Reports in the press indicate a renewed threat to E.C.W battle sites, this time at Newbury. Reportedly breaking a promise that the project would be put on hold for a year, Dr. Brian Mawhinney, the then Secretary of State for Transport, on July 5th gave the go-ahead to the A34 by-pass construction scheme, running to the west of Newbury.

This decision has caused anger among environmental groups, partly because of its impact on natural habitats, and alleged noise pollution, but also because of its claimed destructive effects on the sites of the First and Second Battles of Newbury ( the latter rather oddly referred to in the "Times" of 7th July as "the later skirmish (1644)n. Miss Helen Anscomb, organiser of the "Third Battle of Newbury" protest campaign, is quoted in the same report as saying: "We must stop this road cutting across the Civil War sites, where we know soldiers are buried and regimental buttons [sic] turn up in the soil. People died there to protect our democracy and the site should be preserved."

However, writing in the "Independent" of July 7th, the M.P. for Newbury, David Rendel, (who claims, in words to chill any Royalist supporter, to be a descendent of Lord Digby!), writes that the bulk of the battlefield (referring to First Newbury) has already been so much damaged by development, that the additional damage which the bypass will cause to the north-west tip of the site is justified.

Even if this claim was entirely accurate, it seems to me based upon a dubious line of reasoning, which using the same logic might argue that as most of ite surroundings were destroyed in the Second World War blitz, we may as well demolish St Paul's Cathedral as well!

Much of the by-pass it is pointed out, will follow the course of a disused railway line, but this will hardly prevent further destruction to the surrounding area. Particularly worrying is that the bypass will run across the area of intenae fighting around what is generally known aa "Round Hill" and Skinner's Gun Lane, where some of the terrain is relatively unchanged.

Also, it appears, affected is the area just to the west of Speen Village which was the scene of intense fighting between Skippon's foot and Prince Maurice's troops during the second battle.

Realistically, despite vows of disruption and civil disobedience, it seems optimistic to hope that the decision on the by-pass route will be overturned. The alternative route, to the east of the town, would (shock I horror!) have prevented an extension to Newbury Racecourse and upset the Queen's racing manager, the Earl of Carnarvon (does his namesake's fate at First Newbury not soften his heart?). Nor have "English Heritage" objected - an inauspicious start for the Battlefields Register.

With this in mind, it seems to me that the least that should be done, as a matter of priority, is a systematic survey of the affected area around Skinner's Green, using the techniques employed with such remarkable effect by Glenn Foard at Naseby, in order to record what can be discovered of the course of the fighting before it is still further disrupted. This should be sponsored by the Goverment and local authority, financially aided, one would hope, by the local businesses and Racecourse, who, we are assured, are going to benefit so enormously from the new by-pass.

Sources: "Independent", 7/7/95; "Times", 7/7/95.

This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com