the land changed over the years becomes the question (groundworks for the estate), but you may admit that the bit between foundry lane and York road is different?? Me thinks the man has too much time for digging (soil!).Between Foundry Lane and York Road has certainly been worked, in the first part, infilled to allow the re-routing of York Road (which did away with the Pond) and, more recently, a deal of infill of the valley to create the steeper sides to the beck with the Urban (?) Trail passing over the land.I do find it difficult to believe that work of the extent necessary to produce wht we see today east of the beck took place and, why would they? So much of the land adjacent to the beck was undeveloped. Persuade me before my sepsis spreads

[Phill_dvsn]

There seemed to be a lot of water went over the watefall on Waterloo lake if i recall correctly, certainly much more of a greater volume that goes over the new dam anyway. I just find the whole part of Wyke beck to be a confusing thing around Wetherby road (even though i've been in all those tunnels, culverts and the dam)Is it the 'great head beck' that feeds the lake at the top end? Surely the Great head beck and Wykebeck were all one stream before the lake was constructed?    

[The Parksider]

chameleon wrote: [I do find it difficult to believe that work of the extent necessary to produce wht we see today east of the beck took place and, why would they? So much of the land adjacent to the beck was undeveloped. Persuade me before my sepsis spreads I hope it doesn't spread into septosemia.The question of the watercourse has always been was the water released from the easterley road dam high enough to run along a watercourse cut along the east side of the beck to the mill ponds.That could be marginal, but the measurement is relevant to the contours several hundred years ago.It seems - looking at google - groundworks for the estate could have flattened off (well gently sloped down) any rise above the becks flood plain, to have what we have today.Which leads me to deduce I'm going nowhere with this........What elevation do you believe a dam at easterley road stands at and what is the elevation of the mill ponds??I aren't as smart as thee but reckon that may be 200' dropping to 150' ?Enough for a watercourse, maybe not on todays lie, but some change is indicated and it may not have to be too much for a watercourse to have been easy to cut.

[Phill_dvsn]

Has anyone got any old maps/ordanance stuff to post up here?

[The Parksider]

Phill_dvsn wrote: Has anyone got any old maps/ordanance stuff to post up here? The maps are all inconclusive and I have seen half a dozen or more from 1819 to 1909 none of which can show definitively the full length of a watercourse from Ellers close(Easterly Road) to the foundry mill ponds.I feel that any old reference to what went from where to where cannot be relied on as the writer could have been quite sloppy in his meanings and definitions.Most references to the Mill and it's Tudor feed and later Smeatons feed via a recirculating engine are pretty throwaway asides.Even Smeatons writings are not definitive.But dontcha love mysteries.Plus the pure historians will tell you to work out your own solution rather than believe there may be some archive that will just tell you.

[chameleon]

Old Maps is probably the best source Phill and is what we used mostly for this and if you look at the Asket Hill point of the beck, it seems to break into two, the beck and another channel. Whilst you can trace lines from this to the Mill, what they represent is far from clear.As far as the contours and levels go, there seems to be little difference between them now and those shown in the map Burt's book (History of Roundhay Park) which shows where the dam was built by Christopher Mather in it seems, 1577 (though the map is obviously later). It also shows the lines seen on more recent (old) maps but this text DOES suggest this to be the track of the leat formed from the Dam.The drawing board goes round in circles doesn't it?Great Heads Beck does feed the lakes Phill and firstly the top pond. I've posted this somewhere up top but easier to repeat it here:'Located opposite the main entrance to the house it is constantly fed by a stream of crystal clear water flowing into the estate through Great Pature and Eleven Acres. At the eastern end of the lake were dramaticwaterfalls and several pools which were crossed by a single arched rustic bridge. The top pond would have been the main lake, but for the fortunate acquisition of a tongue of land of former Elam land in August 1815, which gave Nicholson ownership of the only part of Great Heads Beck not in his possession. This enabled him to construct the most spectacular feature of the park - Waterloo Lake.'Need to get you sight of the book phill for it all to come together. (later: Just thinking, the route of the new culverted overflow from the lake must follow the path of this (now) probable extra channel from Easterly Road until its outfall into the beck!).

[The Parksider]

chameleon wrote: As far as the contours and levels go, there seems to be little difference between them now and those shown in the map Burt's book (History of Roundhay Park) which shows where the dam was built by Christopher Mather in it seems, 1577 (though the map is obviously later). It also shows the lines seen on more recent (old) maps but this text DOES suggest this to be the track of the leat formed from the Dam. Burts source for the 1577 events is a Thoresby Society article from 1895, by a writer called Morkill. It may well be that the original channel could manage to hug the contours of the east side of the beck to the mill.But is the 1800's mill and mill ponds what was in place on the site in 1577? If a dam was built at ellers close why bother with any mill ponds?J. Thorpes map of 1820 is very clear as it is minus contour lines and wall lines.If there is any watercourse by then it is cut from Rossgill with clear T junctions down to wyke beck (for an out flow if water was not needed) and a second T junction above the mill for water if it was needed. A sluice gate on each?. No watercourse from ellers close is depicted.To me the "later map" that purports to show a tudor watercourse has nowhere near the clarity of thorpes map which if I had to come to a conclusion shows a later watercourse that is often confused in print with the original tudor one. Burts modern map may be misread.Chronology?1. Tudor dam and watercourse - inadequate in time2. Mill ponds fed from seacroft3. Smeatons recirculation system to augment ponds4. New watercourse cut from Rossgill to augment ponds - especially if the running of the recirc steam engine became expensive?Anyway I have another letter to send off to see if the authors of these short comments feel they have more clarity/detail..............

[chameleon]

Good synopsis. I'll buy the stamp!Strange isn't it, how ever often we think we might understand this, a different trainof thought or something new arises.You'd think by now, we would be much more clear in the way we record events of today to help researchers of the future who try to follow our exploits wouldn't you?