David Johnston has put forward the theory that in non limestone areas
limestone rocks in the glacial till were mined/quarried/hushed as a
source of limestone for lime burning
Graham
>----Original Message----
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Date: 30/08/2013 17:21
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Subj: Re: [mining-history] Surface signature of Bell pits
>
>Mike
>
>
>What sort of area are they in, is it an agricultural area?
>
>
>In Wensleydale, we have quite a number of small coal shafts or adits
working poor quaility coal of only a few inches thickness for lime
production. They all utilise an adjacent outcrop of limestone, in one
instance a shaft was sunk through limestone to get to the coal and the
limestone from the shaft then burnt to produce lime. You say that there
is a surface layer of peat, was that of good enough quality to use for
lime burning? Was the aim of the shafts in fact limestone, if the area
is otherwise generally on acid soils and poorly served with liming
resources, it might depend on how solid the rock was above the
limestone or how deep the limestone was etc.
>
>Ian
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Haseler <[log in to unmask]>
>To: mining-history <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 14:15
>Subject: Re: Surface signature of Bell pits
>
>
>First thanks to everyone. I will try to address other emails using
the
>text from Peter.
>
>Yes, if these are bell pits, the surface signature is not typical.
But
>it doesn't look like anything else .
>
>The area is glacial till, and I have searched these mounds for any
sign
>of mined stone or coal and except for one very small bit of coal the
>only hard material is glacial rounded stones.
>
>The only way I can imagine they were produced from bell pit mining
is
>that for some reason a lot of the material was left at the surface
when
>the mineshaft was filled in . However, some are 1-2m tall but
others
>are barely discernible and except for the fact that the surface is
peat
>from a bog, and so very level and very easy to spot the different
soil,
>I doubt anyone would pay them any attention. And given the
shallowness
>of the square depressions, the "shafts" would have to be very
shallow.
>
>On 30/08/2013 10:37, Peter King wrote:
>> I think Mike needs to make clear what area we are talking about.
Are we
>> dealing with coal and argillaceous ironstone that occur in
horizontal seams,
>> or with ores that occur in veins?
>The area is about 3-5m of peat (measured) on top of perhaps 12foot
of
>glacial till (nearby bores), under which there are layers of
sandstone,
>shale, blase, "foul" coal, mudstone, fireclay, limestone all in nice
>layers .... except for a wapping massive great vertical
>Lenzie-torphichen igneous dike which I can't locate on the surface so
I
>am not able to say whether the line of mounds is on, next to or
perhaps
>100m from it.
>
>I was about to ask: "is there any reason anyone would mine
metamorphic
>material at a igneous dike" ... but isn't graphite metamorphic coal?
>
>There is a suggestion that a layer of coal was found close by. There
is
>no indication of its quality or whether it was dug. I CANNOT FIND
THIS
>SEAM IN LOCAL BOREHOLE DATA. Based no geological maps, the nearest
coal
>is poor quality and thin and I estimate reaches the surface about
300m
>away and dips away so it should not be in this area. The geological
map
>does show a limestone band at this location.
>
>> On wastes (such as commons),
>> levelling would be less important.
>This area is heathland bog and its only value would be for peat
cutting
>which did not occur in the area of the mounds.
>> The object would be to fill up the pit
>> completely to ground level. However, in practice voids would be
left and
>> these would migrate to the surface as the fill settled, leaving a
hole above
>> the shaft, the typical field evidence of bellpit mining.
>This would match the square depressions.
>> The alternative is to have some time of pumping apparatus, or a
sough.
>Water would be a huge problem in this area, but I've carefully gone
>through all other possible explanations and despite the problem with
>water it is at present my best hypothesis.
>> However, if they are in a grid pattern, it may be that this
>> was an efficient way of extracting the maximum possible amount of
the
>> mineral from the ground.
>It is possible there is a grid pattern, but I need to wait till the
the
>vegetation dies in the winter to survey the remaining area to
determine
>whether the features in that area have the same pattern/form as the
less
>"disturbed" line of mounds.
>> Peter King
>> 49, Stourbridge Road,
>> Hagley
>> Stourbridge
>> West Midlands
>> DY9 0QS
>> [log in to unmask]
>> 01562-720368
>>
>>
>>
>
>If you need to leave the list, send the following message to
>[log in to unmask] -
>
>leave mining-history
>---------
>
>
>
>If you need to leave the list, send the following message to
[log in to unmask] -
>
>leave mining-history
>---------
>
If you need to leave the list, send the following message to [log in to unmask] -
leave mining-history
---------
|
