Pine Apple Inn, Quarry Hill

[Si]

...and the Pine Apple on Ivory Street, Hunslet, in the 50s.Both pics from Leodis.PS Thanks for the map over-lay, Liits.    

[Si]

DEE wrote: Hello Si, the only problem is that the ancestral address locations are for a mix of both paternal and maternal side. the paternal side lived mostly around the university area and the maternal side was mostly around York Rd/Quarry Hill. Paternal side addresses were Myrtle St then Wingham Terrace then Meanwood Terrace then Bagby Mills Yard, then Grosvenor Terrace and View. Maternal addresses were Barkers buildings, Union Row, Bridge St, Lorraine St, Brown St,Springfield St. I think Brown St may have been close to a street called Edmund St. Does that give you any further ideas on which it was Si?Also I read on this site that Lady Beck no longer exists. Is that a definite, as I remember about 15 years ago walking along a beck from the end of skinner Lane into the city, it ran behind the buildings on regent St and was very hidden. It looks to be in exactly the same line as the Lady Beck in the picture/map but further down. It even looked like the picture of the Lady Beck. Just thought I would mention it. Hi Dee. All the streets you mention that I can find on old maps or Leodis are north of the Aire (Woodhouse, Sheepscar, etc) so I think the Myrtle Street off Regent Street is your best bet.Lady Beck still exists. It's just mostly hidden or culverted underground. I think Phill explored it in the past.

[Si]

drapesy wrote: Si wrote: As an aside, I was wondering what the strange half-moon shape above the bloke in the previous picture was - perhaps a pub sign?Then I came across this picture of Atack Place, which is behind the derelict buildings in the previous picture. Look at the roof on the right - weird innit?         Its in exactly the same position on both photos - its not an actual feature but some blemish on the negatives or prints. Here's another picture with the same strange mark. Nearby Line Fold.I initially thought it might be flare in the lens, but to appear exactly the same in at least three photos means it's possibly something on the lens itself?    

[Si]

drapesy wrote: Liits - as for Pine Apple as opposed to Pineapple. Spelling was a lot less formalised in years gone by - it wasn't until the Oxford English Dictionary was published (starting c 1860) that we gained 'official' spellings (they're not actually official -simply customary - but that's another story). I suspect that you will find that originally "Pine apple" or "Pine-apple" was the favoured spelling and was gradually replaced by "Pineapple" over time to become the 'correct' spelling we know today. Further to this I bet that you'll find that the pub that was listed as the "Pineapple" was the last to survive and so took up the modern spelling - as the one in Wakefield has. Quite. On the poster in the picture of the back of the pub, the name is written as "Pineapple", but on the pub sign at the front, it says "Pine Apple."    

[Si]

I've managed to find a couple more pics on Leodis of High Street.This is the north side in the early 30s. Some demolition appears to have taken place ready for Quarry Hill flats?

[Si]

According to Leodis, this shows the rear of number 25 High Street, 1901. Does this help with the numbering problem? I would guess that this is on the north side, judging by the slope of the ground (away from the viewer) though it's difficult to tell for sure.There seems to be three doors in a row (two doors and a covered ginnel?) all with glazing above, like the Pine Apple.You'd have to be pretty desperate to use that loo nowadays... Note recurring semi-circular mark, suggesting that the photographer has turned the camera through 90 degrees for this shot.        

[LS1]

All these marks are in the same place and I was wondering if this is in the days before celluloid film or if theses are on plates . Could this explain the mark?

[Si]

LS1 wrote: All these marks are in the same place and I was wondering if this is in the days before celluloid film or if theses are on plates . Could this explain the mark? I think it would be unlikely that the same mark appears on every neg/plate, Lee. IMHO, more likely something to do with the camera. All these pics are simply dated "1901." Any keen photographers have a view?     

[Si]

I've found some interesting maps of the area on Leodis.The first two are dated 1909.

[Si]

This is the other slightly different 1909 map.