Isambard Kingdom Brunel
Isambard Kingdom Brunel was the son of an almost as famous father, Sir Mark Isambard Brunel. He was born in Portsmouth on 9 April 1806 according to Marshall, and died in London on 15 September 1859. He was partly educated in France which reflected his father's French (Royalist) background. His engineering skills were developed on his father's great project the Thames Tunnel, where he was resident engineer: this both undermined his health and gave him an appetite for prodigeous engineering projects. His influence upon the steam locomotive was almost entirely indirect as his own efforts were eccentric (see Bryan page 43 for one of his "contributions" to locomotive history). Perhaps the greatest contribution of broad gauge locomotive development was to inspire men like Crampton and Sturrock to produce locomotives of comparable potential for the standard gauge. Brunel's main strengths were in civil engineering (the Great Western mainline, especially the Thames crossing at Maidenhead and Box Tunnel), the great bridge at Saltash, and his contributions to nautical engineering (which only met with partial success). The atmospheric railway in Devon was a disaster and the citizens of Plymouth are still denied rapid journeys to London because of Brunel's absurd aspirations. Brunel – not so great by John Miles (Rly Arch., 2007 (16) page 55 (letter). was a response to excellent photographs in Issue 15 page 17 of broad gauge, but writer (a professional engineer) condemns Brunel not for his magnificent bridges, nor for his inspired choice of route, but on the folly of the broad gauge (and Brunel's failure to perceive the essential network nature of railways) and his traction policy (his absurd steam locomotives and the atmospheric system): the latter led to a line which continues to be difficult and costly to work.
Adrian Jarvis's commentary on Samuel Smiles partially refutes the assertion that Smiles had nothing to say about the Brunels by noting that he published an extended review of R. Beamish. Memoir of the life of Sir Marc Isambard Brunel entited 'The Brunels' in Quarterly Review, 1862 (112), 1-39.
.Three sources are examined: the classic work by Rolt (which follows), a major criticism of it by Vaughan (which although accurate and studious suffers from several defects, the most devious is to call his subject "Isambard") and Tim Bryan's work which is a highly useful entree to Brunel's life and works and includes an evaluatory bibliography with an assessment of both Rolt's and Vaughan's contributions together with further important studies. Bryan's work is far better illustrated than either Rolt or Vaughan. This page originated as a collection of material which had been intended to show the majesty of Rolt's literary skill rather than from the need to assess Brunel and his father. At the end of this page reviews of more recent studies are appended. Vaughan's more recent work is examined briefly at the end of this page.
Brunel, like Robert Stephenson, had some influence on the development of the steam locomotive (mainly through the selection of the broad gauge), but like him was a civil engineer, and to a major extent a nautical engineer. Unlike Brunel's great friend, Robert Stephenson, Brunels's greatest masterpieces remain: the Royal Albert Bridge into Cornwall and the whole of the original Great Western Railway. The broad gauge was an absurdity, seen in retrospect, as was his attempt to construct an atmospheric railway. In this respect, he was like Bulleid, perhaps too clever to be a really sound engineer. Works with which he was associated included the Thames Tunnel (with his father); the Clifton suspension bridge; the Great Western Railway, notably the bridge across the Thames at Maidenhead (will the M4 crossing last as long?), Box Tunnel, Paddington Station, and the great ship, the Great Eastern.
Rolt's biography is one of the very few literary masterpieces to relate in any way to the history of railways.
Rolt included notes on his sources, a bibliography and a fair index. The following extracts are intended to give some indication of the stature of the book and of its subject:
p.66
Unknown to him, in the autumn of 1832, when his future had seemed so dark and unpromising, four Bristol merchants had foregathered in a dingy little office in Temple Backs.... to discuss the possibility of building a railway from Bristol to London. Vaughan on page 44 identifies the merchants (George Jones, John Harford, Thomas Guppy and William Tothill) but not the dingy nature of the office.
Preface
A century is a brief span as a historian measures time. Yet between 1760 and 1860 a comparatively small group of men transformed the face of England and brought about an economic and social upheaval so vast that the life of no single person in this country remained unaffected by it.
... the further I went the clearer did it seem to me that, large though the achievement was, the man was larger still. Brunel, in fact, was more than a great engineer, he was an artist and a visionary, a great man with a strangely magnetic personality which uniquely distinguished him even in that age of powerful individualism in which he moved.
Rolt enjoyed the advantages of access to Brunel's diaries and letters
The story of the Great Eastern was a tragedy of trust misplaced and betrayed.
p. 110
At this period Brunel kept what might be called a commonplace book in which he collected any material which was likely to be of use to him in building the railway. This has survived as an example of his thoroughness and his astonishing mastery of all the infinite detail involved in railway construction.
Includes list of grasses most suitable for growing under different
soil conditions
tables of local rainfall
cast iron rails at Hetton Colliery had a life of 10-12 years
malleable iron rails laid in 1832 had a life of only four years
Vaughan appears to fail to mention this gem
p. 178 (timber viaducts)
Brunel can be said to have originated a new regional craft and one highly suited to the men of western England with their long maritime tradition. Highly skilled bridge gangs examined each viaduct four times a year and when repairs or replacements were necessary they would lower themselves from the decks in bowline loops, swinging dizzily, perhaps one hundred feet or more above the ground. Vaughan counterbalances this with: These Cornish viaducts were fine structures but Isambard would not have agreed with the unreserved praise heaped upon them by some writers, including Rolt. KPJ: it should be noted that simple structures enabled the West to be opened up whether in Britain, or in the USA..
p. 324
the Thames Tunnel today is merely an insignificant part of London's labyrinthine underground railway system, but to walk through it in the silence of midnight after the last electric train has gone to its depot was for this writer an unforgettable experience. No tunnel in the world can be haunted by the echoes and apparitions of bygone dramatic events
p. 138
in the cutting of Box tunnel alone about one hundred men perished. Such prodigeous feats are never accomplished without risk and sacrifice. There is an implicit accusation in the Vaughan biography that Rolt was indifferent to such daeths,
p. 131
Brunel's infallible eye for proportion and his sense of grandeur
He had set himself to build the finest work in England and was bringing this splendid highway to Bath, one of the most beautiful cities in Europe
WHEN the site of the Thames crossing at Maidenhead had been determined upon, the Thames Commissioners had stipulated that the projected bridge must in no way obstruct the towpath and the broad navigation channel beside it. This limited Brunel to the use of only one river pier in a breadth of 100 yds and as he had planned to cross at no great height he was thus faced with a nice problem; He solved it by designing a bridge with two of the largest and flattest arches that have ever been built in brickwork. Each had a span of 128 ft with a rise of only 24 ft 3 in to the crown. This typically bold conception was naturally hailed by Brunel's enemies as yet anomer example of his extravagant folly and its fall before ever a train passed over it was confidently predicted.
The rest is so well known that it will not be repeated. Suffice it is note that unlike the motorway bridges at Thelwell and Avonmouth, and many more the bridge at Maidenhead is still standing and carrying trains at a velocity and frequency which even Brunel could not have envisaged.
The climax of Rolt's book (page 185) is the great theatre involved in bringing the first of the great spans into place. Rolt's writing more than complements the grandure of the event.
The day fixed for the floating, September 1st 1857, was brilliantly fine and the whole neighbourhood was en fête. Church bells pealed, flags hung from every house in Saltash, a general holiday was declared and from all the country round the people flocked to see the wonder performed until every field and vantage point on both banks of the Tamar was crowded to capacity. Out in the river the five naval vessels under the command of Captain Claxton lay ready at their moorings. Beyond their field of operations the water was packed with crowded, flag-bedecked craft. In the morning the expectant throng watched the pontoons being manoeuvred into position, two in each dock, and the cables attached. As the tide rose the water was pumped out of the pontoons and at a quarter past one there sounded a murmur like the sudden sighing of a wind as the great truss lifted slightly and the thousands of awestruck spectators whispered 'she floats'.
At this moment, like the conductor of an orchestra, Brunel moved to his place upon a platform mounted high in the centre of a truss. Directly above him were his signallers, standing ready with their numbers and flags. He had insisted that the whole operation must be carried out in complete silence and his wishes had been widely publicised. Consequently, no sooner had he taken up his position than there was a dramatic stillness like that which follows the tap of a conductor's baton, and every eye in the vast crowd was strained towards the distant figure of the engineer. Numbers whose purport was unintelligible to the crowd were displayed; flags flickered and then the huge truss swung slowly and majestically out into the Tamar. 'Not a.voice was heard', wrote an eye-witness. As by some mysterious agency , the tube and rail, borne on the pontoons, travelled to their resting place, and with such quietude as marked the building of Solomon's temple. With the impressive silence which is the highest evidence of power, it slid, as it were, into its position without an accident, without any extraordinary mechanical effort, without a "misfit", to the eighth of an inch.' Just as the time of high water came at three o'clock, the ends of the tube were secured in their positions on the piers from which they would be raised by hydraulic presses as the masonry was built up beneath them. As soon as the truss was safely in place the tension was broken. A band of the Royal Marines struck up 'See the conquering hero comes ' and Brunel stepped down from the platform to the accompaniment of a storm of cheering. It was a moment of triumph which must have sweetened the bitter memory of the atmospheric disaster. But not one of the thousands of west-countrymen who cheered themselves hoarse that day realised that their tribute was also a valediction, that their hail was also a farewell.
It was Brunel's chief assistant, Brereton, who superintended the floating of the second Saltash span in July 1858 and who saw the work through to its successful completion in the following spring. When Prince Albert, as Lord Warden of the Stanneries, travelled down from Paddington to open the Royal Albert Bridge in May 1859 amid fresh scenes ofwild enthusiasm, the last link in the broad gauge route to the west was completed. Wrote the ballad monger :
From Saltash to St Germans, Liskeard and St Austell,
The County of Comwall was all in a bustle,
Prince Albert is coming the people did say
To open the Bridge and the Cornish Railway.
From Redruth, and Camboume, St Just in the west
The people did flock all dressed in their best.
From all parts of England you'll now have a chance
To travel by steam right down to Penzance.
But the engineer was not there. No flags flew, no bands played, no crowds cheered when he took his first and last look at the completed bridge. He lay on a specially prepared platform truck, while one of Gooch's locomotives drew him very slowly beneath the pier arches and over the great girders. For his railway career was ended. Broken by the last and the most ambitious of all his schemes—his great ship—Brunel was dying.
In comparison Vaughan almost succeeds in making this climaxial operation to be little more than routine:
Isambard planned to direct the winch operators from a platform on top of the tube by means of red, white or blue flag signals given by a man standing on a platform just over Isambard's head. Each barge had a 'captain' and an 'assistant'. The assistant's task was never to take his eyes off the handsignalman and to pass on the flagged instructions to the captain who would supervise the winchmen. The truss was 'strung' like a puppet, capable of being manoeuvred in any direction. Isambard was puppet-master with 500 'stage hands', including Claxton in charge of the 'fleet' and Brereton as Resident Engineer. The audience numbered thousands.
The launch took place at 1 p.m. on 1 September 1857. When the tide raised the pontoons and lifted the truss clear of the ground, Isambard signalled the relevant winches to haul away and bring the truss out, parallel to the riverbank. The massive structure went gliding out to the centre of the river and was stopped. Ropes were cast off, others attached and the signal given to haul again. The truss swung round, the midstream end pivoting against the stone pier till the Cornish end was alongside its pier. Powerful winches then inched the ends over the stonework, the pontoons were submerged lowering the truss precisely into position, resting on hydraulic jacks.
The jacks, designed by Isambard, had a screw-thread cut in the ram with a locking nut to enable them to be secured at 'full lift' and thus insured against any failure of the hydraulic system. By these means the truss was raised 3 ft at a time and the masonry built up beneath, until the final position 100 ft above high water was reached in July 1858. Isambard, deeply involved at Millwall, supervised one 3-ft 'lift' and then left the works, including the floating and raising of the Devon span, entirely to Brereton.
To balance this comparison: Vaughan is good at capturing some of his subjects deficiences as is shown by [bold added KPJ]:
Isambard considered Gooch as no more than a Resident Engineer and awarded him a salary of £300 per annum against his own £2000. Gooch was at least Isambard's equal, not only intellectually but also in his energy and commitment to the job. He was far in advance of Isambard as a locomotive engineer. They complemented each other: the one a civil engineering genius, the other a brilliant locomotive engineer. Isambard was short of stature, passionate, wordy, some what theatrical, cultured, charming and artistic; Gooch was tall, gaunt, somewhat puritanical, of few words, without drawing-room charm, a practical man who, unlike Isambard, never stepped outside his subject. Furthermore, Gooch had no overwhelming desire for public acclaim - plain old-fashioned wealth would do for him.
Gooch's Diaries afford a modest amount of extra information.
One feature of Mr Brunel's character (and it was one that gave him a great deal of extra and unnecessary work) was, he fancied no one could anything but himself, and I [Daniel Gooch] remember his giving me a scolding for unloading these engines and getting them onto the line without consulting him as to the mode of doing it. I certainly felt no difficulty in the task There was a carriage sent by road from London which had to be got down the side of the cutting from the bridge, and he sent elaborate sketches and instructions how this was to be done. These took up a great deal of his time and of course were of no use in reality, as there was no kind of difficulty in the work, and circumstances were sure to alter his mode of doing it; but this was no doubt his mistake through life. As a rule he did not get experienced and qualified people about him, and with them it was perhaps necessary, but the work was in consequence often badly done and always expensively.
Both Rolt and Vaughan note further sources of information, but Bryan is far more thorough in his assessment. In consequence, the true researcher may wish to add:
Brunel, Isambard. The life of Isambard Kingdom Brunel,
civil engineer. 1870.
Ottley 5932 which notes that it contains many reports and
letters.
Hay, P. Brunel: engineering giant. 1985.
Buchanan, R. Angus.
Engineering dynasties in transport history. J. Rly Canal Hist.
Soc., 2004, 34, 654.
Includes a very useful family tree. Buchanan also wrote the biography contained
in the Oxford Dictionary of National
Biography..
The illustrations are especially good in Bryan's book. Chronology. Good bibliography. Poor review in Backtrack, 2001, 15, 114.
Born in Hacqueville in Normandy on 25 April 1769 and died in London on 12 December 1849 (Marshall). He is important for introducing mass production for the manufacture of timber pulley blocks and a engineer of the Thames Tunnel which originally lacked a strong raison d'etre but has served as a railway tunnel (the East London Line) for a great length of time. He sired the equally great but wayward Ismabard Kingdom
More recent biographies of the Brunels
Son
Brunel: in love with the impossible; edited by Andrew and Melanie
Kelly. Bristol Cultural Development Parnership. 2006.
Martin Barnes (J. Rly Canal Hist. Soc. 2007, 35, 554)
is enthusiastic (quite the most impressive and interesting book triggered
by his bicentenary). Book includes 27 essays on highly specific topics, and
nearly 500 illustrations, many in colour, and mostly of very high
quality.
Brunel: an engineering biography. Adrian Vaughan.
Ian Allan, 2006.
Martin Barnes (J. Rly Canal Hist. Soc. 2007, 35, 554):
"very well written, researched and illustrated" and concluded by observing
that this is a "commendable book".
Father
The greater genius?. Harold Bagust. Ian Allan, 2006.
Marc Isambard Brunel. Paul Clements. Phillimore, 2006.
Anthony Burton (J. Rly Canal Hist. Soc. 2007, 35, 555)
offers expert guidance on both books: Clements first appeared in 1970 and
contains some absurd errors, such as the claim of visit by "Brahms" prior
to his birth. The book by Bagust is far more reliable and shows that Marc
Brunel had a great influence upon his son's success.
Born in Westminster in 1842: died in Westminster on 7 October 1903. Second son of Isambard Kingdom. Contributor with brother, Isambard, to the Life of Isambard Kingdom Brunel published in 1870. Educated at Harrow and King's College, London. Premium apprentice at Armstrong Works, then pupil of Hawkshaw where engaged in surveys for Channel Tunnel. Entered Wolfe-Barry partnership in 1878 where concerned with Barry Dock, Blackfriars Bridge, Tower Bridge and cantilever bridge at Connel Ferry. Marshall.
Updated: 2008-08-21