Oxford Canal Locks - a bit of a conundrum

[ditchcrawler]

Fisher Row .Fishermen,Bargemen & Canal Boatmen in Oxford by Mary Prior. Try this site for a better price. http://Bookfinder.com

Under a fiver here http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Fisher-Row-Fisherman-Bargemen-Canal-Boatmen-in-Oxford-1500-1900-Prior-Mar-/152340950753?hash=item23783a6ee1:g:5ocAAOSwj85YQWvW

[magpie patrick]

Going back to my original question - which was (in effect) how come Wolvercote and Isis locks have the same configuration, when logic would suggest that Wolvercote is contemporary with, and would therefore be like, Shuttleworths Lock and the others up to Banbury. Now that it transpires Isis lock was built in it's present form in 1844 this is even more of a conundrum.

 

A brief check on site last week would suggest there is nothing between Isis Lock and Wolvercote Lock that would prevent a wide beam boat reaching the latter, the narrowest bridge is still approx 15 feet wide (Balls Bridge, in Wolvercote)

 

The layout of Isis lock makes sense for narrowing a wide lock - the paddle culverts would be in the area once occupied by the wider chamber and thus very easy to built (hence single ground paddle at both ends). Was Wolvercote rebuilt at the same time, and if so why? Was it also wide? I think it unlikely, but not totally implausible

[Heartland]

Yes,

 

Duke of Marlborough,

 

Thinking of something else there

[Heartland]

I also understand the Duke of Marlborough also owned the paper mills at Wolvercote, that were on the Thames. A towing path, shown on ordnance survey maps, appears to have followed the north/east bank of the Thames upstream. So at least at one time narrow boats could be hauled in that direction.

 

[magpie patrick]

An update: at Richard Fairhurst's suggestion I contacted a Mark Davies, who knows more about the history of this length. He offered the observation that "The Oxford Canal Company’s records show  that whereas they ‘completely rebuilt’ Isis Lock (1844), Wolvercote Lock (1846) and Duke’s Lock (1844) they merely ‘thoroughly repaired’ Shuttleworth’s in 1852."

So the three locks with a single ground paddle at each end were all completely rebuilt at about the same time, which makes sense - but Mark said the records do not say why they had to be rebuilt. We know Isis was narrowed at that time, it's conjecture whether the other two were ever wide, and likely to remain so. It would be logical as these locks had far more work done that Shuttleworths, but that's only a logical deduction, a long way from being fact.