This watercolour image shows a view of the double arches of the Thames Tunnel, with the geological strata above and, at the top, the river Thames. Figures walk through the Tunnel, and two men row in a boat on the river. The image was produced by Marc Brunel, who signed it with his signature and dated it 1835 (bottom right). The person or people who produced the watercolour are unknown; they may have included the draughtsman Joseph Pinchback, the engineer Richard Beamish, Brunel himself, or others working on the project. The inclusion of Brunel’s signature should not be understood as indicating his authorship, as contemporary records show that Brunel often signed drawings and plans produced by others, and that individual drawings and plans were often the work of multiple people.
In 1835, the Tunnel project was preparing to restart, following a long pause in works after the devastating flood of 1828. In February 1835, Brunel moved to a new house in Rotherhithe and in March removal of the old shield began, to allow its improved replacement to be constructed in situ. The process was long and difficult, with work on the new Shield only beginning in September 1835.
All the while, funding for the project had to be secured. Through the early 1830s, Marc Brunel petitioned various politicians for funding, and was particularly attentive to the project’s public relations. Whilst in the mid-1820s, the project had largely been perceived publicly as a marvel, the floods of the late 1820s dented its reputation and led to accusations that it was little other than a folly. In this context, artist’s impressions such as this one – of a completed Tunnel, open for passengers, with unrestricted shipping above – served a key purpose in projecting the notion of a realizable and realistic project which would produce a return on investments.
The function of the various watercolours and other images produced by those working on the project – Brunel, his engineers, and draughtsmen – can be ascertained both through their appearance and through their later entry into other collections. This image was neither part of the collection given to the Institution of Civil Engineers to inform and instruct others in the profession, nor retained by Brunel. This suggests it was intended for laypeople and was given as gift in or around 1835 – perhaps to an investor or other key stakeholder. While a clear provenance is lacking, this assumption is bolstered by the fact that another version of this image exists amongst the drawings given to the ICE, in a copy focussed on the strata and so devoid of figures.
Whilst it was once suggested that this watercolour depicts the Brunel family – daughter Sophia Brunel, her husband Benjamin Hawes, and Isambard Kingdom Brunel in the rowing boat on the top – there is no evidence for this supposition. Instead, the image should be placed into a direct iconographic lineage going back to the earliest sketches of an idea for the Tunnel. Key to demonstrating the utility of a subaqueous tunnel were images showing it in use by all; they would serve to underline the benefit gained by the project.
The reverse of this image present a peculiarity. Brunel has noted various measurements on the reverse, with an ink sketch of the two arches’ size compared against the breadth of the House of Commons chamber. This comparison appears to have been particularly favoured by Brunel, who sought to engage parliamentarians’ support for his project, and was notably explained by Brunel to King William IV during an audience in 1832. Though the Commons chamber had burnt down in 1834, Brunel clearly continued to use the comparison an ‘object illustration of the magnitude of the undertaking’. In addition to the comparison to the Commons, Brunel’s annotations also note the ‘Size of the drift made at Rotherhithe in 1808 but abandonned [sic]’ – again underlining the importance of his work in moving forwards, beyond what had previously been attempted by others.