Understanding James Brindley

[Heartland]

The International Journal for the History of Engineering and Technology, July 2013, published a paper from Victoria Owens that examined James Brindley's surviving pocketbooks 1755- 1763. She put this piece together to examine what his writings reveal about him as individual at a time when was a self employed mill wright and leads onto his time as a canal and river engineer. It a worthwhile read for those who can access this publication and it particularly helps to dispel the myth of his illiteracy, even if he often spelled words as he heard them.

 

Ray Shill

[Beaker]

even if he often spelled words as he heard them.

 

Rather like some posters on here!

 

....I'll get me coat.

[Hastings]

The International Journal for the History of Engineering and Technology, July 2013, published a paper from Victoria Owens that examined James Brindley's surviving pocketbooks 1755- 1763. She put this piece together to examine what his writings reveal about him as individual at a time when was a self employed mill wright and leads onto his time as a canal and river engineer. It a worthwhile read for those who can access this publication and it particularly helps to dispel the myth of his illiteracy, even if he often spelled words as he heard them.

 

Ray Shill

Ray

 

Victoria has recently produced a paperback book containing the contents of the Brindley pocketbooks, plus comment and interpretation. Brindley certainly wasn't illiterate, though his spelling might not conform to modern norms! The content is a fascinating insight into many aspects of his work.

 

We stock the book at Audlem Mill if any one is interested.

 

Peter

[Heartland]

James Brindley was not the only person who spelt words as he heard them. Modern computer technology that converts the spoken word into text has this fault. But as to his contemporaries the notebooks of John Green, assistant clerk of works to the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal, had words spelt as he heard them. I also recall correspondence from Thomas Dadford Senior had words in this category.

 

Ray Shill

[Laurence Hogg]

I dont think he was that bright, who else would make contour canals go so far to acheive so little mileage? Surely an embankment or two or a cutting wasnt beyond his imagination - or was it?

[FadeToScarlet]

I dont think he was that bright, who else would make contour canals go so far to acheive so little mileage? Surely an embankment or two or a cutting wasnt beyond his imagination - or was it?

But as far as I'm aware he wasn't interested in mileage. The concept of canals at the time was about short distance haulage being as important a traffic, if not more so, than long distance. A contour canal would serve the maximum number of canalside farms and villages, which, it was believed, would generate this traffic.

[John Holden]

James Brindley was not the only person who spelt words as he heard them. Modern computer technology that converts the spoken word into text has this fault. But as to his contemporaries the notebooks of John Green, assistant clerk of works to the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal, had words spelt as he heard them. I also recall correspondence from Thomas Dadford Senior had words in this category.

 

Ray Shill

 

Phonetic spelling was the norm at that time, after all many could not even spell their own names!

It lends an enchantment to early documents as you can almost hear the writer talking, an aspect lost with modern formalised spelling.

But as far as I'm aware he wasn't interested in mileage. The concept of canals at the time was about short distance haulage being as important a traffic, if not more so, than long distance. A contour canal would serve the maximum number of canalside farms and villages, which, it was believed, would generate this traffic.

 

There is a story that when the Barton Aqueduct was completed he took to his bed and stayed there until Gilbert had watered it, de-watered it, fixed design faults and successfully watered it.

[alan_fincher]

But as far as I'm aware he wasn't interested in mileage. The concept of canals at the time was about short distance haulage being as important a traffic, if not more so, than long distance. A contour canal would serve the maximum number of canalside farms and villages, which, it was believed, would generate this traffic.

 

I simply cannot believe such logic was applied to canals like the Oxford.

 

No way in the world would enough traffic have been generated locally at somewhere like Wormleighton to alone justify how much further every other boat would need to travel.

 

Surely far more often it was about water supply, costs of construction, or even just whether they actually felt confident to go for the more direct routes that would need far more engineering features.

 

Labour was cheap, most of the cargoes not perishable, so nobody much cared if it was 50% further to get to the destination, because it was still a massive upgrade on trying to carry small amounts on pack horses across rough tracks.

 

Only as even more effective methods become available was it sensible to start building more heavily engineered, more expensive, canals, with more direct routes, to give them some chance of competing.

 

Or indeed to spend lots of money to re-engineer a lot of the canals they already had, to replace ponderous circuitous routes, by long lengths of new straight cuttings or embankments.

 

That's my take on it anyway - was there ever large volumes of purely local traffic on all the loops they cut from the Northern Oxford - I'm rather doubtful there ever was.

[Pluto]

How to build canals was fully described in Belidor's Architecture Hydraulique, the final volume published in the same year, 1753, that the Duke of Bridgewater visited France, and specifically the Canal du Midi. All the technical expertise to build canals was pretty widely known before Brindley became involved, an involvement which came about because he was a good millwright. Being a good millwright would require some degree of literacy and numeracy, and Brindley's writings are no worse, nor better, than would be expected at the time.

 

The use of contour canal building stems from the early economics of canals and canal building. Most of our earliest canals were built by merchants or coal mine owners as an addition to their business, so money for construction was limited. At the time, no-one realised how quickly canals would become so economically successful, so journey time was not a major consideration. More time was spent on deciding whether to build a wide or narrow canal, the former being much more adaptable, but more expensive. Water supply would have been the same for either for a given tonnage carried.

[Derek R.]

There is also the thought that locks were expensive to build and required engineering accuracy. They also presented a delay in the passage of goods and possible conflicts between boatmen though I doubt the latter was a real consideration in building. They also placed a greater demand on water supply - ideally a lockless contour canal would require less water to maintain its level than one with a lock in any part of its length. Not a practical proposition given the nature of the lands traversed, but surely a consideration. Embankments and cuttings had all to be dug and built with pick, shovel and wheelbarrow. This was after all, the eighteenth century. The horse and man were the main power sources. Build fast - build cheap - get dividends.

[Heartland]

I do not quite agree with the belief that Brindley was responsible for the design of contour canals to the extent it was done in the waterways Birmingham & Oxford. Samuel Simcox was more closely associated with these projects. Looking at his waterways like Bridgewater and Trent & Mersey these lack the curving sweeps that came to be found especially on the Oxford, which I believe was justified for cost. If I read John Green's notebooks correctly, the deviation at Calf Heath on the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal was not done to Brindley's wishes.

 

Victoria Owen has also highlighted Brindleys work with water mills and a steam engine, (no doubt of the Newcomen Type) at Broadfield Colliery. This line of employment and his pocket book records indicate quite a capable person. His visits to Parliament to support the Bridgewater Canal extension and to oppose the Macclesfield Canal must also be to his credit.

 

Ray Shill

[NBDensie]

One possible reason for the excessive winding of some of the early canals could be the bridges. I dont think I have ever seen a very early skew bridge. Some skew bridges are known as "Skew Bridge" indicating that they were unusual. So my theory is that the early canal builders deliberately routed their canals to cross existing roads at right angles because they did not have the technology to do anything else. Any thoughts?

[Athy]

There are certainly skew bridges on the South Oxford, though how many I don't know.

[carlt]

Well if the Fenny Compton "tunnel" is anything to go by he was wise to stick to the contour lines.

[Pluto]

The earliest true skew bridges were on the Grand Canal Naas branch in Ireland, dating from c1797. The first in England was on the Rochdale, possibly dating from c1800, though there is some doubt about the truth of this, and the bridge may be from a later date. Elsewhere on the canal system, skew bridges were built using conventional arches, but with a triangular section, not properly load bearing, at either side. There is a good example at Eanam Wharf, Blackburn, which was built in 1809/10. The true skew bridge, with twisting brick or stonework so that the courses were at right angles to the forces, only became widely used in the railway age, post 1830.