Draft version of

A booklet on the Turnpike Roads around Reading

By Alan Rosevear – written in 2004


The Turnpikes of Reading and East Berkshire

Part A; Foundations............................................................................................................................................................3

1. Introduction...............................................................................................................................................................3

2. The First Roads through East Berkshire....................................................................................................................3

2.1 Roman Roads............................................................................................................................................................................3

2.2 Saxon Tracks.............................................................................................................................................................................5

2.3 Medieval Highways & Bridges.........................................................................................................................................6

2.4 Tudor & Stuart Highways.................................................................................................................................................7

2.5 Speculation on the road pattern around Reading...............................................................................................................9

3. Administration of the Highways..............................................................................................................................11

3.1 The Parish Road System..........................................................................................................................................................11

3.2 Bridges....................................................................................................................................................................................12

3.3 General Highways Acts...........................................................................................................................................................12

Part B: Turnpike Trusts........................................................................................................................................13

4. General Features......................................................................................................................................................13

4.1 Creation of Turnpikes Trusts...................................................................................................................................................13

4.2 Structure of Turnpike Acts......................................................................................................................................................14

4.3 Turnpikes around Reading..............................................................................................................................................15

5. The Bath Road.........................................................................................................................................................16

5.1 The nature of the route....................................................................................................................................................16

5.2 Reading to Newbury Road......................................................................................................................................................18

5.3 Maidenhead Road....................................................................................................................................................................23

5.4 The Road from Maidenhead to Cranford and the Kensington Road...............................................................................28

6. The Salisbury Road..................................................................................................................................................34

6.1 The Nature of the Route..........................................................................................................................................................34

6.2 Powder Mills on Hounslow Heath to Basingstone..................................................................................................................35

6.3 Bagshot to Basingstoke and Farnham.....................................................................................................................................38

7 Roads Through Windsor Forest...............................................................................................................................41

7.1 The Nature of the Route..........................................................................................................................................................41

7.2 The Windsor Forest Trust........................................................................................................................................................41

7.3 The Forest Road......................................................................................................................................................................42

7.4 Windsor Roads........................................................................................................................................................................43

8 Roads from Reading into Oxon & Bucks................................................................................................................43

8.1 Reading to Shillingford...........................................................................................................................................................44

8.2 Reading to St Albans...............................................................................................................................................................47

8.3 Great Marlow to the Oxford Road..................................................................................................................................49

9 Roads from Reading into Hampshire............................................................................................................................50

9.1 Reading to Basingstoke...........................................................................................................................................................50

9.2 Roads from Aldermaston Great Bridge...................................................................................................................................51

10 Improvements in Reading............................................................................................................................................54

10.1 The Streets.............................................................................................................................................................................54

10.2 The Kennet Bridges........................................................................................................................................................56

10.3 Caversham Bridge.................................................................................................................................................................56

Part C: Operation of Turnpikes............................................................................................................................57

11 The Men who ran the Turnpikes.................................................................................................................................57

11.1 Trustees.................................................................................................................................................................................57

11.2 Officers..................................................................................................................................................................................58

11.3 Toll Collectors.......................................................................................................................................................................60

12 Turnpike Finance.........................................................................................................................................................63

12.1 Tolls.......................................................................................................................................................................................63

12.2 Toll Income...........................................................................................................................................................................63

12.3 Loans & Capital.....................................................................................................................................................................65

12.4 Expenditure...........................................................................................................................................................................66

13 Structures along the Road............................................................................................................................................66

13.1 Milestones.............................................................................................................................................................................66

13.2 Toll Houses...........................................................................................................................................................................68

13.3 Weighing Engines.................................................................................................................................................................69

13.4 The Roadway.........................................................................................................................................................................69

13.5 Lighting.................................................................................................................................................................................71

13.6 Watering the Road & Pumps.................................................................................................................................................71

14 Management of the Road.............................................................................................................................................72

15 Traffic on Turnpikes West of London.....................................................................................................................73

15.1 Carriers..................................................................................................................................................................................73

15.2 Coaches.................................................................................................................................................................................73

Part D: Decline and Fall.......................................................................................................................................75

16 Competition with Other forms of Transport............................................................................................................75

16.1 The Competitors....................................................................................................................................................................75

16.1 The Canals & Rivers.............................................................................................................................................................75

16.2 Railways................................................................................................................................................................................76

17 The end of the Turnpikes and Modern Developments................................................................................................77

17.1 Decline..................................................................................................................................................................................77

17.2 Closure of Turnpikes.............................................................................................................................................................78

17.3 The Legacy......................................................................................................................................................................79

Part A; Foundations

1. Introduction

Most of our modern trunk roads are built upon the turnpike roads of the 19th century. Although this earlier road network appears to be a coherent investment in national infrastructure, turnpiking was in general the result of many, uncoordinated, local initiatives. Furthermore, turnpikes were but one phase in an evolving system for repairing and improving English highways to carry wheeled vehicles. Each generation has adapted the administrative and physical structures that it inherited. The Romans adopted ancient tracks and augmented them with new paved roads. In the Medieval period wealthy benefactors built bridges and causeways to improve travel between the new communities along the large river valleys. In the Elizabethan period, with the loss of ecclesiastical management, new institutions and Statutes provided a civil administration for the highways and bridges. Parishes were given responsibility for the upkeep of their roads and this parochial system continued to operate well into the 19th century for local roads. However, it proved ineffectual for maintaining major highways that ran through several parishes and were used by travellers who had no responsibility within the Parish. The turnpike trust was a legal device that evolved during the early 18th century to deal with the inadequacies of the Elizabethan Statute Labour system and ensured adequate finance for the maintenance and improvement of main roads.

Although important turnpikes in East Berkshire ran through Reading, the town had not become a major transport hub until the medieval period. The Roman road network had been focused on the provincial centre near Silchester, a little to the south. The early medieval highways running west from London crossed the Thames to the east of Reading and then diverged to the northwest and southwest. Nevertheless, this Saxon town grew as a market for local goods and as an entrepot for goods carried by vessels along the Thames and the Kennet. The creation of the Abbey increased the status of Reading and by the late medieval period the town was firmly established as a place to rest on the road between London and the western parts of the Kingdom. This evolving status has left its mark on the layout of the road network in the Middle Thames Valley and the adjoining region.

2. The First Roads through East Berkshire

2.1 Roman Roads

The Romans were the first administrators of Britain to build roads; paved routes for wheeled vehicles. Prior to the Roman invasion travellers and traders followed natural features of the landscape when making long distance journeys. Land travel was easiest over relatively dry, clear ground and most difficult in the wet alluvial soils through which many of the rivers ran. Boats provided a better means of transporting bulky goods between those fortunate towns located by the larger rivers. Through a heavily wooded region such as Berkshire, the ridgeways between river valleys were important natural highways (Fig 2.1a). The Great Ridgeway along the chalk of the Berkshire Downs and Chilterns was part of a long distance pathway running northeastwards from Salisbury Plain towards East Anglia. Another arm of the chalk downland forms the southern edge of the Thames basin. Along this ridge runs a natural trackway, commonly called the Harrow Way, from Salisbury Plain, through the Hampshire Downs and North Downs to Kent (Timperley & Brill 1983). Lesser ridgeways above the Kennet and Lambourn valleys would have brought some traffic down from the high Downs towards the Thames.

Away from the ridgeways other natural features were used repeatedly by generations of travellers who beat out ancient pathways. Modern place names may betray some of the ancient fords where a firm riverbed permitted travellers to cross the wide, slow flowing river. Moulsford is conveniently located as a crossing for travellers on the Great Ridgeway. Wallingford could be used by travellers following the high ground towards the Corallian Ridge near Faringdon. Open heath land in Surrey and Middlesex would have facilitated travel either side of the middle Thames and the river gravel terraces may have provided short distance paths. However, heavy London Clay covers the valley east of Maidenhead and floodwater prevented the creation of any permanent network of tracks. In contrast, the rivers, particularly the Thames and its main tributaries such as the Kennet, Thame and Cherwell, provided navigable routes between the coastal trading centres and the productive lands of Southern England. In pre-Roman Berkshire the principal route for traffic through the Thames Valley was probably the River. Any land traffic would have found it easier to use the heaths and downland along the watershed to the south.

Roads were important in the military strategy used by the Romans to subdue and contain the native Celtic tribes after the invasion. Straight paved roads were built by military engineers to facilitate rapid communication and easy transfer of forces around this new Province. These roads took little account of topological features and were cut with military precision between the principal garrisons and towns. The Romans chose to build a local administration centre at Calleva, now Silchester (Fulford 1995). This had been the tribal centre of the Atrebantes (hence the full name Calleva Atrebatum) and in pre-Roman times would have been served by tracks over the dry ground above the upper reaches of the rivers Blackwater and Loddon. Roman Calleva apparently grew to be the main transport hub west of Londinium (Fig 2.1b). Paved roads radiated from the gatehouses in the stone walls that eventually surrounded the large Roman town (Fulford 1995). The main road west from Londinium ran to Calleva via Pontes, presumed to be at an important bridge over the Thames. This entered Calleva by the fortified East Gate. There were gatehouses at three other points of the compass suggesting these were portals for main roads radiating from the town. It is commonly assumed that the road through the West Gate was the Ermine Way, which ran towards Corinium (Cirencester). A road from the North Gate led to Alchester (near Bicester), supposedly crossing the Thames near Dorchester (Oxon.). Three roads are believed to have run southwards from Calleva; the main road was that to Venta (Winchester) but another important road ran to Sorviodunum (Sarum) and a less important road towards Noviomagus (Chichester). These latter two roads may have branched from the Venta road outside the town or may have used the minor gates in the southwest and southeast walls.

After the Roman Province settled into peaceful prosperity, some civil trade routes were also paved. These were probably less well founded and made more concessions to topographic features. One of these route, may have branched from the Ermine Way at Spinis (presumed to be Speen near Newbury) and ran westwards to Cunetio (Mildenhall near Marlborough). This corridor would in later times be the line of the London to Bristol highway but evidence for this Roman road is sparse. In particular the crossing of the Kennet is a tantalising enigma because it has a bearing on where the later medieval road might have run. Determining the line of Roman roads is often little more than informed speculation. South East England has very little good quality building stone and so paving stones and milestones from these roads close to Roman Londinium were robbed out fairly quickly. The aggers or banks on which the roads were built would have remained as visible features along which tracks might run or boundaries be defined. This is clearly the case on the road that approaches Calleva from the east but there is little material evidence of the roads to the north and west. The Ordnance Survey suggests that the road from the west gate of Calleva headed northwestwards, implying a crossing on the lower Kennet and a road westwards along the river valley, close to the line of the present A4 near Thatcham. Earlier historians had proposed that the road ran due west, past the monumental Imp Stone (an old Imperial Roman milestone?) and across the high ground. This perhaps crossed the Kennet to west of its confluence with the Lambourn. The present author believes that during the Roman period roads probably followed both these routes; the arguments for this are given in Appendix R. The line of road north from Silchester is also uncertain but its precise position is of less importance to the later development of the main road network.

There is speculation that a Roman road crossed the Thames near Henley, presumably heading from Pontes to settlements on the north bank of the river in the Cotswolds. The name, Exlade Street, suggests that a stone road passed due west from Henley towards Moulsford. Alternatively Exlade Street could have been on a secondary route between Calleva and Dorchester, crossing the Thames in the Pangbourn area. Speculation on these routes is also contained in Appendix R. Another road may have run northeast from Calleva along the banks of the southern banks of the Thames towards Cookham. Here an ancient crossing of the Thames gave access to the lower slopes of the Chilterns and St Albans.

With the exception of London, the main Roman towns of southern Britain were well away from the large river valleys. However, it seems likely that boats and barges would have used the Thames and the Kennet, perhaps berthing near the site of Reading. This may even have been the point at which goods were unloaded for Silchester, However, it seems unlikely that the Romans had any large urban development close to the rivers of the Middle Thames and any small hythes or wharves will have disappeared under later development of the riverbank.

2.2 Saxon Tracks

The Saxons build several of their market towns and defended burghs beside the rivers. Wallingford and later Oxford grew to be substantial urban communities defending crossing points of the Thames. The main overland trade routes from Mercia to the Channel ports of Wessex ran through Oxford. The new Saxon settlements provided a fresh focus, away from the old Roman centres. Oxford replaced Roman Dorchester and Alchester, Saxon Marlborough replaced Cunetio and Reading appears to have usurped the local role previously fulfilled by Calleva. Like Abingdon and Dorchester, and to some extent Oxford, Reading owed its initial importance to the crossing of a tributary to the Thames rather than a crossing of the great river itself. Any traffic following the southern, relatively flat, bank of the Thames was inevitably led through Reading, located as it is at the southern-most sweep of the river.

The routes between these Saxon communities were not paved roads. Travellers would have been on foot or horseback and most goods carried on the backs of men or pack animal. Beaten paths were adequate to carry this traffic for much of the year. The constant pressure of feet and hooves maintained a clear track through the vegetation without seriously eroding the surface. Traffic carrying agricultural goods to load onto river vessel probably formed the initial highways around Reading. The combination of a thriving market, a good crossing of the Kennet and a convenient route for road traffic further up the Thames valley attracted a growing number of long distance travellers through the town. Reading became more significant as the old crossing of the Thames at Staines deteriorated to merely a ford. Traffic from London began to travel from the heathland west of London onto the river gravel terraces rather than attempting to cross to the south bank at Staines. Consequently, the hub at which the roads to southwest England diverged from those to the Midlands moved eastwards from Calleva to Hounslow Heath (Fig 2.2a).

Nevertheless travellers to the South Midlands must still cross to the south bank if they were to avoid a steep climb over the Chilterns. Hence crossings further upstream became more significant. From a river crossing at Windsor, all traffic on the south bank was led naturally towards Reading. Crossing at Marlow or Cookham, further north, were of limited value for traffic going west from London. Claims that Cookham was an important crossing for the Great Western Highway seem implausible and it is more likely to have been a simple north/south crossing carrying traffic from the Chilterns to the South coast (effectively the function it performed in Roman times). Traffic for the southwest would continue to favour any crossing at Staines since this gave access to the Surrey heathland and the Hampshire Downs. Hence, although Reading was relatively near to Calleva it only inherited a part of the role of regional road hub, previously fulfilled by the Roman town.

The area south of the Thames was in Wessex and presumably highways connected the main Saxon towns of the region. Where it was convenient these would have used the old Roman roads but these paved roads did not connect new settlements such as Wantage, Wallingford, Thatcham and Reading nor the Mercian border town of Oxford. Several, less than perfect routes could probably be followed between these settlements. For instance from Reading to the west, the road on the north bank of the Kennet was over very wet ground but connected with settlements such as Thatcham. The road on the south bank of the Kennet could take advantage of the high heathland above the Enborne but ran through less populated areas. The only evidence of highways in Saxon Charters west of Reading is for the parish of Brimpton where reference is made to Weal a Brucge (the bridge of the Britons or foreigners) (BPRA 1999). It is not clear whether this is over the Kennet or the Enborne but since latter maps only show bridges over the Enborne it must be assumed that this is an early reference to the crossing at Shalford. Most parish boundaries along the Kennet run perpendicular to the river with no evidence of a Roman road providing any landmarks. This castes further doubt on the survival of a principal Roman road alongside the Kennet itself.

2.3 Medieval Highways & Bridges

2.3.1 Royal Highways

Reading, like Abingdon further up the valley, is positioned at the confluence of a major tributary with the Thames, and both were favoured with a large Medieval Abbey. Whether the Abbeys were placed at economically significant places or whether they created that economic power is difficult to judge. Nevertheless, both Reading and Abingdon grew in importance and surpassed in status the defended Thames crossing at Wallingford. They both eventually had bridges across the Thames but, whereas at Abingdon this was an important component in the Great Road to Gloucester, for Reading the Caversham Bridge served a more local function.

Henry I founded Reading Abbey in 1121 and was buried there in 1123. An analysis of the journeys made by subsequent Plantagenet Kings of England (RUTV 9) illustrates how important Reading became as a stopover for Royal travellers. The most frequent itinerary for monarchs from King Henry II to Edward III (a period from 1154 to 1333) was to travel on four or five consecutive days from London to Windsor, Reading, Wallingford and Oxford or Woodstock. Except for Reading, all these resting-places on the road to the royal hunting lodge at Woodstock, were royal castles. The king presumably travelled through Windsor Forest to reach Reading and there cross the Kennet. To reach Oxford the party had to reach the north bank of the Thames and it is proposed that they would use Wallingford Bridge, the strategic crossing used by William the Conqueror in 1066. Wallingford Bridge lay in the shadow of the large royal castle and it may be assumed that travellers from Reading could still use part of the old Roman road remained through Streatley. Nevertheless a single record of a stop in Basildon (and no record of stopovers on the north bank) is the only direct evidence for this being the preferred route towards Woodstock.

From Reading the Plantagenet kings frequently travelled westwards to the royal castle at Marlborough (RUTV9). They may have followed the road along the Kennet valley through Aldermaston and Newbury but there is more direct evidence for them travelling over the high ground through Crookham and Hampstead Marshall. Reading was at the junction of these major routes north and west, making it the most important transport node west of London for royal travellers between the 12th and 14th centuries.

The royal party may have used boats to travel between London and Windsor or could have travelled by road to cross the Thames at Staines or Windsor. Any remnants of the Roman Bridge at Staines had disappeared and the Barons used the ford on their journey to meet King John at Runnymede in 1215 (Phillips 1981). However, a clause in the Magna Charta transferred the responsibility for upkeep of bridges from individuals to districts, facilitating the construction of new crossings. A new wooden bridge was erected at Staines in 1222, assisted by the gift of an oak from the Royal Forest at Windsor. The king donated wood to repair bridges at Windsor and Marlow in the early 13th century but there is no evidence of the royal progress using the north bank of the middle Thames before the Edward the first’s reign (after 1272). By 1223 there was a new bridge at Henley and this created a better highway for Gloucester traffic, avoiding the southern sweep through Reading. A new bridge close to the river hythe at Maidenhead, aligned with the Henley bridge, was in place by the early 13th century and Edward I used this road as much as the Reading road. Nevertheless, Gough’s map, reputed to be from 1360, still shows the two routes to Oxford being through Reading or over the Chilterns through Wycombe. However, the road through Maidenhead was well placed to become the principal crossing of the Thames for all traffic heading along highways to the West and South Midlands. This trend reduced Reading to merely an intermediate stop on the highway to the west.

2.3.2 Maintaining the Highway

The maintenance of particular medieval highways depended on charity and sponsorship by the powerful interests of church or nobility. Wealthy dignitaries often left bequests to pay for work on specific highways or bridges. The King sometimes granted pavage or pontage to local lords so that users of the road or bridge could be levied for a specified period of time to pay for the repair or maintenance work (e.g. see below for Pontage on Staines bridge and Pavage on Basingstoke Road). Longer-term arrangements could involve the installation of a hermit who would collect alms from travellers. The hermit might occupy a small chapel or chantry (see Maidenhead Bridge below) and hopefully collected more than enough to sustain their humble life and to pay for the upkeep of the structure.

Pavage was granted for the road from Hartford Bridge to Basingstoke in 1406 (HRO). The petition stated that this highway was so deep and mirey that various losses and dangers have resulted before this time to things being sent by that road and will result with greater probability in consequence, unless for the amendment of the same, repair and improvement are quickly arranged. Richard Spencer of Salisbury and William the parson of Newenham were empowered to supervise the taking of tolls from things for sale coming by the said road, with the exception of wool, skins and woolfells. The toll was set at a farthing for each horse loaded with skins (fresh salted or tanned) or for each pig. A halfpenny was to be charged on each horse carrying corn for sale, or cloth, or seafish, or other merchandise for each casks of herring (worth more than 5 shillings) and for each head of cattle or horse. Six sheep were to be charged at a penny, each cask of woad or load of cloth or merchandise by cart, four pence. The taking of tolls had to cease after three years. This arrangement seems remarkable similar to that of the turnpike trust that was to administer this road over 300 years later; financing the upkeep of a main highway by local parishes levying long distance travellers who were carrying goods for sale. However, in this medieval case the local landowner and the church rather than a trust drawn from the wider community supervised the activity. More importantly pavage was only granted for a relatively short period and for a few sections of road with particular problems. The petition implies that the majority of goods were carried by packhorse with only woollen manufactured goods going in a wheeled vehicle, and that only by cart (a rigid vehicle with poor manoeuvrability and limited capacity). The exceptions for raw wool and skins (as opposed to treated hides) suggest that local agricultural producers were being protected from the toll.

2.4 Tudor & Stuart Highways

In the Tudor period, Henley was effectively the head of navigation for the large Thames barges. This must have reduced the importance of river-borne trade at Reading but would have increased the importance of the Thames crossing at Caversham. The bridge and a highway along the northern bank allowed products to be carried by road and loaded on the London bound barges at Henley.

Saxton’s map of 1574 does not show roads but does identify important bridges. Bridges were not only costly to build but required a long-term, local commitment to maintain the structure. Hence the presence of a medieval bridge implies either a very important trade route or proximity to a very wealthy institution. Saxton’s Tudor map shows Thames crossings at Windsor, Maidenhead, Marlow, Henley, Sonning, Caversham and Wallingford. There are bridges over the main tributaries at Twyford, Reading and Aldermaston (Fig 2.4a). Higher up the tributaries there are bridges on the Loddon at Loddon Bridge and two bridges at Swallowfield. On the Enborne there are bridges at Shalford and Knightsbridge. The latter was probably on the highway along which English wool was carried from the Cotswolds for export to the Continent through ports such as Southampton. The latter corresponds to the line of the Newbury to Basingstoke road described by Ogilby but may incorporate an old the old Roman Road to Silchester, the western end of the Devil’s Highway.

By the late 16th century the pattern of the main highways radiating westwards from London had been established. William Smith’s A particular Description of England of 1588 shows the Salisbury road through Staines, the road west through Maidenhead and Reading, with the Gloucester Road branching off at Maidenhead and the Road to the South Midlands through Wycombe. This same pattern is repeated in Ogilby’s more comprehensive description of the main highways of England in his strip maps of 1675.

In his commentary on the Road from London to Bristol Ogilby’s wrote that the Post Office made this one of their six Principal Roads of England. He describes the route from the Middlesex/Buckinghamshire border as follows:

Enter Longford, a village of 4 Furlongs; where passing 4 separate branches of the Coln, at 18’5. Cross the Coln itself.

Here at once you enter Buckinghamshire and Colnbrook (the Pontes in Antonine [not now thought correct] a very good Thoroughfare, with a Market on Wednesdays, about 4 furlongs long, at the end of which, branches out the direct way to Windsor; with at Slow 3’4 beyond this place, appears pleasantly at right angles on the Left, at 2 miles distance. From Slow a level Road brings you to Maidenhead, first crossing the Thames at 27 Miles, and entering Barkshire, and 3 furlongs farther the Town, extending half a Mile on the Road, of Great reception for Travellers, has a well frequented Market on Wednesdays, and a Key to which Barges come from London.

A quarter of a Mile beyond the Town the Great Road to Gloucester branches out on the Right, whence through the Commons and Woods called Maidenhead Thicket, you pass Harehatch, and at 35’1. Enter Twiford, a village of 4 Furlongs, and good Entertainment, whence a pleasant way brings you at 39’7. To Reading, so call’d from the Confluence of the Rivers as seated on the Navigable Kennet, near its influx into the Thames, and here crossed by 7 Bridges; the fairest and largest Town of the County, with 3 Parish Churches; is a Corporation electing Parliament Men, Govern’d by a Maior 12 aldermen, &c. Eminent for Clothing and Malting, and once beautified with a rich Monastery and strong Castle.

You pass the main Town on the right, which leaving at 40’4. a pleasant Lane conveys you to Theal, vulgo Dheal, q.d. the Vale, a discontinuous Village with 2 or 3 good Inns, Extending to 44’7. thence passing Inglesfield, the pleasant Seat of the Marquess of Winchester’s near a Mile on the Right, a good way through broad Lanes and open Arable, brings you at 50’3. To Woolhampton, vulgo Woollington, small but of good reception; whence a pleasant way and Prospect conveys you at 53’4. To Thatsham, vulgo Thacham, 3 Furlongs long and a reasonable Thorough-fare, whence having touch’d upon the Kennet, at 56’5. Enter that part of Newbury, called Spinhamland, the relicts of the ancient Spinae, whose ruins gave Rise to the present New Town.

At 57’4. You pass by Spein on the Left, and Donnington Castle on the Right; whence between Craven Park and Wickham Heath, at 62’2. You come to the parting of the Roads, the Left being the Post-way by Hungerford, but the Right the more usual being both the Coach and Plow-way by Ramsbury;….

[clearly west of Newbury the Bristol traffic normally used the more northerly sweep route through Ramsbury road rather than the present Bristol, Road through Hungerford. This junction of the two roads is now lost but was close to the present Barton Court. From here the old road ran along the side of the spur over the top of Eddington Hill and down Gypsy Lane to Leverton and Chilton.]

Unlike the description of some other roads, the adjectives pleasant and broad are generously applied, suggesting that this was a relatively good road for the time. The accommodation is generally praised, even though this was well before the growth of mass travel to Bath. Notes on other Roads indicate the quantity of traffic using roads leading to the riverside; e.g., Henley…having a great Market on Thursdays, where oftentimes above 300 Cart Loads of Corn are sold in a Day. Basingstoke on the road to Lands End is similarly described as having a great Market on Wednesdays for Corn &c.

Morden’s map of 1695 is the first to show a detailed road network in this area. Morden is thought to have consulted local gentry to confirm the veracity of his information and so the roads should reflect the main routes in use in the Stuart period. On his Berkshire map Morden shows road converging on the Thames crossings at Maidenhead, Henley, Caversham and Wallingford. Roads head for crossings of the Loddon at Twyford and at the Kennet crossing at Reading. Reading, rivalling Oxford as a road hub, has two roads approaching Caversham Bridge from the north and six roads radiating from Reading along the south bank of the Thames towards Twyford, Loddon Bridge, Arborfield, Shinfield, Theale and Pangbourn. It suggests that Oxford was reached from Reading by crossing Caversham Bridge, and in fact Leland (1530-40) used this route on one of his journey between London and Oxford (Toulmin Smith 1964). Wallingford Bridge had been in decline since the medieval period and two centre arches had been destroyed by the Royalists in the Civil War; the bridge was not restored permanently until the 18th century. Hence, it is not surprising that this 17th century map does not show a through route along the south bank of the Thames. East Ilsley, where a large sheep market was held, is the most prominent hub for roads north west of Reading, with a track running through Pangbourn and another to Woolhampton to connect with the Bath Road.

Morden portrays the roads south of Reading towards Basingstoke truncated near Spencers Wood and the Forest Road is only shown as far as Wokingham. The only through route into this region is across the southern edge of the Forest to join the Exeter road at Blackwater. The absence of roads using crossings at Shalford or Padworth, west of Reading or at Swallowfield to the south, suggests that the old Roman road network centred on Silchester had declined to insignificance since the medieval period.

This pattern of routes is repeated on maps of the 1750s (e.g. Kitchen and Bowen –RUTV13), although this is probably a reflection of plagiarism by later mapmakers rather than the absence of any changed emphasis in transport priorities. It must be remembered that maps were made principally for the educated classes who used coaches and not for the common carrier that transported heavy goods and merchandise. It is clear from the discussion of turnpikes below that by the middle of the 18th century, roads converging on the Thames from Hants, Oxon and Berks, though not illustrated on the maps, were gaining in importance for the carriage of agricultural products to the Thames side wharves.

2.5 Speculation on the road pattern around Reading

2.5.1 The Initial Foundation

The position of Reading has affected the road pattern in East Berkshire, but the historic pattern of the main highways has itself influenced the network of streets in the town. The Roman roads close to the Thames did not meet the needs of later generations and were abandoned in the region north of Silchester. Reading seems to have developed initially on a north/south axis focussed at a crossing of the Kennet (Fig 2.5a). The main road south of the crossing leads to Hampshire and the Channel coast (Southampton) and to the north roads head along the southern bank of the Upper Thames; Caversham rather than Reading is crossing point of the Thames. A short distance before reaching the banks of the Kennet, the road from the south forks at Whitley. One branch is aligned with the old market centre the other with the gate to the abbey. The more westerly crossing is called seven bridges on Speed’s map of 1610 (Fig 2.5b) and crosses the Kennet where it splits into a series of small rivulets and islands. High bridge, leading to the abbey, is a single span approached along Silver Street, now London Street. Since the town pre-dates the abbey, seven bridges must be the older of the two crossings. This is approached along what is now called Southampton Street, though not much weight can be attached to this apparent link with the Channel port since it was called Horn Street well into the 19th century.

The origins of this north/south route must lie in the early Saxon history of the town. An important Saxon highway from Mercia to Wessex, the Northampton to Southampton road, crossed the Thames at Oxford. Two of the great Benedictine Abbeys founded in Saxon times, at Oxford and Abingdon lie on this road. This highway crossed the Kennet at Newbury, well to the west of Reading. A road that crossed to the north bank of the Kennet at Reading would probably have crossed the Thames at Wallingford; indeed all the evidence is that the Plantagenet kings used Wallingford Bridge as one of their principal crossing points on the middle Thames. Although Wallingford was later to be regarded as an east/west river crossing, its earliest function appears to have been on this north/south axis. It replaced the supposed Roman crossing near Dorchester but still gave access to the old Roman road from Alchester to Silchester and on south to Winchester. This begs the question of where the Romans crossed the Kennet and whether later a substantial detour from this was needed to pass through Reading. There are no obvious hints in the place names, in fact the lower Kennet, unlike other rivers such as the Lambourn, is devoid of settlements with names indicating a ford (Fig 2.5c). The heavy soil does not make it an easy crossing in this area (Fig 2.5d), but a crossing at Padworth, where a bridge was shown in Saxton’s map, aligns reasonably well with a road heading generally northwards from Silchester. A diversion from the old road at Pangbourn would have brought travellers to the protected crossing of the river at Reading. Roads feeding the estates to the south of Reading then carried traffic to the old network of roads at Silchester and highways to the south coast.

2.5.2 The Great Western Road

The east/west roads, that were to become so important to the later development of Reading, were secondary features in determining the street pattern of the town. The London Road joins Silver Street and Horn Street at a right angle, just south of the Kennet bridges (Fig 2.5b). This line of the old London road as it approaches Reading suggests that it came into use after the north/south road across the Kennet was well established.

The origin of this road from the east is also ambiguous and it could have served the river crossing at Cookham/Maidenhead or the Windsor Forest road. Before 1200 the Forest Road would have been the more convenient and direct road for travellers from London. Even the 1610 map refers to the London Road as Ort Lane, the same term applied later to the Wokingham Road through the Forest. However, it is likely that such a route across the Kennett would only serve those heading northwestwards. The Devils Highway through Silchester and routes over the Surrey heaths and Hampshire Downs to Wiltshire were almost certainly an easier natural highway from London to areas south of the Middle Thames, including Marlborough and the road to Bristol. The old crossings of the Loddon at Stanford, south of Swallowfield, lie on the line of the Devil’s Highway and were still evident in Tudor maps. To the west of Silchester the old road is less well defined but Shalford Bridge (Fig 2.5d) may provide a clue to the line of a main road in the Saxon period. However, any London to Bristol road on this old line through Silchester would have declined in importance as the status of Reading and its Abbey grew.

The change in status of the Silchester road would also have been influenced by development of bridges further upstream from the Staines and Windsor crossings. An old crossing at Cookham may only have served as a north/south bridge between Buckinghamshire and Berkshire. However, the building of new bridges at Maidenhead and Henley in the early 13th century created not only alternative north/south crossings but opened up a more straightforward road for traffic from London to the South Midlands. A good river crossing at Maidenhead was also preferable to the old route through Windsor or Staines for medieval traffic from London to Reading. This eventually drew all travellers away from the old roads that had run through the sparsely populated area on the Berkshire/Hampshire border or through Windsor Forest. Once the Roman pavement of the Devil’s Highway was lost, the better draining soils beside the Middle Thames would have made the road through Twyford the more attractive route westwards. The meant that the principal London Road approached Reading from a northeasterly direction and roads from the Forest such as Ort Lane and Red Lane then became tributaries to this highway.

These developments to the east of Reading explain the line of the London Road across the Loddon but the reason for the current line of the Bath Road west of Reading is less obvious. In the absence of any influence from Reading, it is difficult to understand why travellers going westwards from London should choose to make any crossing of the Lower Kennet. All the towns higher up the river, notably Newbury and Hungerford are on the south bank and the modern Bath Road itself runs on the south bank west of Hungerford. It is more logical that the early medieval traveller to head across Burghfield Common. From here they might find the remains of the old Roman road running west from Silchester and the natural ridgeway over Greenham Common towards Newbury. Although his area was heavily wooded the soil drains well and there are few natural barriers. It might be speculated that they used the Bridge of the Britons mentioned in the 10th century Brimpton Charter (BPRA 1999). The bridge at Shalford, is on Saxton’s 16th century map (Fig 2.5d), providing evidence for an important highway lying along this line in the medieval period. It is significant that on their journeys from Reading to Marlborough the Plantagenet kings stayed at several manors on the southern bank of the Kennet (Crookham, Hampstead Marshall as well as Newbury and Hungerford) but parishes on the northern bank are rarely mentioned (RUTV 9). Although the market town of Thatcham is on the north bank it was not particularly successful and declined in favour of Newbury on the other bank of the Kennet. Evidence for the medieval road being south of the river is particularly strong between Newbury and Hungerford. Pihlens (1983) notes old records that state the old and great market road from Hungerford to Newbury ran through Kintbury. The site of Hungerford church suggests that the old settlement was to the west of the current main street and that the Hunger ford was over the River Dun, not the Kennet (which is crossed at Eddington). As late as the Civil War, the Parliamentary forces returning from Gloucester to London chose to march from Hungerford to Newbury through Kintbury and Enborne. It was at Wash Common on the south bank that the army encountered the Royalists blocking the road to the capitol.

Despite the natural advantages of the southern route the increasing economic and political importance of Reading Abbey in medieval times would have shifted the main flow of traffic to the north bank of the Kennet. Wheeled traffic may also have favoured the north bank since the gravel terraces are wider and there are fewer climbs on and off the ridgeways. Certainly by the time of the earliest maps, the Bristol to London road follows a dogs-leg over the river at Reading and heads west up Castle Street on the northern bank through Theale and Thatcham. Ogilby’s roads of 1675 (Fig 2.5e) illustrate that there were arms of the Bristol road on both the north and south banks of the Kennet between Hungerford and Marlborough. Morden’s map of 1695 shows roads to the west on both sides of the river between Newbury and Hungerford, with the road through Kintbury having the same status as the road on the north bank through Speen. However, any road on the south bank between Reading and Newbury had declined to insignificance by this period.

2.5.3 Routes along the Kennet

As at Reading, Newbury and Hungerford grew up along routes running north/south but in both of these the urban centre was on the south bank of the Kennet. Early maps show roads radiating southwards from Newbury. These would have been important routes for the transport of wool for export from the Channel ports such as Southampton. On the evidence of the Tudor maps, the road over Greenham Common and Knightsbridge to Kingsclere was particularly important, and the current route through Whitchurch was not the dominant road southwards. Hungerford lay on the road between the ecclesiastical centres of Oxford and Sarum. In the absence of other factors one might expect the roads connecting these towns to run on the south side of the river. The fact that the Bristol Road grew up on the northern bank illustrates that the position of Reading strongly influenced the route post-medieval travellers took along the Kennet Valley.

In summary, it is proposed that until the late medieval period the preferred road from Windsor to Marlborough and the west, by-passed the town of Reading and ran for much of their length along an old Roman Road at least as far as Newbury (Fig 2.5f). Here the route split to go towards Gloucester through the Roman station at Spinis (Speen) or continued along the southern bank to Hungerford and Ramsbury to Marlborough. The growing influence of the Abbey, pulling more visitors into the town of Reading eventually led to the development of a road westwards on the northern bank. Unfortunately this brought the highway onto soils that were wetter than the ridges on the southern bank (Fig 2.5c) and led to the difficulties that were eventually only solved by turnpiking. At this point in history we move from mere speculation to a period when surviving records can help plot changes to the road network.

3. Administration of the Highways

3.1 The Parish Road System

The weight of traffic using English roads increased in the post-Reformation period as trade grew. Charity and ad hoc arrangements were insufficient to maintain local roads or main highways and active intervention was necessary to keep the roads adequately repaired. In 1555, by Act of Parliament, parishes were made responsible for the upkeep of roads and highways within their boundaries. The Statute for Mending of Highways obliged every had to work four days a year on maintaining the parish roads and persons having arable land or a plough landowners to provide teams of horses or oxen to carry material. A parish surveyor, who was elected each year, supervised this Statute Labour. If roads were inadequately maintained, a parish could be indicted by the Justices and fined. The fine would be given to the surveyor to assist in rectifying the problem. The system became perpetual in 1564 when the amount of Statute Labour was increased to six days per man per year (Jackman 1966).

This system was sufficient to maintain the local roads in many rural parishes but for those parishes through which major highways passed it proved inadequate. On these highways, the vehicles that damaged the roads were from other parishes, yet the locals had to make repairs with no benefit to themselves. The highway had virtually no paving and was regarded as a rights of way rather than a fixed structure. When a particular section of highway became impassable, travellers could use adjoining land to circumvent the problem. As a result some major highways spread to become great quagmires with only narrow sections passable in winter. The problem was particularly acute on the main approach roads to London.

3.2 Bridges

Bridges over large rivers require substantial investment and tend to have higher maintenance costs than roads. In the medieval period they had been built by rich benefactors and were often then maintained by ecclesiastical institutions, who generally installed a hermit to collect alms for its upkeep. After the Reformation these responsibilities were transferred to lay administrations. Some important bridges were maintained by a bridge trust, financed by a combination of tolls on traffic above and under the bridge. The remainder was in the care of the County, in which case the Justices levied rates for their upkeep.

3.3 General Highways Acts

Wheeled vehicles caused much more damage to the surface of the highway than feet or hooves. Carts had been used to carry moderately heavy or bulky items since medieval times. Two-wheel carts with wheels as tall as a man could carry quite large loads but the advent of the freestanding four-wheel wagon greatly increased the weight of what could be carried. The wheels cut the road surface, water lay in the tracks and the next vehicle caused even more damage. Particularly on clay soils, the road was no longer self-healing and more and more horses were needed to drag, rather than pull, vehicles through the deep mire.

Parliamentary legislation attempted to limit damage by restricting the number of horses used to pull wagons and coaches. It was believed that limiting carriers to only five horses in line would make it impossible for them to drag very heavy wagons. However, this legislation not only failed to achieve its aim but also created opportunities for extortion by unscrupulous surveyors.

One notorious case provoked a petition to Parliament from The Carriers and Waggoners of the Western and Northern Roads in 1695 (JHC). The Petitioners cited two surveyors, Richard Feilder and John Littlehale. Feilder had been owed money by the Crown who had failed to pay for corn and other provisions supplied to the army on Hounslow Heath and at Windsor. As recompense he was made Deputy Surveyor of His Majesties Roads with a responsibility to travel round, indicting parishes for failing to repair their highways. In addition he should have reported wagoners who drew with more than five horses in line. However, instead of indicting the offenders he took a regular payment from them, turned a blind-eye and let them use as many horses as they pleased. Initially he only took a few pounds per quarter from the wagoners using the Western Road over Hounslow Heath. However, he became greedier and increased the charges. When the carriers refused to pay, he kept them in line by indicting and seizing the horses of several carriers. Another surveyor, John Littlehale, was operating a similar racket on the Great North Road. He was even greedier and was soon taking several pounds per quarter from some wagoners and even demanding more than four quarterly payments per year! Under examination, Feilder admitted that wagoners could not operate profitably with only five horses and also recognised the damage the heavy loads did to the parish roads. However, it took changes in legislation to stop this predation on the wagoners and extortion that was levying over £20 per year to the costs of carriage through Eastern Berkshire.

General Highways legislation to control vehicles on the highway continued into the 19th century. However, the turnpike Acts of the 18th and 19th centuries were the prelude to a significant change in the approach to road transport. The financial independence of the turnpike trusts eventually allowed them to improve the roads to carry the vehicles rather than restricting the design and size of the vehicle to protect badly laid roads.

Part B: Turnpike Trusts

4. General Features

4.1 Creation of Turnpikes Trusts

During the late 17th century, parishes along the Great North road in particular were being regularly indicted for the state of the roads. In 1663 the Justices of Hertfordshire and Cambridgeshire obtained an Act of Parliament that allowed them to levy tolls on user of the Great North Road and to use the sums raised to augment the Statute Labour. This concept alleviated the pressure on the most vulnerable parishes and over the later part of the century Acts to cover other sections of road were bought before Parliament. Although there were clear benefits in improved maintenance of the roads, increasing the powers of the Justices to control roads across the county was not acceptable. An alternative method of administration was to grant powers to groups of local trustees who would be responsible for specific sections of road through a particular group of parishes.

Despite early opposition to the monopoly that this arrangement created, the turnpike system became accepted as a suitable method of alleviating the problems of parishes on principal highways into London. Although the intention was initially to augment Statute Labour, the amount of revenue generated by tolls grew to exceed the resource provide by the parishes. Gradually, turnpike trusts using toll income became the main means of financing improvements and repair of all main roads in England & Wales. Most of the major highways radiating from London were under the powers of turnpike trusts by the 1730s. This success on the great highways of the kingdom led to a fresh, much larger surge of turnpiking of the provincial main roads. From the 1750s to the 1770s almost all the major cross roads were brought under turnpike trusts creating a network of interconnecting roads, financed by toll charges. A final phase of turnpiking in the early 19th century filled in the few gaps where economic changes in an area had altered the flow of traffic.

Obtaining a turnpike Act involved significant cost for the local community and so the net benefit was not always apparent to the various stakeholder groups. The aristocracy and gentry saw road improvement through turnpiking as general public good, but they could also expect increased rents from their land as the market for agricultural goods expanded. Local tradesmen would expect a growth in business as the cost of transport of manufactured goods was reduced and the additional trade from travellers using local inns and services rose. In areas where the damage to roads from long distance traffic had been greatest, there was a significant reduction in the burden on local parishioners. After the building of turnpikes, agricultural improvers such as John Middleton (1798) were able to observe that bad roads require a greater number of horses to draw any given weight over them, thereby increasing the price of articles to the consumer; better roads meant a wider market for all goods.

However, some of the wagoners and coach masters who were getting by with the present state of the roads only saw additional costs and were unhappy. The carriers of Wiltshire and Gloucestershire and their clients petitioned strongly against tolls on several sections of the Bath Road. In areas where the ground was firmer and drained well, the damage was less apparent and yeoman farmers who might have to travel intermediate distances to market were a vociferous opposition. For instance, in 1753 when a petition to turnpike the road from the Hill near Bagshot, commonly called Golden Farmers Hill, through Farnham, Alton and New Alresford to Winchester, opposition came from gentlemen, yeoman and farmers living on or near the said road. They were clearly of the opinion that there is no necessity for erecting turnpikes thereon, for that the same is naturally very sound and good, the bottom thereof being a firm bed of gravel and stone and chalk, quite from Farnham to Winchester, and may be easily repaired and kept in a safe and commodious condition (JHC). Not only did they see immediate costs but thought it would be very burdensome and detrimental to their posterity. It should be noted that the section of road from Bagshot was over poor ground but the majority of the road ran over the chalk downs.

Rather than incurring the cost of turnpiking some communities preferred to put pressure on the parishes to fulfil the duties to maintain the highway. A notice in the Reading Mercury in December 1769 declared: If the roads from the turnpike road at Goose Mill in the parish of Basildon, through Hook End Lane, Ashamsted Common, Yattendon, Hamstead Norris Common, Long Lane, Shaw Field and the turnpike road at Newbury are not put in suitable repair and direction post properly placed before the 10th March next, the surveyors of the highway of each parish will be taught their duty from the Crown Office. Even when there was support for a turnpike it may be qualified and the power of some trusts was clearly curtailed by powerful local interest. Several Acts stated that tolls could not be taken on certain sections of the highway. This applied particularly close to major markets or facilities such as mills. For instance the turnpikes east of Reading could not collect tolls between the town and Loddon Bridge where the main cattle market was held.

Hence the story of the turnpiking of roads in East Berkshire is not one of unopposed acceptance of the perfect means of improving the main roads. Vested interests objected to almost every step in the creation of the turnpike network that the Victorians were to bequeath to the 20th century; plus ca change.

4.2 Structure of Turnpike Acts

The powers granted to a turnpike trust were viewed with suspicion. In effect the trustees were given powers to charge for use of an existing resource, the highway. Unlike the later canals and railway builders they were not creating a new facility and so their rights were restricted. Powers were only granted for a specific length of time and the trusts were not expected to make a profit, merely raise and employ sufficient money to improve and maintain the road. Each trust was empowered through an individual Act of Parliament that closely specified what was the trustees were permitted to undertake to achieve their objectives.

Turnpike Acts had a similar overall structure.

The initial pages defined the road and the trust structure; Fig 4.2a is the opening page of a typical Act.

• The opening paragraph of an Act specified the road in very general terms, usually the highway between A and B via C.

• Early Acts frequently gave some justification for the turnpiking, e.g. that the road as so poor that it was impassable in the winter season and could not be repaired by the present laws.

• Previous legislation relating to this road was recited.

• The trustees were named and the place of their first meeting specified.

• Arrangements for electing replacements trustees were laid down.

The next sections dealt with the raising of tolls (Fig 4.2b).

• It was stated that tollhouses could be erected, although it generally left the number and position of the tollgates to the discretion of the trustees who had local knowledge. Trusts did move their gates to intercept the maximum number of travellers at minimum cost to the trust.

• The amount of the tolls was recited, usually distinguishing tolls on passenger vehicles (coaches) and freight vehicles (wagons) and drove animals.

• The penalties for evading these tolls and payments to be made to informants against evaders were specified.

Most Acts contained a long list of those exempt from tolls (Fig 4.2c). Exemptions fell into a number of categories; local farmers going about their husbandry tasks, officials and the military on county or national business, religious observance, voting, those involved in road maintenance and then groups who had negotiated concessions to permit the particular Act to pass. Some Acts made special provisions for parishioners taking corn to a specified local mill (e.g. at Swallowfield and Aldermaston). Others protected local manufacturers as in the Reading renewal of 1746 when carts and horses carrying cloth, druggets, surge or other woollen manufacture to or from a fulling mill were exempt.

The Reading to Basingstoke Act of 1821 is typical in its list of those who did not have to pay tolls;

The Royal family

Surveyors

Wagons carrying material for repairing the roads, tollhouses, bridges, drains and fences on the highway

Seed for use in the parish

Hay, grass, straw, corn, pulses in straw, turnip, potatoes, milk, furze, wood for the use of the owner in the parish and not for sale

Beasts involved in ploughing, harrowing etc

Beasts involved in conveyance of mould, dung, soil, manure or compost (except chalk) used to improve land,

Horses returning from being shoed or farried

Parishioners returning from church or chapel or funerals

Ministers visiting the sick

Those riding to their own fields

Army officers on duty

Wagons carrying baggage of soldiers or sick & wounded or carrying ordinance

Volunteers dressed in uniform

Coaches and horses going to elections of the Knights of the Shires at election time.

Subsequent Paragraphs provided for upkeep and management of the road.

• The rights of the trust to take road-making materials from the Parishes were stated along with the compensation terms for damage.

• Obstructions could be removed and nuisances suppressed, overhanging trees removed and road improvements made.

• The trust were empowered, where necessary, to make new roads and sell the land of any old roads

• The requirement to place milestones was made and the punishment for defacing stones stated.

• Provisions were made on how Statute Duty Labour and Teams were to be provided by the Parishes (e.g. by the justices on application by the trustees).

• The arrangements for contributions by the parishes are laid out; i.e. either statute labour of Composition Money in lieu of this.

Finally there were clauses relating to long-term provisions.

• By the 19th century, Acts specified how money was to be borrowed and the wording of mortgages.

• Finally the term of the Act then makes clear what earlier Acts may have been superseded and limited the period over which the new powers were granted.

 

These were normally Local Acts of Parliament and so records are not as complete as for the main Statutes. Full sets of published Acts are rare before the 19th century but there are occasional records from the earlier period in the House of Lords Library. Complementing the information from the published Acts are summary reports of the deliberations of the Parliamentary Committees that examined the petitions for turnpikes. The records from the mid-18th century are generally more informative than later records that merely note the Act was granted. The Journal of the House of Commons (JHC) records these deliberations of Parliamentary Committees and any references from these are italicised in the text below.

In some cases the last clerk to a trust in the late 19th century may have saved some papers and eventually these might be lodged in a County Record Office. However, the vast majority of individual records have been lost. There are some centralised records such as total income from tolls and investigations of particular issues such as the impact of the railways on the trust’s finances. These records are in Parliamentary Papers (referred to as PP below).

4.3 Turnpikes around Reading

Acts covering the roads between London and Reading were granted during the initial phase of turnpiking in the early 18th century. The Bath Road was the second of the major radials out of London to be turnpiked, the section from Reading to Puntfield being covered under an Act of 1714. Acts covering the other main roads in the region followed soon afterwards with parts of both the Salisbury Road through Staines and the Oxford Road through Wycombe under the control of turnpike trusts by 1718. The road from Reading to Basingstoke was also turnpiked in 1718, remarkably early for a road that was not a London radial. The Henley Road was turnpiked towards the end of the initial phase, in 1736. The crossroads in East Berkshire were swept up in the turnpike mania of the late 18th century, leaving only roads around Windsor to be taken under the care of a turnpike trust in the early 19th century and the road from Aylesbury to Marlow turnpiked as late as 1822 (Appendix 1). Fig 4.3a illustrates the final turnpike network that developed around Reading and East Berkshire.

The Information available on individual turnpike trusts varies enormously.

The discussion below deals with groups of trusts;

• The Bath Road from Kensington to Newbury (Chapter 5);

• The main radial to the south of Reading; the Salisbury Road. (Chapter 6) (Note that the Henley Road to the north of Reading is dealt with elsewhere in RUTV7);

• The Windsor Forest Roads (Chapter 7);

• The Other Turnpikes north of the Thames in East Berkshire (Chapter 8);

• The Other Turnpikes south of the Thames in East Berkshire (Chapter 9);

5. The Bath Road

5.1 The nature of the route

5.1.1 The ground

Until the late 17th century the western road out of London was referred to as the Great Road to Bristol, the nation’s most important Atlantic port. However, this emphasis changed after Queen Anne began to patronise Bath as a restorative spa. Through the genius of Beau Nash this inland town to the south east of Bristol, grew to be the premier recreational destination for the wealthy and famous during the 18th century. The only practical way to Bath from London was by road and large numbers of private vehicles and public coaches began to travel along what became known as the Bath Road.

The Bath Road through Berkshire (Fig 5.1a) follows essentially the same route described by Ogilby in 1675 (Fig 2.5e). The route west from London, through Kensington, Brentford, Hounslow and Slough was over relatively low-lying ground, underlain by London Clay. Although the route did take advantage of stretches of heathland on old river gravels, most of the ground was wet heavy clay (Fig 2.5c) that was cut into deep, water filled ruts in winter and baked to a hard uneven surface in the summer. Along this northern bank of the Thames, minor tributaries such as the Brent and the Coln presented no great barrier to travel. Between Colnbrook and Maidenhead the ground was not so bad and in 1688 Pepys travelling in his private carriage was even able to comment that the way mighty good. The road was carried over the Thames at Maidenhead where a succession of bridges has stood since medieval times. From Maidenhead an exposed area of the Chiltern chalk underlies the southern bank of the Thames provides relatively firm ground for a highway. The roads to Henley and Reading branch along low chalk ridges, avoiding Ashley Hill. The Bath Road takes an easy crossing of the Loddon where it is divided into several branches at Twyford (the twin fords). It then picks a path between the river and the high ground at Woodley to reach the major crossing of the Kennet at Reading. Much of the route is over low-lying gravel terraces close to the rivers except for the section west of Maidenhead. Instead of the route taken later by Brunel’s railway, the Bath Road climbs onto the high ground to go over Knowl Hill. Whether this is a reflection of the route being pulled north along the line of the Oxford Road or was to avoid the deeper parts of the Royal Forest of Bray is not clear.

West of Reading the route follows the low ground of the Kennet river terraces rather than the firmer soils on the high chalk downs to the north. It is not until the road leaves Speenhamland, west of Newbury that it finally reaches the drier chalk downlands that then stretch forward through Wiltshire and the west. Even then it descends back to the terrace gravels at Benham and at Barton Court foregoes the opportunity of the old route over the chalkland to Ramsbury in favour of the flatter, wetter ground through Hungerford. In 1691, Celia Fiennes travelling from London to Hampshire observed that From Redding to Veale (Theale) 5 miles sad clay deep way, this is Barkshire; thence to Newbury 8 miles all clay and mirey ground. On another journey she noted Hungerford to Newbury in Barkshire 7 miles all very deep way, 15 miles thence to Reading in Barkshire flatt way, but the vale is heavy sand for 3 or 4 miles; Reading is the shire town its pretty large, accommodated for travellers being a great Road to Gloucester and the west Country but it is very dear (Morris 1947). This evidence illustrates how the combination of wet ground and heavy vehicles had created problems with which individual parish surveyors were unable to deal. In frustration some travellers used alternative tracks through the hills north of the river valley. For instance papers relating to the Frankum family of Woolhampton (Trigg 2002) suggest that before the Bath Road was turnpiked travellers went through Beenham and Kift Green to avoid Woolhampton.

Both coaches and wagons used the Great West Road through Berkshire and Buckinghamshire. The road through Reading carried a substantial number of clothiers’ wagons bringing cloth up to London from Wiltshire towns such as Trowbridge and Bradford. Thomas Deloney stated that large convoys of clothiers’ wains from Gloucester and Worcester blocked the London road through Reading and Colnbrook in the 16th century (Burke 1942). Whenever there was a threat of conflict with the Continental Powers, West Country merchants preferred to use road transport rather than coastal shipping and so the volume of commercial carrier traffic varied. Coaches carrying wealthy patrons to the spa at Bath depended on the Western Road and made passenger traffic an important factor on this route. Regular coach services between London and Bath began in 1657 and by the early 18th century large numbers of stagecoach services and private postchaises were travelling between London and Bath. Whereas the petitions to turnpike the Great North Road were based on the damage done by wagons, the case for turnpiking the Bath Road was concerned with the problems of coach travellers. One might speculate that wealthy passengers were more able and prepared to pay for improvements and this may explain why the Bath Road, although not on the worst soils in England, was turnpiked relatively early.

Acts to take tolls for maintenance of the western sections of the Bath Road, around Bath and Calne, had been passed in 1706. Like the improvements on the Great North Road these first turnpikes were administered by local Justices (Philips 1981). However, all the turnpikes created subsequently in this area were administered by trustees drawn from the local communities.

5.1.2 The administration

The first turnpike on the Bath Road through the Thames Valley was over the wet ground beside the Kennet from Reading to Theale. This turnpike, initially to Puntfield in 1714 and later on to Speenhamland (Newbury), is dealt with in Section 5.2. The Bath Road west of Speenhamland towards Marlborough is briefly covered in this section. The busy roads between Kensington over Hounslow Heath to Twyford were turnpiked over the following three years and the remaining sections were under turnpike trusts by 1728. The Bath Road to the east of Reading, under the Maidenhead T