Network rail archive

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 9:20 pm

Jogon wrote: Where is that Kings Mill goit these days ie outflow etc?I've a map of Leeds c.1500 showing High damBondman damA manorial corn mill (near Scarboro taps?)and 2 fulling mills either side of leeds bridgeAre these still there under the water? Next time your near Leeds bridge take a look at the river bank around herehttp://g.co/maps/xyzt5There is an inscribed stone on the outfall of the goit. I can't recall what it said exactly, The Kings mill, or Kings Mill goit e.t.c. I think I've only seen one photo of it before, but I'll have a look and see if I can find it again. I might get a photo of it myself when I'm next down that way.

Leodian · Post by **Leodian** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 9:21 pm

I was just about to ask the same question as Jogon. I assume the King Mill Goit is the water area to the right corner in image 2 of 6 that seems clearly to be part of the River Aire there (I cannot definitely make out what its name is, so perhaps my monitor defintion is not good enough). Edit added moments after posting. Thanks Phill. I really must type faster!

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 9:27 pm

No worries Leodian, we were hitting the keyboard at the same time Here's the outfall looking back towards Leeds bridge as it was in 1860.

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 9:50 pm

This photo is the only one I've seen, and the only mention of this carved stone that I have seen to date. I have the photo in a little book called 'Leeds visible history' by G.A. Rhodes.I wouldn't have known about it's existence until I saw the book. I wonder if Mr Kevin Grady or any of the other notable Leeds historians know about it? You never see it mentioned anywhere to say it's a part of Leeds medieval history. So that's what you need to be looking out for Jogon

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 9:58 pm

In detail.

Tasa · Post by **Tasa** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 10:22 pm

Just for cross-reference and info, there is some more information on the King's Mill and Isle of Cynder on this thread:http://www.secretleeds.com/forum/Messag ... ighLight=1

Tasa · Post by **Tasa** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 10:39 pm

Phill_dvsn wrote: [Photo of King's Mill carved stone - removed from quote to avoid taking up space]This photo is the only one I've seen, and the only mention of this carved stone that I have seen to date. I have the photo in a little book called 'Leeds visible history' by G.A. Rhodes.I wouldn't have known about it's existence until I saw the book. I wonder if Mr Kevin Grady or any of the other notable Leeds historians know about it? You never see it mentioned anywhere to say it's a part of Leeds medieval history. So that's what you need to be looking out for Jogon I wonder if the stone was placed more recently, for example when the Leeds waterfront was regenerated? A few Leodis photos of the area mention the stone, but only to say that it was set into the riverbank to mark the site.I have a book published by the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society in 2002 which recounts the archaeological investigation of the mill site in 1998 before the site was redeveloped. The foundations of the 18th century Oil Mill were uncovered, as well as the walls of the wheelpits.

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 10:47 pm

Yes that's what I was wondering myself Tasa. The only question would be is where was that Kings Mill stone kept all those years if it was only recently placed into the river bank? And why was it saved if I'm right in thinking it was demolished way back in 1913?

Tasa · Post by **Tasa** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 11:10 pm

Do you think the stone is definitely a relic of the mill rather than a more recent commemorative stone? If so, it says "King's Mills" rather than "King's Mill" which would seem to date it back to the medieval building. My book is quite inconsistent in the use of the singular and plural for the name, so it's not helping!

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Tue 28 Feb, 2012 11:14 pm

Tasa wrote: Do you think the stone is definitely a relic of the mill rather than a more recent commemorative stone? If so, it says "King's Mills" rather than "King's Mill" which would seem to date it back to the medieval building. My book is quite inconsistent in the use of the singular and plural for the name, so it's not helping! Hard to say isn't it? I need to take a closer look really. But from the time I saw it, and on the photo it certainly looks old. It's either the real deal, or a very good weathered and worn reproduction.