The Russian Iron Industry (Excluding Bridges) Up to About 1850

Notes

• J. G. James, ‘Russian Iron Bridges to 1850’, TNS, 54 (1982–83), 79–104.
   Google Scholar
• F. Trevithick, Life of Richard Trevithick, 1 (1872), 10 has an old engineer saying that the only large bar obtainable in the 1780s was Spanish, which was ‘red-short and difficult to work’, or ‘Swedish or Danish bar said to come from Siberia’. In those days the Urals were regarded as part of Siberia. Boulton & Watt preferred Russian iron for their boiler plates (H. W. Dickinson and R. Jenkins, James Watt and the Steam Engine (1927), pp. 236–37.
   Google Scholar
• The Walkers of Rotherham, who made the Paddington and Sunderland bridges, were regular importers of Russian bar as were the Carron Company and most other large concerns.
   Google Scholar
• J. Percy, Metallurgy: Iron and Steel (1864), p. 738. Russian iron had outstanding malleability and ductility.
   Google Scholar
• Foreign historians, naturally interested in feats of their own émigrés, have always emphasized outside influences on Russia, particularly German technology which was encouraged by a series of Germanic rulers in the eighteenth century. Pre-revolutionary Russian writers drew heavily on western historians (because of the paucity of early Russian published sources) thus perpetuating the view that Russians were generally second-rate copyists. In modern times there has been a laudable attempt by Soviet writers to rescue Russian names from oblivion and restore national amour-propre via archival research. Many valuable books and papers were published in the 1930s and 1940s but during the cold war of the 1950s a progressively nationalistic view of history took over and many will recall how Russian claims to have invented almost everything became at that time a music-hall joke. The inevitable happened and a violent counterblast appeared from a German author: W. Keller, Ost minus West = Null (Munich, 1960), translated into English as Are the Russians Ten Feet Tall? (1961). Thankfully, a more balanced attitude has returned and much historical mist has been blown away in recent years.
   Google Scholar
• All governments are arts-dominated and Russia’s is no exception so that technological history gets negligible attention. Unfortunately no specialist minority publishers like David & Charles can spring up there to challenge the dominance of uncomprehending establishment Goliaths and bridge the gap between the ‘two cultures’. In Leningrad the contrast is marked between the many packed art museums with their vast book production and the little railway museum (unlisted in most guidebooks) where the few visitors — mostly foreign — are outnumbered by the attendants and the abandoned bookstall offers only a 5-kopeck badge of Cherepanov’s locomotive as a souvenir.
   Google Scholar
• Peter spent some time in the west studying ship-building and technology at a period when much of Russia’s wealth was still going into bigger and gaudier monasteries. He drew on Britain for shipwrights and naval officers (see Anon. (J. Deane), History of the Russian Fleet during the reign of Peter the Great (1899)) and on Dutch engineers, German technicians and Italian architects to create St Petersburg: his early iron technology came from Sweden and Germany.
   Google Scholar
• There is much literature on Tula history but I have seen little. A. S. Britkin, Pervye Tulskie stroiteli slozhnikh vododeistvuyshchikh mashin (M, 1950) translated as The Craftsmen of Tula (Jerusalem, 1967) notes British influence in early nineteenth century: Lloyd lathes were imported and in 1813 Baird sent a 24 hp steam-engine to operate them, ‘but nobody ever succeeded in starting it and water-power remained standard’. In 1826 the emperor consulted with a Mr Jones about British versus Russian craftsmen there. Murray’s Handbook for Travellers in Russia &c. (1893) assigns a major role to a Mr Trewheller.
   Google Scholar
• The works at Petrozavodsk was also called Alexandrovsky and thus sometimes confused with the two of that name in St Petersburg: there was yet another in the Urals. There are at least two histories of Petrozavodsk but I have seen neither.
   Google Scholar
• N. S. Alferov et al., Sverdlovsk stroitelstvo i arkhitektura (M, 1980), includes a brief history. Murray, Handbook, claimed that machine shops there were built by a Mr Tait (early nineteenth century?).
   Google Scholar
• Hennin’s early eighteenth-century drawings were only published in modern times, in Opisanie Uralskikh i Sibirskikh zavodov (M, 1937): I have not seen this but several later writers reproduce examples secondarily. A valuable source of late eighteenth-and early nineteenth-century drawings and plans is N. S. Alferov, Zodchie starogo Urala: pervaya polovina, xix (Sverdlovsk, 1960). I have found no better guide to an understanding of how large eighteenth-century water-powered ironworks were organized and run than these illustrations, which make similar British records seem very meagre.
   Google Scholar
• R. Portal, L’Oural au XVIIIe siecle (Paris, 1950) with its extensive bibliography is an indispensable cornerstone for westerners studying Russian iron history.
   Google Scholar
• B. B. Kafengauz, Istoriya khozyaystva Demidovikh, xvii–xviii (M-L, 1949); K. Rozhdestvenskaya (ed.), Nizhne Tagil (Sverdlovsk, 1945) is a collection of republished papers by various authors, including a bibliography.
   Google Scholar
• Alferov et al., Sverdlovsk stroitelstvo i arkhitektura.
   Google Scholar
• Portal.
   Google Scholar
• Attempts to introduce more modern west- ern methods into the Russian interior did not get far until the second half of the nineteenth century. The most heroic early venture was Polzunov’s great two-cylindered atmospheric engine (1763–66): this was a world first although it only functioned for a few months (see V. V. Danilevskij, I.I. Polzunov (M-L, 1940)), and was built £or direct drive of the blowers at Barnaul copper works.
   Google Scholar
• B. A. Rozadeev et al., Kronstadt (L, 1977). Samuel Greig (1735–88) found that he was unlikely to progress beyond Acting Lieutenant in the Royal Navy without the right connections, so he transferred to the Russian Navy in 1763 and in less than a decade was Admiral. After a vital role in defeating the Turkish fleet he was made governor of Kronstadt, whence he exerted considerable influence in his last ten years. The big Kronstadt engine was proposed by a colleague Admiral Knowles in 1773. A team of ten went from Scotland with it including A. Smith, J. Smith, J. Rennie, J. Martin, D. Conochie, A. Thomson, W. Bruce, J. Ditchburn and a Mr Taylor. Adam Smith and William Bruce remained there. Greig personally ordered a second, very small, engine from Carron but the parts were only received in 1788 and it was never erected.
   Google Scholar
• R. H. Campbell, The Story of Carron Company (1961) tells of Gascoigne’s early years. W. Tooke, View of the Russian Empire, 3 (1799), 550 said Gascoigne was paid 30,000 rubles p.a. but J. E. Norberg, Ueber die produktion des Roheisens in Russland, und über eine neue Schmelzmethode in sogenannten Stürzofen (Freyberg, 1805) said that Gascoigne’s salary was £2500 at a fixed rate of exchange equal to about 15,800 rubles, plus board and salaries for his team of twelve British experts, plus half of any reduction in the price of iron achieved below a certain target: after six years this amounted to 147,000 rubles (about £20,000). V. V. Danilevskiy, Istoriya gidrosilovikh ustanovok v Rossii do nachala, xix (M-L, 1940), trans. as History of Hydroengineering in Russia Before the Nineteenth Century (Jerusalem, 1968) agreed that Gascoigne got £2500 p.a. and said that the share of reduced costs amounted to 171,422 rubles when Gascoigne died, at which time it was found that he had also abstracted a further 143,442 rubles from the works funds.
   Google Scholar
• Gascoigne built new blast furnaces but also introduced the cupola at Petrozavodsk: it was this latter novelty which most struck Swedish engineer Norberg in 1792. He published an illustrated description (1802, Stockholm) which was translated into German as Norberg, Ueber die produktion des Roheisens in Russland.
   Google Scholar
• Obituary of Wilson in Proc. ICE (1870), pp. 461–65. J. Q. Adams (US Russian envoy) noted in his diary April 1810 that Wilson, despite his achievements, ‘has no pay — nothing but occasional presents; leaving him in a state of anxiety and suspense […]’ (A. G. Cross, Russia Under Western Eyes (1971), pp. 289–93). Whistler made the same point many years later that it was vital not to enter Russian service formally but to remain a foreign expert if one wished to retain any sort of standing or freedom of will.
   Google Scholar
• T. Tower, Memoir of the Late Charles Baird &c. (1867). A sadly shoddy work commissioned by his widow.
   Google Scholar
• A. Muir, The Story of Shotts (n.d., c. 1952), oddly omits all reference to the Russian Bairds.
   Google Scholar
• A. G. Cross, By the Banks of the Thames; Russians in Eighteenth Century Britain (Newtonville, Mass., 1980), p. 191 says that Morgan was already in St Petersburg by 1771. A. S. Britkin and S. S. Vidonov, A.K. Nartov (M, 1950, English trans. Jerusalem, 1964), p. 106 say that Baird’s (i.e. Morgan’s) workshops were founded at St Petersburg in 1777. It is generally agreed that the partnership came in 1792 but I am not sure if the large works on Baird’s Island began then, as commonly assumed, or after Morgan’s death in 1802. By 1812 he had 400 employees plus 50 to 100 compulsory Russian trainees.
   Google Scholar
• Baird’s business acumen was a byword. Z. Walker, in a letter to Boulton & Watt from St Petersburg in 1805, suggested that Baird should be made their agent: ‘He is […] very active and intelligent, knows the Russian language well, is pretty intimately acquainted with the Mechanical Professors in general, both Russian and Foreigners, also with many of the principal nobility; and with the proper mode of applying the Key to the private Doors of the Chief Officers in most of the Government Departments […]’ (J. Tann (ed.), Selected Papers of Boulton & Watt, 1 (1981), 354–64). To Sir John Rennie, who met him in the 1820s, Baird was ‘a shrewd, intelligent, clever, active, indefatigable person, wholly devoted to making money. He was in constant communication with England and, as soon as a patent was taken out there for any new invention, if it was applicable in Russia he at once imported it and patented it and thus obtained a monopoly’ (Autobiography (1875), pp. 253–55). His most important monopoly was of course the manufacture and operation of steamboats in Russia, particularly on the St Petersburg-Kronstadt run: both Fulton and Dodd had earlier tried to get this (see V. S. Virginskiy, Robert Fulton (M, 1965, Engl. trans. New Delhi, 1976)). In addition to his ironworks Baird had in St P coke-ovens, cornmills, sugar-refineries and steam-operated sawmills. When Kulibin proposed his iron lattice bridges for the Neva (1808–15) he advocated their manufacture in Baird’s works as the most advanced in Russia.
   Google Scholar
• Obituary of Handyside in Proc. ICE, 10 (1851), 85–87, credited him, inter alia, with the Baird steamboats and it is generally accepted that Baird’s steam-engine business only really grew after Handyside arrived. When Handyside returned to England others of his family remained in Russia. It is surely more than a coincidence that, within a few years of his return, the old Britannia Foundry in Derby was revitalized by one Andrew Handyside (see M. Higgs, ‘Andrew Handyside & Co’, J. Soc. Archit. Historians, 29 (1970), 175–80): this firm supplied many iron bridges to Russia in the 1860s and 1870s (see E. Matheson, Works in Iron […] by A. Handyside & Co (1877)). Intermarriage is shown by names such as Charles Baird Handyside (surgeon, d. 1859) and James Baird Handyside (contractor and ironmaster, 1836–82).
   Google Scholar
• One of the managers was Scott Russell’s son Norman who had previously bankrupted a Welsh firm.
   Google Scholar
• It has been suggested that Matthew Clark was also the architect who worked in Gomel c. 1800–26 but that was John Clark, architect to P. A. Rumyantsev (see V. F. Morozov, ‘Arkhitektura Gomelya nachala XIX veka’, Stroit. i Arkhit. Belorussii, 4 (1979), 22–24).
   Google Scholar
• Most Russian sources say the St P state foundry was created by transfer of the Kronstadt foundry to the mainland in 1801 but this must be wrong. Rozadeev (17) encountered in the literature later. A. G. Raskin, Triumfalnie arki Leningrada (L, 1977), p. 123, says that Matvei Egorovich (i.e. Matthew son of George) Clark went to Russia with Gascoigne (as a small boy with father?) and began as fitter and turner at Petrozavodsk: he then participated in creation of the St P state works in 1801 and rose to be its director. Contemporary sources locate Colonel M. E. Clark(e) at the foundry’s head in 1817.
   Google Scholar
• J. Harrison stated in his memoirs that the Alexandrovsky works were formally handed over to him in 1843 by their ‘Director’ Col. Foulon and made no mention of Clark. His letters however refer to social evenings with the Clarks, their cousin(!) Alexander Wilson and the Handysides. Engineer-Major A. A. Foulon rebuilt Kronstadt Citadel 1828–34 and presumably must have joined Clark some time after that.
   Google Scholar
• It is said that in 1864 Russia’s mechanical power totalled a mere 37,000 hp of which only 7 per cent (2600 hp) came from steam (V. V. Danilevskiy, Russkaya tekhnika (L, 1948), p. 80). Steam power gradually crept into the South Urals works but in 1870 the N. Urals works were still almost all water-powered. Barry then gave as examples the Ufimsk and Serginsk groups (S. Central Ural) with 132 waterwheels totalling 3364 hp and eight steam-engines totalling 300 hp; and the Gusevsky (Ryazanprovince) works with 180 waterwheels only. The ‘modern’ Vuiksa complex near Nizhne Novgorod then had seventy-five waterwheels totalling 1200 hp and twenty steam-engines totalling 700 hp. Page 23 gives the first reason why water-power was the basic prime-mover and wood the basic fuel.
   Google Scholar
• E. G. Bowen, John Hughes 1814–1889 (Cardiff, 1978). Hughes introduced largescale coke-smelting and modern rail-rolling machinery, creating (1869–74) the largest ironworks in Russia, fully steam-powered. The Donbas area soon outstripped the Urals where little changed: the latest Urals blast-furnaces in the 1870s (60 ft high, out- put 20 t/day) were still fuelled by birch- wood (see C. Frohlich, ‘The Raschette Blast Furnaces at Nizhne-Tagil’, Proc. ICE, 40 (1874/5), 328–29).
   Google Scholar
• Eighteenth-century Russian iron statistics are crude. I have used here A. Birch, Economic History of the British Iron and Steel Industry (1967, citing Swedish sources); Portal (12); and H. Scrivenor, History of the Iron Trade (1854), although all differ markedly.
   Google Scholar
• L. Beck, Geschichte des Eisens, 2 (Braunschweig, 1893/5), 979–87.
   Google Scholar
• W. E. Minchinton, The British Tinplate Industry, a History (1957).
   Google Scholar
• C. E. Peterson, ‘Iron in Early American Roofs’, Smithsonian J. of History, 3 (1968), 41–76; and D. S. Waite, ‘Roofing Early America’, ch. 8 in C. E. Peterson (ed.), Building Early America (Radnor, Pa., 1976). J. C. Loudon said in 1833 that tinplate roofs were then in universal use in Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• H. Faenson and V. Ivanov, Altrussische Baukunat (Berlin, 1972, trans. as Early Russian Architecture (1975)). For technical words I have preferred the original.
   Google Scholar
• V. I. Baldin, chapter ‘Architecture’ in N. N. Voronin and V. V. Kostochkin (eds), Troitse-Sergieva Lavra (M, 1968), quoting a chronicler of local events from 1513–1640.
   Google Scholar
• Yu. I. Arenkova and G. I. Mekhova, Donskom Monastir (M, 1970), quoting 1678 description.
   Google Scholar
• T. B. Dubyago, Letniy Sad (M-L, 1951). An 1807 drawing by A. E. Martinov shows diagonal plates but a mid-nineteenth-century one by C. Beggrov shows green-painted rectangular plates.
   Google Scholar
• A. Krutetskiy and E. Lundburg, Zodchiy A.N. Voronikhin (Sverdlovsk, 1937), p. 126.
   Google Scholar
• For example Welshman Robert Morris visited Carron 6 June 1774 and noted the mould-drying room with a ‘low circular roof’ and floor, both of iron’ (J. E. Ross, Radical Adventurer (1971), p. 195).
   Google Scholar
• R. Jenkins, ‘The Rise and Progress of Manufacturing Industry in England’, TNS, 7 (1926), 3: he gave no reference but F. Whellan, History &c. of Durham (1894), p. 1094, referred to two iron pans built by Lionel Bell of South Shields in 1489. For cast iron salt-pans in China (dates vague) see J. Needham, The Development of Iron and Steel Technology in China (1964).
   Google Scholar
• Beck, vol. 3, 434–35 cites Polhem (1750s) and Rinman (1772) re Swedish plates and discusses national differences.
   Google Scholar
• I. Grabar, Istoriya Russkago iskusstva, 3 (M, 1910/15), 32–34; and S. P. Luppov, Istoriya stroitelsteva Peterburga v pervoy chetverti, xviii (M-L, 1957), 27–34.
   Google Scholar
• Luppov, pp. 35, 70 (citing Anon., Eigentliche Beschreibung der […] Russischen Residenz-Stadt (St Petersburg, 1718). The Menshikov palace complete with roof was depicted in a 1714 scene of a naval display (the Gangutskiy Triumf) by A. Zubov. The palace has recently been heavily restored (see N. V. Kalyazina, Menshikovskiy dvorets-muzey (L, 1982)). The front balcony has cast iron ribs with diminishing circles in the spandrels but this is thought to date from the early nineteenth century.
   Google Scholar
• Menshikov’s architect in St Petersburg and Oranienbaum was Gottfried Schädel. The Oranienbaum palace (now Lomonosov palace) is currently awaiting restoration.
   Google Scholar
• G. N. Goldovskiy and V. V. Znamenov, Dvorets Monplezir v Nizhnem Parke Petrodvortsa (L, 1976), pp. 11–12.
   Google Scholar
• Portal, p. 67, states that when Hennin was sent to Ekaterinberg he was instructed (29 April 1722) ‘s’occuper en particulier de la fonte de canons et de la fabrication du fer, fer-blanc, et tôles de couverture’.
   Google Scholar
• Voronin and Kostochkin, pp. 58–60. Typically exasperating, this large book with 224 plates has no illustration of the most structurally interesting item and dismisses it in a seven-line note.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, p. 181 (misprints 1764 for 1746).
   Google Scholar
• A. A. Tits and V. V. Belogub, Istoriya arkhitekturi (Kharkov, 1965); plate 29 gives a small sketch from which my Figure 1 is taken) but gives no details in text.
   Google Scholar
• Emperor Paul was much taken with the Darmstadt drill hall (155×230 ft, c. 1771, by Schubknecht) on a visit in the 1780s. Plans for much larger halls were made for him by several architects and engineers in the 1790s. His successor Alexander commissioned others and three still exist in Leningrad in addition to the Mikhailovsky one. The Moscow monster illustrated by Krafft in 1805 (235×1920 ft) was never built but one much the same size as the Mikhailovsky building was erected near the Kremlin (and still stands) by Bétancourt, Carbonier and Beauvais (see A. Bétancourt, Descr. de la salle d’exercice de Moscou (1819). This iron-plated roof was erected in five months in 1817 with thirty-two wooden trusses 18 ft apart. Sagging occurred and in 1819 Bétancourt requested permission to rebuild it with ribs 12 ft apart. It was reported in J. des voies de communication 11 (1828), 11 that this roof (147 ft span) had been replaced some time between 1823 and 1827 but no details were given. In the 1840s Whistler designed a long-span iron roof for a proposed new manège, presumably with Howe trusses, and after his death Harrison unsuccessfully tried to recover his drawings from the authorities on behalf of Whistler’s son.
   Google Scholar
• J. Rondelet, L’art de batir, 6th edn (Paris, 1830), vol. 3, 132–39, 141–43, 191–92. I have not seen the original but used two English versions which differ in details: J. G. Kohl, Russia and the Russians 1842, 2 vols (H. Colburn, 1842–43) and Russia (Chapman & Hall, 1844).
   Google Scholar
• H. Lemonnier, Proces verbaux de l’Academie Royale de l’Architecture, 7 (Paris, 1911–29), 7–9.
   Google Scholar
• J. C. Loudon, letter (8 May) to Monthly Mag., A, 2 (1 July 1818), 491–92. Loudon toured Russia in 1813–14.
   Google Scholar
• W. Reed, Letter (10 August 1831) to Mech. Mag., 11 (21 April 1832), 46 (this was copied into several other journals). Reed was one of a new wave of technologists invited to Russia after Napoleon’s defeat by Alexander: he was manager of the new state paper mills and lapidary works at Peterhof and wrote an interesting series of letters to Mech. Mag. 1829–34 from Peterhof where he died 1835.
   Google Scholar
• Orlov’s spare-no-expense palace at St Petersburg was given a copper roof in the 1770s but Potemkin’s palace was covered in 1784 with green-painted iron.
   Google Scholar
• M. Wallis, Canaletto, the Painter of Warsaw (Warsaw, 1954), pl. 44.
   Google Scholar
• A. B. Granville (pseudonym), St Petersburg, 1 (1828), 402.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, ‘Iron…’ (35), p. 43.
   Google Scholar
• This Robert Morris (‘financier of the revolution’) was not connected with the Robert Morris of n. 40.
   Google Scholar
• F. M. Feldhaus, Die Technik der Vorzeit (Leipzig & Berlin, 1914), p. 244, article ‘Eisendächer’ (citing Journal des Luxus (1786), p. 110 and (1797, sic), p. 283.
   Google Scholar
• Dingler’s Polytechnische Journal, A2 (1832), 471.
   Google Scholar
• H. Schroder, ‘Ueber die Russische Dachbedeckung mit Eisenblech’, Dingler’s Polyt. J., 104 (1847), 172–76 and pl. 3 (from Mannheimer Gewerbvereins-Blatt).
   Google Scholar
• ‘L.B.’ Letter to Monthly Mag., A2 (1 July 1818), 498. He complained that water got through at first: he then increased both the slope and the overlap but ‘after a few years the sun drew the screws which fastened down the plates and I then adapted the roof to slate. I cannot recommend iron roofs at any price’.
   Google Scholar
• T. Botfield, Curved Plates Riveted or Screwed Together Through Flanges to Form Self-Supporting Arched Roofs (British Patent 3246/1809). A letter in Gents. Mag. (March 1811), pp. 228–29, noted that an example existed near Botfield’s home, Hopton Court.
   Google Scholar
• R. J. Tomlinson, Interlocking Plates (British Patent 3750/1813). Tomlinson had become part-owner of the Melingriffith tinplate works in 1808 and, with Bristol roof contractor Wellington, was active in the iron roof business for many years. It was their roof at Brunswick Theatre (see n. 170).
   Google Scholar
• E. Carter, British Patent 5552/1827. 2 ft square ×3/16 inch plates with 2 inch flanges. In Mech. Mag., 8 (8 December 1827), 328–30, it was stated that a factory had been set up at Toll End Furnaces, Staffs.; in Mech. Mag., 17 (23 June 1832), 181–82, Carter claimed that business was flourishing.
   Google Scholar
• S. Lewis, Topog. Dict. of Wales, 2nd edn (1840), article ‘Brecknockshire’, stated that various types of rolled-plate roof, ‘some flat, others curved like common pantiles’ existed there: ‘the spars, side-rasers &c., are also sometimes of iron’.
   Google Scholar
• Official Description & Illustrated Catalogue of the Great Exhibition, 3 (1851), 1365–66 noted roof plates from Nizhne-Turinsk, Nizhne-Isetsk and the Polish state works. H. Barry, Russian Metallurgical Works (1870), pp. 28–31, said that at Verkhne-Isetsk alone 9500 tons of sheets were made annually.
   Google Scholar
• China went straight to cast iron at a very early date without going through a long period of wrought iron development. See Needham, The Development of Iron and Steel — cast iron roof tiles p. 71 and fig. 36; and J. Needham et al., Science and Civilisation in China, 4·3 (1971), civil engineering, ch. 28. Neither of these sources refers to tinning of iron.
   Google Scholar
• Imperial Japanese Government Railways, Official Guide to Eastern Asia, 4 — China (Tokyo, 1915), 175.
   Google Scholar
• B. Rozadeev, Smolniy (L-M, 1958), p. 12, says that their manufacture was arranged in autumn 1750.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, By the Banks of the Thames, p. 26; R. Ransome, British Patent 1392/1783. For scanty notes on Ransom see A. E. Newby, History of Engineering in Ipswich (Ipswich, 1950) and D. R. Grace and D. C. Phillips, Ransomes of Ipswich (Reading, 1975).
   Google Scholar
• R. J. Mainstone, ‘The Structure of the Church of St Sophia Istanbul’, TNS, 38 (1965/6), 23–49. Dr Mainstone tells me that bars spanning the main arcades (columns about 15 ft c-to-c) are about 2 inches square and undoubtedly date from the sixth century although other bars in the church may be tenth century.
   Google Scholar
• R. P. Wilcox, Timber and Iron Reinforcement in Early Buildings (1981).
   Google Scholar
• Numerous good photos are given in Faenson; and V. Kostochkin, Old Russian Towns (M, 1972).
   Google Scholar
• Faenson, pp. 399–405.
   Google Scholar
• S. P. Bartenev, Moskovskiy Kreml v starinu i teper, 1 (M, 1912), figs 219, 220, 233, 248, 258, 281, 323, 330.
   Google Scholar
• I. Vasilev, ‘Drevneishie zheleznie konstruktsii’, Arkhitektura SSSR, 3 (1956), 44–45.
   Google Scholar
• Yu. I. Arenkova and G. Lmekhova, Donskom Monastir (M, 1970).
   Google Scholar
• Yu. Ovsyannikov, Novo-Devichiy Monastir (M, 1968), p. 26: interior photo of refectory — pl. 53.
   Google Scholar
• Voronin and Kostochkin, pp. 49–50. They give no interior view of refectory but see Faenson, pl. 280. An early barrel-roofed refectory with suspended wooden tie-bars exists at Mont St Michel, France (c. 30 ft span, date not known).
   Google Scholar
• B. V. Pavlovskiy, Dekorativno-prikladnoe iskusstvo promishlennogo Urala (M, 1975), p. 23.
   Google Scholar
• V. V. Danilevskiy, Nartov i ‘yasnoe zrelishche mashin’ (M-L, 1958, trans. as Nartov and his Theatrum Machinarum Jerusalem (1966)), p. 89.
   Google Scholar
• On Novodevichy monastery refectory the sign says ‘Open at 17·30’: access to the monastery ceases at 17·30!
   Google Scholar
• T. Bannister, ‘The First Iron-Framed Build- ings’, Architectural Review, 107 (1950), 231–46. Ranelagh rotunda fireplace is shown in Bowles’ print (1754) reproduced in W. Wroth, London Pleasure Gardens of the Eighteenth Century (1896), p. 202, and in H. Phillips, The Thames about 1750 (1951), p. 160.
   Google Scholar
• Such street hearths are illustrated in dozens of early nineteenth-century drawings and prints. The earliest I have seen, dated 1780, shows one outside Petrovsky Theatre, Moscow (reprod. in M. Z. Dolinskiy, Torzhestvo Muz (M, 1979), pp. 9 and 11). For the description from J. Carr, A Northern Summer (1805) see Cross, Russia Under Western Eyes, pp. 275–81.
   Google Scholar
• A. N. Petrov, Pushkin dvortsi i parki (L, 1964, 2nd edn 1969), p. 86 and n. 69. Petrov said this cast iron (sic) pavilion existed when he wrote but did not illustrate it: it is not there now. In 1978 an octagonal iron pavilion was re-erected outside the ‘Cottage’ at Petrodvorets during its restoration but I have found no reference to the origins of this one. In Britain a cast iron octagonal arbour was made at Coalbrookdale for Richard Reynolds (1790s?) and in 1798 Repton proposed one for Plas Newydd, Anglesey.
   Google Scholar
• For these details I am indebted to Mrs Stepanenko who quoted the relevant archival documents to me recently.
   Google Scholar
• Exhibition of architectural drawings and prints at the Shchusev Museum of Architecture’s Donskoy Monastery Annexe, Summer 1981 (no catalogue). The drawing, of which I give a sketch (Figure 2), was merely captioned ‘Moskva. Zdanie Senata v Kremle. Razrez Kruglogo Zala. Arkh. M. Kazakov 1776–1787’.
   Google Scholar
• Alferov et al., Sverdlovsk stroitelstvo i arkhitektura, p. 17 (citing a 1776 manuscript by G. Makhotin).
   Google Scholar
• N. Belekhov and A. Petrov, Ivan Starov (M, 1950), ch. 5 on the Taurida Palace, pp. 81–102.
   Google Scholar
• The first published reference to these columns was apparently H. Storch, Gemglde von Petersburg (Riga, 1794, rev. English edn 1801, neither seen by me); but they were mentioned in a diary entry for 17 November 1792 by J. Parkinson, A Tour of Russia &c. 1792–4 (1971), p. 38. The decoration of metal chimneys and columns as trees goes back at least to Callimachus. The Taurida Palace columns were preceded in the eighteenth century by those in London’s Guildhall and some made in England for a conservatory for the Queen of Naples. Famous later examples are those at Brighton and Alupka palaces.
   Google Scholar
• W. Tooke, Article ‘Inflammation’ in Encyclopaedia Pantologia (1813, from Repertory of Arts).
   Google Scholar
• Presumably food smells would have wafted through into the church and one can imagine the frantic rush when the bell signalled the end of a lengthy service: perhaps Pavlov’s dog experiments were inspired by observation? The designer of Donskoy monastery refectory thoughtfully provided three doors, not one.
   Google Scholar
• Faenson (36), p. 459; (p. 461 in English edn has Schmiedeisen wrongly translated as cast iron).
   Google Scholar
• Ovsyannikov, p. 46 and pls 42, 43.
   Google Scholar
• A. A. Goncharovoy and N. V. Gordeev, Moskovskiy Kreml (M, 1965), pl. 93; and V. N. Ivanov and D. E. Desyatnikov, Pamyatniki Russkoy arkhitekturi i iskusstva XI–XIX vekov (L, 1972), pl. 167.
   Google Scholar
• J. S. Gardner, Ironwork, part 2 (1896) generally ignores Russian work but states (p. 47) that this type, with ‘scrolls beaten into arabesque or organic forms… without collars or rivets, began in the late seventeenth century’. Somewhat similar work appears in Austria and Germany (some optimistically dated back to the Renaissance) but these Russian examples are particularly well made.
   Google Scholar
• Among more individually styled railings were those outside the Pashkov House (now Lenin State Library), Moscow (architect V. Bazhenov, 1784–86): they are well known from engravings but only a vestigial remnant now survives. Following his iron bridges Quarenghi designed wrought iron gates as an addition to Rinaldi’s marble Orlov (or Gatchina) Gate (1777–82) at Tsarskoe Selo. These were forged at Sestro- retsk in 1787 (Raskin, Triumfalnie arki Leningrada, p. 65).
   Google Scholar
• The authorship of these railings has long been disputed. M. F. Korshuuova, Arkhi tektor Yuriy Felten (L, 1982), pp. 12–15 reviews the data but, despite her defence of Felten’s case, it is still possible to doubt. The basic motif appears elsewhere, e.g. at Batashev’s Moscow mansion (c. 1800).
   Google Scholar
• M. Malchenko, Art Objects in Steel by Tula Craftsmen (L, 1974), pls 5–9, 15–30, 65 and 66.
   Google Scholar
• Both are displayed in Moscow Kremlin. The Tsar bell was the last in a series steadily increasing in size. The Tsar cannon is mounted on a bronze carriage bearing Baird’s name and the date 1835. Leningrad artillery museum has a superb collection of cannon, including sixteenth-century bronze ones from unfamiliar N. European foundries. For Russian bronze founding see N. N. Rubtsov, Istoriya liteynogo proizvodstva v SSSR (M-L 1947 and 1962, trans. as History of Foundry Practice in USSR (New Delhi, 1975)).
   Google Scholar
• M. M. Denisova et al., Russkoe oruzhie, xi–xix (M, 1952).
   Google Scholar
• Beck, vol. 2, 1302.
   Google Scholar
• B. V. Pavlovskij, Dekorativno-prikladnoe iskusstvo promishlennogo Urala (M, 1975), p. 24 states that these were Urals castings but notes that they bear on their edges in western characters the letters SNBT and TBNON, a mystery still awaiting solution.
   Google Scholar
• Unfortunately Pavlovskiy illustrates none although he notes delivery of 40 square floor-plates, weighing about 2 tons, to the Mining Board laboratory in 1746.
   Google Scholar
• Luppov, p. 126, reckoned the mains here were probably wooden but Belekhov, n. 86 states that there were two iron main pipes, removed in 1781. The water for these fountains was raised to the header tank by horse-wheels normally but a Desaguliers/Savery steam-pump was installed in 1718 by an enginewright named John Pitly, Petley or Petling from England (‘Ivan Petling’ was still in St P in 1727 and in 1720 designed the first street-lamps there).
   Google Scholar
• Another long conduit was the 10-mile feeder to Tsarskoe Selo from springs at Taitsi (1772–82), which apparently had a 3¾-mile tunnelled section.
   Google Scholar
• N. N. Federova, Petrodvorets (L, 1959) gave a photo of the old Sampson pipes, at least 18 inches diameter. The definitive books on the palace and fountains, A. Raskin, Petrodvorets (M-L, 1959 and L, 1978) ignore the pipes. Only the modern replacements are now to be seen and I was told (1981) that no specimen of the old ones was preserved.
   Google Scholar
• Technical drawings and description were published by the scheme’s Greek proposer, Le Comte Marin Carburi de Ceffalonie, Monument élevé à la gloire de Pierre-le-Grand, ou relation des travaux et des moyens méchaniques qui ont été employés pour transporter à Petersbourg un rocher de trois millions pesant &c. (Paris, 1777). Pictorial views by architect Felten (who was delegated to assist sculptor Falconnet) were engraved by J. van der Schley; these are reproduced by M. F. Korshunova, Dzhakomo Kvarengi (L, 1977); the one showing the rails is also in F. M. Feldhaus, Ruhmesblatter der Technik, 2nd edn (Leipzig, 1924), vol. 1, 202–04 (see the ancient twin-grooved trackways in some Mediterranean countries).
   Google Scholar
• G. N. Germont, Reshetki Leningrada i ego okrestnostei (M, 1938) not seen by me; N. N. Sobolev, Chugunnoe 1ite v Russkoy arkhitekture, 1·1 (1951); and E. N. Bubnov, Ograd uzor chugunniy (Sverdlovsk, 1962).
   Google Scholar
• German literature on historic cast iron is voluminous: for a recent bibliography see E. Schmidt, Der Preussische Eisenkunstguss (Berlin, 1981). To provide an international comparison an exhibition of German cast iron was mounted in Leningrad recently (catalogue: Berlinskoe khudozhestvennoe lite is chuguna pervoy polovini XIX veka (L, 1976)).
   Google Scholar
• The Nevyansk tower, shrouded in sinister legend, gets nearly as much coverage in Russian literature as the Coalbrookdale arch here, but as claims for its ironwork continue to grow so published photos get fuzzier and fuzzier. A recent popular article is L. Shakinko, Legends and Facts about the Nevyansk Tower (Sputnik, June 1982), pp. 60–63.
   Google Scholar
• A. G. Sisco, Réaumur’s Memoirs on Steel and Iron: a Translation from the Original Printed in 1722 (Chicago, 1956), pp. 341, 344, 354.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, vol. 2, 1000–01 stated that A. C. Daviler, Cours d’architecture (Paris, 1691) illustrated cast iron railings. R. Jenkins, ‘The Beginnings of Iron Founding in England’, in Collected Papers (1936), pp. 119–21 quoted an advertisement for cast iron balconies by London founder Stringer dated December 1700. The first famous example of cast iron railings came with Wren’s heavy palings around St Paul’s (1709–20) made by Richard Jones. The Coalbrookdale company began casting railings in the 1720s (after Réaumur?) and architect James Gibbs (1682–1754) became a user about then (J. Gloag and D. Bridgwater, History of Cast Iron in Architecture (1948), pp. 46–48 and 115–16).
   Google Scholar
• Urals expansion gathered momentum after 1721 when licences for new works were freely granted (on payment of 10 per cent profits to state) and unlimited transfer of serf labour was permitted.
   Google Scholar
• Luppov, p. 48.
   Google Scholar
• M. Ilyin et al., Moskva, pamyatniki arkhitekturi XVIII–pervoy treti XIX veka (M, 1975), pl. 55.
   Google Scholar
• Bubnov, fig. 24. I know of no similar western railings but various large gates in somewhat similar style (but probably bronze?) are illustrated in every picture book on Turkey. There is a dearth of literature on Turkish bronze founding and no details or dates have been found.
   Google Scholar
• Needham, The Development of Iron and Steel, pp. 8, 20–21, figs 11, 38. Undated animal figures go back to the Han dynasty (200 bc–ad 200) but Needham’s earliest dated figure is an animal from ad 502: many Buddhas were cast from about that time on (see illustrations in Gloag, pp. 3–5). In W. Europe a few cast iron figurines are known from seventeenth century but the first large cast statues are those from Lauchhammer in the 1780s.
   Google Scholar
• Anna Ivanovna, Duchess of Courland, ruled Russia 1730–40. She made Biron Duke of Courland and gave him control over the Urals and Tula works via a special new company. He brought in a team of German experts to boost production and was somewhat resented by established interests. After Anna’s death Biron was temporarily banished but his experts remained and are reckoned to have been very effective.
   Google Scholar
• The extensive literature on Rastrelli, whose works are world famous, has few references to his cast iron. I am indebted again to A. L. Punin for drawing my attention to his role, providing extracts from Yu. M. Denisov, Arkhitektor F.B. Rastrelli; metodika proektirovanniya i stroitelnaya praktika (L, 1975) and photos of Biron’s palace details.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid. cites archival data on this clash. Illustrations are given in architectural guidebooks on the church by G. Logvin (Kiev, 1959), E. K. (Masko Kiev, 1969), and A. K. Mironenko (Kiev, 1977).
   Google Scholar
• N. Novakovskaya, Palace Ensemble in Kiev (Kiev, 1959) does not refer to the decorative details but her illustrations show possible iron capitals on columns and pilasters.
   Google Scholar
• B. Rozadeev, Smolniy i Tavricheskiy Dvorets (L-M, 1958), p. 12.
   Google Scholar
• On Smolny cathedral are gilded metal cherubs and scrollwork round the domes: Rozadeev states that these final touches, installed 1765–67, were made of fire-gilded beaten copper, but possibly they have cast iron cores. N. Semennikova, Arkhitekturniy ansambl Smolnogo (L, 1980) has good plates but no technical data.
   Google Scholar
• They were used not only for cathedrals such as Kazan (iron bases 1804) and St Isaac’s (bronze bases and capitals 1820s), or palaces such as Yelagin and Mikhailovsky (1820s), but on minor churches and houses. Punin even showed me a small portico (on No. 1 Volkhovsky Lane, c. 1770) with wooden columns on iron bases. There are, of course, gilded bronze bases and capitals in the interiors of the Vatican and the Escurial.
   Google Scholar
• C. Marsden, Palmyra of the North (1942), p. 238 said that Rastrelli’s iron-domed Hermitage pavilion at Tsarskoe Selo originally had cast iron bas-reliefs (c. 1752) although they are now plaster: Petrov, Pushkin dvortsi i parki does not confirm this.
   Google Scholar
• Soviet writers largely accept the iron terrace’s early date although in photos the railings look typically mid-nineteenth century: unfortunately the public is denied access to this building and it is not possible to examine details. The ironwork is more intact in the photo in the 1958 edition of A. N. Petrov et al., Pamyatniki arkhitekturi Leningrada (p. 195) than the 1969 one (p. 240).
   Google Scholar
• Bannister, ‘The First Iron-Framed Buildings’ drew attention to Casanova’s reference and suggested his host was Pavl G. Demidov. For the Demidov family tree see Portal, p. 54.
   Google Scholar
• Pavlovskiy, Dekorativno-prikladnoe iskusstvo promishlennogo Urala gives illustrations and locates the statues on the Slobodsky estate of Nikita N. Demidov. One Slobodsky house in E. Moscow is listed in Ilyin et al., Moskva, pamyatniki arkhitekturi XVIII–pervoy treti XIX veka but without note of statues, nor could I see any there in 1981. Nizhne Tagil, where they were cast, then belonged to N. A. Demidov.
   Google Scholar
• N. Ya. Tikhomirov, Arkhitektura podmoskovnikh usadeb (M, 1955), pp. 108–11; M. Ilyin, Podmoskove (M, 1974), pp. 113–15; and E. N. Podyapolskaya et al., Pamyatniki arkhitekturi moskovskoi oblasti, 2 (M, 1975), 61–64.
   Google Scholar
• Belekhov and Petrov, pp. 48–53. Starov was architect to all three mansions which still exist although their grounds long ago lost all portable items.
   Google Scholar
• P. Decker, Gothic Architecture Decorated, part 1 (1759), pl. 3 ‘Gothic entrance to a moat’. This book has no text nor explanation of Decker’s intentions re materials.
   Google Scholar
• Petrov, Pushkin dvortsi i parki, pp. 86–87; Pavlovskiy, Dekorativno-prikladnoe iskusstvo promishlennogo Urala, p. 29; and notes from Mrs Stepanenko.
   Google Scholar
• A. L. Punin, Arkhitekturnie pamyatniki Peterburg vtoraya polovina, xix (L, 1981), 64–65; and drawings received from Punin. After a fire on 19 May 1845 two alternative designs for new wrought iron roofs for the mill were made by Alexander’s brother Lewis (Lev) Wilson. In one the spans were to be 14 + 28 + 14 ft ‘as existed in cast iron before the fire’, but the other was a single 56 ft span. For Bentham’s Okhta building drawing see Mech. Mag., 50 (31 March 1849), 294–99; I have found no Russian reference to this.
   Google Scholar
• In catalogue of exhibition ‘Petersburg-Petrograd-Leningrad’ (L, 1980), p. 100 is an 1850s view of a ‘steam sawmill’, presumably Baird’s, in the New Admiralty area.
   Google Scholar
• V. I. Pilyavsky, Stasov arkhitektor (L, 1962), pp. 125–27.
   Google Scholar
• S. P. Acosta, El ingeniero A de Bethencourt y Molina (Tenerife, 1958), pp. 46–47; and A. Ciaronescu, Agustin de Bétancourt su obra tecnica y scientifica (Tenerife, 1965), pp. 176–79.
   Google Scholar
• Rossi’s modern biographers M. Z. Taranovskaya, Karl Rossi (L, 1980) and V. I. Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi (L-M, 1951) are singularly uninformative. Petrov, Pushkin dvortsi i parki says there were twenty-two columns. Handyside stated that three of the beams cracked which may explain the early Russian change to wrought-iron beams discussed later.
   Google Scholar
• In 1793 Parkinson, A Tour of Russia noted that iron had been proposed as a cheap alternative for a colonnade planned for Tsarskoe Selo.
   Google Scholar
• Petrov, Pushkin dvortsi i parki, pp. 87 and 129; Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, p. 90; Raskin, Triumfalnie arki Leningrada, pp. 177–80.
   Google Scholar
• Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, p. 153.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid., pp. 154–56. The columns were connected by annular cap and base plates. The earliest iron-clad spire I have noted was on the original St P Admiralty building (erected by ‘roof- and spire-master’ van Boles) in 1719. The first wrought iron-framed spire I have noted was the much publicized one by R. L. Edgeworth at Edgeworthstown, Ireland in 1811. Probably dozens of later iron spires could be traced.
   Google Scholar
• Taranovskaya, p. 157 and Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, p. 36.
   Google Scholar
• S. Makovshy, Dve podmoskovniya knyaza S.M. Golitsina, Starie Godi (January 1910), pp. 24–37. ‘locday Kuzminki is sadly depleted of its once famous ironwork. The propylaeum and the chain bridge have gone, the large griffon-supported lamps at the entrance are missing, the beautiful circular landing-stage with its cast iron lions is a mass of rubble, and the Urals cast iron copies of Klodt’ horses are barricaded up. Only a few of the elegant railings and cast iron lions survive in situ.
   Google Scholar
• Ilyin et al., Moskva, pamyatniki arkhitekturi XVIII–pervoy treti XIX veka, pl. 259 and p. 93 in text vol. This gate is now relocated on Mozhaisky road.
   Google Scholar
• Raskin, Petrodvorets, pl. 225, pp. 98–142.
   Google Scholar
• I. M. Shmidt, Dvortsovaya Ploshchad (L, 1974), pp. 24–28.
   Google Scholar
• C. L. G. Eck, Traite de l’application du fer, de la fonte, et de la tole dans les constructions civiles, industrielles et militaries (Paris, 1841), p. 31 and pls 18–20; Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, pp. 184–88; and Raskin, Triumfalnie arki Leningrada, pp. 182–208.
   Google Scholar
• It is odd that a classical Greek surname appeared in Edinburgh long before it became nicknamed the Athens of the North, and disappointing that no dossier on the family exists in the Central Library there. The most famous was William (1818–82), manager of the great Dowlais Ironworks from 1852 until his death. It would be difficult to conceive two faces more dissimilar than those of Adam and William Menelaus and yet surely they had common roots. I wrote to all of the family in the Edinburgh telephone directory in 1977 (they now call themselves Menelaws to appear more Scottish, and one suggested that they were affiliated to the Laidlaws!) but received only three replies, none shedding light on their origins.
   Google Scholar
• At Gorenki there was a little masonry bridge with Chinaman figures on the parapets: such figures also existed originally on one of Cameron’s masonry Chinese bridges at Tsarskoe Selo.
   Google Scholar
• Menelaus and Stasov worked simultaneously at Tsarskoe Selo, which leads to disputed authorship of some items. Much cast iron work in and around St Petersburg is repeated at different sites and it seems likely that several architects — even the great Rossi — took stock items from founders’ pattern books.
   Google Scholar
• Petrov, Pushkin dvortsi i parki, pp. 87–88.
   Google Scholar
• Other Menelaus buildings at Tsarskoe Selo include the Farm (1818–22), Arsenal (1819–34), Llama House (1820–22), Chapel (1825–28), Elephant House (1828) and Retired Horses’ Stables (1827–29). My thanks to Mrs Stepenskoe for a guided tour in 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Petrov, Pushkin dvortsi i parki, pp. 112–13. Granville, there at the end of 1827, was shown the brick carcass awaiting its ironwork by Menelaus himself. The reliefs, based on Egyptian originals were modelled by Demut-Malinovsky and cast by Clark.
   Google Scholar
• James, pp. 84, 93.
   Google Scholar
• Punin, Arkhitekturnie pamyatniki Peterburg vtoraya polovina, pp. 42–44. He tells me that the church still exists but without its spire. Bryullov also designed St Peter’s church on Nevsky Prospekt (1832–33) which has three galleries on cast iron columns and beams. G. A. Ol, Arkhitector Bryllov (M-L, 1955) also reproduces a design for a wrought iron-framed theatre roof.
   Google Scholar
• M. A. Kozlovskaya in Yu. P. Volchok et al., Konstruktsii i arkhitekturnaya forma v Russkom zodchestve — nachala, xx (M, 1977), 24 states that the dome Vias built ‘without calculations, by intuition’. G. C. Grimm, Arkhitektor Voronikhin (M-L, 1963) has a chapter on the Kazan cathedral but merely says (p. 48) that the metal framework for the cupola was erected in 1809 and gives no details.
   Google Scholar
• Taranovskaya, p. 74. The existing high dome over the building is a twentieth-century addition. Western iron-ribbed domes include the Halle aux Bles, Paris (1811), Brighton Pavilion (1818), Mainz Cathedral West Choir (1827) and of course numerous conservatories.
   Google Scholar
• Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, pp. 202–09 states that Stasov’s dome ribs had horizontal ties and that the span was c. 20 m (66 ft). Eck, Traite de l’application du fer said that Bazaine’s dome span was 87 ft.
   Google Scholar
• A. Ricard de Montfernand, Eglise cathédral de Saint Isaac (St P and Paris, 1845). An abstract of this was presented to the RIBA by T. L. Donaldson (see Civil Engineer & Architectural J., 12 (January 1849), 9–12)). Lame and Clapeyron published calculations which they had made for the dome as first planned (1823) but, according to G. F. Butikov and G. A. Khvostova, Isaakievsky sobor (L, 1979), definitive calculations were by P. K. Lomnovsky. A large model of the dome is displayed in the cathedral. Montfernand praised Handyside, Baird’s ‘premier ingénieur méchanicien’, as a ‘practicien consommé’.
   Google Scholar
• Alferov et al., Sverdlovsk stroitelstvo i arkhitektura illustrates tie-less roofs at Nizhne Saldinsky (fig. 13), Kuvinsky (figs 44z, 85a) and Chernoistochinsky works (fig. 46); and roofs with ties at Artinsky (fig. 85), Kishtimsky (fig. 44d), Rezhevsky (figs 31, 44i) and Verkhne-Saldinsky (fig. 44b) works. Eck, Traite de l’application du fer, illustrated such a roof at Goroblagodats (pl. 42) and said (pp. 55–56) that another existed at Nizhne Tagil.
   Google Scholar
• Eck, p. 56 and pl. 43.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid., pp. 54–55 and pl. 41 (Kolpino roof). For Alexandrovsky flax-mill roof see n. 138.
   Google Scholar
• Alferov et al., Sverdlovsk stroitelstvo i arkhitektura, pp. 31, 142 and figs 44k, 59 and 85g (Votkinsky) and figs 44b, 85b (Dobryansky).
   Google Scholar
• Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, p. 162.
   Google Scholar
• Eck, pl. 46 gave detailed elevation. Recent accounts are in Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, pp. 105–30 and Taranovskaya, pp. 145–46. The committee included engineers Bazaine, Carbonier and Operman, who were also on the St Isaacs committee; Bazaine presented alternative proposals but they were rejected. In defence of the emperor’s fears it will be recalled that a much-publicized collapse of a wrought iron roof had occurred two years earlier (Brunswick Theatre, London) with heavy loss of life.
   Google Scholar
• de Montfernand, p. 37 and pls 20, 27. This spare-no-expense roof was covered with copper plates 9 ft×3½ ft×2½ lines thick.
   Google Scholar
• A. L. Punin, Arkhitekturnie pamyatniki Peterburg vtoraya polovina, xix (L, 1981), 66.
   Google Scholar
• C. Polonceau, ‘Notice sur un nouveau système de charpente en bois et en fer’ (he proposed wooden rafters), Rev. Gen. de l’Archit., 1 (1840), 27–32, pl. 2. (Jean Barthélemy) Camille Polonceau (1813–59) was son of the better known A. R. Polonceau. French historians state that he first exhibited his roof system at 1837 Paris Exposition: the form had already been used in ‘roofs at that time in Britain and multi-panelled versions had been discussed in print. See also S. M. Holzer, ‘The Polonceau Roof and its Analysis’, HET, 80 (2010), 22–54.
   Google Scholar
• Alferovet al., Sverdlovsk stroitelstvo i arkhitektura, pp. 141–42, figs 441 and 87.
   Google Scholar
• Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, pp. 219–20.
   Google Scholar
• A contemporary 62 pp. illustrated description was published: N. I. Olkhovskiy, isanie zheleznik balol stropil ustroennikh v Zimnem dvortse pri vozobnovlenii ego (St P, 1839), but I have not seen it: presumably Eck, pls 37–40 and pp. 47–53, drew on this. Other illustrations are in Pilyavskiy, Zodchiy Rossi, pp. 217–20. Compare the parallel-chord trusses with Débia’s earlier proposal (TNS, 52 (1980/1), 77, fig. 62).
   Google Scholar
• Eck, pl. 38 (also reproduced in J. M. Sutherland, ‘British Contributions to Structural Iron Concrete’, ch. 6 in Peterson, Building… (35). These tubular beams were used over several apartments including the Little Chapel, Fieldmarshal’s Hall and the Ceremonial Staircase. Stasov also proposed in 1839 to use similar beams as the lower chords of large triangular roof trusses for the neighbouring art gallery but his designs were not accepted.
   Google Scholar