Superb 1891 Hunslet brickyard/quarry photos

[Si]

The Parksider wrote: grumpytramp wrote: 5. The brick lined square (ish) shaft in the Boyles photograph (taken according to Leodis on 11/08/1943) is clearly complete and at or very near to original ground level (judging by the grass and glimpse of wooden fence in the RHS corner). In the Gould and Stevenson's quarry the shaft is broken into at the surface Any thoughts on why these shafts?? And how were they built? Did they dig the hole and then line it with bricks, or did they line it as they dug?PS I was looking on Leodis for that terrace on Jack Lane at the same time as you, Parksider. In the end, a fruitless race!PPS Thanks for the virtual medal!PPPS As for the origins of Quarry Hill's name, several people on here have asked the same questiuon, and it's never been satisfactorily answered.    

[chameleon]

The Parksider wrote: chameleon wrote: Possibly a silly question but one I don't recall having been answered - is Quarry Hill so named because of the nearby quarry off York Road or, is there another origin? I dunno Kam but the flood plain of the Aire finishes and the land rises at quarry hill as does the slopes of the valley that Lady Beck cuts through (most markedly the rise above Mabgate). Given the town of leeds was essentially at the other side of this rise in the land, I assume it was the best place (i.e. not built on) to quarry stone from once they started to use it comprehensively for building purposes. The piccy of the bell pit in the calls also was commented on in terms of the old town being built close to and on a lot of iron and coal pits, and I assume clay pits too!! Whatever the extractive industry they won't have wanted, or had the efficient means to drag the stuff far....... I feel a need for GT to jump in his time machine and come back with a miracle of informative dialogue

[Si]

Si wrote: The Parksider wrote: grumpytramp wrote: 5. The brick lined square (ish) shaft in the Boyles photograph (taken according to Leodis on 11/08/1943) is clearly complete and at or very near to original ground level (judging by the grass and glimpse of wooden fence in the RHS corner). In the Gould and Stevenson's quarry the shaft is broken into at the surface Any thoughts on why these shafts?? And how were they built? Did they dig the hole and then line it with bricks, or did they line it as they dug?     Thanks Jim, for explaining how this was done. As the shaft was dug, a framework was lowered into it, which was lined with bricks as they went. At least, that's my understanding. Correct me if I'm wrong, Jim!

[The Parksider]

Si wrote: Si wrote: The Parksider wrote: grumpytramp wrote: 5. The brick lined square (ish) shaft in the Boyles photograph (taken according to Leodis on 11/08/1943) is clearly complete and at or very near to original ground level (judging by the grass and glimpse of wooden fence in the RHS corner). In the Gould and Stevenson's quarry the shaft is broken into at the surface Any thoughts on why these shafts?? And how were they built? Did they dig the hole and then line it with bricks, or did they line it as they dug?     Thanks Jim, for explaining how this was done. As the shaft was dug, a framework was lowered into it, which was lined with bricks as they went. At least, that's my understanding. Correct me if I'm wrong, Jim! You really must dig out Fred Dibnahs programme in which he dug a coal mine in his back garden and used an iron frame to line the shaft in brick as he descended.Blooming marvellous to see him do that......

[jim]

Just to clarify, the bricks were laid on top of the frame and carried down by their own ever-increasing weight as the frame was undermined by the shaft sinkers. The deeper you went, the more the supported brick column weighed to overcome the side friction. Originally a technique for well sinking.

[grumpytramp]

The Parksider wrote: Any thoughts on why these shafts?? My next port of call sir!If you take a look at the first series OS sheet of the Hunslet Area:http://www.british-history.ac.uk/mapshe ... oy=1700You will note just at the junction of the North Midland Railway the outcrop of the Beeston Coal is clearly marked. I have found a reference in a paper from a predecessor of the Yorkshire Geological Society regarding the construction of the North Midland Railway written in 1840: Quote: Where the cutting enters Hunslet-moor, the "Beeston Coal" bassets out, and is of the usual thickness, namely five to six feet. This coal lies seventy or eighty yards above the Low Moor "Black Band" which here is termed the "Royds Coal". The "Beeston Coal" has been worked under the north part of Hunslet Moor, and in the cutting this portion of the Railway, several old pits were discovered near the brige opposite Mr Bowers glass works By the way basset is an old mining term for outcrop and the Black Band/Royds coal is the same Black Band Coal & Ironstone discussed in the Foundry Mill threadI have revisited my small collection of Geological Survey memoirs and found another useful reference. In the 1940 "Geology of the country around Wakefield" it refers briefly but specifically to our pit when describing the measures below the Beeston Coal Quote: Fossils found close under the Beeston Bed in the old Hunslet Clay pit (Jack Lane) include Neuropteris Schlenani Stur, Alethopteris valida etc Therefore the shaft in the photo must be to strata below the Beeston Coal, which is either to the Crow (thin but very high quality coal) or more likely to the Black Band Coal (Royds) and Ironstone.    

[grumpytramp]

Knowing that the strata worked in the pit was just below the Beeston Coal, I have suddenly realised that the coal (and possible old workings) are showing in the photographs.It is obvious now why the higher of the ranging posts has been lent against the face so high up!

[grumpytramp]

I suspect that the general poor condition of the working face in this photograph is because part of the Beeston Coal has been worked. It is possible that the props showing on the left are old props in the workings exposed by the quarry operations (I have seen these kind of things frequently when exposing old mine workings in opencast mines, reclamation schemes or general civils projects)

[The Parksider]

grumpytramp wrote: If you take a look at the first series OS sheet of the Hunslet Area:http://www.british-history.ac.uk/mapshe ... 45&oy=1700 Quote: Where the cutting enters Hunslet-moor, the "Beeston Coal" bassets out, and is of the usual thickness, namely five to six feet. This coal lies seventy or eighty yards above the Low Moor "Black Band" which here is termed the "Royds Coal". The "Beeston Coal" has been worked under the north part of Hunslet Moor, and in the cutting this portion of the Railway, several old pits were discovered near the brige opposite Mr Bowers glass works Quote: Fossils found close under the Beeston Bed in the old Hunslet Clay pit (Jack Lane) include Neuropteris Schlenani Stur, Alethopteris valida etc Therefore the shaft in the photo must be to strata below the Beeston Coal, which is either to the Crow (thin but very high quality coal) or more likely to the Black Band Coal (Royds) and Ironstone.     Fascinating stuff! The clay pit is close to Leeds Pottery, Jack Lane Pottery and Pottery field. The Burmantofts pottery also had a massive clay pit of course.I once marked by filling in squares on a grid all the old coal pits I could trace on maps and in records. Of course south of the city centre, SW along the Holbeck valley, SE from Knostrop on and east leeds starting on York Road was mostly shaded in as mining areas.But I had nothing for the city centre and assumed the coal was only in "Them there hills". It wasn't until the famous calls bell pit picture did I realise there's coals etc right under the city centre and it's inner city environs.The brick lined shaft isn't a typical 18thC bell pit though is it? And as the 1854 OS map marks the outline of the clay pit I assume the shaft was very early victorian if not before?? How does that square with the move from shallow to deep mining??I assume the quality of clay was important for the potteries? Did that come in different types like the coal, and if they were after better quality coal down this shaft (or ironstone) was that connected to a local need - e.g. the several iron foundries in this area??? indeed did foundry waste help to fill in the pit.....Finally why a square shaft when it seems that most shafts were traditionally round ones. Even Fred's back garden shaft was built with a round frame??

[Si]

I would imagine that a round shaft would be inherently stronger, and less likely to get stuck as it moved down the shaft?