Jump to content

Double bridge Marsworth


magpie patrick

Featured Posts

A good walk yesterday - I'm in my way home from a holiday as Magpie the Elder's carer and booked into Aylesbury Travelodge (it's canalside) for a break of my own. 

 

Walking most of the Aylesbury Arm, Marsworth Locks and Wendover Arm (on which more later) I saw the double bridge below the first wide lock I encountered at Startops End. As well as an arch, it has rubbing strips for the towrope,  and a flight of steps to get on and off the boat.

 

My booklet said it was built in anticipation of paired locks that never happened, but if that's true they made a deluxe job of it! The lock was rebuilt in 1870 so any trace of another lock may have gone, that said further up the flight it looked much less likely there had ever been paired locks. 

 

I'm guessing the opportunity arose to double the bridge but the lock was never built, but does anyone know? 

 

I'm still in Aylesbury so no books to hand!

 

Photos below 

20190803_120945.jpg

20190803_121149.jpg

20190803_121515.jpg

20190803_121427.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The full story of these locks is contained in Alan Faulkner's "The Grand Junction Canal" pp. 114-116.

Briefly, from 1838  twenty three locks north of Tring were duplicated.  The narrow lock alongside the double lock was to conserve water if only a single boat needed passage.

With the improved water supply from the new reservoir at Wilstone; the increased use of back pumping and the construction of side pounds, the single locks were no longer needed and the locks north Tring were filled in.

Edited by koukouvagia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, what he said!

My understanding is that the parallel narrow locks were only in use for about 10 years in total - it seems like a hell of a lot of construction for such a short service life!

At several places the upper entrance approach to the single lock is still in place, (e.g. Seabrook top), and the best evidence of the bottom end of a single lock is at Slapton, where really quite a lot survives.

 

When the Marsworth locks were de-watered a few years back you can clearly see evidence of bricked up culverts at several that can only have been as part of a paddle arrangement such as at Hillmorton, (or as the Regents used to have) that allowed the narrow lock to be used as a side-pond for the broad one, or vice versa.

The author of any source that says the locks were never built, or they were duplicate broad locks, has clearly never looked at the available surviving evidence.  Possibly the same authors that suggest you can't see straight through Braunston tunnel!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the late Alan Faulkner did much to provide a detail history of the Grand Junction Canal. The duplication of locks, using single locks (and somewhere I have a letter from him explaining this) did happen.

 

There was certainly an accompanying increase in trade and the new locks aided the passage of narrowboats, Whether this saved water must be a matter of discussion, though.

 

With the opening of the London & Birmingham Railway, and other railways thereafter, there followed a corresponding fall of trade and the need for additional lock capacity would have been reduced, I would suggest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd wondered about the top lock and the dry dock, but I could also see that becoming folk-lore without further evidence.

 

Although the locks are offset that isn't that uncommon,  and there is very little evidence on the ground except for the double bridge. I was looking for the usual tell-tale such as a change in coping stones or similar, but there wasn't enough to conclusively say there once were parallel locks. (Unlike at Soulbury three for example)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/08/2019 at 11:58, koukouvagia said:

The full story of these locks is contained in Alan Faulkner's "The Grand Junction Canal" pp. 114-116.

Briefly, from 1838  twenty three locks north of Tring were duplicated.  The narrow lock alongside the double lock was to conserve water if only a single boat needed passage.

With the improved water supply from the new reservoir at Wilstone; the increased use of back pumping and the construction of side pounds, the single locks were no longer needed and the locks north Tring were filled in.

the only one that semi remains is the dry dock top of matters flight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/08/2019 at 09:06, David Mack said:

And the duplicate top lock at Marsworth was converted into the dry dock.

The problem wit the suggestion that the dry dock is actually the original paired lock is that that lock should have been narrow, like all the other duplicates.

I'm not sure of the exact width of the dry dock, but I think it is probably about the same as a double lock, so whilst it may be sited where the narrow lock was, a lot of rebuilding must have been done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I've now read all the relevant bits in Faulkner and am enlightened!! I need to go back and have a look at lots of other bits of the Grand Junction too - I've hardly seen most of it, although I already knew it had some interesting and unusual arrangements regarding water management for example. 

 

If I've got this right - the 23 locks from Bulbourne to Stoke Hammond were duplicated with narrow locks, then two were not duplicated at all (Fenny and Cosgrove) then Stoke Bruence had wide duplicates. The rationale for the latter escapes me as the narrow duplicates weren't for capacity but to save water....

 

@1st ade, I may need to stay for a few days sometime :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, magpie patrick said:

Okay, I've now read all the relevant bits in Faulkner and am enlightened!! I need to go back and have a look at lots of other bits of the Grand Junction too - I've hardly seen most of it, although I already knew it had some interesting and unusual arrangements regarding water management for example. 

 

If I've got this right - the 23 locks from Bulbourne to Stoke Hammond were duplicated with narrow locks, then two were not duplicated at all (Fenny and Cosgrove) then Stoke Bruence had wide duplicates. The rationale for the latter escapes me as the narrow duplicates weren't for capacity but to save water....

 

@1st ade, I may need to stay for a few days sometime :) 

 

Stoke Bruerne were all wide and you can still see were they all were - the coping stones are starting to appear - lock 15 especially - top lock duplicate is still there.  My understanding from the late David Blagrove was they were in use from 1835 to about 1865 - very short period for such an undertaking to be constructed. Top lock (14) is offset from 15 because 14 leaked so badly (again source David Blagrove and it certainly does still leak water from the retaining wall at the top across into the Canal House garden).  Side ponds at all locks except 14. Imagine they kept 15 where it was because of its proximity to the side ponds. I would guess the locks on the west side were the original ones to keep them away from the plateway railway from the time before Blisworth Tunnel was opened. The dry lock (as it is called) at 14 has been messed about with so much over the years - it was the home for the weighing machine - now at the Maritime Museum in Swansea, it houses the cast iron gates from Welshpool, an inscribed stone cill and the rather sad remains of the station boat May.

 

If you see the 'thick' dewatered there's a definite change in the colour of the concrete walls of the short pounds where the entrances to the duplicate locks were.

Edited by Leo No2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/08/2019 at 13:37, alan_fincher said:

the best evidence of the bottom end of a single lock is at Slapton, where really quite a lot survives

Down having me dinner on the bench and thought I’d have a nosey

 

dont think the last picture is clear but you can clearly see the ground has sunk where the lock chamber would have been2F730613-66FB-42D0-ADFA-6E8DF3CBAC03.jpeg.f86c836e8cfb8fa31a26c3d9eace4537.jpegECAC3B0D-2E77-4521-BC6A-B9407FB0AB78.jpeg.14219992db68afaae837bcb28c565222.jpegAB7EE9A1-1CBF-4399-B119-8822C32CE7F5.jpeg.5843f549e596873cf30f910263cfc80f.jpeg

 

469D68E3-95C5-4B40-8A03-5759077390F7.jpeg.4c0b7ea056ae674bbf0eaa6f97bb7039.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The single lock tail is also pretty evident at the next lock down, (Grove Church), though there is not much evidence on the ground next to the wide lock. This lock also has a double hole bridge as part of the lock tails.

 

N

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.