Jump to content

History dude

Sheffield History Member
  • Content Count

    1,280
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by History dude

  1. I found this in my collection of Arbourthorne Pond taken around 1980.
  2. It was Arbourthorne pond in the seventies. We were only after little fish such as Sticklebacks hardly needing a licence! The bloke was just natsy!! Yes Richmond Pond is still there where you said it was. It was orginally connected to Woodthorpe Hall which was demolished in 1934 and was much bigger when that was on the go. The Hall was very close to the site of Woodthorpe School. The pond keeps getting cleaned out from time to time and is home to mostly Sticklebacks, Frogs and Newts. But I haven't been near it for years. The biggest fish in it will be I suspect Goldfish dumped in by people who don't want to keep them anymore. I think it would have been well-stocked in the days of the Hall, but by the 50's and 60's polution and the like would have put an end to any fish that fishermen would catch. It was always getting clogged up by Water Lilys and the like when I was young.
  3. Just to break up the conversation on boozers The stream running down from Arbourthorne Pond is called the Jervis Lum. The pond itself is shown on the first OS map and is probably a great deal older. I reckon it could have been a fishpond connected to Sheffield Park Deer Park and was kept for the purpose of watering animals on the farms later. The name Jervis comes from the park keepers and later tennants of the Duke of Norfolk. Much of the area was never built on due to either drainage or coal mining. Arbourthorne Road coming off City Road is dead straight, clearly an old waggon road dating from after 1779, because that is when the Turnpike Road "City Road" as it's known now, came about. A clause in the Act for 1779 allows wagon ways to be built off it for the purpose of transporting coal. When I was younger I used to keep fish in tanks and I would sometimes go to the pond to catch fish for the tanks. However there was always this nasty bloke who didn't like kids catching even Sticklebacks and would chase you off or threaten to fetch the police. So we didn't go to it often. The pond also had a plague of Arglus or fish loush. Which would get on the side of the fish and suck the blood. The only way to get them off was to take the fish out of the water. The louse would then drop off! So we went more often to Richmond Pond which had no nasty man or fish louse!
  4. I thought uses might be interested in these registers on Internet Archive. The parish register of Sheffield in the county of York (1917) Internet archive 1 The parish register of Sheffield in the county of York (1917) vol 58 Internet archive 2 The parish register of Sheffield in the county of York (1917) vol 60 Internet archive 3 The parish register of Sheffield in the county of York (1917) vol 68 internet archive 4 Registers of Bradfield, in the Diocese of York, 1559- (1905) Internet archive 5
  5. There's always DNA testing. If as you say she has relations, if a check is made on you and anyone of them, it would prove without doubt she is related to you.
  6. OK Markbaby here you go! Beacon.mp3 Capitol.mp3 LBC.mp3 Orwell.mp3 Pennine.mp3 Picadilly.mp3 Plymouth Sound.mp3 Radio Fourth.mp3 Swansea Sound.mp3 Trent.mp3 Victory.mp3 Clyde.mp3
  7. Have got a few jingles from Hallam for you all in stereo! They all date from the late seventies. Keith Skues was a collector of jingles and the punk one was placed on the end of a batch he broadcast around 1979. It featured on a whole bunch of them from ILR stations all over the country. I've got them all if anyone wants them. Hallam (punk style).mp3 Rouse Saturday.mp3 Hallam countdown 54321.mp3
  8. Has anyone noticed that he gets on one train, which the other day was an engine powered train pulling several coaches, but the aerial shot showed a two coach DMU Once it was raining and the aerial shot again showed a different train in bright sunny weather! It makes it look like the trains are regular as buses too! But a really good series apart from these.
  9. I'm a Manor lad born in Queen Mary Road (now demolished). From my recent posts you can tell that I'm interested in the Manor Lodge and Sheffield Park. But I'm also interested in my family history. This covers several surnames: Appleyard, Benton, Yeardley, Dolan plus others. Done tons of research on Manor and Park, so unless you come accross something in the archives, I doubt anyone could surprise me there. Family history mysteries to track down still are: on Appleyard side, finding the graves of any Appleyards in Sheffield area and on the Benton side why they seem to have moved in mass from Birmingham?
  10. There was for certain AA guns just below the Manor Lodge site near the farm. My Dad, who lived on Wulfric Road remembers them well. He were playing with fragments of shell cases afterwards. He also says later on nearby they installed "Rocket Guns". The Lodge site also had a Home Guard post and Pauline Beswick who was in charge of the excavations in the 70's & 80's says they dug up live amunition connected with the Home Guard. :o
  11. Yes I reckon it was about 1890 the photo. We found some of the 'kids' burried in Tinsley Park Cem. One died on my birthday aged just 40. The other at Perhawar India, aged just 22. James Yeardley was his name. The gravestone says private in 2nd Batt, 19th Yorks Regt. He died July 13 (unlucky for him ) 1898. So he must have got killed in someone's war.
  12. Mary asked for Elizabeth's protection. She wrote a letter asking for precisely what the English dished out to her. I suppose the nearest thing today would be protectivty custody. But like many offered this it's sort of like being in prisoner. Which is true of Mary. She could have escaped to France. But by coming into England without waiting for permission from Queen Elizabeth, she was what we would call an Asylum Seeker. But as she was a Queen of another realm that was also wrong. Even today our Queen as to ask for permission to visit another country. It could be seen as an invaison otherwise Mary did hate the place, but she was moved after an abortive attempt at rescue, rather than to keep her happy. Not true. In fact I believe she went back there after Talbot's discharge. Which wouldn't make sense if that was the case. Sorry, I don't follow your logic. How would signing a death warrant stop the Catholic opposition from plotting against her? Suppose after signing Elizabeth had died or been assassinated? I think it's doubtful that anyone would have gone ahead and executed Mary, she now being the rightful Queen? Your not a woman! In Elizabeth's eyes the signing of the warrant, would put an end to plots by those who wanted a Catholic puppet on the throne. Because she would excute her. Thus ending any chance of a Catholic queen. Before Mary had even settled herself in Scotland she had requested to be name heir by Elizabeth. But after what she went through in her own life, Elizabeth wasn't interested in heirs to the throne. Infact she had no objection to Mary Stuart being the next Queen, just as long as she died a natural death. Mary's son surporters would have been very glad to get shut of Mary after Elizabeth had gone. Mary's letters were scrutinised before being sent. Secret letters were usually interecepted before they could be sent. It didn't stop them going to the recipents. They were passed on after being copied. In Leader's book you will find a letter in reference to the King of Persia who says he wouldn't mind Royal Treatment, as he says Mary writes to whoever she pleases. They were housed in Sheffield, and forbidden to go further afield, on pain of not being allowed to return. As stated earlier when choosing Sheffield, it was far from main thoroughfares, and apart from thraffic between the Queen in London and the castle, few if any people would travel far. In addition, the local population were kept away from mary. If she ventured beyond the castle gate George had to ensure there were no people to see her. Gossip has a way of traveling great distances. The servants of Mary were so numerous they would be in close contact with those in the town. Those in the town would include alsorts of travling tradesmen. If you think about it that's how the plague travelled around. Sheffield was not as isloated as you seem to think, that's why it was impossible to control it. Again, you're imposing present values on the 16th Century. It wasn't just that Bess suspected George of an affair, it was to do with his perceived neglect of her. As they drifted apart she spent a good deal of time at Chatsworth where the building work was her pet project. She wrote to George asking him to send building materials, and when he failed to supply them, wrote another stinging letter accusing him of neglect. George for his part complained that he wished he'd never heard of Chatsworth. No I'm not. Realtionships break down for all sorts of reasons. This is true now as it would have been then. Back then he would have been seen as not been able to control his wife. However even that letter doesn't prove that the relationship broke down because of either rumours of an affair, or neglect of his wife. Just that they were not getting on well. Past historians might be guilty of spreading the story that the marriage broke up due to the "charge". But you are equally guilty in sticking to the idea without any evidence. And George could be grumpy anyway. For instance when Elizabeth told him she trusted him. It was George who spoke first to the Queen. Not something he should have done! By telling her that the tenants in Bolsover would be causing trouble while he wasn't there. The Howards, first Earls then Dukes of Norfolk, have been the foremost Roman Catholic family in England, up to the present day, even through the Protestant ascendancy under Henry VIII and Elizabeth. Not true he was a Protestant. Otherwise why would Mary offer to change her religion? It was quite acceptable for someone of rank to receive visitors while in bed. (Even Winston Churchill did it 400 years later!) Yeah but even he didn't ask to marry anyone as much as she did The midwife tale is in Leader.
  13. Thanks to my grandmother on my dad's side of the family, we have quite a number of the photos from her line. Alice (my grandmother) was very keen on history and used to take me on day trips to York. So I think I got the history bug from her The photo below is the oldest in my collection and features my Great Great Grandfather John Fletcher Yeardley who was born in 1846. Alice had put on the back "Grandfather Yeardley" but not the woman's name. So we assumed it was his wife Till I came accross the online 1881 census for Sheffield. This lists him as 35, a Cast Steel Forgeman, at 21 Flora Street. And also indicated his wife was dead By the style of the picture we reckon that it couldn't be earlier than the census, and luckly the census reveals who she could be. For also listed at the same place is his sister Maria aged 42. a dress maker, and unmarried. So it is Maria in the picture and it also explains the dark dress! Wonder if she made it herself? Why was she living with her brother? Well John had six boys aged from 2 to 12, so that would explain it. A quick check on the 1871 census showed that his wife was called Elizabeth born 1849, but we don't know anything else about her and why she died, or even when. Though due to the two-year-old son it was before 1880. The fact that Maria never married also help trace her back home to her mum & dad, who were Joseph born 1806 and Hanah born 1811. Can a mod correct the title error please! Sorry! - Done RB
  14. SteveHB the image on this site is JPG converstion of a much larger file. When I did the converstion the program said it wouldn't look as good. If that is what you are refering too.
  15. I remember this song. It was in the Radio Hallam top 50 for ages. Though I didn't keep records of the records in the Hallam Countdown and it's chart positions, I did keep a kind of record of it's performance in that chart. It first appeared on the 2 October chart (1982), it then spent 20 weeks going up a down like a yo-yo I do remember it being in the top ten of Hallam's chart. Even for a local band that was very unusal for Hallam's chart to have a record in it's chart a long time which wasn't in the BBC top 40.
  16. Here's another picture from my collection this time of Phillimore School in Darnall c1930. This one was heavily damaged and I restored it using a photo shop software. Wonderfull things they are The only person I know on it is Dorothy Yeardley. She's the front girl on the right.
  17. In my collection is a picture which we think is connected to the Boer War. It shows horses so they must be a mounted or transport regiment. I don't know who the men are, but I would guess that a least one is a relative. The orginal is very dark so I have cleaned it up with a photo shop application. The original is mounted on a stiff card of a photographer called Basebe of 32 Station Road Aldershot. It measures 15cm by 10.5cm.
  18. As with many artists impressions they have a trend of either going over the top or underplaying the actual structure. In the Martin Davenport of the Star version, it's very much undersized. As there was more buildings to the back of the Towers. I belive that the front section was a three stories high, with the section on Manor Lane two stories high. Incidently I've seen an archaeological report on the cruck barn. Which is fenced in and the one with the wooden beam still in place. Despite it's appreance it wasn't there when Mary Stuart was there. It seems it the bits that look older where salvaged from the main site when it was constructed well after 1600. Also I should mention that Manor Lane itself wasn't there during the Elizabethan period. Instead the private path went up to the Turret house. At the back of the main building a second "tradesman" entrance formed a lane to Attercliffe. V.I.P's in the front, rif-rafe out the back Another largely unkown fact is that an inventory of 1582 shows that the Towers had a good number of beds in them.
  19. Lets start with her first husband's death. William Cecil reports that she intends to get married within' a few days of his death. She should have seen no males for 40 days, 14 days later she's talking to a male. Oh she was "Maire" not Mary, she's a bit of a snob I think. She offered to marry Henry Curwen's son, when she landed at Workington. Curwen owned Workington Hall. Before she left she was talking about marrying a Hamilton. And then Knollys says "Mary is bold, speaks too much and is too familiar". No doubt he came to this conclusion when she invited him to her bedroom, which she did. I take "familiar" to mean touchy etc. Knollys would have been the source for most of the courts information. So if he makes it clear she's like that, then it would have to be somebody not prone to this 'charm' she can put out. Because Elizabeth still saw Mary as Royal, then also it would need someone with wealth so that is also true. However it was not the intention that she should move around from house to house. Tutbury was to be her home. But Mary hated the place, so they had to move, to keep her happy. Mary had a 12,000 allowance, her own money. She could pay for herself. She was using the cash to stir up trouble, hence the cuts to Talbot's fee. The English knew about her money. George sacked her servents that he was paying for instead. It wasn't Elizabeth that was causing George grief, but Mary. She even wrote to the Queen, that the midwife had burst in on her. She was there over a family birth, went into the wrong room and woke Mary up! Talbot had to answer if Mary complained to the Queen, but he did his best to try to meet her demands (Mary's not the Queen's). To stop her petty letters to the Queen. But George was clearly a moaner! His Sheffield accent by the way comes out in his letters. But he was the worse speller in the gentry (even worse than me ). Mary's plan to marry the Duke of Norfolk, would have seen her change her religion, for the Duke was a protestant and not prepaired to change his. She had married Bothwell, another protestant, who was married already. That didn't go down well with the Pope! Most of the Catholics extremists were using Mary for there own ends. Elizabeth knew that and a signed death warrant was just what she needed to stop these people. When she was executed it was a case of heads Elizabeth lost and tales Elizabeth lost. The inkeeper reference is found in Leader's book on Mary P608. William Fleetwood writing to Cecil, Oct 1584. The reason is that it was impossible to keep the location of Mary secret as she writes to whoever she pleases. Also the Scots people Mary had around her could not be housed in the same building as Mary and were lodge in the local areas, for instance in Sheffield town. It would be impossible to do. Lastly Bess was also around Mary much of the time. Later she had a MASSIVE row with Mary. What about we do not know, but unlikely to do with any affair. After which Mary wanted her punished, even wrote a the "scandel letter" to see her punished. So bad that the later historians left parts in French Marriage break ups are complex even today, so it would be a MASSIVE assumption to blame it on just one reason alone. But past historians have.
  20. Once you know something of Mary Stuart's personality it becomes very clear why George wanted out. The story of the affair was traced back to an inkeeper in Islington who was prosecuted. However George was having an affair just not with Mary. It becomes very clear in the will. For Eleanor Briton (a cook), comes out very well from that piece of paper. He also spends a great deal of time with her over at Handsworth Hall, after his discharge from the service in August 1584. It's worth mentioning also that he got the "service" because he was a happly married man. Though as with many Tudor marriages it was a property transaction, it's very clear that it was also a 'love' match too. For it becomes clear to the court that no single man or anybody whose marriage could be open to question, should be allowed near Mary. You can see why in Sir Francis Knollys letters to the court. I get the impression that Mary was one of these women that would get too close to any male she was talking to. Such as standing to close and a very touchy / feely sort of person. The other reason was Elizabeth said to him "I trust you as few I do". But even now love can break down so George fell out with his wife. Even Queen Elizabeth couldn't get them back together and she tried. Talbot was known for loyal service and if anyone gets a chance check out the translation of the tomb in Sheffield Cathederal, it shows how much he was trusted and important in the court of Elizabeth. George was indeed at the trial of Mary. The trial could have been just a 12-man jury trial, but Elizabeth wanted the full works. Also present were foreign observers. There were also some known Catholics on the trial. The evidence brought forward clearly convicts her, but she also does this in her own words. Mary's main defence is that she is is a Queen. But she resigned. And James was King now. So they could prosecute her. As for the Babbington plot. She says she has "never heard of him". Then says when pressed "only wrote to him to free me, who wouldn't in my circumstances". After the trial, Mary could have been pardoned or banished by the Queen. But the rest of her court was calling out for execution. Eventually Elizabeth signs the death warrant. However even that is not good enough to carry the deed out. It must have the Great Seal attached to work it's magic. I think she signed it to stop anymore plots, and was intending to keep Mary ALIVE. However Walsingham was ill, so William Davison was acting Principal Secretary. I don't think he knew Elizabeth moods well, so he made a MASSIVE mistake and sent it to have the Great Seal attached. He showed it the Queen and she went potty with him. Afterwards he told William Cecil, he called the Council together. Cecil knew the law inside out, so he knew they did not need any contact with the Queen, plus there was nothing she could do to them in the law. Elizabeth was a stickler for that, so they sent it off without telling her a thing. Afterwards Elizabeth tried her best to get them executed or prosecuted (but largely failed) however Davison went to the Tower. Cecil also lost his favour only getting her trust back during the Armada campaign.
  21. Historians are suposed to work from records of events. As James could find no record of the events mentioned by Antonia Fraser, the only conclusion is that Antonia made the evidence up. It's also extremley unlikly that the person in charge of the execution, which George Talbot was, would shed a tear. I don't think you would find many instances of judges (who condem people to death) cry over what they had done. Unless they thought the person was innocent. And George Talbot knew she was guilty, so that I think stops the notion. However it wasn't a pretty sight. For Mary went into an uncontrollable panic (shaking from head to foot). So much so the highly trained executioner needed another man to hold her, but she still shaking, made him miss the mark and caused a botch job. So he had to strike again. And we know the body was shaking (apart from the need of another man to hold her) for when the head was lifted up the lips were still moving. As said at the time as if she was speaking.
  22. "Mary Queen of Scots" by Antonia Fraser is not really a good book for historical truth. She's the one that invented the story that George Talbot cried at Mary's execution. I suspect you wiil find out more in the book by James Mackay which uses the same title as your thread RichardB. It was also James who discovered the fact Antonia made up that tale of George. See P134 note 20 in that book.
  23. RichardB three images on the way! Sorry I got the idea that it wouldn't need to be cleared with L.S. Good job it's not from one of the "National" bodies. They want an arm and a leg for thier material!
  24. In the 1980's I did photocopy some of the pages from these volumes and have scanned some of the images. Now at that time Xerox machines where not very good so there's nothing I can do about the quality and they are too large in size to upload direct on to here. So I have done one at much reduced size to show our friend what they are like. It's from page 279 and it's the Wesleyan Chapel at Richmond. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Image removed by RichardB, permission required from Local Studies. Will update when the situation is clear. Thank you for your patience. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
×