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

Si · Post by Si » Tue 12 Oct, 2010 8:49 pm

chameleon wrote: On page umpty something here, is the Godfrey map which shows buildings almost all the way down the road. When I have a mo I'll re-post it, if nobody else does it first - will be quicker than the week it would need to look through all this Found a version, Steve.I think the red crosses indicate buildings which have been demolished, although they're a little out of date now!The site immediately to the right of the Crown and Fleece was a covered ginnel I believe ( the corner of the existing wall is rounded, so as to prevent damage by cart wheels, etc,) but it isn't marked as one - see the covered ginnel further up the skulls' alley, leading to Kirkgate - it is marked with diagonals, the usual sign of a covered ginnel.

Leodian · Post by **Leodian** » Tue 12 Oct, 2010 11:36 pm

This is a photo I took today (October 12) showing the view of the Corn Exchange from across Kirkgate. It is a different position from that I took on October 8th and so does not have the lampost directly in front of the Corn Exchange!

Leodian · Post by **Leodian** » Tue 12 Oct, 2010 11:45 pm

This is a photo I took today (October 12) that shows the scene round the back. It shows a difference already from the photo I took there on October 8th. The bricks were being compressed today, no doubt to create a flatenned area.I apologise to the people in view for not asking their permission because they may have been busy, so I did not want to disturb them.

Leodian · Post by **Leodian** » Tue 12 Oct, 2010 11:49 pm

This photo I took today (October 12) shows a better view of the old woodden roof beams and trusses compared to the photo of some of those that I took on October 8.

Post by **cnosni** » Wed 13 Oct, 2010 10:28 am

Leodian wrote: This photo I took today (October 12) shows a better view of the old woodden roof beams and trusses compared to the photo of some of those that I took on October 8. Compare the fairly high status (given location and time) of the apex in the picture on the previous page (and shown in this one)and that of the more rustic looking,less worked beam on the right stood up,that looks older than 18th century to me.What do you think?

Leodian · Post by **Leodian** » Wed 13 Oct, 2010 12:24 pm

cnosni wrote: Leodian wrote: This photo I took today (October 12) shows a better view of the old woodden roof beams and trusses compared to the photo of some of those that I took on October 8. Compare the fairly high status (given location and time) of the apex in the picture on the previous page (and shown in this one)and that of the more rustic looking,less worked beam on the right stood up,that looks older than 18th century to me.What do you think? Hi cnosni. That is my thought also. I did not look closely at the wood that is stood up but it and the similar ones on the far left did have an older look to them. They are also not in a bad condition, particularly compared to the thick beams on the floor that are very corroded.

agesofelegance · Post by **agesofelegance** » Wed 13 Oct, 2010 9:27 pm

the archeologist told andrew that all the beams were contemporary to the date of the building nothing was earlier, and not medieval

Post by **cnosni** » Thu 14 Oct, 2010 1:46 am

agesofelegance wrote: the archeologist told andrew that all the beams were contemporary to the date of the building nothing was earlier, and not medieval Wow,thats odd,such well worked apex and then other timbers that look like they have had minimum done to them,the sort of standard you see on medieaval buildings.Hope they took a picture whilst they were in situe.Might bob down tommorrow and have a look.

Si · Post by Si » Mon 18 Oct, 2010 10:31 am

agesofelegance wrote: the archeologist told andrew that all the beams were contemporary to the date of the building nothing was earlier, and not medieval I wonder how they know? Presumably, they haven't had the time/funds to check them with dendrochronology tests? Beams were often reused from one building to another, and even recycled from timber ships.

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Mon 18 Oct, 2010 10:41 am

Si wrote: agesofelegance wrote: the archeologist told andrew that all the beams were contemporary to the date of the building nothing was earlier, and not medieval I wonder how they know? Presumably, they haven't had the time/funds to check them with dendrochronology tests? Beams were often reused from one building to another, and even recycled from timber ships. I don't actually believe what were been told here. were been led to believe the entire White cloth hall was taken to bits and rebuilt over the years if nothing is contemporary? I find that rather hard to swallow, roof and all lol