SCOTTISH 2

PHOTOGRAPHY

BULLETIN 1990

Special Issue in Honour of Murray Johnston

In November 1984, at the commencement of a Carnegie Trust Fellowship, I was invited to lecture at the
National Library of Scotland. Although the chief thrust of that talk, "The Meaning of a Photograph; a
Leaf from a James Nasmyth Album," was the interpretation of photographic archival resources, Murray
Johnston was intrigued by the enigma presented by my main example. In the absence of a fonnal text,
the following is a recall of the example presented in that lecture (the question posed, by the way, remains
very much open).

THE FIRST PHOTOGRAPH JAMES NASMYTH EVER SAW

LARRY J. SCHAAF

Fig.8. P-G. Froment. Paris Rooftops, detail. Trustees of the National Library of Scolland.

A most interesting example of early photography is
preserved in one of the National Library of
Scotland's James Nasmyth albums (Fig. 9). It is a
somewhat enfeebled but clearly defined positive
photograph on an irregular scrap of plain paper
roughly 120mm square. This image of unidentified
Parisian rooftops is bluish against a yellow-tinged
background. The most intriguing aspect of it is the
pencil inscription in James Nasmyth's hand written
in the sky area:
The First Photo I ever saw. 1835 taken by G.
Froment at Paris
Photography was first announced to the public at
toe start of 1839, almost simultaneously in Paris by
Louis Jacques Mande Daguerre. and in Britain by
William Henry Fox Talbot. The announcements
created quite a stir and within days many persons
on both sides of the Channel were actively engaged
in discovering new processes. I do not propose to
digress into the pre-history of photography here
except to say that 1839 was the magic year for
inspiration, not for technological breakthroughs.
The camera was well-known as a drawing
instrument for centuries before this, and various
chemical processes that could be applied to caprure
an image permeated eighteenth- and early
nineteenth- century literature. Simply put, there is
no basis for doubting tbe existence of an 1835
photograph on technical grounds alone.
However, the year 1839 is so well established as
the public birthday of photography that one is
inclined to dismiss stich claims (and they are not
uncommon) out of hand. In addition to lts
contradiction of accepted history, there .are other
factors that weigh against the accuracy of tbe
identification of this photograph. The physical
structure of tbe album has been disturbed and, most
suspiciously, tbe date of 1835 has obviously been
added to the inscription. It may not even be in
Nasmyth's hand. l Yet, there are aspects of this
particular artifact that beg to be examined more
closely, attributes that' defend the possibility that
tbis object is what it claims to be. Even if it is not,
this photograph is tbe only known early example by
an independent inventor of photography. It also
establishes an early link between the photographic
communities of Britain and France.
The provenance of the two NLS James Nasmyth
albums seemingly offers few clues. They were
purchased in March 1945 in London at a Hodgson
& Company auction; this was a "Red Cross Sale,
sold on behalf of the Duke of Gloucester's Red
Cross and St. John's Fund." The Library'S
1944/45 Catalogue No.5 describes these as
No. 279. Nasmyth (James - Engineer,
1808-90). A collection of small original
pen and ink and pencil sketches, mostly
topographical subjects, with some of
mechanical and astronomical interest,
many signed and dated, with brief
descriptions; also a few by Alexander
Nasmyth (1758-1840) and his son Patrick,
laid down on brittle brown paper, in
portfolio.

15
 s
c

Ii
bl
B
hi
m
en
AI
ffii
Na
art:
dra
tim
Bril
MllJ
the
stea
key

Earll
in So
the
Ma~
man
Some]
activi
he ev.
later?
Guara
Was 01
Dague
nearly
British
SciencE
displa
meetin I
impmb'
evidenc.
Fig.9. P-G. Froment, Paris Rooftops, posilive print, 71835. Truslees oflhe Narional Library of Scotland.
photogI'.
The wbritUe brown paper" had to go, so at some 1885. As one would expect, aU of tb.e photogr.
Joseph ~
unrecorded point the portfolio was reassembled by photographs, including some very early ones, are
the Library into two albums - presumably carefulJ y, in the second volume. All that is, except folio 214,
Perhaps
but of course this always carries with it the the Froment, which is stationed in the first volume
potential of confusion or the possible kindly photogI'
on the page just before an item dated 6 May 1835.
intercession of "good deeds." No record of the It seems unlikely that a post-war manuscript CundelJ
original collation has been traced; mostly likely it librarian would casually scribble a suggested date included
set at least the general pattern for the present on the face of a print, and in such close proximity with the
arrangement, which is strictly chronological. to an original caption. Since all the other SCOtland,
Calotype
MSS3241 covers the period from 1811 to August photographs are carefully situated in tbeir proper
1838 aDd MSS3242 covers from December 1838 to instructio
place, it seems to me that the mind of a librarian

16
 would have sought consistency, and would have
placed Froment with the others. That is, the
librarian would have unless Nasmyth himself had
signaned otherwise, either in his manuscript
caption, or in his original collation.
James Nasmyth was a highly inventive engineer,
born in Scotland, but mostly active in Lancashire.
His fertile mind was a rich store of details, making
his otherwise self-congratulatory autobiography a
marvellous window on society and on the
emergence of industrial Britain. 3 His father,
Alexander, was an important artist in Scotland and
much of his talent was carried to the son. James
Nasmyth had interests in etching and other graphic
arts; an example of one of his camera obscura
drawings is included in the NLS album. By tbe
time of the introduction of photography, his
Bridgewater Foundry at Patricroft, near
Manchester, was well situated to take advantage of
the railway revolution. Nasmyth's invention of the
steam hammer in November 1839 was one of the
key contributions to industrial development.
Early photographic activity was particularly intense
in Scotland and there were important links between
the photographic enclaves in Edinburgh and
Manchester. Could a gregarious, artistic, scientific
man with interests as diverse as Nasmyth's
somehow have totally missed all signs of such
activity, so much so that the first phofograph that
he ever saw was done at the end of 1839 or even
later? And then by a foreigner? The Manchester
Guardian (which Nasmyth almost certainly read)
was one of the first British newspapers to report on
Daguerre's discovery, on 19 January. 4 Nasmyth
nearly always attended the annual meetings of the
British Association for the Advancement of
Science. Could he have overlooked Henry Talbot's
display of scores of photographs at the Birmingham
meeting in August 1839? This seems most
improbable, especially when we consider the
evidence of the interest Nasmyth soon took in
photography. He had direct connections with
photographic pioneers such as Sir John Herschel,
the Joseph Sidebotham, and Charles Piazzi Smyth.
are
214, Perhaps the most important of Nasmyth's
ume photographic contacts was with George Smith
835. Cundell (1798-1882), two portrai ts of whom are
;;ript included in the album. Cundell had close contacts
date with the emerging photographic community in
;mity
Scotland, and his 1844 explanation of Talbot's
lther Calotype was the first really clear set of practical
'oper instructions in photography available to the
anan
17
amateur. 5 Nasmytb remembered that
among my most intelligent private friends
in London were George Cuodell and his
two brothers. George was agent for Mr.
Patrick Maxwell Stuart, in connection with
his West Indies estates... My special
friend, George was known among us as
"the worthy master". He was thoroughly
versed in general science, and... he had
the most happy faculty of treating complex
subjects, both in science and politics, in a
thoroughJy common-sense ;manner. His
two brothers had a ftne feeling for art, and
indeed, possessed no small skills as
practical artists. With companions such as
these, T spent many of my Saturday
evenings most pleasantly and profitably.
They were generally concluded with a
glass of beer of tbe "the worthy master's'
own brewing. 6
Nasmytb's albums were apparently assembled in
the last years of his life - a time when memories
typically begin to pleasantly blend. However, it
seems impossible that a scientific man with so
many personal associations with the photographic
art could have been wildly imprecise about his first
encounter with the new art. I think, on the
strength of James Nasmyth's personality, that we
must accept that this photograph was by Froment
aod was the first one that Nasmyth ever saw. It
could not possibly date later tban 1839. Was it
made as early as 1835? When we examine the
character of the photographer, this earlier dating
seems less improbable.
Paul-Gustave Froment, the son of a watchmaker,
was born in Paris in 1815 and entered the Ecole
Po]ytechnique [the Military Academy of Artillery
and Engineering] in 1835. In 1837, keenly feeling
the inadequacy of bis training, Froment made the
pilgrimage to England to study her great
mecbanical workshOps. Returning to France
sometime near the end of 1839, he soon established
his own workshop dedicated to the construction of
precision instruments (Fig. 10). Coming on the
heels of the turmoil of the Napoleonic years, the
period from about 1840 to 1870 was the golden age
of French instrument making.' Froment's career
coincided with tbe period in which the Parisian
instrument makers were unquestionably the finest in
the world, and Gustave Froment was one of the
leaders. By -1855, Charles Wheatstone felt
confident in recommending him as the "most able
Fig.lO. Part of Fizeau's device for measuring the velocity of light, made by pG. Fromenl, c.1865. T",stces of the Nlllional Museums
of Scotland.

mechanician in Paris. ,,~ the first to employ an electric motor in an industrial

application. Froment's ruling machine worked to
Around 1843, Frornent was involved in perfecting such a level of precision that it could scribe 25,000
the electric telegraph. In 1844 his workshop was lines per inch. At this microscopic level, however,

18

 vibrations from tbe commerce of the street were
sufficient to confuse the pattern. Fromeot powered.
his engraving machine with an electric motor (of
his own design) connected to a clock mechanism
which started. it working in the dead of night. In
the morning, as traffic was building up, the
precision work had already been completed. by his
automated. electric factory. F roment received a
medal at the Great Exhibition after he presented an
elaborately engraved glass medallion to Prince
Albert - it was only 1/30 of an inch in diameter and
had to be viewed under a microscope! Froment
was a recipient of the Legion of Honour and built
the instruments for Leon Foucault's experiments on
the rotation of the earth. Yet, he sought no
personal fame, so much so that Dionysius Lardner
was led 10 exclaim after seeing Froment's display
at the Great Exhibition that "never was presented a
more conspicuous example of modest reserve on
the part of artistic genius the most exalted. "9
When Froment died in 1865, the aerial photography
pioneer, Colonel Aime Laussedat. wrote the most
extensive and illuminating obituary of his friend.
Laussedat had difficulty fmding enough room to
enumerate the various inventive and scientific
accomplishments of bis respected colleague. Still,
he could not resist an important diversion:
The second testimony which T can supply
is much more extraordinary, but the fact is
undeniable, and I should not pass it in
silence. Froment touched on the
discovery of photography.
When a great invention, like the one of
which I speak, has become part of the
concern of the public, it is rather usual to
hear people say that it was already Imown,
that it had been done much earlier, etc.
Has it not been claimed that the process of
Daguerre had been rediscovered in the
manuscripts of the Monks of Mount
Athos, and does Fenelon not speak
somewhere in his charming fables, without
believing in the truth of it, of portraits
obtained by making people look into
certain mirrors?
1useums Others, adopting the diametricalty opposite
opinion, willingly believe that the inventor
did everything, discovered everything, as
lustrial if it were not enough to have known how
:ked to to remove the difficulties which were
25,000 thought to be insurmountable up to then.
wever,
19
With respect to photography (and in spite
of assertions to the contrary by an
illustrious physicist Sir David Brewster),
Niepce and Thtguerre undoubtedly share
this glory; but the problem had already
been stated and could oot fail to be
resolved before long. Frament was at that
time one of those more actively engaged
in this problem, and once put on the path,
with his perseverance and his customary
ingenuity, no one will question that he was
capable of arriving at it first. Here,
furthermore, are some facts which are
authentic.
Some time after he left the Polytechnic,
our friend had gone to England with the
goal of studying the workings of English
industrial society. During his spare time,
and principally on Sundays, a day so
difficult to spend among our neighbours,
he would repeat physics and .chemistry
experiments, and used to construct
ordinary and solar microscopes, and in the
same way that he bad wanted to put in
motion machine drawings, he had the
greatest desire to preserve or fix the
fugitive images projected on his screen.
The properties of the salts of silver, which
he had heard about from M. Dumas, had
been very striking to him; he had
reproduced those impressions of lace, of
delicate leaves, of wings of insects laid on
some paper covered with silver chloride,
which one employs for demonstrating the
rapid action of light on this substance. He
had even fixed them, but there' was yet a
great distance between that and obtaining
the aerial images of the camera obscura.
Nevertheless, Fromeot attempted the
breakthrough, and, on 9 January 1839, he
communicated the results, as yet
unfinished no doubt, but already very
remarkable, of his researches on the
subject to the Manchester Philosophical
Society.10
No published record of such a presentation has
been traced. Unfortunately, the archives of the
Manchester Philosophical Society suffered a direct
hit during World War II and were largely
destroyed. It would seem to be almost too much of
a coincidence for Froment to have decided to
disclose his process just three days after Daguerre
did so in Paris, and before the news appeared in
any of the British journals. Had he received a
private communication that goaded him into action?
One would expect that any fonnal presentation to
the distinguished Manchester L.it. & Phil. would
have been noted in some form. Was Laussedat
perhaps slightly off in his details, but still revealing
an essentiaUy true memory? The Manchester
Mechanics' Institute, for example, was hosting a
very ambitious and diverse exbibitionat the start of
1839. On 9 January, tbey had a special free day
for subscribers. Was this Froment's impromptu
forum in response to word of Daguerre? If so,
there might not be a public record of it.
Laussedat continued in Froment's obituary:
It was onJy in the month of October of the
same year that the process of Daguerre
was made public. Froment was then back
in Paris; he attended the meeting of the
Academy of Sciences, where Arago
described the process; without waiting for
the conclusion of the explanations by the
illustrious perpetual secretary, he ran to
his house, rue du Bouloi, and all gasping,
despite the light which was weakening, he
obtained tbat same evening a trial plate.
It is therefore very probable, one could
even say certain, that our friend was the
first to repeat the experiment which has
since then become so popular, although at
that time it seemed quite difficult to
achieve successfully.
To tell the truth, before gomg to the
meeting at the Academy, Froment had
prepared everything. The camera obscura
and the very ingredients which he could
foresee needing were made really. But is
this not precisely the best proof that the
shrewd operator was himsel f on the verge
of reaching the same goal?
Laussedat, remembering back more than twenty
five years, was wrong about the month of
Daguerre's first disclosure. The process was
revealed by Fran~ois Arago at the Institut de
France on 19 August to a wildly enthusiastic and
overflowing crowd at a joint session of the
Academies des Sciences and des Beaux-Arts.
Reactions such as the one ascribed to Fromellt were
widely reported. But Fromenl's work went beyond
merely repeating the direct positive process of
Daguerre. At the end of 1839, Baron Seguier
20
included him in the short list of those who, like
Talbot, had invented negative/positive processes. II
Laussedat indulged himself with a solitary anecdote
in Froment's obituary; as it happens, this provides
an important clue:
If I were not afraid of giving this notice
an anecdotal character, when I still have
so many important things to say, I would
show Froment in the midst of the English
family at whose home he was living in
Manchester, spending his evenings
making, for the children of the hosts, with
scraps of sheet iron and copper, delightful
small locomotives which ran on wire rails
fixed to the floor, and which imitated in
all respects the great machines which
performed the daily journey to
Birmingham, and which came forth from
tbe workshop which Froment was
observing. I have other analogous stories
to add to the fooner, but I must relinquish
the pleasure of telling them in order to
return to the serious aspects of our
colleague's career.
Fig. 11
At the dawn of photography, the rail line from calolYl
Manchester to Birmingham was the ambitious
appre
Grand Junction Railway, a line with a prevailing
HenI]
gradient four times as steep as that of the one
running to London. It provided a supreme
challenge to iron horses and to engineering skill.
~a:~
Eng}]
Of the twelve firms that had supplied tbe sixty-four
Stephc
locomotives to the Grand Juoction by 1840, only
recalh
one, Sharp, Roberts & Company, was based in
Manchester. 12 The inventive genius of the firm,
the person to whom Froment would most likely
have been attracted, was Richard Roberts (1789
1864), a Welsh-born inventor whose influence was
felt in many fields. Textiles, of course, were a
mainstay of the British economy. Roberts'
maduoes fabricated the reeds for looms and his
most famous invention, his 1825 Self-Acting Mule,
was a cornerstone of the Manchester cotton mills.
His planing machine, an important invention in
itself, was used by his own finn to make diverse
products, including precision iron billiard tables.
Roberts was also one of the pioneers of railway
construction. Hi s 1845 electro-magnet was the
most powerful in the world. 1J He lectured at tbe
Just siJ
Manchester Mechanics' Institute and had frequent
establis.li
commerce with colleagues in France.
of Shal]
these t~
Tn the autumn of 1830, James Nasmyth was an
same ma
 Let us speculate further. Let us assume that
Froment did make experimentfll photographs during
his student years in Paris. He might well have
brought along examples when he went to England
(as Niepce had done a decade before). Assuming
Roberts is the engineer with whom Froment Stflyed
from 1837, is it oat it likely that Frament would
have met Nasmyth through him and perhaps
showed him these examples? Perhaps this was a
gift in 1839, after the public announcement, but of
a photograph made years before.

Gustave Frament. the maker of this print. was an

exceptional person - be was creative and inventive
.[ and ahead of his time in many ways. He was
s credited in late 1839 with being an independent
n inventor of pbotography. All of this points towards
b. the type of individual who could have and might
o well have invented a photograph ic process by 1835.
n F roment also shunned personal fame and in 1839
IS
was just lauDching a career in another field, a
career that would prove to be highly successful.
;h Virtually everyone was amazed by the "magic
to mirrors" of Daguerre. In these personal and public
ur circumstances, it seems quite understandable that
Froment would choose not to press an independent
Fig.ll. D.O. Hill and Robert Adamson, James Nasmylh, claim.
ca.Jotype, 1843-1846. Scottish National Portrait Gallcry . .

We might expect that Richard Roberts, the likely

apprentice in the famous engineering works of
ng intennediary between Froroent and Nasmyth, would
Henry Maudsley in London. When his master had
IDe have raised a defence ofFroment. After all, it was
to travel to the Continent on business, the young
me Franz Bauer in England who reminded France of
Nasmytb took a month off for his own journey into
ill. Daguerre's deceased partner, Joseph Nicephore
Eogland's industrial heartland. After seeing
:Jur Niepce, when he was initially overlooked in 1839.
Stephenson's Rocket in its trial runs, Nasmyth
nly Roberts might have been expected to have played
recalled that his guide
in a similar role for Froment. However, by 1839, he
(111,
would have been distracted by personal problems.
at once proceeded to take me to tbe
:ely Roberts was becoming increasingly estranged from
extensive machine factory of Messrs.
89 his firm, leaving it soon afterwards. A better
Sharp, Roberts, & Co... Mr. Roberts, an
was inventor than capitalist, tbis brilliant man was to
admirable mechanic as well as an
'e a die in poverty,'S
inventor, had derived many of his ideas on
~rts' the subject while working with Mr.
his James Nasmyth, the recipient of this print. was an
Maudsley in London, and he had carried
'ule, exceptional witness. He was a scientific person
thero out with many additions and
~lls. who kept detailed records. He was personally
improvements. Indeed, Roberts was one
n in acquainted with many of the pioneers of
of the most capable men of his lime, and
'erse photography. Something exceptional must have
is entitled to be regarded as one of the
)les. happened, whetber it happened in 1835 or later, for
true pioneers of modem mechanical
lway him to claim tbis particular item as the "first {'hOlO
mechanism. 14
the 1 ever saw".
t the Just six years after this meeting, Nasmyth
luent It is often by studying the exceptions that we are
established his Bridgewater Foundry near the works
able to establish the fundamental truths about a
of Sharp, Roberts & Company. Is it not likely that
field, especially a field so young as is the history of
these two masters of their field, both pupils of the
IS an photography. At the minimum, this photograph is
same man, would have maintflined regular contact?

21
the only known survivor of Froment's early work.
I t establishes Nasmyth' s initial contact with the new
art. It provides a clue of a link between Britain
and France. And, just perhaps, it will some day
prove to be one of the earliest photographs known.
Notes and references
1. Since giving this lecture, I have published some
others that explore aspects of the prehistory of
photography: "The First Fifty Years of British
Photography: 1794-1844", Technology and Art;
the Birth and Early Years of Photography, edited
by Michael Pritchard (Bath: Royal Photographic
Society Historical Group, 1990), pp. 9-18;
"L'Amour de la Lu rni he: Herschel, Talbot, et la
Photographie" , us Multiples lnventiOfiS de La
Photographie (paris: Association Fran~ise Pour La
Diffusion du Patrimoine Photographique, 1989), pp
115-124; "Niepce i.n 1827 England\ Proceedings
& Papers, Symposium 1985 (Bradford: European
Society for the History of Photography and the
National Museum of Photography, 1988), pp. 112
121.
2. It does appear to be a nineteenth-century
inscription, however, and the number eight
shaped in the same fashion as Nasmyth's.
3. James Nasmyth, Autobiography, edited by
Samuel Smiles (New York: Harper & Brothers,
1883).
4. "New Method of Taking Views from Nature
Manchester Guardian, v.19 n.l047, 19 January
1839.
5. George Smith Cundel1, WOn the practice of the
Calotype Process of Photography" London,
Edinburgh and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and
Journal of Science, 3rd series, v.24 n.160, May
1844, pp. 321-332. The fourteen calotypes Cundell
made to illustrate this paper survived in the British
Museum until at least 1870, but all recent efforts to
trace them have been to no avail. See John
Hungerford Pollen, The First Proofs of the
Universal Catalogue of Books on Art (London:
Chapman and Hall, 1870). Substantial collections
of Cundell's work survive in the George Eastman
House, the Gemsheim Collection at the University
of Tex.as, and in the Edinburgh Central Library.
6. Nasmyth, Autobiography, pp 155-6.
7. For the context in which Froment flourisbed, see
1. rayen, "La Construction des Instruments
Scientifiques en France au XIXe Siecle" ,
Nineteenth-Cefltury Scientific Instruments and their
Makers, edited by P.R. de Clercq (Amsterdam:
Rodopi, 1985), pp. 159-182.
8. Letter to Mr Brookes, 22 April 1855. Archives
of the Wellcome Institute Library.
9. D. Lardner, The Great Exhibition and LOlldo1l in
1851 (Londou: Longman, Brown, Green, and
Longmans, 1852), pp. 423-439. Dr Lardner's
review is an important source of information on the
workings of Froment's Paris operation.
10. Translated from the original French. Aim6
Laussedat, "Notice sur les tTavaux de Gustave
Froment, Iue dans la seance du 3 juin 1865 de 1a
Societe philomathique de Paris", L 'Institut, Journal
Universel des Sciences, v.33 n. 1644,5 July 1865,
1S pp. 209-220. Other biographical notices appear in
several of the standard French and scientific
biographical dictionaries.
11. M. le baron Seguier, "Rapport sur la
proposition de divers prix pOUf Ie perfectionnemenl
de la photographie," Bulletin de ta Societe
W
, d 'Encouragement pour L 'industrie Nationale, v.28,
December 1839, p. 481.
12. Francis Whishaw, The Railways of Great
Britain and Ireland (London: Simpkin, Marshall,
and Co., 1840), pp. 124-5; Appendix VI.
13. Samuel Smiles, Industrial Biography; Iron
Workers and Tool Makers (London: John Murray,
1863), pp. 264-273.
14. Nasmyth, Autobiography, p.162.
15. See the entry in the Dictionary of National
Biography.
22