Lion: Mistaken Identity? 

I’m not surprised. I’ve experienced it myself. An ancient wagon sat outside a scrapyard in Fife. All the experts were convinced it was the only survivor of the Fordell Railway. ( 4ft 6inch gauge ) A crane and lorry were arranged to rescue it. The crane broke down and a worker from the scrapyard came out to see what was going on and said he remembered the wagon coming from WPR ( standard gauge ) everyone thought he was talking rubbish until someone produced a tape measure and and the wagon turned out to be standard gauge. Lol. All the embarrassed experts got in their cars and sped off and the wagon abandoned.

The one thing I take away from your excellent video is that there are people, like yourself Anthony, who do not just accept as given what we are told is fact/history. But have the confidence and skills to do the spade work, present us with the results and then allow us to come to our own conclusions. Thank you Sir.

Seems to me that the story breaks up as follows: Evidence for this locomotive being Lion: possibly faulty recollections of an old codger, possibly dodgy research by an early luminary of railway history. Evidence that this isn't Lion: everything else...

This is why I love railways and history- we are always discovering more and hypothesizing! To be honest we are just lucky to have it!

i was thinking 17 new heads and 14 new handles until near the end when it seems that it wasnt trigger's broom after all.

Excellent video! Memory is a fickle thing: When we briefly had a demo line going at Coed y Parc, Penrhyn Quarry Railway, we had an 0-4-0VBT visit with the general appearance of a DeWinton loco', of which the PQR had at one time owned several. Yet 'Iorwerth' was actually nearly half the size of a real DeWinton, had a chain drive from a single cylinder from a steam-launch (or similar) not two cylinders working a cranked axle, and had been built in the owner's garage just two years prior to its first visit from oddments and named after ex-PQR engineman Iorwerth Watkin Jones who donated the tiny vertical boiler to the project (originally used in a bakery, in nearby Bangor, to relife stale bread by steaming it in the oven!)... Anyhow, on 'Iorwerth's first visit to the demonstration line, a little old lady _insisted_ she remembered _this exact_ locomotive running there 80years prior, and refused to believe the owner telling her he'd built it in his garage from oddments!

Fantastic video. What ever loco it is, it has a rich history, as an original, rebuilt, replica and as a film star. As a graphic designer and love of visual history, I’d love to see an historical animation of all the components of the original Lion, turning into the loved loco of today. Maybe a project in the making. 😉

I absolutely adore the idea of mystery concerning the origins of the locomotive acclaimed as Lion. The 1840s and 1850s were a fascinating period of British rail history and I love the notion of a series of mishaps leading historians to believe the Lion we have as the original.

Seeing the lead wheel and crank axel wheel having a different amount of spokes pointed out I can't unsee it and it annoys me greatly, AMAZING VIDEO AS ALWAYS! I love a good railroad mystery

This reminds me of the question regarding Dolgoch and Talylln's identity from their extensive rebuilds that followed the purchase of the Talyllyn railway for preservation. I think, whether or not this engine is infact Lion, that's nearly a more exciting aspect of herself. Also I think the opportunity to have a newbuild of how Lion would have looked in 1830s condition vs the Manchester & Birmingham 0-4-2 is a prospect many are ignoring 😁. (Or might be my delusions to want more Era 1 newbuilds. Twin Sisters is high on my list) Also, the mention of the Bird class reminded me of reading in your book on the L&MRs locomotives and I must admit I did laugh out loud at the classmate named 'Bat'. One of these things was not like the other

I noticed when taking close-up pics of several locos in preservation, that a loco is primarily a name/number plate. When you look at the numbers stamped on a lot of the parts, many come from different locos. For example, S&DR No.88 tender has 4 different types of axle-boxes, and wheels of different spoke profiles to each wheelset. The general enthusiast sees an 'original' steam loco: The 'Rivet-counter', (Moi 🤪), sees a giant Meccano set.

This rather reminds me of the Titanic 'switch' theories that were popular about 20 years ago in that... At the end of the day it didn't matter which ship actually sank that night, what mattered was the story of 1500 people dying. Similarly... It doesn't matter if it's really a locomotive originally named Lion, or just some other locomotive - almost everything that made this loco iconic happened after any such switch happened anyway.

fantastic video as always but may I put forward the thought that all the talk of "original material" in my opinion does not really matter. When we talk of pre-1860's locomotives, most of the time the original material has long since been lost to history. What matters most is that the restorations of the locomotives are faithful to what they are. That the replicas as well as the original engines don't retain all 100% original components, but components that make it look like how it was when in service. By that logic, the Lion we have today is not Lion to me. She is culturally and historically significant and a wonderful locomtoive, but like you are annoyed by, the Restoration that was done was not faithful to the original L&MR locomotive she once was. Sure the evidence of the larger cylinders, spare boiler, and everything do give credence to the theory that she is not Lion, but I also think that she might be Lion, just having gone through the most trying time for locomotives, when the majority were rebuilt heavily, lost to history, or stripped down so much, that a lot of as built material is nonexistent. Hopefully this all makes sense

At the end does it really matter that an early steamlocomotive survived the odds and was preserved under the wrong name? The most important part is that engine X from the 1840's is still with us. She is just an engine called Lion. She is nearing here bicentenial age in the 2040's thats a very big achievement. Also Engine X has been called Lion longer now then what she original was named/numbered from the start.

Putting the cats among the pigeons this month, are we Anthony? An excellent and informative video nonetheless.

It is an 1840's locomotive, whatever modifications it may have had since then. Surely that is enough for us to appreciate the technology of the period? Does its name matter?

Golly, what a marvellous set of responses to a very detailed piece of research. The big problem with many surviving old engines is the number of repairs, rebuilds and general maintenace they went through, particularly if it wasn't very well recorded. Somebody mentioned the General and the Texas, which are a good example. General was later blown up; both survived regauging (possibly by shifting the tyres on the wheels centres), conversion to coal burning and a very long active life. How much of the original engines is incorporated in them now is a moot point. Something must have happened at some point to require this engine's leading wheels replacing - probably with a spare set that were handy. We've all seen photos of wagons with spoked wheels at one end, discs at the other (the repair shop used what was available) - and I've seen photos of both British and American 4-2-0 and 4-4-0 engines with similarly mismatched pilot truck wheels. Whatever her original identity and owner, this engine clearly had a very long, useful active life during which she underwent a number of repairs and modifications. We are the richer for the simple fact that she has survived to be known as 'Lion'. Just out of interest, did Ernest Twining, roughly speaking Ahrons' contemporary (I think) have anything to say about her? Brilliant, and very dedicated, patient piece of research. Loved it - particularly the photos of the old lady in 'as found' conditon.

This reminds of the _Railway Series_ book where Thomas goes to the Railway Museum at York and met Iron Duke, who said that broad gauge was used for the GWR back in the 1800s, speaking as though he lived through that time. Ya know, despite the fact that Iron Duke is a replica and was built five years before when the book takes place.

Dear Mr.Dawson, I would like to see a video on the most interesting "locomotive" from the 1837, the Galvani. It was the first electric locomotive, and was exhibited at the 1841 arts exhibiton. I just think it would be intersting as it is a rarly discussed locomotive on youtube. Thank you for reading.

Thoroughly interesting. Lion is never recorded as carrying No.149, is it (Was there any loco with an 0-4-2+T that carried that number around in the UK during the 1840s)? Anyhow a very enjoyable video; to me I don't mind that Lion isn't Lion as long as the loco doesn't continue to pretend it is, which probably will continue. Which is a shame as a more obscure locomotive from the 1840s got into preservation and people don't even know. Again great video and I'm glad there is a significant amount of 1840s material left on the loco.

Rocket was heavily modified during it's lifetime, so it's completely possible that the loco is Lion, just modified numerous times over it's lifetime.

What a curious thing, and unless the locomotive could talk or we built a time machine, we may never find the real truth behind this mystery..

This was interesting! 🚂

I think your right about possibly being a Stephensons made locomotive, as design wise it looks alot like their earlier work, before the restoration that is.

cool vid on the channel nice loco keep up the good vid on the channel thanks lee

The story is getting more and more interesting. When I first saw the movie Titfield Thunderbolt and saw 'Lion', I thought it was a movie prop. There was something wrong with that smooth copper box at the back. It looked like some sort of addition to make it look more 'old fashioned'. I know very little about locomotives but I think I have a keen eye for detail and, in it's present form, 'Lion' doesn't look quite right to me. That is my lay person's view. I like your summing up of it being an older loco with a later boiler. I would still like to see that copper box taken off though.

If it's a Stephenson locomotive, there's another option. Robert had a habit or reusing his popular nameplates - multiple Meteors in 1830 and 1832 and a Sampson class locomotive called Rocket in 1836. Could there have been multiple contemporary Lions?

Hi Anthony. I've had the same broom for some thirty years; it's had 17 new heads and 9 new handles (LOL)!

A great video, very interesting and informative. Well done Sir. 🙂👍

I love the video's Andrew, please keep them coming. Lion captures the history of an age and while it might not be the Lion built in 1838, it is the Lion named in 1924 and for the last hundred years it's been a part of our history, and so we should perhaps settle for the know fact that this engine may not be the original Lion but it certainly is an engine called Lion which commemorates an age of innovation and of skills which is lost today.

Could it just be that Lion is the real thing but had so many replacements and improvements over time that no parts from its 1838 form still exist today?

So, basically, the cylinders don't match the description for those that Lion should have had, but they, the valve gear, rear driving wheel etc. match and are from the 1840s. The front, replacement driving wheel and crank are later and were made in Bolton. Considering the two 1858 locos were also built in Bolton, I would suppose that it is likely that 'our Lion' has parts of at least one of the Bolton engines. That said, 'our Lion' has matching older components that would be less likely to be put on later in life- the 1840s cylinders and valve gear- so I would suggest that 'our Lion' is/was a mish-mash of designs (even before the 1920s restoration), with the 'basis' being a loco built or rebuilt in the 1840s which had cannibalised Bolton-made components added on later- probably from one of the 1858 locos. Maybe one of the 1858 locos gave out whilst the other needed a replacement wheelset (perhaps following an accident), and if this was immediately before reuse as a pumping engine then mismatched numbers of wheel spokes would have been even less of a worry. Industrial railways always had a tendency to recycle older equipment, so to me this seems plausible. Furthermore, in my mind this 'basis' could potentially be Lion, reasoning being 1. Lion was indeed sold to the dock company and 2. the records/evidence of Lion's rebuild are- like everything from this period- far from concrete fact. Although Lion shouldn't have these cylinders according to the records, the records themselves may not be complete, or (however unlikely) Lion could have had another extensive rebuild later which replaced the valve gear and cylinders. Of course, we would need to conduct further research on the other docks locomotives to find out which could be the 'basis loco' for 'our Lion'. For all intensive purposes, it could even be one of the LNWR 2-2-2 locos bought in 1859 with Lion, but converted into an 0-4-2 with Bolton parts (having bought 2 locos from them the year prior) to make them more suitable as goods engines- which would explain the mismatched driving wheels. Either way, until compelling evidence of it being another prototype appears, I'll just say that 'our Lion' is Lion with extra bits put on.

'New' locomotives were sometimes described as 'rebuilds' for accounting purposes.

What fantastic video I love any history on the railways Thank you for sharing Keep safe ARP

Very informative video well done Anthony. I still love Lion as it is.

Regardless of all the facts stated here, Lion is still my favourite steam locomotive. And she still deserves to be in the Museum of Liverpool given its age and history working for the docks. If I ever become stupidly rich, I would commission two replicas of Lion. One in original L&MR condition called Tiger. And the other in persevered condition called Thunderbolt.

This is a fantastic and informative video, it's likely I have placed a deposit with Rapido for an imposter! Actually, I'm okay as it's the Titifeld Thunderbolt I am purchasing, which we know at least, to be accurate :) Off to see if you've covered any aspects of the Wisbech and Upwell tramway now, my favourite line from history.

She more than likely Is lion, just having been rebuilt extensively to keep her in service for an extended period of time, even the General and Texas are a bit different in appearance than they were during the famous locomotive chase, and Sierra Number 3 looks different than it did before the wood cab was replaced with a spare steel cab after it's first major accident, even the boiler is brand new. The john bull had to be restored back to it's original appearance when it was donated to Smithsonian, the 1927 replica represents its later appearance when it was turned into a 4-2-0 instead of the 2-4-0 as it was built. People forget that steam locomotives were once regularly operating machinery and things were changed during certain maintenance periods to keep them running. A lot of strange franken locomotives were made in the early days of railroading so an older set of cylinders, an older frame and a newer boiler (but still older) and old safety valves and whatnot were added.. That poor locomotive.

I knew about there being gaps in the history, but had no idea just how wrong it may have been.

I guess the irony is that she been Lion longer now than she hasn't!

first sounds déjà vu, but the other video is still there 😉

My mum had the same broom for 60 years, only had 4 new handles and 6 heads. Still the working life of "lion" is truly remarkable.

It is equally possible that the locomotive known as the Lion, is a mixture of the 3 locomotives, of a similar design, that the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, had purchased, along with with other parts, from other obsolete locomotives, that were built around the same time. This mix and match would most likely have taken place, when it was converted into a pump engine, and the resulting locomotive was called the Lion. Of course this is just a theory, and it could be any of the 3 locomotives that were in the shed, with parts of other locomotives added to it.

If the loco we know as Lion now has been known as such for longer than the original, then I think it’s valid to say this loco is more Lion than Lion

Thank you Anthony for this intriguing video. I have only just discovered this series and will certainly be watching more episodes. Do we have any idea as to the kind of locomotive from which the current boiler came? The shape of the firebox suggests a saddle tank from one or the Leeds builders to me.

Fascinating, great research, thank you.

I think if you add the context of the period to this mystery, it goes some way to explain it. This was the grouping era when the new companies engaged in publicity and promotion to establish strong corporate identities and heritage. What greater prestige coup for the LMS than to claim it's heritage back to the LMR - especially with the centenary coming up? Its great rival the LNER had "Locomotion" afterall! So, with no obvious early survivors operational, deliberately or inadvertently identifying the loco as "Lion" was more important than if it was really just old L&Y stock. A case of confirmation bias based on wanting to discover a LMR loco.

That is very confusing but interesting

How did a locomotive run a pump? was it just using the boiler to supply steam for a pump engine? or was the pump some how attached to the driving wheels of the loco? (google was of no help)

I enjoyed the video. I'm confused now. Is it Lion or not? Lol. Either way... It sure is pretty. Glad it was saved from a pump house... no matter who it is

I was not aware before now that there were two locomotives sold in 1874 to the Harbour Board. However I still am inclined to be assured the engine we have now is indeed the much-rebuilt Lion. We don't know exactly what Manchester & Birmingham Railway Nos. 12 or 13 looked like for a start, plus it is my firm belief that even as early as said date Lion was "particularly fortunate" to have averted the fate of the scrap-men. The Harbour Board people would surely have been aware even then they had an engine on their hands that was a former-relic of the old Liverpool & Manchester Railway, so to prolong its existence for as long as possible they bought another surplus engine to take over its shunting duties while it was installed in the pumping house. Regards, Samuel Farris.

Do we know the provenance of the locomotives purchased from Thompson and Co of Bolton? This might reveal further details that could be verified on the preserved locomotive.

Hi Anthony, "Lion" had a sister engine called "Tiger".

While it would be nice to know whather it is Lion, or which other loco it could be, the fact is that this locomotive has been called L&M No.57 "Lion" for longer than it ever had any other identity. I doubt that will change any time soon.

Adding to your observation about the parts of the loco not fitting properly and that not being an issue because it was a stationary pumping engine, is it possible that it wasn't any particular loco at all but made up of spare parts from many locos all from the same 1840s era? Just guessing here!

Even though this engine is likely not Lion it's still lion to me

Thanks for another interesting video; it sounds like you are in danger of using facts to spoil a good story...

So if there is a newbuild it shouldn't look like Lion. 🤔

It sounds like the dock authority didn't keep records after purchasing. So there is a good chance that not many internal records were not kept either. Let say Lion and others worked the docks for 15 years. They would have been rebuilt, overhauled, chopped up, scrapped and salvaged on site. Quite a lot of ports and docks had their workshops afterall. They could have even rebuilt the boiler on sight The bore size inconsistencies can be put down to cylinder rebores over next 45 years. A 1/4 inch skim every 5 years or new liners could account for that. And it all sounds like dock authority simply did everything on the cheap for as long as possible.

Perhaps the current lion was a bit like Sir Haydn and combination of locomotives?

Another one? You spoil us sir. Has any work been done to work out where the two candidate locomotives offered for sale were used prior to their being offered for sale? Guessing the firm mentioned was a contractor or just a trader in such things buying them up and selling them on?

Is it possible that Lion is an amalgamation of locos, recieving the cylinders and valve gear off a loco which had been scrapped?

Witam, bardzo fajne filmy o historii kolei. Bardzo interesujące materiały. Mieszkam w Polsce w okolicy najstarszych linii kolejowych z 1842 i 1943 r. Jeździły tu parowozy od Stephensona i od Sharpa. Jeden z parowozów Sharpa został sfotografowany po eksplozji kotła we Wrocławiu Swiebodzkim. Z tego co wiem parowozy te były zbudowane przypuszczalnie wcześniej bo w 1842, lub możliwie że już w 1841 r. A więc w wersji pierwotnej. Czy są rysunki tendra do parowozów Sharp & Brothers o długości 16' ?

My Grandad said Lion was so heavily modified, it now carries the name The Flying Scotchman. He worked in Crewe Works, so must be right. I hope this answers everyone's questions ..

An interesting Historical review, but really brings us no closer to the truth. It does however bring one pertinent question to mind; how much of an original locomotive can you change, before it is no longer the original locomotive? At one of the scale is the LMS 10000 project. A Class 58 subframe mounted on Class 77 bogies isn't LMS 10000, anymore than a "cut & shut" Class 37 on Class 20 bogies is a Class 23. At the other end of the scale are the former Barry scrapyard locos now in fully functional condition. Where is the line, and who draws it?

Bolton is a long way from Liverpool isn't it?

Could she have been alive to tell us her story!

Lion is the mechanical Anna Anderson.

are you saying that the engine they believed to be Lion a kit of parts?

Don't you think that the story is much more interesting because there isn't a paper trail? 😁 Who was this chap Salter? The gauges he invented would seem to be a very important part of the rail story.

That's ok

Or they reused cylinders of a larger diameter of the 1840 pattern.

👍👍🚂🚂

Gosh very analytical - The cylinders are not original Lion nor is the boiler but would you expect them to be for an engine well used?

Scandal, intrigue, locomotives impersonating each other, mysterious part swapping. All is not what it seems. It's outrageous. This warrants a serious, investigation into the matter. ..... Clearly, someone is lion, Anthony.

It is equally possible that the locomotive known as the Lion, is a mixture of the 3 locomotives, of a similar design, that the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, had purchased, along with with other parts, from other obsolete locomotives, that were built around the same time. This mix and match would most likely have taken place, when it was converted into a pump engine, and the resulting locomotive was called the Lion. Of course this is just a theory, and it could be any of the 3 locomotives that were in the shed, with parts of other locomotives added to it.