An investigation of two wellheads at Oakwell Hall,West Yorkshire

Dave Weldrake

An investigation of two wellheads at Oakwell Hall, West YorkshireImages and text © Dave Weldrake 2013Website: http://daveweldrake.wordpress.com/

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Site location

3.0 Historic Background

4.0 Previous archaeological work in the vicinity

5.0 Methodology

6.0 Description

6.1 Wellhead A6.2 Wellhead B

7.0 The finds7.1 The brick

8.0 Discussion

9.0 Conclusion

10.0 Recommendations

11.00 Acknowledgments

12.00 Bibliography

Appendix 1 The photographs

An investigation of two wellheads at Oakwell Hall, West Yorkshire

1.0 Introduction

1.1 The two wells which are the subject of this investigation lie in the grounds of Oakwell Hall Gomersal, West Yorkshire), a property now administer by Kirklees MDC. The investigation was carried out at the request of the Museums and Countryside setoff as part of a continuing programme of work on the historic environment of the Country Park. The investigation took place on the weekend of May 24 – 25 2008.

2.0 Site location

2.1 Oakwell Hall is situated on a plateau of land at SE 2174 2710. To the west is a sharp slope down to Oakwell Beck (sometimes also known as Scotland Beck). To the east is a gentler slope down to Nova Beck. The main water source for the site is however neither of these, but an unnamed watercourse which enters the site from the north to fill the duck pond and moat. This flow was interrupted by the construction of the Heaton Lodge to Farnley Junction (Leeds New Line) in 1900 (Holroyd et al. n. d.). Water is carried over the now disused railway line by means of a pipe and disappears underground again before entering the duck pond. The outflow to the moat is at its western end. Two wellheads which may be related to this system were investigated during the course of the project. Their locations are as follows:

2.2 Wellhead A is situated at SE 2169 2705 to the south of the outflow of the moat and slightly below the western edge of the plateau on which Oakwell Hall itself stands.

2.3 Wellhaed B is situated at SE 2167 2163 to the north of the outflow of the moat and further down slope than either the moat outflow or Wellhead A.

3.0 Historic background

3.1 The first mention of the place name Oakwell occurs in 1310/11 when John de Tilly is cited as being Lord of the Manor (Faull and Moorhouse 1981 p. 383). Before that time it was presumably an outlying hamlet of the town ship of Gomersal The present house is much later. A datestone over the entrance the Hall gives the date of its construction as 1583 though there was substantial remodelling in the 17th century (Pace and Denison 2002 p. 8). The house continued in private hands until the mid 1800s when it became a school which figured in the novel Shirley as Fieldhead. The property was acquired by Birstall Union District Council in 1928 (Pace and Denison 2002 p. 9)

3.2 Neither Wellhead A nor Wellhead B is marked on the first edition six inch to the mile Ordnance Survey map which was produced in IIIIIII. However, both wellheads appear on the 1:2500 (25 inch to the mile) Ordnance Survey map of 1970.

3.3 Other water sources formerly existed in the area. A spring is shown to the east of Warren Lane at 2185 2717 on the 1:1,2500 map. Opposite the entrance to the Country Park is Springfield House (SE 2176 2695). On the 1st Edition Ordinance Survey map a pump is shown outside the house. No trace of either feature now remains.

3.4 The place-name Springfield may also be relevant in the context of water supply. Elsewhere, as at Guiseley for example, the name is given to areas where water comes to the surface, rather than to an area containing coppice springs.

4.0 Previous archaeological work in the vicinity

4.1 A number of excavations were carried out in the environs of the Hall in the 1970s. Although the results of this work have never been fully published, it is clear from the interim reports (Gilks 1977/8) that the substantial remains of a sequence of medieval buildings still survive as buried archaeology. Pottery evidence would suggest that the earliest of the structures so far identified may go back as far as the 12th century.

4.2 An earthwork survey of the field bordering Nutter Lane on the southern edge of the park was carried out by Moorhouse in 1983. This suggested that a substantial medieval settlement underlay the eastern part of this area. However subsequent trial trenching has failed to confirm this (P. Boothroyd pers. comm.).

4.3 Over the past ten years a series of small scale investigations have been carried out by the West Yorkshire Archaeology Advisory Service as part of their continuing programme of educational projects. These have revealed the existence of further buried features including what might be late medieval stone-lined drains.

4.4 More recently the site has been the subject of investigations by South Leeds Archaeology. These have in part confirmed the existence of one of the buildings reported by Gilkes (P. Boothroyd pers. comm.).

5.0 Methodology

5.1 Topsoil was removed from the two wellheads to reveal the capping stones. A visual inspection and a photographic record were made of the two features. For health and safety reasons no attempt was made to remove material which had collapsed into the two structures.

6.0 Description

6.1 Wellhead A

6.1.1 The top of Wellhead A was originally formed by two sandstone flagstones covering and area approximately two metres square. The western flagstone is cracked in a number of places but all the sections are still present. The eastern flagstone is similarly cracked and its southern section has been replaced by a concrete slab moulded rough to fit with the structure. (See appendix : Image 1)

6.1.2 There is a square opening (c. 0.44m x 0.44m) in the centre of the wellhead. This has been rebated to allow for the insertion of a cover although no trace of this is now present. (See Appendix 1: Image 2)

6.1.3 The flagstones are supported on a framework of 0.14m deep I-section iron girders. (See Appendix 1: Image 3) These in turn rest on the top of a brick-lined cistern with. The full width of the cistern could not be measured accurately without the removal of the capping stones but it is in excess of 1.5m.

6.1.4 The full depth of the cistern could not be established as it is now choked with rubble. However comparison with Wellhead B would suggest that there is a substantial depth of cistern below the current water level.

6.1.5 No trace of either an inflow or an outflow was observed. However, when an attempt was made to remove the water with a bucket, more water welled up in its place. This would suggest that an inflow may be hidden by the rubble in the interior of the cistern.

6.2 Wellhead B

6.2.1 Wellhead B could not be examined in such great detail as Wellhead A since it is in a state of partial collapse and it was felt that removal of too much material might result in an accident.

6.2.2 The upper surface of wellhead B was originally formed by two sandstone slabs similar to those described in section 6.1.1. Only one of these now remains. It is broken in two and is balanced over the top of the cistern. (See Appendix 1: Image 4)

6.2.3 Beneath the sandstone covering slabs is a brick lined cistern of a maximum internal diameter of 1.42m. The upper courses of bricks, where they survive appear to be stepped in to reduce the diameter of the top of the cistern (See Appendix 1: Image 5). however this may just be the result of the collapse of the capping stones. The total depth of the structure was not established as it is now choked with bricks and other rubble. However it is in excess of

6.2.4 An inflow can clearly be seen leading into the eastern edge of the cistern where it is lined with modern earthenware drain pipes. (See Appendix 1: Image 6) It was not possible to trace this to its source and there may be a break somewhere along its length as the cistern is now dry.

7.0 The finds

7.1 Several sherds of pottery and pieces of vessel glass were recovered during the clearance of the topsoil from around the two wellheads. All of it was early 20th century in date.

7.2 One brick was removed from the collapsed rubble in the interior of Wellhead B. This was a heavily oxidized engineering brick with dimensions of 39.5 x 8. 5 x10.5 cm (9 ¼ x 3 ¼ 4 1/8 inches). There are frogs on both the upper and lower surfaces of the brick and two cleats in the upper frog. The surface of the upper frog also has a makers name - EASTFIELD BIRSTAL.

8.0 Discussion

8.1 The two features are broadly similar in appearance especially in the treatment of the sandstone flags which form the actual well head. This would suggest that the two features were built within a short time of one another if they are not actually contemporaneous.

8.2 The slight differences in construction noted in section 6.0 might suggest that the first two be built was considered in some way to be unsatisfactory and that the design needed to be modified. Alternatively the two features could have been put together by two different gangs of workmen with slightly different building practices.

8.3 It is difficult to account for the fracturing of the covering slabs. The one remaining slab of Wellhead A may have given way after the structure was no longer in use. This may not be the case with Wellhead A. It is conceivable that there was some form of collapse and that the metal girders were introduced to shore up the fractured flagstones.

8.4 The function of the two features is also problematical. They are marked as wells on the 25 inch to the mile Ordnance Survey map of IIII. By then Oakwell was in the hands of the local authority, but it is reasonable to assume that the two features were originally constructed in farmland as they appear to serve no adjacent structure. As noted in 6.1.1, there is central access which is large enough to allow a bucket to pass through, though is difficult to see what useful purpose this could serve as, at least in the case of Wellhead A there is a plentiful supply of water from the mot outflow. There is no trace of a pump fitting and the two features would be unsuitable for the watering of animals.

8.5 It is impossible to date the two features with any accuracy but, given the construction methods and the materials used, an early 20th century date would seem to be the most likely.

9.0 Conclusion

9.1 The investigation of these two features has thrown up some interesting questions about agricultural practices at Oakwell in the past. Although the wellheads can be dated with reasonable certainty to the early 20th century, their precise function has not been ascertained. This may become clear through further work in the Country Park or through a search of the documentary records.

10.0 Recommendations

10.1 Wellhead A is still in a reasonable state of preservation and measures for its preservation and display should be considered. With sympathetic management it could be turned into an attractive feature and could be the focus for such activities as, for example, well dressing.

10.2 Wellhead B is in a poor state of preservation. One of the upper slabs is missing and the other is in danger of collapsing. Pars of the upper layers of bricks forming the cistern have also collapsed into the structure. In its present state it presents a potential health and safety hazard. Measures need to be taken to ensure that it is no longer a potential danger to the public.

11.0 Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the following people for helping with the investigation of the two wellheads.

Angela Ellis, Carole Bloom, Debra Maltas, Jean Cain, Helena Jenks, Rebecca Ellis, Stuart Heaton

The author would also like to thank the staff at Oakwell Country Park for their continued interest and support during the project.

12.0 Bibliography

Faull, M. L., and Moorhouse S. A., 1981, West Yorkshire and Archaeological Survey to AD 1500

Moorhouse, S. A., 1983, Earthwork survey. Copied viewed in Historic Environment Record, Wakefield.

Pace and Denison, 202, Oakwell Hall, Birstall West Yorkshire, Building Assessment Study (Draft version prepared by Peter Gaze Pace Chartered Architects and Ed Denison Associates for Kirklees MDC)

Gilks, J., Kirklees museums Services Excavations May 1977, September 1978. Viewed in the Historic Environment Record, Wakefield

Holroyd P., et al., n. d. (last visited June 09), Leeds New Line http://www.lostrailwayswestyorkshire.co.uk/leeds%20new%20line%204.htm

Appendix 1: Photographs

Image 1: Wellhead A looking south with 1m builders rule for scale.

Image 2: The central rebated opening of Wellhead A facing south. A 1m builders rule for scale.

Image 3: A close up of one of the I-section girders supporting the capping stones of Wellhead A.

Image 4: The remaining capping stone of Wellhead B facing east. The rebate around the central opening can be clearly seen as can the inflow to the top right of the picture.

Image 5: The interior of Wellhead B facing east. The upper courses of bricks are stepped int to reduce the upper diameter of the cistern. A 1.0m builder’s rule has been used for scale.

Image 6: The inflow to Wellhead A. 0.5 m builder’s rule used as scale.