Ports Around The World 0517533782, 9780517533789

Citation preview

ee ae

4

‘

a5)

P

.

SSe

xs

ee

to

pe

reer ied

te

the * ©

4 ha ae ad

i]

:

‘a

.

-

A beautifully UTE |G er) Tee ’s greates Le)

m Raat history rts—their growth

im portance in our economic and ae

va , |

Ss i

|

.s

; hee: ‘

ae

li i today

\~

Sih eco

7

NR re

/

:

Sy

Pe

M2 ee

sea

>

o

Sit

ISBN:

0-517-53378-2

» 13.95

tinia” Ports Around the World YEHUDA

KARMON

Since man took to the seas, ports have played a vital role in history and legend. Absolutely everything about the development of ports from those of the Phoenicians to the sleek, modern installations of today is covered in this abundantly illustrated and highly readable survey. Ports in all areas of the world are represented, from those in Northern Europe such as Stockholm, Bordeaux, Antwerp, Hamburg, and London, those in the Mediterranean such as Hydra, Barcelona, and Haifa, to North American ports such as Halifax, New York, Buffalo, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Hampton Roads,

San Diego, Long Beach, and San Francisco, to ports in Latin America such as Rio de Janeiro and Valparaiso, and those in the Pacific Ocean such as Bangkok, Singapore, Hong Kong, Kobe, Honolulu, and Sydney. Yehuda Karmon traces the building of ports from ancient times through railway and steamer installations to their industrialized counterparts of today. He surveys the contemporary ports of the world, discussing the main geographical and climatic features of each region and their influence upon the port’s location. The activities of the ports are explained through the area’s agricultural and mineral products and the development of inland transportation. For each port he details the physical and marine conditions, and the

technical means used to overcome difficulties. Karmon includes the port’s maritime activities, (Continued on back flap)

Jacket Illustration: Hong Kong at night (Hong Kong Government Information Services)

19-G54-7477

Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2020 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation

https://archive.org/details/portsaroundworld0000karm

Ports Around the World

To my wife, Marianne, who accompanied me on many of my trips and provided a great number of the illustrations

PPorts Around the World YEHUDA KARMON

CROWN

PUBLISHERS, INC.

NEW YORK

Designed by OFRA KAMAR

Editorial Secretary:

Rachel Gilon

First Published in the United States of America by Crown Publishers, Inc., 1980. © 1980 by G. A. The Jerusalem Publishing House Ltd., 39 Tchernechovski St., P.O. Box 7147, Jerusalem. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 79-9654

L.S.B.N.: 0-517-53378-2 Printed by Japhet Press, Givataim

Printed in ISRAEL

CONTENTS

Reese

CG Ligaen

ee

SAM SAX Y eet Wea eNO

eee

Oe

A

ee CPR

Ne een Ae een eR hese

LNUA ES gene

mnie CU) UG LO Nese

eee ara

PART ONE: THE DEVELOPMENT Bert eal

ee)

POE

re Oe re

reeaan

ener Mg a

ee ere

eM

PRE

eye,

ghtNe ps MMB ety

ee

cae

a

eu.

aan Set

= Shag

eR Foc

og ie Weg 8.

ebicten oacltce, Bulatees8

Viegas Orem WA EO ods Mla Linh Creanna leuaeewe ely wokste aelie eS Bokeh 9

OF PORTS

keel NG ELLSL)ayGea en

ee

eee a es We, Bee ene Ae

RORCSHMPAUIULCULLY aememeee eRe ne sateen ie Tenn

Nr

Ee Fee

Meee

Ae aC

besMicidl epAcestameemr a OMe e Wr rte ie On hahaa LRNa Ths ee.

inte)

ec hie cet oie ek ete «Mee GER 7

ee

OY

ee

8 eed 11

Mraseptate uke titres ay gn aes wow a ILD

11

dens ae ete teats Roe ign nat 18

nex olonialel rade tere cre Os ce, Sere nme Acre Mode Ma wi el sPORPSIAND (I THESINDUSTRIAL- REVOLUTION 2.2.00 fie

Mire 2 AR ce wie ee A

as eee OOD el 30

SlLealmpoweiminmncusthveana sTansportaiOn weenie Maries 4 © hh as Sins ee conta, od See 30 Chanvesmupthe Ma yOuLOnE OMS amare E Reema cnet ee Ase he a hat tel. foe aus lo eee oe Regionals Dittenentiail0 ie me meena meme mr ma eearen tey a teed Marae GAl Gad tetas SEN ctu done esbssume 43

Pe ae

eer OMe LN Gand VOLUUTION:

eanm. te. tts

De RNiseammLOpUlLanO nance rOCUCTIONN INR INFOS GE UTES.

ce.

inennmar Meee

oth a erca, cute 5.8 eee

ek

os

Os So odd dae ve ee eS

Sen arn cee

ee lt

ne

ceeemteees

Rare Bn

eer

LR CHCCTEeINPOLATgE Oltamrr ere meee ateer RUer eR.gira trehier wea. a ara

ees

45

ahd oS

45

GN a

or or47

shes a sei ees ares aT bank

PART TWO: PORTS OF THE OLD WORLD rte eeeeee

VLE) tn

Re IN EVA IN;RO RUUS Camp eure atenese

ces nares

glee eas @scihia es oe

MOR os ve

65

reve Oa Sesh NesMediLertaneant ce ae menmmemearer tyator eniare arpw acted cle1. ly cpPiq boo eseRi xe.esses Bak 65 |G AeFeWats Ps tal ct Cer ee ame, net Ee Mia ita acre

trey wesfog eras

Marseille sat enc tee

Barcelona

Mie

rca

m nee ace

LAL 68

inde US ape mete ame

tad ress

FStan6 Ulan Seweern ee CONE een

mem

oe se aA

Soto aire de

vse guceee eeu rocecs stones ensecede igh

IRI SUC eee

Wee tea

ee eer

MIDSR Ad ACH

ie

en

ae

ee ae cache

ELSI epee are ue eee ALCS OMUL ae erin

EUROPE

mite Se

eek 116

Copennha ren teva oe pence nny tee eeu eS Stock Iolitte pepe eters acts ous east xeckh Rordeaxcand the GitGnge i. ea ansaie Le ddayre andabe scine pOrtSes.. sia es ac PATICW CLDire wracge: Cee hen tec tobias rebar a ong

are

eke oc coy. ee tem ooh 93

ee

coMeee

bcs an Ges 2 96

ers, Becca cbtoe

eye fine cea

102

80

AND NORTHERN

wed lticuh ein CCS Ob ENILO DCm

ibe Ckawr eerie eae

ene aie Sees otro Peg aiee 90

chenaps tes, ae 69

sharia SOnde

ieee eee OR Lo OrwWESTERN

GenOae meat ree

118 121 123 126 137

ae ee

— 2.3. cs eo

ck

es ee

esicab God 6 WOE Seek

ee

a oS

LTS Lis

ATIStET CAI Meeewee wet Riot eco ecncen as ss Aci oh 143

FRGOUCL QIN saree Myre teach aaticlye.ial sevuador IanO UTS Pape atu ns ats Air ae iusca esiyecls (SOLE DOLE Bnew ae a a no oe Gila RO Kingston upon Hull and the Humber...... DOVE Taran rerter teeta ee este ns, areas ce

145 148 151 161 163

CHAPT:

-63-

PORTS: OF THE INDIAN-OCEAIN

eee)

einer nes cee

The: Indian: Ocean and its Coastsz*:. 2 )

PORTS IN HISTORY URBS

DOMINGO

IN HISPANI

=

reir

ae

Santo Domingo: the earliest Spanish maritime trade centre in the New

growing numbers, which reached their peak in the 18th century. The slave trade was the main driving force behind the

development of shipping to the coasts of West Africa (see p. 257). The Portuguese had also gained a foothold in South America. Immediately after the discovery of America, Spain and Portugal signed a treaty dividing the colonial sphere in such a way that all areas east of a demarcation line “270 leagues west of the Azores” would become Portuguese territory, and those to the west of it — Spanish (Treaty of Tordesillas, 1494, arranged by Pope Alexander VI). As was to emerge later, this line cut through the then unknown

territory of Brazil, which was discovered around

1500 by the Portuguese due to the fact that the best navigational course around the Cape described a broad arc to the west, and thus touched Brazil. The Portuguese set up a number of colonies in the 16th century, among them Belem, Natal, Pernambuco (Recife) and Bahia (Salvador). Rio de Janeiro was taken over from French colonists in 1565. As the Portuguese colonies did not yield many precious minerals, their development was slower than that of

24

World.

the Spanish colonies, and they grew mainly sugar cane. The new trade routes had an enormous impact on the evolution of shipping and ports in Western Europe, giving rise to a general trend of gradual translocation of the centres of commerce from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic coast. This process was slow, as the major ports of the Mediterranean were so firmly entrenched in the spheres of financing and banking that they were able to hold out on their own. Ports like Venice, Genoa and Marseille persisted as centres of power until the 18th century. Of the Atlantic ports three attained prime importance successively: Antwerp until the end of the 16th century; Amsterdam during the 17th century; and London as from the beginning of the 18th century. A number of other ports played a secondary role. The degree of relative commercial power depended not only on the geographical position, but also on the political strength and, especially, the financial organization and power of each city. The shift of centrality was marked by the transfer of the dominating world bourse from Antwerp to Amsterdam and then to London.

PORTS IN HISTORY The first European town to benefit from the American trade was Sevilla, then Spain’s principal Atlantic port, at the head of the tidal section of the Guadalquivir River, 85 km upstream from the coast. This site had been utilized as a port already in Phoenician times, and during the Arab conquest it had served as the capital of the Almohad dynasty. It was conquered by the Christians in 1248 and served asa major port from which the Azores islands were colonized. Its “golden age” of prosperity came with the discovery of America, when the city was chosen as the sole contact with the new world. In 1503 the Casa de Contratacion (= House of Contracts) was established here, which monopolized all trade with the colonies (until 1717). The “Law of the Indies”, based on mercantilism, stipulated that all ships sailing to the Spanish colonies had to be Spanish and had to start from and end their journey at Sevilla, where the crown imposed heavy import and export duties. Later on (in 1558) Cadiz was granted permission to serve as a second port. Since other European countries also wished to benefit from the huge profits deriving from this trade, they preyed upon the Spanish ships as buccaneers, or tried to buy their way into American ports by bribery. In order to counteract these piratical attacks, the Spanish ships set out for the colonies in large convoys (up to 100 ships, each of 150—500 tons capacity, accompanied by war ships) once or twice a year. Sevilla served as an entrep6t port, visited by ships of all nations in order to distribute the merchandise brought from the colonies and to provide the convoys with trade goods assembled from all over Europe for the colonies. Through this trade Sevilla became the most affluent port in Europe and its population grew from 60,000 around 1500 to 150,000 in 1588. Antwerp was the second city within the Spanish realm to take full advantage of the colonial trade. It, too, had developed into a major port even prior to the discovery of America (see p. 138), but in the 16th century it became the West European distribution point for goods from both the Spanish and Portuguese colonies. It had the advantage over Sevilla of being free from the bureaucratic control of the Casa and of having large and varied industries. Its openness to refugees (Jews from Spain and Portugal, Protestants) encouraged private enterprise, and it became the centre of European banking, financing the wars and economic activities of most European rulers. By 1585 it had about 100,000 inhabitants and was the second largest city (after Paris) in Europe north of the Alps. However, this situation changed suddenly with the ascendance to the Spanish throne of Philippe II, the fanatic Catholic and protector of the Inquisition. Antwerp, which saw its entire economic and spiritual existence threatened by the new monarch, placed itself at the head of the “Revolt of the Netherlands” (1568). It was conquered and sacked by the Spanish (1574 and 1585) and lost both its predominance and, within five years, half of its population, who fled mainly to the Netherlands. The remaining parts of

Seville: the tower (Giralda) of the medieval cathedral.

the Netherlands were not overrun by the Spanish because they protected themselves by breaching the dikes and flooding the lowlands. After a long struggle they declared their independence in 1581, which, however, gained international recognition only in the Peace of Miinster (1648). (For the later history of Antwerp see p. 138 ff.). Philippe pursued the war against the Netherlands. As this country had been aided by Britain, he despatched a huge naval force, the “Invincible Armada’, against Britain (1588), which was defeated by the British navy and partly destroyed by gales. The destruction of the Armada opened a new chapter in the history of the Atlantic trade. Spain had lost the main instrument for the enforcement of its colonial policy and was no longer able to prevent breaches in its monopoly of trade or colonization, although the “Law of the Indies” remained officially in force until 1770. Spain’s weakness encouraged the other European powers to embark upon a new aggressive policy of colonization. They did not try to challenge Spain directly, but founded colonies in unoccupied territories, such as some of the Caribbean islands, and especially North America. In the Caribbean the French occupied Guadeloup and Martinique in 1635 and Haiti in 1659; the British settled in Jamaica in 1655 and in the Bahamas in 1694. The Dutch seized Curacao from the Portuguese in 1634. Colonization in North America took on a completely different character. Since there was no great hope of discovering precious minerals and tropical agricultural pro-

ducts could not be raised on most of the continent, colonization was regarded as a means of absorbing Europe’s surplus population or refugees who had fled their homeland

25

PORTS IN HISTORY ——__ .~" (warns

A Hye

wlG ( Mra

drcrinaann 2 fe)

The city of Antwerp in the 16th century before its destruction by the Spanish.

because of religious persecution. Fur trading and fishing, mainly of cod, served as the main economic basis of the European settlers, and a food supply was provided by immigrant farmers. Here the pioneers were the French, who used the great rivers as lanes of entry. One line of colonization followed the St. Lawrence

River, reaching Quebec in 1608,

and founding Montreal in 1642. A fishing base was established in Newfoundland in 1610. Towards the end of the 17th century a second colonial drive had started working its way along the Mississippi, which became the axis of“‘Louisiana” in 1698. New Orleans was founded in 1718. Both movements

met

at the Great

Lakes, where

Detroit

was

founded in 1701. The Dutch made their famous attempt at settling in North America with the purchase of the island of Manhattan (1626) and the founding of New Amsterdam, but were driven out by the British in 1664, who changed the name of the settlement to New York. Another Dutch colonial venture, on the Brazilian coast, was also short-lived (1630-45).

The first British settlement on the North American continent was Jamestown (Virginia) (1607), but large-scale colonization is generally regarded as having begun with the arrival of the Mayflower at Cape Cod in 1620. By 1630 a few settlements had been established in New England,

26

among them Boston. The European powers, and especially the Dutch, also embarked upon colonial expansion along the Cape route to India, and each country set up an “East India Company” for that purpose. Thus the 17th century became the period of colonial development by the European countries outside the Iberian Peninsula, and the main exponent of this trend was the port and city of Amsterdam. The Dutch people had utilized their newly won independence to make enormous progress in all fields: land reclamation, agriculture, industry, trade. But the main advance was in maritime activities. The principal one became fishing, especially for herring. Dutch ships ventured far into the North Sea to the Doggerbank, in addition to the Zuiderzee, to which herring shoals had migrated from the Baltic Sea by a chance of nature. For the long voyage the Dutch had developed large fishing boats — bussea — of 20—30 tons carrying capacity, which enabled the fishermen to salt the fish at sea and to stay longer at the fishing grounds. During certain periods the Dutch provided up to 80% of the European herring catch. The second maritime activity was ship building. By adopting methods of mass production, resembling assembly

PORTS IN HISTORY

}5

f}:

{a ad pepe eee abe a: PP PEPE roe Boh ere bab Be BaAL a

pee

SAR ei eRe RB SitAia TI

Bs

Amsterdam in the 16th century, before the onset of the huge development plan.

lines, they were able to build large ships so cheaply that they became the main suppliers of vessels to most European nations, even to Spain. Their own ships, built as bulky carriers, enabled Dutch shipowners to offer transport rates 30% below the usual rates and to capture a large section of interEuropean shipping, thus finally putting the Hanse out of action. By the end of the 17th century they owned half of the European tonnage. Their venture into colonial trading has already been mentioned. After the setbacks in America, they concentrated on the Cape route. The Dutch East India Company was founded in 1602. A fort and colony were founded at the Cape in 1652. By 1680 the Dutch had gained complete control of the spice regions of the Malayan Peninsula and Indonesia, with intermediate stations in India and Ceylon (Sri Lanka). Although all Dutch ports participated in these activities in one form or another, the main centre, especially in the sphere of finance and commerce, was Amsterdam (see p. 143). Founded around 1270 as afishing village on the Zuiderzee (which was created by the greatest natural disaster befalling the Netherlands in historical times), by the 15th century it was already the principal trading centre of the Netherlands, with a population of about 16,000. By 1550

this figure had increased to 40,000. The main growth of the city was the result of the destruction of Antwerp by the Spanish in 1585, when tens of thousands of people emigrated to Amsterdam. Among them were many Jews and Protestants who brought with them their skills, initiative and international connections. By 1600 the population had risen to 100,000, and by 1650 to 200,000, on a par with London

and not far behind Paris. This unprecedented growth necessitated an extension of the town beyond its medieval walls, and this was carried out according to the ambitious plan of 1612. It was based on Renaissance planning concepts, using a number of semicircular canals (grachten), crossed via bridges by radial roads emanating from the old city gates (see above). This plan provided Amsterdam with sufficient space until the end of the 19th century, and turned it into one of the most beautiful cities of Europe. The grachten provided, in addition to residential space, large opportunities for warehouses which could be supplied directly by boats. By 1700 the port and city formed the largest staple market of Europe, and processing industries were spread throughout the urban area. The harbour was able to accommodate up to 4000 smaller vessels, but larger ships had to anchor in the open sea and were unloaded by lighters. The Bank of Amsterdam (founded 1609) and the bourse, re-

PORTS IN HISTORY spectively, became the principal financial establishment and stock market of Europe. In the 18th century the Netherlands started losing many of its advantages; the country was too small and lacking in natural resources to compete with the new great powers which were emerging in Europe, especially France and England. It was no longer possible to maintain an economic empire on the basis of managerial and financial skills alone. Military strength and naval power had become more important, and the Netherlands (as well as small Portugal) was no longer able to afford them. With the outbreak of the French Revolution and the ensuing Napoleonic wars, the Netherlands lost not only many of its overseas possessions but also its independence (1795—1814). France entered the colonial trade relatively late. Its main political interest had always been centred on the European mainland. It showed little involvement in the Cape route to India and turned towards America only in the 17th century, where its main efforts were concentrated

on Canada and Louisiana. In West Africa it showed a certain interest in the Senegal coast. The internal power structure of France, based on an absolute monarchy and feudal aristocracy, was also more interested in agriculture and industry than in maritime trade. In addition, most of its Atlantic ports had been im-

mobilized by the Hundred Years’ War with England, and started a slow recovery only after its termination in 1453, but suffered again in the religious wars in the second half of the 16th century. It was only in the 18th century that the Atlantic ports

of France entered the profitable “triangular” slave trade, chiefly Bordeaux and Nantes, and to a lesser degree Le Havre, originally a military arsenal. Other European countries also entered the colonial trade, but to a lesser degree and without establishing permanent colonies. Copenhagen and Hamburg became centres of colonial trade, and in 1612 Sweden founded its first North Sea port at GOteborg, with a new city planned according to the principles of the Baroque. England, too, entered the colonial trade relatively late. In the 16th century its vessels were still built strictly for European trade. It was the feeling of strength gained by Britain after her victory over the Armada that initiated the move towards colonization and the development of oceanic trade. Within one century England had become the strongest maritime power, with about 5000 merchant ships and 100,000 seamen. Although colonizing achievements in the 17th century were still limited, the growing might of her merchant fleet was felt in the carrying trade and culminated in the so-called “triangular trade”. Ships loaded with English industrial products, such as printed cotton, glass

and metal goods, but also weapons, sailed to West Africa, where they exchanged their merchandise for slaves which were transported, sometimes at a loss of life of 25%, to South America, the Antilles and the Mississippi region. There tropical products (sugar, rum, cotton, timber) were loaded

28

and carried either to Britain or North America, to be exchanged for cotton, tobacco, rice or — further north — tim-

ber and ship-building material. The mainstay of this trade was the transport of slaves, and their numbers are reckoned at 3 million in the 17th century, and 7 million in the 18th century.

Trade to India was also developed but could not compete quantitatively with the American trade. Ships plying the direct route to the West Indies were able to make 2—3 round trips a year, whereas a voyage to the East Indies and back took up to two years. The colonial trade was concentrated almost exclusively in London; only Bristol and, in the second half of the 18th century, Liverpool, had a small share in this lucrative enterprise. Thus, the port of London was about to become the largest port, and London itself — the largest city in Europe or even the world. Its population grew from 200,000 in 1600 to half a million by 1700 and to overa million in 1801. Its port handled 80% of all exports in 1700, and fifty years

later 75% of all shipping to Britain entered London. The port of London was unable to cope with this increase in traffic. The port area consisted of a stretch of land downriver from London Bridge, where “official wharfs” were equipped with customs sheds, and where all goods had to be unloaded. The space available at these wharfs was so limited that only a small proportion of all ships in port could moor at the wharfs, and hundreds were obliged to wait for many days or even weeks in the river, in the “Pool of London”. The only way to speed up handling was by the use of lighters. Notwithstanding these difficulties the ships preferred to bring their wares to London, because this port alone possessed the necessary storehouses, the various exchanges which fixed the price of the goods, and the financial and commercial infrastructure which controlled all trade. The first insurance company (Lloyds) was established in 1687, and the Bank of England in 1694. The City of London became the seat of trade representatives from all over the world, and within “Greater London” were concentrated all the industries which processed the imported foodstuffs and raw materials and produced finished goods for export. Thus, London’s supremacy over all European ports was established at the beginning of the 18th century, and it was to last for 200 years. Within a period of 250 years since the discovery of America, the Atlantic coast of Europe had completely superseded the Mediterranean as the focus of maritime trade and the leading region in commerce and finance (but not yet in political power). A number of new, prominent ports had been established, which differed, however, from other ports only in the quantity of ships and goods handled but not in technology or physical appearance. Their main advantage lay in their social, commercial and financial infrastructure.

All the ports which developed through colonial trade were located in estuaries at the upper limit of the tidal

PORTS IN HISTORY range, at the lowest point where the river could be spanned by a bridge. In view of their location, these ports were also able to serve as foci of inland transportation as well as points of transshipment to river barges. (Amsterdam alone was situated on the Ij, an elongated arm of the Zuiderzee,

but with a very low tidal range.) Not all of the ships in the port were able to find anchorage at piers or wharfs where cranes were available; some had to wait their turn in the river. The main distinctive feature of the major colonial trade ports lay in the fact that they were port cities. The demands of such a port for a labour force, services, ship-building and repair facilities, supplies, processing industries and management could only be met by a city with a large population, and the major ports indeed ranked among the principal cities of their countries and were sometimes even the largest ones. On the other hand, the wealth produced by the colonial trade enabled the citizens to plan new cities or quarters on a grandiose scale, for which the Baroque style of architecture and town planning was ideally suited. A street system based on mathematical patterns and consisting of broad, straight or semicircular avenues and spacious plazas or circles, gardens and parks ornamented with statues and fountains, huge mansions

and palaces, libraries, museums

and theatres, universities and hospitals — all these served as proof of the wealth and importance of the port city and have remained as historical monuments to the present day. Only London missed the opportunity of undergoing reconstruction according to planning principles. After the “Great Fire” of 1666, the famous architect Christopher Wren submitted a plan for the reconstruction of the city in accordance with the Baroque style. However, it was rejected, and the city was rebuilt on the old narrow street pattern, but with many Baroque churches spread over the urban area. Nevertheless, the new style found expression in London in the 18th century in the form of many “places”, “circles” and “crescents”, built by the aristocracy and filling in the space between the city and Westminster. But what a contrast to the ports and towns at the other end of the colonial routes! Except for those in Southeast Asia, the colonies were founded mainly on virgin land, and the sole criterion for the choice of a port was the availability of calm water in a bay or river mouth. The first sign of a settlement was a fort, surrounded by a few huts or — later on — buildings. The social structure was dominated by a few colonists or soldiers from the home country, who controlled masses of indigenous workers or slaves huddled in clusters of huts. Even when Spanish planning concepts were later introduced in each new town, they applied only to communities of a few thousand inhabitants. Since manpower was cheap, all port activities were based on manual labour, no wharfs were constructed, and ships moored at open roadsteads, the merchandise being transferred in primitive boats. Only the immigrants’ settlements in North America were different. Here the colonists regarded themselves as citizens

of a new country and took over the responsibility for the development of their new towns, most of which grew without any planning. However, some, like Philadelphia or those founded by French settlers, were built according to a preconceived checkerboard pattern. The settlers also tried to impart to their architecture, and especially to public buildings, the style of their countries of origin together with names borrowed from the homeland. Not all of these towns attained considerable size. In 1730 Boston was the largest city in North America with 13,000 inhabitants, Philadelphia had 11,000, and New York 8000. Baltimore was founded in 1740 and by 1790 had 13,000 inhabitants. Ports like Providence, Norfolk and

Charleston had populations of only a few thousands. As late as 1820 only 12 cities in North America boasted a population of more than 10,000. At that time the cities of Spanish America were much larger, owing to the large percentage of native Indians and African slaves; the population of European origin was probably no larger than that in the North American cities. (Moreover, many of the larger ones were situated inland.) The largest city in the Spanish empire around 1800 was Mexico City (140,000), followed by Lima (Peru; 80,000), Quito (Ecuador; 70,000) and Buenos Aires (Argentina;

60,000). Along the coasts of tropical Africa there was not a single city with more than 10,000 inhabitants. The end of this period saw the appearance of the first specialized ports — the naval bases. This specialization was necessary because the military ports had to fulfill functions totally different from those of a commercial port. They had to be able to provide anchorage for a large number of ships under conditions which would facilitate immediate sailing in the event of an approaching enemy fleet. They needed

large-scale ship-building and repair facilities. Their warehouses had to store military supplies, especially ammunition, and usually there were ammunition factories attached to the port. A large number of military personnel and industrial workers — together with their families — required housing near the base, and this necessitated the development of new towns, which were laid out in a checkerboard pattern according to concepts of that time.

The distinctive functions of a military port also imposed different conditions for their location. Whereas commercial ports were sited deep inland, in the innermost part of estuaries, the military ports needed to be positioned near the open sea, in order not to lose time sailing down the estuary. An inland location was anyhow unnecessary, since there was no need for commercial contacts or a financial infrastructure.

Along the coast the main prerequisites were a broad expanse of deep water for quick maneuvering of ships under all wind conditions, and a natural or artificial protection against high seas. The main adversaries from the end of the 17th century to the beginning of the 19th century were England and

22

PORTS AND THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION France, facing each other across the English Channel. The coasts of both countries provided good opportunities for military ports in the form of drowned valleys or rivers (rias coasts). On either side of the Channel there are large peninsulas protruding far westwards into the Atlantic Ocean: Bretagne and Normandy (Cotentin) in France; and the regions of Devon and Cornwall in England. These served as the main locations for military installations. There were two main periods of construction of naval ports. The first was at the end of the 17th century during the reign of Louis XIV, when the powerful “controller general of finances” Colbert initiated the planning of naval ports, whose construction was organized by General Vauban, the father of modern de-

fenses. According to his plans, the main military bases were constructed

at Brest, Dunkirk,

Le Havre, Rochefort

and

Saint Malo. The second period was associated with the Napoleonic wars, when the ports of Cherbourg and Lorient were fortified. The British built their main naval base at Plymouth (Devonport) during the first period, foliowed by the extension of older bases such as Dover and Portsmouth. In the second period Britain also constructed colonial naval bases such as Gibraltar, Malta, Bermuda and Capetown. Most of the naval harbours retained their special character until the 20th century, and usually the only other maritime occupation compatible with their activities was fishing.

Ports and the Industrial Revolution STEAMPOWER IN INDUSTRY AND TRANSPORTATION The greatest change in the economic activities of the world and in transportation, which began at the end of the 18th century and transformed all aspects of life in the world beyond recognition, is generally referred to as the Industrial Revolution, although it was actually a gradual process and not a sudden upsurge. This process influenced every aspect of man’s existence and endeavours — from health and population growth, to agricultural and industrial production with accompanying developments in transport, to the great achievements of humanity in science and technology. It was accompanied by revolutionary upheavals in almost every country of the globe and by wars between states which increased in intensity until they culminated in two world wars and in the explosion of the atomic bomb. The Industrial Revolution was not a simultaneous development in all parts of the world. It started in Britain in the second half of the 18th century, but came to full expression there only during the 19th century. It moved to Western Europe and the United States in the 19th century and attained its peak there in the second half of that century. Russia and Japan experienced it only in the 20th century, and the so-called “Third World”’, i.e., almost two thirds of the world’s population, is now experiencing the various stages of accelerated industrial development. Its prime mover was the utilization of new sources of energy which liberated production from the limitations of muscle power (human or animal) or from the unreliability of water and wind. Until World War I this source of energy was identical with coal, made usable through the invention of the steam engine, either static (in industry) or mobile (in transportation: railways and steamships). Therefore the end of the first period of the Industrial Revolution coincides with the replacement of ‘King Coal’’, as the predominant source of energy, by other sources — oil and atomic power. The new energy era started more or less at the time of World War I.

The new means of utilizing energy facilitated a tremendous growth in industrial production, which led to an unprecedented increase in the demand for raw materials and manpower, in turn creating a rising demand for transportation facilities. Science and technology had to be called in to provide new means and systems of production and especially of agricultural output to provide food for a steadily growing population, which increased manifold owing to new opportunities of employment and the improvement of health conditions. The new production methods neces-

sitated concentration of the population and led to the process of urbanization, which today is the dominant factor in human settlement and poses the greatest environmental problem of mankind. All these processes, which characterize the first phase of the Industrial Revolution, achieved increased intensity after World War II, when the new sources of energy came into full use. Therefore it seems opportune to deal with the two phases separately, regarding the interval between the two world wars as an intermediate period. It is not the aim of this chapter to describe the different elements of the Industrial Revolution; we shall conce.sr ourselves only with its implications for maritime trade and ports. However, it will be necessary to furnish a few figures

in order to illustrate the quantitive changes wrought by the Industrial Revolution in its first phase. This increase in the production of commodities, up to one hundredfold within one century, would not have been possible without a parallel development of transportation, and this was accomiplished by the railroad, the greatest revolution in continental transport to date. After trial experiments in Britain, the railway age was launched almost simultaneously in all industrial countries. The first com-, mercial railroads were built in England in 1825 (Stockton to Darlington) and 1830 (Liverpool—Manchester), followed by France (1832), and Germany (1835). In the USA the

PORTS AND THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION Population of Selected Countries at Selected Dates (millions) Region or Country North and Central

America South America Europe Asia

1650

1800

i 6

16 9 187

38) 20 266

602

749

330

Africa Oceania

2

World

1850

90 zi

1880

1900

1913

-

106 38 401

5 2

545

; 1450

1608

Production of Pig Iron (Steel since 1875) (thousand tons)

USA United Kingdom Germany France

1800

1820

1860

1875

1900

1913

: 200 —

20 400 100 200

800 3800 500 900

2000 6500 2000 1400

14000 9100 8500 2700

31500 10400 19300 $200

937

Russia

=

100

200

400

2900

4600

120 6

World

400

1700

7400

14000

41000

89000

1800

Industrial Countries

USA United Kingdom France Germany Russia Production of Coal (million tons)

1800 USA United Kingdom Germany France Russia

World

1868

1900

33 107

286 205

34 14

157 36

1

12

209

827

first few miles of the Baltimore—Ohio line were completed in 1830. The main breakthrough in railroad development occurred in the second half of the 19th century, when isolated lines were linked to form networks, connecting all parts of the industrialized countries and spanning the American continent in 1869. By the end of the 19th century all of the industrial countries had fully developed their networks, and few lines have been added since.

For the first time in history, land transportation had developed an instrument which was superior to water transport in safety, speed and accessibility, and capable of carrying on one train a load almost equivalent to that ofa ship. Its main drawback was the high cost of land acquisition and construction, which resulted in transportation costs much higher than those by water transport. The advent of the railroad heralded keen competition between land and water transport, either inland and along the coast, or across continents such as North America and Europe. Speed was weighed against costs, and these considerations resulted in low-priced mass commodities being carried by water, and valuable or perishable and complex commodities by rail. In our time this competition has been heightened by the introduction of container transport. It was natural that the increase in the quantity of goods to be transported presented a new challenge to shipping,

and this was met by increasing the number and size of ships. At the beginning of the 19th century the total carrying capacity of ships amounted to approximately 4 million tons (not including the fleets of the Indian Ocean and the Far East): approximately 40,000 ships of a size of 50—250 tons. By 1840, at the beginning of the railway age, this number had risen to 100,000 ships with a combined tonnage of about 10 million. By 1890 this figure had reached 23 million tons, and at the outbreak of World War I — 45 million tons (30,000 ships). The reduction in the number of ships was due to the increase in their average size to about 1500 tons. The total tonnage hauled increased at a greater pace than the carrying capacity of the ships, because round trips had been shortened both by reducing the time at sea and by speeding up the handling in the ports. However, while coping with the quantitative aspects of the new industrial age, shipping was hesitant to adopt the technological innovations of the Industrial Revolution. Although a steamboat had been developed by Fulton (1808) even before Stephenson perfected his locomotive (1823), it took much longer for the steamboat to gain general acceptance. As late as 1890 the tonnage of sailships was still equal to that of steamboats. The reason for this slow breakthrough lay in the fact that the change induced by the steamboat was much less revolutionary than that brought about by the railroad. The speed of a goods train was 10 to 20 times greater than that of any traditional land vehicle, and its carrying capacity from the outset was 50 times that ofa wagon. The increase in the efficiency of the steamboat was much smaller: the

An India clipper built in the 1860's.

PORTS AND THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION ¥

The World’s Fleets by Flag in 1914 (million tons)

World

Britain

A SSS

2 LO

USA

S):4

Germany

Sal

Italy Norway France

A

2-5

1D)

Japan Russia

LH

0.8

The number of steamships was about 24,000.

Early steamship with sails.

early steamboat was roughly twice as fast as a sailing ship and carried approximately double the cargo. Its only real advantage was its independence from wind conditions. Initially, the steamboat was even at a disadvantage, as most of its space was taken up by the engine, fresh water for steam and, especially, coal for fuel. In fact, the first steamboat to cross the Atlantic Ocean was loaded only with coal,

and even this was used up before the goal was reached. Thus, throughout the 19th century almost all steamships were still equipped with auxiliary sails. It was only with the construction of iron and steel ships (as from 1877) that the percentage of the payload could be increased by building larger vessels. In the meanwhile the need for carrying such large loads of coal had been reduced by the establishment of bunkering stations on islands along the route, such as the Canary Islands, Bermuda, and the Bahamas on the Atlantic route, and Perim (at the southern extremity of the Red Sea) on the Indian route. The steamboat made an early start in one particular field of ocean shipping — passenger transport. (Generally, it had been introduced into river transport much earlier.) A new type of ship, the “packet boat”, which sailed according to a fixed schedule, was developed for carrying mail, passengers and highly valued goods. It was introduced in the mid-19th century and heralded a new type of service: the “liner”. The first liner service was the Cunard line, which started in 1840 with ships of 1300 tons, which made the journey between Liverpool and Boston in 17 days. Once the superiority of the steamboat had been established, the building of new sailing boats virtually came to a halt, and steamboats became dominant both numerically and in tonnage. By 1889 the tonnage of steamboats was equal to that of sailing ships — but their number was obviously much smaller — and by 1913 steamboats carried almost 90% of the total tonnage. By the end of World War I the sailing boat had actually disappeared from the seas, except for the coastal trade in the Indian Ocean and Far East. Throughout the 19th century England was the dominant maritime nation. Its rise to supremacy has been described in brief on p. 28 and was given further endorsement during

Sp)

the Napoleonic wars, one of the results of which was the reduction of the French and Dutch fleets. The naval primacy of Britain at all stages of the Industrial Revolution further increased her lead, which was maintained throughout the century at a level of about 50% of the world’s shipping tonnage. Only at the beginning of the 20th century did Britain’s share in tonnage drop to 45%, owing to the rapid rise of the fleets of Germany and the USA. Only 4% of the steamers used oil as fuel, and the rest were powered by steam generated by the combustion of coal. Coal had also become the most important cargo, constituting about 20% of all goods transported by sea, fol-

lowed. by grain (13%), ores (10%) and timber (8%).

CHANGES IN THE LAYOUT OF PORTS

How could the ports adjust themselves to these new conditions? The greater number of ships called for a much larger area of protected water, and the much increased volume of goods necessitated more space on land. Neither was usually available in the existing ports. Even at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution the major ports were already overcrowded, and ships had to be loaded and unloaded with the aid of lighters and barges. On land the short stretches of quays were covered by warehouses and sheds, and the city centre — with its monumental buildings — had developed immediately behind them in order to be close to the port. There was no alternative but to enlarge the port area along the river front, since almost all major ports in the industrialized countries were located along estuaries. Fortunately, the need to constrain the port within the perimeter of the city walls no longer existed. However, extension upstream was not generally possible, since the original ports had been located at the uppermost limit of the tide, and further upstream the river was navigable only for river barges. On the other hand, the tidal range increased rapidly downstream, and the use of cranes and other implements was ruled out on account of the rise and fall of the ship’s deck with the tide.

HISTORICAL PORT CITIES

A 17th-century map of the British Isles. 1S)Ww

HISTORICAL PORT CITIES

ps (a int? Fart ares “ e arpa .

é

.

‘.

J i

ee eee iia

HISTORICAL PORT CITIES

(above) Venice, the “Queen of the Adriatic’: entrance to the Canale Grande. (left) The world-famous St. Mark’s

Square at the historical landing stage of the city. (opposite page) (top left) Santorin, the rim of the inundated crater of an exploded volcano. (top right) Sicily, the melting pot of Mediterranean civilizations. The monastery of Monreale. (bottom) The cathedral of Palermo.

WW GN

19th CENTURY

INNOVATIONS

The system of enclosed docks time in the port of Liverpool. ‘ks on the lower right, and srain elevator— in the centre.

was introduced for the first The picture shows older the latest addition—a giant Locks are shown on the left.

19th CENTURY

INNOVATIONS

(above) Specialized fishing ports were introduced with the coming of the railway. One of the first such ports was Grimsby. (left) The 19th century was the age of canal building. The Corinth Canal (completed in 1892) represents the deepest cut of these canals.

MODERN

38

SHIPBUILDI

MODERN

SHIPBUILDING

(above) A giant tanker in d at Marseille.

(opposite page)

(top) Construction of an oil drilling platform at Le Havre. (bottom) A giant tanker under

construction at Rotterdam.

MODERN

SHIPBUILDING

a ET ATE Lc Ste neni a

orm LP .

ieee ld

eh Ed aeea ee

ere SS]

AR ES LI

“

OY Sea, bate Bs An Te

Ww=

cS Oa oR

bE

Selah cre ee

(fOp

(bottor

40

ae

PORTS AND THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION The solution was found in the construction of docks;

such “wet docks” had already been introduced at the beginning of the 18th century in those ports which were sot located at the head of the tidal movement, but in pools and creeks branching off the tidal stretch of a river. Thus, the first dock in the world was constructed in 1715 ina part of the famous “Pool” of Liverpool on the Mersey. Its gates were opened only at high tide to keep the water level constant, but this naturally limited the time when ships could enter or leave the port. Five additional docks were built along the Mersey estuary by the end of the 18th century. In 1778 a dock was constructed in Kingston upon Hull along a former moat to the west of the city (see p. 162). The port of London possessed no docks in the 18th century, and offered only a stretch of less than 500 m of “legal” quays. With hundreds of ships waiting for weeks in the “Pool” and another thousand along the lower reaches of the Thames, the situation became chaotic. This congestion was relieved finally with the opening of the “West India Docks” in 1802 and of the “London Dock” in 1803,

thus starting the dock era that dominated port development throughout the 19th century. The topography of estuaries was a great advantage in dock construction, as excavation

of the soft earth was relatively easy, and the excavated material could be used to raise the level of the land for the construction of piers. The functioning of docks was greatly improved by the introduction of sluice gates (locks), which facilitated entrance to and departure from the docks at any stage of the tide. The advent of the railway posed new problems in port development. The foremost was the approach of the tracks to the harbour area. The location of a railway station was a problem for any historical city: a passenger terminal needed to be located near the historical city centre, but the latter was surrounded by densely built-up urban areas. Therefore, in most of the historical cities the terminal was erected at the fringe of the built-up area, and only in a few instances was the railroad brought to the city centre on elevated lines or (at the end of the 19th century) underground. Goods yards were always built on rural land on the outskirts of the city.

But in the case of port cities, goods had to be hauled by rail to the waterfront, and since the tracks could not cross the urban area, they had to skirt the city in order to reach the river beyond its limits. The link-up with the central part of the port was effected by reclaiming a stretch of land along the waterfront and turning it into railway sidings. Examples of this are numerous, e.g., in Amsterdam, Bordeaux and Antwerp (see maps). This technical solution had dire social consequences. It created a physical barrier between the port and the city, and whereas formerly a port was an area of intense contact between the population and its source of livelihood, and a centre of social gathering, it now became a separate entity, frequented only by persons whose work was connected with the port, and finally an area of lowest social prestige.

Railways and urban development: a comparison between Bordeaux (above) and Antwerp (below). For explanation of signs, see maps on p. 22.

Additional signs: 1 = medieval city extension 2 = dried river bed, former Roman port Port areas are marked with hatching.

Al

PORTS AND THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION LANGTON

CARRIERS

GRAVING DOCKS BRANCH DOCK

BRANCH NO 3

DOCK

GRAVING DOCK BRANCH

r

NO 3 GRAVING

DOCK

WELLINGTON DOCK

as BS

|

BRAMLEY - MOORE CK -

BROCKLEBANK

aie

re

al

BRANCH NO

GRAIN TERMINAL

ti

2NO BRANCH

Mm ROYAL SEAFORTH DOCK

ee 3S

GLADSTONE DOCK

1NO BRANCH

DOCK ORNBY BRANCH NO 3 ALEXANDR > H 9° OCK

Sh

LANGTON

STANLEY WAREHOUSE

DOCK

CLARENCE

RIVER MERSEY

rlla,

SANOON HALF

TIDE

DOCK

SV TATION POWER

EAST WATERLOO bock

WN

STANLEY DOCK COLLINGWOOD DOCK SALISBURY

LIVERPOOL DOCKS

GRAVING

ELECTRIC

i

DOCK

B+l TRAFALGAR/WATERLOO

nec sass

s

= PIER HEAD PRINCES HALF TIDE DOCK PRINCES LANDING STAGE

(above) The elaborate dock system of Liverpool. Quays and piers are in black. (right) The elevated railway which passed over the entire length of the docks in Liverpool, it is no longer in use.

The railway also exercised a strong influence on the lay- are forced to close down entire sections of their existing facilities, as for instance in London and New York (see out of ports. The huge quantities of goods carried by rail relevant chapters). demanded quicker handling and necessitated much larger Another outcome of the impact of railways on ports was berthing facilities for ships and a large number of cranes. the passenger terminal. It has already been pointed out (p. All these requirements were met by the “finger wharfs”, which were built at right angles to the shoreline and in- 32) that the first special steam-driven ship was the packet boat. Its main advantage was its speed, and speed was the creased the area of contact between ships and quay manifold. With the aid of finger wharfs a stretch of river ofa main means of competition employed by rival shipping length of 1 km could provide a quay length of 5 km. © lines, expressed in the contest for the “Blue Ribbon”, the A finger wharf or pier has a width of 25—60 m, and a award for the quickest ocean crossing. However, steamships could lose their speed advantage when forced to wait for length of 60—500 m. It could provide berths for 10—20 the tide in an estuary, winding their way through a crowded ships. Along its centre was a row of warehouses flanked by port and in the time-consuming passage through locks. railway lines on one or both sides, and its waterfront was In the search for new sites for passenger terminals the studded with cranes, which became the main visual symbol historical considerations governing port locations were comof a port (see p. 49). The combined length of railway pletely reversed. For many centuries ships had tried to sidings within a port measured tens or even hundreds of _ kilometres. penetrate as far inland as possible, since every mile of water transport was a gain over slow and inefficient land transport. The best example of the use of finger piers was to be With the advent of speedy and comfortable railway transfound in the port of New York, which at the height of the railway age possessed over 800 such piers, 250 of which port, passenger terminals were constructed either at the seawere employed for commercial ocean shipping. Liverpool ward end of an estuary or on peninsulas jutting far out into offers some 50 of these “‘fingers’’. the ocean — locations which in the preceding centuries had {t should be noted that while the finger pier was the been preferred for military ports. A high tidal range posed solution to the problems of the railway era, it is not able to no problems, since there was no need for cranes, and pasmeet the needs of a modern specialized port. The adaptasengers could embark and disembark via floating bridges tion of finger piers to present-day requirements is the and landing stages on pontoons. The most famous of these greatest problem confronting old, established ports, which landing stages was in Liverpool. Originally built in 1847 it

42

PORTS AND THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION has gradually been extended to a length of 800 m and is supported by 200 pontoons. It is connected to the pier by a number of bridges which swing up and down with the rise and fall of the tide. Shipping companies also competed in the size and spaciousness of their terminal buildings, especially in the sections for first-class passengers. The terminal buildings were directly linked to a railway terminal, where special boat trains were operated. Passenger terminals were of particular importance to London, whose port is about 100 km from the open sea, and whence Atlantic traffic has to sail around the Kentish peninsula. The choice for a passenger terminal fell on Southampton, which has the advantage of double tides. It was linked to London by railway (170 km) in 1839. A train ride of avout 5 hours (today less than two hours) saved a boat journey of more than 300 km or one day’s travel. Southampton also served as a port-of-call for packet boats from Germany (Bremen and Hamburg), Holland (Amster-

dam) and France (Le Havre). It thus became the largest passenger port in England, and in 1930 37% of all British ocean passenger traffic passed through it. Other passenger terminals for London were constructed at Dover (for traffic with France and southern Europe) and Harwich (for Holland and central Europe or Scandinavia). Within the port of London proper a passenger terminal was set up at Tilbury

as late as 1929. Other famous passenger terminals were built at Cuxhaven (for Hamburg), Bremerhaven (for Bremen) and Le Havre (for Rouen and Paris). Amsterdam and Rotterdam used the sandspit of the Hoek van Holland for their connections with Britain. In Canada, Halifax became the main passenger terminal in order to save the long journey into the mouth of the St. Lawrence River. Only New York did not require a special passenger terminal, as its port is situated only 12 km from the open ocean. It thus became virtually the sole point of entry for all passenger traffic from Europe and other continents, with each of the great lines maintaining a terminal of its own. The possibility of concentrating goods of one type with the aid of railways induced all larger ports to install special

Newport News: general cargo facilities; the railway shunting area in the background.

equipment for the handling of specific commodities. Thus each port used special docks or quays for different goods. In certain cases some ports became geared to specialization for a single purpose. An example of this is the fishing port. Whereas prior to the railway era fishing was carried out from many small harbours, the possibility of quick rail transport to the centres of consumption facilitated the concentration of installations for the freezing and processing of fish in certain locations. These became the principal fishing ports of their country. In Britain the main fishing ports were at Hull, Grimsby (see p. 37), Yarmouth, Aberdeen and Milford, in France — at Boulogne, Lorient and La Rochelle, and in Germany — at Cuxhaven, Bremerhaven and Kiel. A number of fishing ports were also developed in the USA and Canada with the growth in population. Another example of specialized ports were those engaged in the export of coal, mainly in Britain, where the major exporters were Newcastle, Cardiff, Newport, Immingham and Swansea, and in the USA, especially the ports of Virginia (see p. 208). Some of these ports were owned and constructed by railway companies, in order to draw traffic to their lines.

REGIONAL DIFFERENTIATION The Industrial Revolution arrived in the Mediterranean region late in the 19th century. The first half of that century was a period of economic and political decline, owing to the loss of the Spanish colonies, the Napoleonic wars,

Passenger terminals in New York.

the Greek War of Independence and the Italian War of Unification. The economy remained rural, and industrial development was severely hampered by the lack of coal. Railway development was impeded by the mountainous terrain of most of the area. The gap in development between the industrializing nations of Western Europe and the countries

43

PORTS AND THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

A passenger-car ferry liner passing through the Suez Canal.

of the Mediterranean, especially those under Turkish rule, widened throughout the century, and the Mediterranean was a kind of backwater in global transportation. This situation changed with the completion of the Suez Canal in 1869, which restored to the Mediterranean its historical role as a major axis of communications, and with the breaching of the barrier of the Alps by railway tunnels. On the completion of the Vienna-Trieste line in 1857, Trieste became the first port to be connected by rail to the centre of Europe. It enjoyed a period of prosperity as the only

pletely occupied by the existing installations. The rocky coasts are too narrow to allow for modern port construction. The only solution was to resort to the costly method of reclaiming land from the sea. This had to be done by building breakwaters or moles, mainly parallel to the shore adjoining the historical port, deepening the area between the mole and the land, using the excavated sand and rocks to build a narrow stretch of new land for port installations and railways, and increasing the quay length by means of finger

port of the huge Austro-Hungarian empire, which later on (1875) established a second railroad link with the port of Fiume (today Rijeka). Genoa experienced a revival with the construction of the St. Gotthard tunnel in 1881. The most important port on the Mediterranean was Marseille, whose ascent began with the French conquest of Algeria in 1830. It became the main link between France and her new empire in North Africa and was soon connected by rail to the traffic corridor of the Rhone valley. Marseille was the first city to develop a modern port in the Mediterranean (1847). Enlargement and modernisation of ports in the Mediterranean had to follow completely different lines from those

Since the hills generally abut directly on the shore, the reclaimed area was still very limited. Crowding and congestion plagued the new areas from the outset, and railways often had to approach the port via tunnels (see p. 82). Thus, even the new ports had little space for industrial development, and this disadvantage became crucial in the latest phase of port development (see next chapter). However, there was one advantage to this. The historical port fringing the bay was not touched and the direct contact between it and the city was not disrupted. Today the “Old Ports” serve as yachting and sporting harbours, and their shores cater to the recreational needs of citizens and tourists alike. This is what gives most of the Mediterranean ports their romantic character (see p. 84; 111). Greece, too, revived an ancient project by cutting a canal through the Isthmus of Corinth. This canal, constructed in the years 1881—1893, is only 6 km long, but it has the deepest cut of any canal — 68 m from the edge of the plateau to the bottom of the waterway — and requires no locks. Its prime goal was to integrate the port of Piraeus in

in the North Sea and Atlantic. In the latter, extension was

achieved by excavating basins and docks in the muddy tidal flats, and the main problem was the tidal range which increased downstream. There is no tide in the Mediterranean (see p. 66), but there are also no river mouths, except a few deltas which are completely silted and provide the least favourable conditions for port construction. The original sites of the historical ports were bays or inlets, but these were too shallow for steamships and their wharfs were com-

44

piers.

the new route to the Suez Canal, without the need of a

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION lengthy detour, and the expansion of that port was indeed started with the completion of the canal. But its narrowness and shallowness precluded its use for modern shipping, and today it mainly serves Greek coastal shipping and pleasure cruises (see p. 37). The port development of the Industrial Revolution also strongly affected the “New World”. The Atlantic ports of North America were directly influenced by it, the ports of the Great Lakes followed with railway development, and the Pacific ports became centres for trade with the Far East as soon as the latter was opened up for “Western trade”,

but received their main impetus in the 1870s from the transcontinental railways. The terminals of these railways,

such as San Diego and Los Angeles, and in particular San Francisco, Seattle and Vancouver, became ports of global importance. All featured “classic” examples of finger piers. An important fact was the completion of the Panama Canal (1914) which shortened considerably the distance between American Atlantic and Pacific ports (see p. 190). In other parts of the world port development was mainly the outcome of colonialism. Although South America gained its independence from Spain and Portugal early in the 19th century, it came under the strong economic influence of the United States. The ports in South America were de-

veloped mainly for the purpose of exporting agricultural products (coffee, meat, grain, sugar). In Africa the gradual abolition of slave trade in the first half of the 19th century in favour of exploitation of agricultural and mineral resources resulted in constant shifts in the location of ports (see p. 247). But modern, deepwater ports did not make their appearance until the 20th century. Most striking was the development of ports in South Asia and the Far East, owing to the expansion of the British Empire. Most of these ports, such as Aden, Colombo#Bombay, Calcutta, Singapore, Hongkong, Sydney and Wellington, combined a strategic role with commercial activities. Japan was forced by the United States to open its ports, and Yokohama became its first modern port, but it soon took the initiative in developing others. China, too, built modern ports under the threat, and sometimes military occupation, of the industrialized powers. Examples are Shanghai, Canton, Port Arthur and Tsingtao. Russia fortified its positions on the Pacific Ocean with the development of Vladivostok. At the outbreak of World War I, which marks the end of the first phase of the Industrial Revolution, modern ports existed throughout the world, the most important of which were those visited by the passenger liners.

The Shipping Revolution THE RISE IN POPULATION AND PRODUCTION

The first half of the 20th century brought no revolutionary changes in the world of shipping and ports, but was a period of gradual development of trends which had been established in the previous century. Major breakthroughs in transportation took place on land and in the air. The motor vehicle became the dominant means of overland transportation, and air transport was in the early stages of development, but was yet unable to provide a regular transoceanic service. The evolutionary changes in shipping took the form of the final replacement of sailing boats by steamships or motor-vessels, and the gradual supersedure of coal by mineral oil as fuel. The latter facilitated an increase in the size of ships, but the prevailing average size of cargo ships remained 2500—8000 tons. Port development also followed the established pattern. More ports, especially in less-developed countries, constructed deep-water berthing facilities or enlarged existing ones by extending breakwaters or building new docks. The preferred layout was still based on the finger pier. In the vast majority of ports, cargo was still being loaded and unloaded by cranes of 2—5 tons capacity and shifted within the port by wheel-barrow or muscle

power.

Industrial production had reached its peak in 1913, and recovery after World War I was slow. It actually declined in the wake of the Depression of 1929-34, only to be followed by the total disruption of civilian life in World War II. When viewed in a historical context, World War II appears as the catastrophic termination of an era that was marked by the predominance of Europe. By the end of the war Europe was left with tens of millions of dead, millions of refugees, hundreds of cities totally or partly in ruins, most of its industrial capacity destroyed, and a change of the political and economic system in its eastern and central sectors.

The political dominance of European powers over large parts of the other continents — in the form of colonies — was broken, in Asia immediately

after the war, in Africa

around 1960. However, the former colonies’ struggle for independence led to new wars, especially in India and Indochina, and in their wake to millions of new refugees. The Pacific War, which culminated in the dropping of the atomic bomb, had also caused much loss of life and property and resulted in the American occupation of Japan and the rise of communist China as a new aspirant to the status of a world power.

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION For a short while the USA emerged as the only world power, being the sole possessor of atomic weapons, but it soon had to share this possession with the USSR. This polarisation of world power still exists today, but the two “superpowers” are obliged to take into account the formation of new blocks: Western Europe, combined in the “Common Market”, China and the “Third World” of former colonial

or semicolonial countries.

Population Growth 1950—1975

(millions)

% 1950

1960

1970

166 164

199 216

226 283

America, North America, South

Asia*

1S)

in 25 years

401

83

23,1 324

43 96

1368

1644

2027

2256

Europe*

392

425

459

473

65 Pa

USSR

180

214

243

255

42

12

16

19

Australia and

Oceania

2M

67

3967

58

834

1077

38

1667

2890

WD

World Industrialized

countries Developing countries

* Excluding the USSR.

This table shows not only the enormous growth of the world’s population, especially in the years 1960—70, but also

the difference

between

the industrialized

countries,

Europe in particular, and the — mainly new — non-industrialized states, whose share in the total population has

risen from 66.6% in 1950 to 72.8% in 1975. The population explosion dictated no less revolutionary changes in all branches of the economy, starting with food supply. In order merely to maintain the growing population of the world at its former standard of living, a 60% increase in agricultural production would have been necessary. However, in actuality, the population of the developing countries, which had been living on the verge of starvation, aspired to an improvement in their living conditions after gaining independence, whereas the industrialized peoples demanded improvements in the quality and variety of their food. Thus, great scientific and technological effort was required to bring about the “green revolution”: the cultivation of new high-yield strains, the introduction of mechanization and the use of chemical fertilizers, and the cultivation of virgin lands in all climatic regions. Special attention was paid to improving methods of preservation, transportation and marketing of agricultural products. By all these means the volume of agricultural production was increased 145% in 25 years.

46

However, the main goal of all development projects was the increase in industrial production, which meant not only advances in technoldgy, but primarily the development of new sources of energy and raw materials. Initially, the greatest hopes were placed on the development of nuclear energy, but these were not realized, and nuclear energy at present does not provide more than a small fraction of all energy resources. Huge hydro-electric projects considerably increased the production of electricity from this source, but it still furnishes only about one quarter of all electricity consumed. Thus, 75% of electricity is still produced in thermal power plants. The overall increase in electric power supply greatly surpasses the growth in population. Consumption of electricity rose from 854 billion kWh in 1950 to 2825 billion kWh in 1963 and to 6722 billion kWh in 1976, a total increase of 687%. The most significant change in energy supply is the transition from coal to petroleum. The latter is used not only for the generation of electricity, but also as the almost exclusive fuel for all means of transportation. Today coal is virtually no longer used as fuel for ships, and in railways it is employed only in some marginal regions. It was never used for motor vehicles and air transport. It is still needed as an industrial raw material in the production of iron and steel and in chemical industries. But petroleum has superseded it in petrochemical industries and especially in the production of synthetic materials. Thus coal is one of the few raw materials that has lagged behind the rise in population. Its production increased from 1948 million tons in 1950 to 1956 million tons in 1960 and then dropped to 1384 million tons in 1976. The increase in the production of lignite was greater: from 305 million tons in 1950 to 898 million tons in 1976, an overall gain of 183%. In contrast, petroleum has experienced the greatest increase of all raw materials: 523 million tons in 1950; 1053 million tons in 1960; 2250 million tons in 1970; and 2774 million tons in 1976; a total growth of 430%. The increase in production of other basic raw materials was also considerable and greatly surpassed the rise in population.

The amount of iron ore mined rose from 93 million tons in 1950 to 500 million tons in 1975, a total increase of

438%. Production of steel grew from 188 million tons in 1950 to 643 million tons (a rise of 242%), and the corresponding figures for cement were approximately 200 million tons and 711 millions (a rise of 255%). The main change in the production of raw materials — aside from the replacement of coal by petroleum — was geographical. Whereas prior to World War II most of these minerals were mined in the Northern Hemisphere, a con-

stant shift to the Southern Hemisphere is now taking place. However, since the principal users of these raw materials are still concentrated in the industrialized countries of the Northern Hemisphere, transport distances have increased enormously, a fact which is of special significance for maritime transportation.

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION This tremendous increase in the supply of food, energy and industrial raw materials reveals that up to the present the earth’s resources have been able to cope with the population growth and rise in demand. It has also created new problems relating to the conservation of the environment and preservation of reserves of raw materials, but these topics are beyond the scope of this book. The manifold growth in production in all branches of the economy has placed heavy demands on all types of transportation. Land transport has met these demands by introducing more efficient rail transport, but mainly by developing more flexible road transport. The increase in the number of trucks and automobiles has been more revolutionary than the developments in all other branches of the economy. For long-distance passenger transport the aeroplane has virtually replaced the passenger liners and trains. These two developments are principally responsible for the increase in consumption of petroleum. Sea transport has nevertheless retained all its advantages. The transfer of bulk cargoes across the oceans is still only possible by boat (cargo transport by plane is still confined to the most valuable or perishable goods), and, wherever feasible, sea transport is still the cheapest. The increase in the cargo carried by ships in external trade is shown in the following table:

World Sea-borne External Traffic (in millions of tons)

Year

All cargo

Petroleum

As in the case of the world’s population, the largest increase took place in the years between 1960 and 1970. The change in the geographical location of mineral sources has given rise to an even greater increase in tonmileage. The statistical records are less detailed, but figures

Commodity

1966

relating to the last decade are available for the five main bulk commodities and crude oil. The annual rate of increase averaged 6% in tonnage and 8% in ton-miles. In the case of crude oil there was an annual increase of 8.8% in tonnage and 14.6% in ton-miles. If the global movement of mineral raw materials is detailed according to continents or economic regions, a large difference is noted between despatching and receiving regions. The main despatchers are the developing countries, while the main receivers are the industrialized regions;

NEW

TYPES

OF

SHIPS

The almost six-fold increase in sea-borne cargo necessitated a similar increase in shipping space, and the even larger increase in ton-mileage called for a yet greater growth of the world’s fleets in order to cope with the additional travelling time. On the other hand, World War II had inflicted tremendous losses on all shipping fleets, owing to submarine warfare, the bombing of ports and the conversion of merchant vessels for military use. Fortunately, the American ship-building industry had adapted itself to the system of mass production, not only to overcome war-time losses at sea, but also to enlarge the available shipping space by increasing the average size of the mass-produced, standardized vessels:

to

10,400

dwt

for general cargo vessels of the

“Liberty” type, and to 16,600 tons for tankers of the T-2 type. The Liberty ship had a draft of 8.66 m and an average speed of 11 knots. Some 2700 vessels of this type were built during the war. A speedier variety was the “Victory” ship, of which 414 were built. Its size was 10,700 GRT with a draft of 9.08 m, and it was able to develop a speed of 16.9 knots. The number of T-2 tankers reached 707. In the first post-war years, these ships carried the bulk of the world’s maritime trade and, with the arrival of new types of ships, found their way gradually to less-developed nations. However, the shipping needs of the late 1950’s and especially of the 1960’s necessitated the construction of many more ships, which meant primarily a huge increase in ship-building capacity. In view of the nature of this industry, which is highly sophisticated and draws on the products of many other industrial branches, especially the production of steel, only highly industrialized countries were able to set up new shipyards. To this day ship building is almost exclusively concentrated in the industrial regions of North America, northwestern Europe, Japan and, since the late 1960’s, also in the Soviet Union and its affiliates in Cen-

= =

million metric tons billion ton—miles

tral Europe. Smaller numbers of ships are also constructed in the northern Mediterranean (see p. 107), South Africa and Australia. The developing countries are able to provide at least some of the repair facilities.

47

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION eS

Ss

TUN

million

Ye

Xs

ton

300 2100 log 50

Maritime trade of major world regions (1937-1975).

The growth of the world’s merchant fleet is reflected in the following figures. 1950: 84.6 million GRT 1960: 109.8 million GRT 1970: 227.5 million GRT 1975: 342.1 million GRT

These figures show that the percentage-increase in shipping space was smaller than that of cargoes and this gap was closed by considerably increasing the speed of ships so as to utilize the available shipping space for more turn-arounds. The smaller increase in the number of ships relative to that in tonnage was the result of the enlargement of the average size of vessels. The latter was the most important factor leading to the “shipping revolution”. It was made possible by developments in technology which found formulas for the stability of longer ships, devised new means of propulsion, and provided new steel alloys for the hulls. It was motivated by the laws of “economy of scale”. In ship building, a two-dimensional increase in steel plates creates a three-dimensional increase in carrying space. A ship of 20,000 dwt does not need twice as much steel or labour as a ship of 10,000 dwt. _ It has the advantage over two ships of 10,000 dwt each of ‘needing only one engine and one crew. Thus the cost of construction of one ton capacity and the cost of transporting one ton of cargo decrease with the increase in size, and the larger the ship the greater the saving. However, some of these advantages would be lost if the doubled cargo carried by the larger ship would demand twice the labour force or time for loading and unloading. The saving of costs in the larger ship could be effective only if new methods of cargo handling were introduced simultaneously (see p. 62). Thus, in the beginning, there was

48

no advantage to carrying general cargo and having it loaded and unloaded in the traditional way. On the contrary, the larger size of the ship would make access to the different holds more difficult, thus increasing the cost of handling the cargo. Therefore, the larger ships were initially used only for hauling bulk cargo, and the introduction of new handling techniques proved to be most effective if these ships carried only one type of cargo. A necessary outcome of the introduction of larger ships was the specialization of cargo. Thus, the term “large ship” became more or less synonymous with “specialized ship”. The pioneer of the new development was the oil tanker. Because of the nature of its cargo it was a specialized ship from the outset, using specialized equipment (pumps) for loading and unloading and able to increase its handling © facilities at will by the employment of more or stronger pumps. By the end of World War II, the standard tanker of the T2 type, with 16,600 dwt, already ranked among the largest cargo ships afloat. When, in the late 1950’s, the “Tina Onassis” (45,000 dwt) was completed in Hamburg, it was already called a “supertanker”’. By today’s standards it is a small tanker. In 1967 tankers had already reached the size of 200,000 dwt, and by 1973 (before the beginning of the _ “oil crisis”) there were 206 tankers of 200,000—250,000 dwt and 87 of more than 250,000 dwt, but 350 additional tankers of over 200,000 tons were already on order. The largest ship now in service is the Batillus with 550,000 dwt, and even larger tankers, up to 1 million tons, were previously on order, which have now been cancelled. The influence of the oil crisis on the construction of new supertankers is evident from the fact that orders for new tankers dropped from an overall tonnage of 106 million in 1973 to 27 million in 1974 and to 3 million in 1975.

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION Since the dimensions of the supertankers have become critical for their use on sea routes and in canals and ports, they are given in the following table.

Dimensions of Oil Tankers

Approximate Average Length

Less than 16,600

20,000—33,000 34,000-65,000 66,000—130,000 131,000—200,000 ViECEe

200,000—350,000

ULCC 350,000—450,000 Larger than 450,000

Average

Number of Ships (1976)

Draft

184 = Sam 160—207 m 210—260m 260—290m 290-310 m

7.5-10m

=

10.5—12.5 m 11.0—13.0 13-16 m 18m

1000 1200 300 200

Conventional handling of general cargo (steel coils).

310—325m

320-330m 330-335 m

The construction of the supertankers provided the pattern for that of other types of specialized large ships, the most important of which are the following: ore carriers, grain carriers, liquid bulk

carriers

(vegetable

oils, wine,

chemicals), liquid natural gas carriers (LNG), and certain combination ships for alternative uses, such as OBO (oilbulk-ore) or combined ore and grain carriers. The share of these types of ships in the world’s fleet is shown in the following table.

World Fleet by Type of Ships (1977) Number of

Ships Total Tankers Bulk carriers less than 40,000 tons

40,000—100,000 tons more than 100,000 tons

Container ships full containers mixed containers multideck Ro-Ro LASH Liquid gas carriers Liquid chemical carriers Passenger + cargo General cargo General cargo, multideck

Tonnage (millions)

GRT

dwt

325315 7093

motives, and in every form of package (barrels, boxes, rolls, coils, crates, etc.) All these goods still had to be handled and stored individually, a time-consuming process calling for much manpower. They also give rise to much difficulty in distributing the cargo over the ship’s holds. But it is precisely this type of cargo that very often requires speedy delivery and is carried by cargo liner services. Attempts at optimizing the transport of these goods led first to the introduction of “unitized cargo”’, i.e., large con-

signments with similar packing were stacked between pallets and could then be handled as one unit, not only in the ports but also in land transport. The handling of pallets also facilitated the introduction of the fork lift as the main means of transferring cargo from the quays to the sheds or freight cars and trucks, or even inside a ship’s hold. This change has proved so successful that today palletisation and the use of fork lifts have become the standard procedures for handling most of the general cargo, especially timber and other forest products. This method is also employed in the transport of fruit and vegetables (often in special refrigerated ships), chemicals in barrels, paper, or iron and steel products.

3826 2949 We 124

741 406 Dn) 62 27 493 492 380 10,671 11,010

All these revolutionary innovations had no effect on the most valuable cargo carried by ships, the “general cargo” consisting of items of all sizes, from small parcels to loco-

A conventional general cargo quay at Bordeaux.

49

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION However, the breakthrough in general cargo handling came with the introduction of the container, a solid box of wood, aluminium or steel, first used in 1956 on the lines plying between the Pacific coast of the USA and Honolulu. The main condition for the introduction of the container in international trade was agreement on the standard length (10°, 20’, 40’) and width (8’) of the boxes, but not their height. This was one of the rare cases where all shipping authorities have agreed on standardization of equipment, thus making possible the handling of any container at any port. The advantage of the container lies not only in the quicker handling on the quay, but also in creating a means of transport “from door to door” through coordination of sea and land transport. As the handling of containers in a port calls for special quays and expensive equipment, and since the labour-saving use of containers met with strong opposition from labour unions, it was not until the late 1960’s that some ports agreed to handle containers. The “container revolution” took place mainly in the 1970’s. Initially, containers were carried by general cargo ships, in special holds or on deck, but specialized container ships were soon built, increasing in size with new “‘generations”’. The “first generation” consisted of part container vessels or converted general cargo vessels, and carried on the average 260—700 containers per ship. The “second generation” already consisted of specially built full container ships of about 27,000 GRT, able to carry 1500 containers. The “third generation” made a great leap forward, reaching 55,000 tons and a carrying capacity of 3000 containers. The ships have a length of 300 m and a draft of 12.5m.A further increase in size is not feasible at present because of the limitations imposed by the Panama

Canal, one of the

main container routes of the world. The number of container ships is constantly increasing. In 1964

there were

only 36 full container

ships, 23 of

which were converted general cargo boats. By 1973 this number had risen to 624, of which 151 were converted. In addition, 319 part container vessels were in service. The total number of container vessels increased to 651 in 1976.

Handling ofa container.

50

Unfortunately, there are no statistics,sshowing which part of general cargo is now carried by containers, and many ports are not yet equipped with full container handling facilities. In the largest container ports of the world, between 50 and 75% of all break bulk cargo is already carried in containers. The latest means of transporting general cargo, which appears to be about to become a major feature in shipping, is the Roll-on Roll-off vessel, briefly referred to as Ro-Ro. It is based on the military landing craft used in World War II or on railway trajects ferrying railway cars over short distances. It is equipped with openings at the stern or bow, or both, and sometimes on the flanks of the ship. Wheeled cargo, like export cars, tractors and, of late especially, heavy earth-moving equipment, can enter the undivided

hold under its own power, while other cargo, including containers, is wheeled in on trailers or moved by large fork lifts, so that loading and unloading can be accomplished within a very short time. Actually, the principle of Ro-Ro had already found earlier application in car ferries carrying passengers and their cars to islands or across narrow seas. The main difference between the Ro-Ro ship and the ferry boat is that the former lacks passenger facilities. In addition to rapid handling of cargo, a further advantage of the Ro-Ro vessel is that it requires no equipment in the port and only needs space for assembling the trucks or trailers. These ships take up little room along the quays, as they are able to moor with their stern to the quay (see p. 61). The necessary bridge ramp can be carried on board, thus facilitating the movement of cargo even in undeveloped ports. This is the reason why the congested ports of oil-producing countries have lately given first priority to Ro-Ro vessels. The essential disadvantage of the Ro-Ro ship is the incomplete utilization of the available loading room. The holds cannot be filled to capacity, as the trailers and motor vehicles cannot be loaded one on top of the other (although latest Ro-Ro models have installed horizontal partitions). The most recent development in this field are ships of a combination type — containers and Ro-Ro — using their own gantry crane for container handling. These are especially useful for carrying containers to ports of developing countries which cannot afford to build their own container terminals. The first of these vessels, of the “Tarros” type, can carry 113 twenty-foot containers. The second generation, the “Strider”, of 6500 tons, is already able to carry 330 TEU’s in four tiers below deck and two tiers on the weather deck. Another variety of the container vessel is the LASH boat (see p. 62), or its larger version, the Seabee. Instead of containers it carries closed barges of 300-ton capacity, which can be lowered into the water by the ship’s gear and then be towed by tugs to other parts of the port or, especially, along inland water routes. The home of the LASH is New Orleans, where sea transport links up with river naviga-

Unloading containers from a Ro-Ro ship at Bordeaux.

tion on the Mississippi. It was also hoped that the LASH would prove suitable for ports in developing countries, but these expectations were not realized because the stripping of the barges in the port takes a longer time than was anticipated, and there is too little return cargo available. A LASH ship would thus either have to wait for its own barges or to return with empty barges. In order to maintain its turnaround speed, a LASH ship would need four sets of barges for the actual transport of one loaded barge, and the financial investment is too great to be economical. At the beginning of this section it was stated that the building and running costs of one ton capacity are smaller for a large vessel. However, owing to the size of the large vessel, the overall costs are much greater than those for a small ship. The huge investments in large ships dictate the most effective utilization of their capacities. As interest and amortization or running and maintenance may run to as much as $25,000 per day, the shipping company is interested in wasting as little time as possible on the voyage, entering the port and for cargo handling. Therefore, speed has become one of the major criteria in shipping. Cruising speed has been increased to 24 knots, but the location of ports or terminals has also become a crucial issue. Whereas throughout history a situation on the inner shore of a bay or upriver in estuaries provided the greatest advantages (see p. 116), a port located directly on the

coastline or even at the tip of a peninsula is preferable today from the viewpoint of the shipping companies. An upstream voyage of 4—5 hours would mean the loss of halfa day.

THE

CONTEMPORARY

PORT

The speed of handling in the port has taken on even greater importance. Waiting time for berthing space and slow handling could make the use of a certain port unprofitable for a shipping company. The ability of a port to provide sufficient cargo for one destination and, even more important, the availability of a return cargo became prime considerations in the choice of line terminals. This obviously led to a preference for large, well-organized ports serving a large hinterland. All these considerations worked to the advantage of the large ports, while the smaller ports were left for older and smaller vessels. On the other hand, ship users are interested in the speedy delivery of their goods (the longer the travelling time, the larger the interest payments, either by the despatcher or the receiver), and this also rules in favour of the large ports, which are served by many liner services. Thus, the counterpart of the giant ship is the giant port.

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION

cee

Lambert Point Docks of Norfolk on the Elizabeth River. Coal piers can be seen on the upper right.

At the end of World War II no port was prepared for the onslaught of so many innovations all at once. An average depth of 9-10 metres was regarded as sufficient for quays or for passage through ocean-shipping canals. The prevailing construction of finger piers left an apron of 9-15 metres between the quay and the warehouses, depending on the length of the arms of the crane. A port was considered to be very large if it handled about 10—20 million tons, and large if it coped with 2—5 million tons. The new ships called for completely different conditions. Container ships of the second generation have an average draft of 10 m; those of the third generation, 12.5 m; a large ore carrier, 17 m,a VLCC, 22 m; and a ULCC, 26 m. Not only did very few ports offer such depths along the quays, but many even lacked sufficiently deep approaches, and approach channels had to be excavated over great distances. Still greater was the problem of handling the vastly increased quantities of goods. Speedy unloading of the cargo of a giant ship primarily calls for a large area for temporary storage, until the cargo can be moved to trains or trucks or to permanent storage. A modern container ship requires a back-up space of about 250 m width for each berth (see p. 60) and a bulk terminal of about 50—100 m. An oil terminal must have tank farms able to receive hundreds of thousands of tons of oil and to pump them further in order to make room for the oil cargo of the next ship to arrive. Most of the existing ports were unable to find this additional space. The conventional finger piers proved to be completely

unsuitable

sidings, commercial buildings and the town itself prevent any extension of the port in this direction. In ports of the “Mediterranean type”, mountains enclose the city and the bays and prevent any enlargement whatsoever. Theoretically, the best solution would have been to abandon the existing ports and to build new ports at suitable locations having all the necessary space, equipment and inland transportation. However, this is not possible in practice. A port is not only the site where cargoes are handled, it is also a complex social organism. The case studies presented in this book will show that there exists an organic, historical relationship between a port and its city, an economic and social infrastructure of financial institutions and shipping firms, of merchants and port workers, of political and municipal forces. The interaction between port and city is of vital importance to both. The creation of new ports was feasible only for the transportation of minerals and crude oils. Petroleum is a new cargo and its handling is not based on any historical tradition. Most of the oil entering international trade is produced in developing countries, much of it in virtually unpopulated deserts or tropical forests. Thus, the majority of ports constructed since World War II are oil-exporting ports: 17 on the shores of the Persian Gulf, 6 on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean, and 10 on the North African coast. There are also some new oil exporting ports around the Caribbean Sea and in Indonesia. On the receiving end the number of new oil ports is much smaller. Many existing ports have added oil-receiving facilities, and a small number of specialized oil-importing ports have been newly constructed only in Western Europe

and Japan. In the export of minerals, especially iron ore, the switch to the Southern Hemisphere has resulted in the establishment of a number of new ports, while ore-importing facilities have been set up mainly as part of iron and steel complexes. The largest new iron ore exporting ports are Dam-

for meeting these demands, as the

existing warehouses, railway lines and roads leave only a few metres for temporary storage. Further inland, railway

A crowded container terminal in the port of Haifa.

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION lands or peninsulas. The best examples of modern harbours of this type are the Japanese ports or the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. In the Mediterranean, instead of broad artificial islands, long breakwater-piers were constructed parallel to the shore, as in Marseille or Genoa. Even before World War II the availability of cheap transport of raw materials had induced some material-intensive industries to move to a shore location and to build their own harbours. This mainly involved steel works, ard the best examples of this seawards move are provided by the steel works near Chicago and Detroit, Sparrows Point (near Baltimore) and Port Talbot on the coast of South Wales in Britain. This shift gained momentum after the war and included also oil-refining and petrochemical industries. With the onset of the construction of new ports or downstream sections, this trend led to the concept of the MIDA (Maritime Industrial Development Area), a planned industrial area within the new port, providing a comprehensive infrastructure An oil tanker along pier: the oil terminal of Le Verdon in the port complex of Bordeaux.

pier and Port Hedland in Northwest Australia (about 35 million tons each) and Tubarao in Brazil (53 million tons). In order to create the necessary facilities for the new type of port, the tasks of providing additional space and deep water were tackled simultaneously by digging deepwater basins and using the excavated material for the reclamation of strips of land wide enough to furnish the necessary back-up space. It was easiest to do this in ports located upstream on a tidal river. The estuary is usually covered by mud flats which can readily be excavated, and the general level of the area can be raised by sand and mud fills. Thus, most of the European ports bordering on the North Sea or Atlantic Ocean either extended their ports down-river or established outlying ports at the mouth of the river or in its proximity. This gave rise to new problems because of the increase in the tidal range towards the sea. It became necessary to build huge wet docks, which now rank among the largest in the world, e.g., at Le Havre (for ships of 320,000 tons, see p. 126), Dunkirk (200,000 tons), Antwerp (180,000 tons), Wilhelmshaven (100,000 tons), Liverpool (100,000 tons), Amsterdam-Ijmuiden

(100,000 tons), Saint Nazaire (80,000 tons) and Bremerhaven (80,000 tons). The sections of ports utilized for oil terminals generally need no sluices, as the functioning of tanker pumps is unaffected by tidal differences. Thus, near Le Havre, the largest oil terminal, able to receive tankers of up to 550,000 tons, was constructed at the open sea at Antifer, protected by two large breakwaters. However, in regions lacking estuaries the problem was even greater, especially in the Mediterranean, Japan, on the Pacific coast of North America and in Africa. Here the only possible solution was reclamation of land from the sea at much greater depth through the formation of artificial is-

of railways, roads, pipelines, water supply, fire-

fighting equipment, etc. The new ports or sections were particularly attractive for this purpose, as they could offer almost unlimited space on reclaimed land for space-intensive industries, even those such as car assembly plants that did not require direct sea-borne supplies. In the existing ports or port sections, such space is almost unavailable, as most of the land is already put to other uses. Its transformation into an industrial site would demand much time and even more money for the transfer of existing property rights and the laying down of a new infrastructure. On the other hand, the port authorities would be able to recover part of their huge investments by leasing or, in some cases, selling reclaimed land with a direct approach to a canal or basin. The idea of the MIDA differs from the former concept of locating industries along waterfronts, especially popular in North America. There, from the beginning, ports had developed as an agglomerate of wharfs and piers, each constructed privately by railway companies or industrial plants lacking any coordinating authority. Generally, port authorities were established much later and were obliged to cope with the existing situation (see p. 280). All these industrial sites had been established at a time when production was on a much smaller scale than at present, and no space was left for further extensions, except by expensive acquisition of occupied land. The MIDA’s are constructed according to a master plan and generally offer space in excess of present industiral needs. A good example of the execution of this policy is the chemical plant of BASF (Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik, a German concern) in the port of Antwerp (see p. 157). BASF has acquired an area four times greater than its current needs, and has built the works in such a way that each section can be enlarged separately. In view of the different conception of the roles of private enterprise and public initiative in the USA, the MIDA concept has not been applied there. It has found its main

53

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION

9]

p

Sg = * iamf? s 0 mm 9° 7am 1°tam #*aay = 4 ; Som) s* am 6° lm p> ,

Los

r

i> ee Be one 4 ne

‘eer

Seyt eo

p>ee 7 PTSs ay By Stee y Beet

ke

t$: 4 —

fim 5

kone.a

te a

a!

fom

»A

€

ay

ss)

(a “ "at

i

0

e

Cars for export are loaded on a specialized ship in the Bassens section of the port of Bordeaux.

expression in Japan and Western Europe. In the Mediterranean because of the limited possibility of reclaiming large tracts of land, only Marseille-Fos has been able to employ this principle. The difference in historical development also produced another disparity in the new industrial ports. In the USA the construction of private industrial port facilities was started at a time when the population was still relatively small and sea fronts or river banks were little used for other purposes. Thus, already by the end of the 19th century, ports stretched for many kilometres along the waterfront. The port of New Orleans had no need to build finger piers and stretches more than 80 km along both banks of the Mississippi, while a further stretch of 50 km on both banks between New Orleans and Baton Rouge is occupied by chemical industry. The ports of Philadelphia (““Ameriport”’) occupy about 60 km of waterfront along the Delaware river, and the port of New York streaches for a length of 30 km and with the aid of finger piers provides about 100 km of berthing space. The new industrial ports in Europe and Japan are located within densely settled regions and built on compact lines. Estuaries or canals serve as the axis of these ports, from which side canals or basins extend at right angles. The

54

best examples are Hamburg, Rotterdam and Amsterdam. Hamburg port stretches for 15 km along the Elbe, but provides a quay length of 43 km for ocean-going ships and of 22 km for river transport. The port of Amsterdam extends for 15 km along the North Sea Canal and provides a quay length of about 45 km. The new giant ports engage in all activities, including (with few exceptions) receipt of crude oil. There is no specialization, though one port or other may place greater emphasis on a certain type of cargo handling. Only three of the ten largest container ports also belong to the group of the 20 largest ports in the world, each of which handles at least 50 million tons. Within this elite group the rank of a port in handling of cargo is particularly dependent on the role played by crude oil in the overall cargo. Without this consideration, the list would be different (see table). Taking into account all cargo, the list of the 20 largest ports includes eight which each handle more than 100 million tons of cargo. Eight of the giants are located in Japan, five in the USA, two in France, and one each in West Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy and Singapore. All of these ports, with the exception of the three USA ports of New Orleans, Houston and Hampton Roads, show

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION The Twenty Largest Ports (1976)

Rank according to all cargo. The figures in parentheses indicate the rank disregarding crude oil.

Rotterdam

. . . . .

. .

. .

Ameriport (Philadelphia) New Orleans Kobe New York Chiba Yokohama Marseille Nagoya Houston Kitakyushu Kawasaki Le Havre Osaka Antwerp

Singapore Hamburg Hampton Roads

(Netherlands)

field there still exists a full hierarchy of services. Some focal points on the mainland or on a larger island have connections with international shipping. From here cargo is transferred to smaller vessels, usually combining cargo and passengers on a regular liner service. These call at the larger islands or settlements on isolated coasts, where the cargo is transferred

(USA) (USA) (Japan)

(USA) (Japan) (Japan) (France) (Japan)

(USA) (Japan) (Japan) (France) (Japan) (Belgium) (Singapore) (W. Germany)

(USA)

.

Tokyo

(Japan)

.

Genoa

(Italy)

The rank list is perhaps not completely accurate, as various countries use different facts and methods in compiling their statistical reports. In general, however, it shows the relationship in regard to total cargo handling, including and excluding oil. For particulars see the relevant chapters in this book.

to small boats, sometimes

even sailing boats,

which sporadically visit the smaller settlements. Larger islands with more than 100,000 inhabitants generally receive the same services as a medium-sized mainland port. Another case of vital small ports are the specialized ferry ports. Long-distance passenger traffic had declined markedly owing to the competition of jet airliners, and even the huge liners, which were once the pride of each national fleet, have been laid up or are now used for pleasure cruises. These liners call only at the major ports, where the luxurious passenger terminals are only partly in use. However, for short distances — across bays or narrow seas and especially for trips to nearby islands — the passenger-and-car ferries still play a major role, and their terminals, which sometimes lie outside the great ports, still handle millions of passengers. These ferry terminals require far fewer port installations. Even in ports which need locks, passengers can board the ferries outside the closed docks with the aid of floating terminals or Ro-Ro ramps, and the shore facilities consist mainly of a passenger terminal and a large space for the assembly of cars and trucks before they are driven on board. The following regions have the best-organized ferry services: Western Europe and its connections with Britain and Scandinavia; the Mediterranean Sea, with focal centres at Valencia, Barcelona, Marseille, Naples, Venice and Piraeus;

a large surplus of receipts over shipments, and together they receive 40% of all cargo carried in maritime trade. The move towards larger ports has also affected all other ports. Ports of medium size have made efforts to develop modern handling facilities, and 60 additional ports handle more than 10 million tons of cargo each. These figures do not include the specialized oil-exporting ports or specialized ports for the shipment and receipt of iron ore. In summary, it may be stated that about 100 large ports handle three quarters of the world’s maritime shipping, while the thousands of other ports cope with the remaining quarter. These smaller ports, for lack of resources or sufficient quantities of cargo, have only been able to install modern equipment for part of their cargo handling, and only few of them can provide sufficiently deep water for the larger ships. An increasing number of the smallest ports are being closed down, but many of the small ones are still of vital importance, especially in developing countries (where no alternative transport facilities exist as yet), on islands, or along mountainous coasts, e.g., in Norway or Yugoslavia. The thousands of islands around the world constitute a special category. As they have no alternative means of cargo transportation (except aerial transport in exceptional cases),

they depend on the regular arrival of ships, even if the particular island has only a few hundred inhabitants. In this

Japan, with the best-developed ferry services; and on a lower grade the Philippines, Hongkong and Indonesia. Many of the smaller ports have found a new function in tourism. Here, smallness has become an advantage. The tourist prefers the intimacy of a small bay, and is attracted by the romantic charm of old houses or fishing boats. Many ports around the world have been turned into marinas, or yachting ports, with adjoining bathing beaches. The larger ports are experiencing similar problems. Their oldest parts are now outdated. Their depth is insufficient, the piers are too short and there is no space for any largescale cargo handling. Their inland approaches, which in the past served as the centre of the city, are narrow and congested, and these sections have actually become superfluous because the larger ports have developed modern facilities in the newer, outer sections. Some ports have directed auxiliary services to these old basins, such as boat repairs, space for laid-up ships and fishing terminals, but many have found it necessary to shut down these sections completely. The port of London has closed its oldest docks — St. Catherine’s, London Docks and Surrey Docks. New York has abandoned a large number of piers on the Hudson and East Rivers, which now look like a row of decayed teeth (see p. 170). These abandoned port sections present an urban problem and a challenge. Being located near the centre of

55

THE SHIPPING REVOLUTION the city, their land is of great value, and each city is debating whether to use them for the improvement of the environment or for commercial purposes. The city of Kingston upon Hull (see p. 163) has covered the abandoned Victoria Dock and converted it into a garden flanked by avenues which lead directly to the civic centre. London has turned St. Catherine’s Dock into a pleasant nook of nostalgia, used for sailing crafts and surrounded by a number of quaint inns and restaurants, which form an island of recreation within an area afflicted by the worst urban blight (see p. 135). However the London Docks still have the dreary appearance of the Industrial Revolution, and their warehouses are used as storage depots, now served only by

inland transportation, creating even more congestion. The future of the huge area of the closed Surrey Docks is still under discussion: whether to turn them into a residential

area, open them to commercial enterprises or use them for recreational purposes. The large “Vieux Port” of Marseille has been given over to recreation, used as a yacht harbour and surrounded by avenues with outdoor cafes and restaurants. In New York, the private ownership of the abandoned piers prevents any overall planning for urban renewal in the disused parts of the port. Thus, the “shipping revolution” has given rise not only to a radical change in the size and functions of ships, but also to a corresponding change in the size, extent, and location of ports and port cities. Nevertheless, there are regional differences and exceptional cases within the general trends of the last 15 years. Details of typical or exceptional cases in the different regions of the world are the subject of the following regional chapters.

The “Strider” is a “‘mobile container terminal”’, designed to serve ports lacking specialized equipment. Containers are stacked as in any container vessel, but in port they are put on trailers and unloaded with the aid ofa Ro-Ro ramp carried by the ship. The function of the ship (above) is shown in the drawing (below).

56

TYPES OF PORTS

! i) be at

oeis ra at ‘

A conventional port: Antwerp, old docks. A forest of cranes along narrow quays. Used for handling general cargo carried by ships of small and medium size, these quays are everbustling with activity.

TYPES OF “PORTS

op) An improved quay for unloading ore: Bauxite terminal of Sete, southern France. :ottom) A modernized finger pier with wide apron for handling of general cargo at Bremen.

TYPES OF PORTS

:

a

genet aeeag i.*..

A modern railway and car ferry terminal at Puttgarden. Huge railway sidings (top) shunt trains for entrance into the

lower deck of the ships (bottom).

TYPES OF PORTS

p) A typical container port.

! A container ship and gantry crane.

60

YPES OF PORTS

ce mY

TD let ee ae

nyae i

Cn ATO es

ioe ‘retacs

vos a eae

* oe oe

E EFi FS:: :

(top) Equipment ofa container port. (bottom) Connecting platform on terminal for roll-on-roll-off (Ro-Ro) ships.

TYPES OF PORTS

(above) LASH (Lighter aboard ship) barges (at left) alongside a finger pier at Bremen.

(right) Straddle carriers for container transport on land. (below) A container ship in port.

62

TYPES OF PORTS

Small-boat (or yacht) harbours are now found by the thousands for the convenience of pleasure boats. They do not need deep water or heavy equipment and provide services for provisions, customs and repair. The picture shows one of the yacht harbours in Honolulu, Hawaii.

TYPES OF PORTS

(top (bottom

64

led beaches at Benidorm, Spain.

nger and car ferry terminal in the port of Naples.

PORTS OF THE OLD WORLD Mediterranean

Ports

The port of Haifa represents all the features ofa Mediterranean port: reclaimed land in a bay close to the mountains.

THE COASTS OF THE MEDITERRANEAN

SEA

The Mediterranean Sea was the cradle of maritime transportation in the Western world, and probably also in a global context. This was due to its proximity to the first great centres of civilization in the valleys of the Nile and of Mesopotamia and in the highlands of Anatolia, but also to favourable natural conditions. It is the region with the most prominent interpenetration of land and sea in the world, fringed by innumerable bays or headlands, free of tides, and

enjoying a climate with cloudless skies for at least half a year, constant wind conditions and almost no storms. The Mediterranean is virtually a closed sea, connected with the Atlantic Ocean only via the narrow Strait of Gibraltar, which is no more than 20 km wide and 400 m deep. The quantity of ocean water penetrating into the Mediterranean is so small that it has no influence on the latter’s waters, which are more saline than those of open seas at the same latitude and are also much warmer. In winter, the water temperature is 13°, even at the greatest depth, and the air is heated to such a degree that the winter climate is

65

MEDITERRANEAN

PORTS

mild and free of frost all along the coast. This narrow passage also prevents the ocean tides from entering the Mediterranean. Local tides may develop, but the range is usually no more than 40—60 cm; it can attain 1—2 m only at the head of long gulfs or in funnel-shaped passages, such as the northern end of the Adriatic, the bays of the Syrte, the Gulf of Messina and the Strait of Evvia (between Attica and the island of Euboea, where the tide changes its direction every few hours). The Mediterranean stretches from west to east for about 3500 km, and is continued to the northeast in the Black Sea, with which it is connected by the “Straits” (the Dardanelles, Sea of Marmara and Bosporus).

It is divided into two main basins by the peninsulas of the Apennines (Italy) and Cape Bone (Tunisia) and the island of Sicily between them. The western basin is smaller, triangular-shaped and lies further north. Its southern shore is at the same latitude as the northern shore of the larger, rectangular eastern basin. The two basins differed markedly in their political and socio-economic history, and only in certain periods, such as the time of Phoenician and Greek colonization, the Roman Empire, or the Crusades, were crosslinks developed. There is an important geographical distinction between

the northern and southern coasts of the eastern basin. Along its northern coast the geological movement of continents uplifted and compressed the upper layers of the earth’s crust to form

chains of folded mountains, which

were fractured by the stress. This gave rise to the formation of long peninsulas (the Apennines, Greece, Antolia), continued in thousands of islands of different sizes, and separated by arms of the sea, such as the Adriatic and Ionic seas, the Aegean

and the “Straits”. The southern shore,

which provided the “compressive force”, is part of the African Block. It has a plateau-like character and straight coastlines, and the adjoining part of the sea lacks islands. The western basin, because of its more northern position, falls completely within the folded region, and its southern coast greatly resembles the northern one. Former peninsulas, broken up into the island chains of Corsica, Sardinia, and the Baleares, divide this basin into a number of

sub-basins, e.g., the Tyrrhenian, Ligurian and Balearic seas. The term “Mediterranean type of coast” usually refers to the folded coasts. The overall length of the northern coastline — disregarding small inlets — is approximately 14,000 km, while the southern coastline extends for only 5000 km.

The geological movement of folding and faulting accompanied by volcanic activity is still continuing to this day and causes destructive earthquakes. In the course of history many towns and areas around the Mediterranean have been destroyed by earthquakes, and disastrous volcanic eruptions are known from antiquity, e.g., the explosion of Santorin, north of Crete (see p. 13) around 1400 B.C. and of Vesuvius (A.D. 79). In later times Mount Etna has often wrought destruction on eastern Sicily, and certain other volcanoes are still alive.

66

The Mediterranean type of coast is dominated by the proximity of the mountains to the seashore. Along most of the coast the mountains either slope down steeply to the water’s edge (see p. 82) or leave a narrow coastal strip, usually not broader than 1—3 km (see p. 84). Two types of mountainous coasts can be discerned. In regions where the fold axes or ridges run parallel to the shore, coastal strips are either lacking or intermittent; large bays are absent, but there are numerous coves and inlets bounded by cliffs or headlands (see p. 84). The mountains block almost all access to the interior. The most typical example of such parallel mountains is found on the eastern shore of the Adriatic. Where the mountains trend perpendiculary or obliquely to the shore, a series of ridges and valleys is created. The mountains form peninsulas, whereas the valieys are partly drowned and form wide, elongated bays, continuing inland as river valleys which provide access to the interior. The latter type of coast is obviously much more conducive to the development of ports. Examples are to be found in western Anatolia, the southern section of the Greek Aegean shore, at the eastern extremity of the Atlas mountains (Tunisia) and in Provence (southern France). Larger plains are encounterd only at the deltaic mouths of rivers, where river alluviume has pushed beck the sea and created a semicircular, flat, marshy plain, only a few metres above sea level, through which the river meanders in several arms. Unless these deltas are artificially controlled and drained, like that of the Nile, they are uninhabitable and not suited for the location of a port. In general, these rivers have played a negligible or even negative role in communications and the location of ports. The concentration of rainfall over the Mediterranean region in winter reduces the flow of streams to seasonal or sporadic floods, and even perennial rivers — on account of the proximity of the mountains to the sea — have such a steep gradient that they are unsuitable for any kind of navigation. Of the thousands of rivers debouching into the Mediterranean, only a few are navigable by small craft, and then only for stretches of a few kilometres from the coast. Fewer still are those that provide access further into the interior, such as the Ebro, Guadalquivir, Po, Maritza and the two main

rivers — Nile and Rhone — originating in other climatic regions. But the deltaic mouths of even these rivers are blocked by silt. Some rivers whose coastal stretches were of great importance in antiquity have now become silted up completely. Examples are the Orontes in Syria, several rivers in southern Anatolia, the Meander in western Anato-

lia, some branches of the Po (especially the one passing through Ravenna), the Arno and Tiber on the west coast of Italy and the Aude River at Narbonne in southern France. Nevertheless, in antiquity the choice of sites for ports

was considerable. The preferred location was an inlet, elongated or circular in shape, with a narrow entrance. The largest of these provide the best harbours even today, being used mainly for naval installations. Examples are Taranto,

MEDITERRANEAN Brindisi, Syracuse, Genoa, Cartagena,

Toulon,

La Spezia

and Constantinople. In larger, open bays, the curved part was selected asthe port site, because the shore was usually wider there. However, it was necessary to protect the harbour by breakwaters and moles, which came into use in Greek (7th century B.C.) or even in Phoenician times (11th century B.C.). Offshore islands, when linked to the mainland. by causeways, served as port sites, as was the case with Phoenician ports of Alexandria and Syracuse. Narrow peninsulas or headlands running parallel to the shore provided protection for a large body of water, and the port was located mainly at the base of such projections. The disadvantage of most of these types of ports was that they had a very restricted agricultural area and were cut off from the hinterland by mountains. Therefore port builders turned to the deltas, notwithstanding the difficulties encountered there. Port sites were chosen on the rocky ground closest to the landward edge of the marshy plain. The advantage of the delta was that, on being drained, it could provide agricultural land, and the river valley served as an easy lane for penetrating inland. Sometimes canals were dug to furnish a better approach to the port site. Some of the larger rivers were utilized by ports which were located at a considerable distance from their mouths but nevertheless dominated the fringes of the delta. Such was the position of Alexandria in relation to the Nile, of Tarsus — to the Seyhan, of Izmir — to the Menderes, of Trieste — to

the Isonzo, of Ravenna (and later Rimini) — to the Po, of Marseille — to the Rhone, and of Tarragon — to the Ebro. Most of these have ranked among the most important ports of the Mediterranean throughout history. It should be noted here that beyond the limits of the Mediterranean

Sea, where tides prevail, the role of rivers

was and is completely different (see p. 114). A short distance west of Gibraltar, on the shore of the Atlantic Ocean,

lies the port of Cadiz, still in a “Mediterranean” position, at the rocky head of a sandspit running parallel to the marshy shore. It was the site of one of the earliest Phoenician colonies — Gadir — established in the 11th century B.C. and chosen because the tidal differences facilitated navigation on the Guadalete River, thus affording access to the tin mines of southern Spain. It also served as an observation point for the study of tides by the scientists of ancient Greece. Further along the coast the tidal changes made possible navigation on the Guadalquivir River; small craft reached as far upstream as Cordova (a distance of 200 km), while large sailing ships had access to Sevilla (85 km), which in the 16th century became the largest Spanish port (see p. 25). Most of the port sites selected in antiquity have persisted throughout history, rising and declining with the vicissitudes of wars and political developments. Some 750 sites are known to have served as commercial or fishing ports at one time or another. Today there are 265 registered ports in the Mediterranean, 175 of which date from antiquity and

PORTS

55 of which were founded in the Middle Ages. Only 35 ports have been newly constructed since the 19th century. This large number of historical ports can be explained by the topography of the region. The mountainous terrain and the lack of navigable rivers made land transport extremely difficult, and localities near the coast found it much easier to communicate with one another and to exchange goods via the sea. Thus, the majority of ports dealt mainly with coastal traffic. Their hinterland was restricted, owing to the peninsular character of most of the coasts; areas at the centre of an island or peninsula could choose between two seas for their outlets. Only a few ports were able to serve as gateways to continents. Such were the ports on the coasts of Anatolia and the Levant, and those located at the north-

ern extremities of the northern bays of the sea. Since there are not many routes leading across the mountain barriers to the continental hinterland, only a few of the coastal sites gained global importance and the harbours founded there were and still are the main ports of the Mediterranean. Africa had only two portals: one on the eastern margin of the Atlas Mountains — Carthage in antiquity and TunisBizerta today; and the other at the entrance to the Nile Valley — Alexandria. Along the Levant coast access to the interior was gained via the ports of Syria or Palestine — Jaffa, Acco—Haifa, Tyre (replaced by Beirut) and Antiochia. In Anatolia ports on the eastern shore of the Aegean took turns in playing this role (presently Izmir), but the main approach to Asia was always via Byzantium (= Constantinople = Istanbul). There were only five historical gateways to Central Europe: Thessaloniki, at the northern end of the Aegean, as the entrance to the Vardar—Morava pass through the Balkans; Trieste at the head of the passes through the Julian Alps; Genoa, offering access to the passes through the central Alps; Marseille — to the Rhone Valley; and Narbonne — to the Toulouse pass leading to the Bay of Biscay. Other large ports, such as Barcelona, Naples and Piraeus, serve only regionally restricted hinterlands. The historical development of the Mediterranean ports has been dealt with in detail in Chapters 1 and 2, where it was mentioned that all of them experienced a severe decline at the end of the 18th century and during the 19th century,

owing to the lag in the onset of the Industrial Revolution. However, in the lates phase of shipping development (see p. 53), a number of Mediterranean ports have again attained the status of modern industrialized ports. This is due mainly to the impact of oil. Those located on its northern coasts are major consumers of oil or engaged in refining, whereas the ports on the southern coasts are either producers of oil or involved in its transport. The northern ports,

which served throughout history as gateways to the Alpine passes, have been transferred into terminals for pipelines to Central and Western Europe (Marseille, Genoa, Trieste), but refining has been spread regionally over a large number of ports. As an outcome, all ports of the northern Mediterra67

MEDITERRANEAN

PORTS

ay ee “d

The international passenger terminal at Naples.

nean show a large surplus of imports over exports, whereas southern ports tend to have an export surplus. The industrialization of ports is impeded by the difficult terrain and lack of space. Even the construction of container terminals is hampered by the narrowness of the level stretch between the mountains and the port and calls for expansion projects involving reclamation of land from the sea. The investment in building an industrial port is so great that only the largest ports are able to cope with this problem. Thus, a process of polarisation is setting in, with the largest ports becoming also the main industrial ports at the expense of the medium-sized and small ones. The gap between these types of ports is widening constantly. A compensation for the minor ports has been found in tourism and yachting, leading to a revival of the historical ports. Since the natural beauty of their bays and headlands has not yet been spoiled by large industry, and as their cities still retain much of the romance of their medieval cores, they provide an attractive background for the beaches, to which tens of millions of visitors from inland and abroad are drawn by the sunny summers and mild winters of the Mediterranean (see p. 64). These vacationers avoid the industrialized areas and the pollution of the large cities and ports, and almost every location which formerly served as a small port now provides shelter for fishing and pleasure boats.

68

Thus the Mediterranean has regained its position as one of the major shipping regions of the world. It cannot compete with the oceans, which serve the major world powers, as most of the countries on its shores still belong to the group of developing nations, and in most of them industrialization is still in the initial stage and restricted to a few concentrations. However, industrialization is advancing steadily and has begun to compete with tourism for the available space. Industrial progress is accompanied by the danger of pollution of the air and water, which is particularly serious in the case of the Mediterranean because of its closed character. Hydra

The small port of Hydra (Greek: Idhra) can be regarded as a representative example of the numerous small islands in the Mediterranean. The common factor for all these islands is their restricted hinterland and population, which generates but little traffic. Almost none of the small islands possesses great mineral wealth calling for much shipping space for the handling of exports. Most of the exports consist of fish and agricultural products which, in view of the poor soils of the mountainous islands, are few. On the other hand, almost all the needs of the population of an island, from petrol to sugar and clothing, have to

MEDITERRANEAN be supplied by sea, and because of the perishable nature of most of these goods, they have to be delivered at frequent intervals, albeit in small quantities (see p. 85). Thus a traffic pattern has evolved, with frequent sailings of small ships or even boats plying between the chief ports on the mainland and the various islands, loading and unloading only a few tons of merchandise at a time. As there is no need for large, wholesale enterprises, retail trade is carried on close to the harbour area, which thus serves also as the commercial centre of the small town. The arrival of a boat is usually accompanied by the gathering of people around the port, and this in turn has led to a concentration of restaurants and cafes along the bay fringing the port. This atmosphere of the port area, based on centuries-old tradition, today creates a nostalgic and romantic picture, which has proved to be a great draw for tourism. These comments about island ports also hold for many small ports located on elongated peninsulas or on isolated

bays and serving a restricted hinterland. The island of Hydra is situated in the Saronic Gulf, opposite the southern coast of the easternmost peninsula of the Peloponnese. Notwithstanding the small distance separating this coast from the island (6 km), all connections with Hydra are via Piraeus, which lies 65 km north of the island. The island consists of an elongated, narrow ridge, 1-3 km wide and 18 km long, which is rocky and almost barren. Only in one locality are there softer rocks which have been eroded to form some small valleys covered by soil and underlain by a groundwater horizon. At the point of convergence of these valleys, a small, round bay has been created. Thus, all conditions favourable for human settlement are concentrated at one point, the port of Hydra. At present 2500 of the 3000 inhabitants of the island live in the port town.

Since there is little soil and no water beyond the region of the port, the island was uninhabited for most of its history. However, it enjoyed a brief period of glory in the past. After the conquest of Greece by the Turks in the 16th century, the inhospitable island served as an asylum for a number of refugees, especially from the town of Mistra on the Peloponnese, which had previously been ruled by Venice, and whose inhabitants possessed a certain cosmopolitan outlook. Later on, refugees arrived also from Albania. For lack of natural resources, the refugee population started to develop maritime activities, and in the 17th and 18th centuries Hydra possessed a large fleet of sailing boats which carried on a lucrative trade, especially grain transport from the Russian shores of the Black Sea. During the Napoleonic wars the islanders acquired great wealth as blockade runners. The rich shipowners and merchants built themselves large, palatial abodes on the amphitheatre-like slopes surrounding the port. The town had 20,000 inhabitants and ranked among the largest in Greece. During the Greek War of Independence (1821—30) they provided most of the ships for the insurgents and suffered

PORTS

terrible losses in ships and men. Part of the price of the Greek victory was the decline of Hydra, which never recovered from its setbacks. Its maritime activities were taken over by other ports, in particular Piraeus. Most of its population emigrated and Hydra became merely a small fishing

village. But its past has provided the source for revival. Modern tourism has discovered Hydra. The old patrician houses have been restored in part as hotels, art galleries, restaurants and museums, and the town has become an artist’s colony. The curved shore around the bay is now covered with cafes,

restaurants and art shops, attracting daily tourists brought from Athens by frequent other tourists utilize the nearby rocky beaches and diving. This detailed description of Hydra is not singular example

thousands of ferry services; for swimming intended as a

but serves to point out a common

trend

characteristic of most of the Mediterranean ports. Each of them has enjoyed a short (or longer) period of prosperity at some time in the past, each possesses a large number of architectonic and cultural relics, and most of them are now

utilizing

these

assets

for the

development

of tourism.

Malta

The island group of Malta consists of three inhabited islands, — Malta, Gozo, and Camino — and a few islets with a total area of 316 sq. km, of which Malta itself occupies 246 sq. km. Although it still falls in the category of the smaller islands of the Mediterranean, it differs in all aspects from the general pattern described in the previous section. Malta is only about five times as large as Hydra, but its population is one hundred times greater (322,000 in 1971). Indeed, it is the most densely populated island in the Mediterranean and the only one that enjoys political independence (since 1964).* Malta also differs markedly in language, culture and historical development from all other Mediterranean islands and countries. The islands are considered to occupy an important strategic position in the bottleneck separating the western and eastern basins of the Mediterranean. They share this position with the small island of Pantelleria, which lies at the centre of the narrow gap (120 km) between the western corner of Sicily and Cape Bon, the northern extremity of Tunisia, but has never attained any strategic importance. Malta lies at a far greater distance from the other shores (85 km from southern Sicily, 270 km east of Tunisia, and 350 km north of Tripoli in Libya), and when sailing conditions of the historical past are taken into account, it is difficult to define this location as possessing a natural strategic ad* The much larger island of Cyprus is also recognized as an independent republic, but is presently divided by a military line separating the two national components of its population (Greeks and Turks) and also contains a sovereign British military base.

69

MEDITERRANEAN

PORTS

Malta in the 18th century. The city of Valetta, planned according to a checker-board pattern, is flanked by fortresses which protect the entrance to the bay.

vantage. Only in very specific historical situations did it gain strategic significance. Moreover, the Maltese islands actually lie off the main sailing routes. Throughout antiquity and the Middle Ages Mediterranean traffic hugged the coasts, and the passage from the western to the eastern basin either followed the southern coast of Sicily or passed through the Straits of Messina. A visit to Malta would have called for a wide detour under difficult wind conditions. Thus, the situation of

Malta at that time could be defined rather as one of isolation than as that of a necessary port of call. Geographically ,Malta would merely be one of the small islands, sustaining a restricted rural population (as is the case with Pantelleria), were it not for one asset: it possesses what is probably the best natural harbour in the Mediterranean. However, the native population was unable to take advantage of this asset for want of a hinterland or natural resources. Its full potential could not be utilized for commercial purposes, but only as a naval base for a foreign maritime power. Malta has the structure of a plateau sloping towards the southeast and attaining a maximum height of 258 m. The slopes along the southern coast are steep and drop abruptly (150 m) into the sea, but those on the northeast are gentle. Its rocks consist mainly of a special soft type of limestone — globigerina limestone — underlain by blue clay, which forms an underwater horizon. A special feature of this limestone is that it is easily quarried but hardens on contact with the dry air. (The beautiful sculptures in the cathedral of Valetta, which look like wood carvings, have been made of this stone.) It also weathers easily to form soil, and a large percentage of the area is thus suitable for

70

terrace cultivation, today especially vines, potatoes and vegetables. In the northeastern corner of the island, erosion by ephemeral streams (locally called wied) has cut deep valleys in the underlying clay, which have become drowned by the sea. Thus, a fjord-like landscape has been created at the point of convergence of these streams. Deep inlets have been formed, spreading out along tributaries and separated by rocky peninsulas. The main inlet, called Grand Harbour, is about 4 km long and on the average 800m wide; it branches out into three prongs. About | km to its north, another inlet, 2.5 km long and divided by an island into sections 400 m wide, forms Marsamxett Harbour. Altogether, a quay length of about 20 km of deep water is thus available. However, the entrance to both ports passes through rocky promontories. It is about 400 m wide and easily protected by forts, which have been constructed on each of the promontories. Thus Malta harbour has been called an “‘impregnable fortress” and proved this in World War II when, in complete isolation, it withstood all attacks by the air force of the Axis powers and was rewarded with the George Cross. Throughout history Malta has generally shared the fate and developments of Sicily. However, there were also some local developments and these are the ones that have left their mark on the population of the island and its cultural life. The earliest period is still shrouded in mystery. From Neolithic times there are a number of huge burial chambers or temples, either carved out of the soft rock or built of limestone, which are much too large to have served the needs of the local population. The people who used them must have come from afar by boat, but nothing is yet known about maritime activities at that period, although some legends about Ulysses are regarded as referring to Malta. In historical times Malta was first settled by Phoenicians, later -by Greeks around 735 B.C., and in the fifth century B.C. by Carthaginians, who gave it the name of Melita. Under Roman rule from around 250 B.C., the island enjoyed autonomy, probably in acknowledgement of the strong feeling of individuality that has always pervaded the life of its population. An important historical accident was the shipwreck of St. Paul in the year A.D. 60, which resulted in the fact that Malta became one of the earliest Christian territories. The Saracen domination of Malta, which lasted from 840 to 1090, left an important imprint on the island. Although the population remained stubbornly Christian, it adopted important elements of the Arabic language, and Maltese thus consists mainly of a mixture of Arabic and southern-Sicilian Italian, with a later sprinkling of English. However, it is possible that Arabic intruded more easily into Maltese because of ancient Phoenician elements which had been kept alive in the local language. Another relic of

the Arab occupation is their capital — Mdina (Rabat), which was not located at the port (proving its relative in-

MEDITERRANEAN significance), but 10 km inland, on the high ridge overlooking the southern coast. However, the factor that exerted the greatest inflyence on the face and character of the island was its occupation by the Knights of St. John. This Order was founded during the Crusades and is also known as the Hospitallers. After the loss of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, it moved to the island of Rhodes, which was fortified and withstood Moslem and, especially, Turkish attacks until the beginning of the 16th century. The Knights were forced to abandon Rhodes in 1522, and the Pope and Emperor Charles V granted them the island of Malta in 1530. They adopted the name Maltese Order, and the Maltese Cross became their emblem. They remained a fighting Order; membership was restricted to European nobility drawing their income from their European possessions, who were thus able to set up a parallel economy on the island, independent of its meagre resources. Later on the Maltese Knights engaged in buccaneering activity against Turkish shipping, thus further increasing the wealth of their Order. They soon had to prove the strategic importance of Malta when defending it against the onslaughts of the Ottoman Empire, the fiercest battle being the siege of Malta by

the Turkish navy in 1565. On the conclusion of these battles the Grand Master of the Order, Jehan de la Valette, fortified the port and founded the city which was named after him (1565). It was built on the rocky hill between the Grand Harbour and Marsamxett, according to the latest principles of urban planning: in checkerboard pattern straight roads crossing at right angles without regard for topography (anticipating the planning of San Francisco by three centuries). The city is about 1.5 km long and 800 m wide and boasted many splendid buildings, homes of individual knights, national chapiersas and especially the palace of the Grand Master (now the government building), the armory (now a museum) and the Co-cathedral, one of the most beautiful baroque churches in the world. With the further growth of the population and increase in wealth of the island, other towns were constructed, each on a spur between two prongs of the harbour. Thus, to this day, Valetta is not a single city but a conurbation of individual towns, such as Vittoriosa, Cospicua, Senglea and Floriana, separated from one another by basins of the port and each having about 15,000 inhabitants. The latest and most modern city is Sliema (25,000), situated north of Marsamxett.

The rule of the Maltese Order was terminated by Napoleon’s conquest (1798), which, however, lasted only two years. In 1800 the island was captured by Lord Nelson and remained a British possession until its independence (1964). The British turned Malta into their main Mediterranean fortress, whose harbour was able to provide shelter for entire fleets. Huge arsenals and repair docks were constructed on its innermost bays, and the greatest part of the population was engaged in the service of the British navy and army.

PORTS

With the advent of the steamship, large sections of the outer parts of the port became a coaling station. Malta’s strategic importance for Britain was put to the decisive test in World War II. However, the dismembering of the British empire, which followed the war, also strengthened the movement for independence in Malta. After severe clashes negotiations were started which finally gave realization to the historical aspirations of the Maltese people. After gaining independence the Maltese government faced the task of readjusting the island’s economy:to the new conditions. The British navy gradually abandoned the shipyards, and these are now engaged in civilian activities such as the repair and cleaning of supertankers and the building of small craft. A number of small industries provide jobs for the unemployed. Agriculture employs only 6% of the labour force and concentrates on the export of wines, potatoes and vegetables. An important economic factor is the development of tourism. Marsamxett has been converted into a yachting harbour, large hotels are going up all over the island and especially near the beaches, and the number of tourists has increased from 47,000 in 1965 to 170,000 in 1970 and 339,000 in 1975. Construction of new tourist facilities is presently the largest factor in employment. Plans for new industries are under consideration, but there is still insufficient work for the entire population

and a negative balance in migration. Thus Malta’s plans for development turn again towards the port. However, the small hinterland does not generate sufficient traffic, and the yearly average exports do not exceed 40,000 tons, mainly potatoes, grapes and early vegetables. On the other hand, the import needs of the islanders include almost everything in the way of foodstuffs and manufactured goods, and amount to a yearly average’ of 950,000 tons. The largest item is oil for power generation and bunkering. The main trading partner is Italy (47%); Britain’s share has been reduced to 8%. The main prospect for utilization of the port remains ship building. Malta has an agreement with NATO for ship repairs, which expires in 1979. New plans for independent ship building are now being implemented, financed mainly by Libya and other Arab states. Two new shipyards — one for tankers up to 300,000 dwt, and the other for ships of 30,000 to 120,000 — are under construction in the Grand Harbour and in Marsaxlokk, a bay in the southeastern corner of the island. A number of new industries are to be lo-

cated in industrial port areas. These plans again demonstrate the fact that a small island can develop a balanced economy only by taking on functions

which

are not based

on local resources, other

than manpower, but serve a wide foreland.

Marseille

Marseille is the largest port in the Mediterranean and the second largest in Europe. Its geographical situation is domi-

71

MEDITERRANEAN

PORTS E

A

ORKERS

ES 5S ORS ERR HR KOO R KKK BEE

RPOE RO SS COI POO

POHCION] RG SSP Kd

rr hoe TN ASS Se OOo Pe S ovhs So PR

MARSEILLE

3 xed

National

nated by the nearby delta of the Rhone, and in this respect it has something in common with Alexandria, which was the largest Mediterranean port in Hellenistic and Roman times (third century B.C. to seventh century A.D.). The Rhone and the Nile are the only large rivers originating in humid climates at great distances from the Mediterranean. Both rivers form large deltas, through which their distributaries meander and form lagoons and marshes. The shore line of the delta is blocked for most of its length by sandbars, which prevent the entry of larger ships into the river. The completely flat landscape of the delta does not provide any shelter against winds. For all these reasons deltas are unsuitable for harbours, and ports seek a location on a protected coast to one side of the delta, in the direction opposite to that of the sea current, in order to prevent silting up of their entrance. For this reason Alexandria is situated to the west of the Nile, and Marseille to the southeast of the Rhone. In contrast to the Nile delta which, after the construction of dykes and canals, became one of the most densely populated areas of the world, the Rhone delta has remained virtually unoccupied until the most recent times. It is bounded by two main branches, the Grand Rhone to the east and the Petit Rhéne to the west. The town of Arles was founded by the Romans at the head of the delta. The intervening area is known as the Camargue, a marshy region and birds’ paradise, utilized throughout history only for fishing and, near the sea, for huge salt pans. In the east the Rhdéne Valley along its entire length borders on the southernmost section of the Alps, which reaches the sea in a broad front between Marseille and Genoa. This gives rise to a typical “Mediterranean coastline” (see p. 66), with almost no level area between the mountains and the sea and an indented shore with hundreds of headlands and small bays. This area is known as the French and Italian Riviera and today serves as the largest recreational region of the Mediterranean. These conditions change near Marseille because of a bend in the coastline, which turns north for a stretch of about 15 km. Along this stretch the folded ridges of the Alps meet the coast perpendicularly in the form of spurs

72

separated by small basins. The northernmost of these basins is the largest one, and through it flows the Durance River which now joins the Rhéne near Avignon. The central basin continues under water as the inlet called Etang de Berre, and the southernmost one is occupied by the Huveaune River, whose lowest part has been drowned and forms an inlet which became the ancient port of Marseille (Vieux Port). It forms a bay, stretching from west to east for about 1 km, and 350 m wide. Its main advantage is that it is protected against the northerly winds (the mistral) by a mountainous ridge. Some outliers of the mountains rise as isolated, steep hills, the best known of which is the Mont de la Garde (160 m high), now crowned by the church Notre

Dame de la Garde (see p. 106) which forms the landmark of Marseille. The Etang de Berre is linked via a narrow opening to the Etang de Caronte, which is about 5 km long and reaches the sea in the Bay of Fos, whose northern coast already forms part of the delta. The distance from the old port to the head of the delta is about 35 km as the crow flies, and the modern development of Marseille is greatly influenced by this topographical setting. The advantages of the inlet of Marseille as a shelter were recognized in early antiquity and were probably utilized by the Phoenicians. However, the earliest permanent settlement that can be identified with certainty is that of the Greek colony of Massalia, founded by the Phocaeans around the year 600 B.C. Notwithstanding Marseille’s advantages as a harbour, the place did not develop into a major port as inland connections with the head of the delta were difficult. Therefore the Romans selected the site of Arles, at the apex of the delta, as centre of the region. In early medieval times, when the coasts were unsafe owing to Saracen raids,

the centre was moved further north to Avignon, which, in addition, possessed a large agricultural hinterland. During the Crusades Marseille again came to the fore, but it could not compete with the Italian cities of Genoa, Pisa or Venice. In the 13th century its population was about 20,000. Throughout its early history the city was located on the northern shore of the inlet, climbing the gentle slopes of the low hills.

MEDITERRANEAN

PORTS

Marseille experienced its first expansion under the policy of port development which characterized the reign of Louis XIV in the 17th century. The entrance to the port was fortified on both sides by the citadels of St. Jean and St. Nicolas. The city started occupying the area on all three sides of the port, spreading along the depressions between the steeper hills, a trend which was dominant also in later times. At the onset of the French Revolution the city already had

100,000 inhabitants, and the urban area began to be shaped by boulevards and to develop its main axis along the line of the Canebiére, which followed the valley of the Huveaune and became one of the most famous boulevards in Europe in the 19th century. But the real growth which gave Marseille precedence over all other Mediterranean ports started in the middle of the 19th century. It was based on three main elements: the French conquest of Algeria in 1830; the Industrial Revolution; and the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869. With the conquest of Algeria — followed later by the

French acquisition of Tunisia (1891) — Marseille became the natural point of departure for the military and commercial penetration of these territories and the sole terminal for the transfer of passengers and goods. In the decade between 1830 and 1840 the activity of the port grew by 40%. In 1847, when the Joliette basin was opened, the tonnage of ships entering the port amounted to 3 million (at that time no cargo statistics were recorded), and Marseille took first place among the ports of continental Europe. The Industrial Revolution was launched by linking Marseille to the rest of France by railways: 1852 to Avignon, with connections to Lyon and Paris; 1859 to Toulon, with later extensions to Italy; 1877 to Aix-en-Provence and Grenoble. With the opening of the Suez Canal, which was essentially a French enterprise, the Mediterranean regained its role as a global thoroughfare and provided an alternative land-sea route from Western Europe to the Levant and the Indian Ocean, with Marseille as the main break of bulk. These developments led to an unprecedented growth of the city: from 183,000 inhabitants in 1846 to 500,000 in 1900. It expanded about 7 km to the east and north of the port, and its industries developed from food processing to a wide range of consumer goods. The old port proved unable to meet the challenges presented by these new developments, especially the introduction of steamships with their greater draft. It thus became necessary to build a new port, which became the prototype for all Mediterranean ports. Owing to the lack of a level stretch of land between the hills and the sea, it became necessary to reclaim land from the sea for the new port. The advantage afforded by the topography was the possibility of reaching deep water ata short distance from the shore, but its disadvantage was the necessity to work in deep water and to use huge quantities of material for the construction of breakwaters and piers. The work plan called for the construction of a breakwater parallel to the shore, at a distance of about 600 m.

Marseille: the Avenue de la République, designed by Hausmann, Napoleon III’s town-planner.

The intervening space is divided by transverse piers (about 90 m wide), which almost reach the breakwater and leave a narrow passage that can be bridged. By this method the new port is divided into different basins which may be further subdivided by finger piers. The rail system of the new piers was linked to the main railways via tunnels. In stages, the breakwater attained a length of 5 km, and was recently extended to 8 km. The total usable quay length is 18 km. The old port was slowly abandoned and now serves only for recreation and yachting. The centre of gravity of the port moved to the basin of La Joliette, which also became the passenger terminal and the seat of the port’s administration. It was connected to the city centre by a new avenue (Avenue de la République) built in a uniform style and planned by Hausmann, who had also been responsible for the boulevard system of Paris. Near the entrance to the basin a cathedral in Neo-Byzantine style was built by Napoleon III (see

p. 106). Before World War II, the new port of Marseille handled about 6 million tons of general merchandise and more than one million passengers. Although the railways were able to cope with these quantities, attempts were made to move part of the goods by boat along inland waterways, following improvements in navigation on the Rhone River. Even in antiquity attempts had been made to improve inland navigation through the delta, and Arles had served as an inland port. In modern times a number of canal projects have been executed. Tarascon, on the Rhone north of Arles, was connected by canals to Aigues Mortes on the western margin of the delta coast and to the Durance River. Arles was linked by small canals to the Durance and by side channels to the Etang de Berre. However, the focal point for larger canals was the Etang de Berre. Its outlet to the sea at the Bay of Fos was deepened and widened, and the two ends of the passage, Martigues at the Etang and Bouc at the bay, became auxiliary ports for Marseille. The most ambitious canal project was the link-up between the Etang de Berre and Marseille by means of a tunnel (Rove Tunnel) 7 km long and able to carry barges up to 1000 tons. This tunnel was constructed between 1911 and 1927 but has now been abandoned. The latest development in canal construc-

qo

MEDITERRANEAN

PORTS

tion was the modern canal for European barges from Arles to Port de Bouc, which runs near the western edge of the delta, more or less parallel to the Grand Rhone. With these developments the Etang de Berre became a major industrial extension of the port of Marseille. An oil port was constructed at Lavera, at the southern entrance to the canal of Caronte. It supplies three oil refineries around the Etang de Berre and also serves as a terminal for the crude-oil pipeline to Strassbourg, Karlsruhe and Ingolstadt. Petrochemical and other industries have been located on the southern shore of the Etang, as has the airport of Marseille — Marignane. Nevertheless, all this has been dwarfed by the latest project: the “Europort du Sud” at Fos. The Bay of Fos possesses all the features of a delta, which have been regarded throughout history as completely unsuited for the location of a port. On the other hand, it offers an area of 120,000 ha of almost unused land, with a much larger region in reserve in the Camargue, presenting the challenge to conquer a delta for the first time in history for use as a port. The project involves the excavation of an approach channel, 9 km long and 23 m deep (suited for the passage of oil tankers of 500,000 tons capacity), from the deep sea outside the bay. This channel leads into three basins, each 4 to 4.5 km long, scooped out from the swampy ground. The excavated material, cemented with the agglomerates of the adjoining region of Crau, is to be turned into a broad expanse of industrial land, reserved mainly for a large oxygen steel plant with an ultimate production capacity of 7.5 million tons. Another part of the reclaimed land is earmarked for oil storage and petrochemical industry, while a third area will become the largest container terminal in the Mediterranean. Work on the project started after the port of Marseille and those of the Etang, Fos and St. Louis du Rhéne were combined into one autonomous port authority. By 1977

“oil refinery:

the approach channel and two of the basins were already completed, and the steelworks, oil terminal and petrochemical plants had started functioning. Beyond, the wide expanses of completely level, almost desert-like land offer prospects for future development. As soon as huge quantities of oil began to be delivered at Lavera and Fos, Marseille jumped to second place in Europe (after Rotterdam) in terms of total tonnage handled, of which 85% (88.5 million tons) was oil. However, other facets of modern maritime transportation are also being developed. Ship building was given a new impetus by the construction of new types of dry docks for the building of

supertankers; the number of containers handled surpassed one million, two thirds of them handled in Fos. The reopening of the Suez Canal in 1975 also opened the way for completely new developments. The huge quantities of goods being delivered to the oil-rich Arab states have given rise to serious congestion in the ports of the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, (see p. 178) where priority is being given to quickloading ships. Marseille grasped the opportunity of becoming the main terminal for Roll-on Roll-off services; this involves all parts of the combined port. About 30 special quays serve the Ro-Ro ships, and in 1976 27% of all general cargo was moved by Ro-Ro, as against 18% by container.

The number of ships with general cargo sailing from Marseille to the east of Suez increased by almost 100% from 1975 to 1976: to the Red Sea from 108 to 222, and to the Persian Gulf from 87 to 140. At the same time the number of sailings to Algeria dropped by 45%. The city of Marseille has also been affected by the growth of its ports and industries. As early as the 1950’s an urban renewal project for the oldest part of the city was put into effect, but the main growth in population and area has taken place since the 1960’s. The influx of a large number of refugees from Algeria caused a sudden increase in the population, which now approaches the million figure. The city has spread mainly towards the north (industry and lowincome residential quarters) and east along the valleys and lower slopes, while the steeper slopes of the south have been used for low-density housing of higher income groups. In this process many older villages and small towns have been incorporated in the city. A “second Marseille” is being created around the Etang de Berre, where the population has grown to 250,000 within the last 25 years, an increase of 100%. All the parts of the conurbation and the ports have been connected by suburban railways and motorways. Notwithstanding the fact that Marseille has become the largest port on the Mediterranean, the city itself occupies about tenth place because it lacks the functions of a political capital. The distribution of traffic between the various sections of the port of Marseille is given in the following table. Forty-three percent of the crude oil delivered at Fos and Lavera was forwarded by pipeline: 18.5 million tons to France, 2.6 million tons to Switzerland, and 17.2 million tons to Germany.

MEDITERRANEAN 1976

Number of ships, entered GRT (million tons) Total cargo (million tons) Thereof oil (million tons)

Marseille

6864 18.8 5.6 =

St. Louis

661

Lavera

Fos

1547

0.8 0.8 —

6.8 16.2 14.3

\

te

Wine depot in the port of Marseille.

The total amount of cargo handled in the port was 104 million tons, of which 88 millions tons were imports and 16 million tons exports. In addition to the above-stated quantities of oil, the port handled 8.1 million tons of dry bulk, of which 4.7 million tons were minerals and 1.6 million tons coal. General cargo of all types amounted to 6.3 million tons.

Marseille also serves as an important passenger port for ferry services. Of the 792,000 arriving and departing passengers in 1976, 422,000 used services plying to and from Corsica, 239,000 — Algeria, and 70,000 — Tunis. Due to the large quantities of oil imports, Marseille now ranks eighth among the ports of the world, and even without oil it is included among the 20 “giants”. With the planned further development of the industrial port in Fos, it seeks to play the role of the “Europort of the South”. Barcelona

Barcelona is the largest port in Spain and its second largest city, after Madrid (at the beginning of the 20th century it was even larger than Madrid). However, the advancement of the city and that of the port were not always congruent, and important historical changes in the city depended mainly on political events in the interior of Spain and not on maritime developments. This is indicated even by the geographical location of the port. In contrast to most Mediterranean ports, Barcelona is not located ona mountainous coast fringing a sheltered bay, but on a shallow, sandy, almost straight shoreline, at the edge of a small deltaic plain formed by the rivers Llobregat on the south and Besés on the north. This plain is bounded

PORTS

on the landward side byaline of hills about 7 km from the sea, the most prominent of which is Mount Tibidabo (502 m). These hills, which reach the sea about 20 km to the north and south of the city, cut it off from all contact with the interior, except via the gaps created by the valleys of the two rivers. However, the latter do not lead to the centre of the Iberian Peninsula, but towards the mountains of the Pyrenees. Thus, although Barcelona has never occupied a dominant position astride routes of communication, it was ang still is surrounded bya large area of cultivable land along a generally inhospitable coast. The first settlements there were founded because of these agricultural assets. On the coast a steep isolated hill, Mont Juich (Roman: Mons Jovis = the Mountain of Jupiter), rises to a height of 228 m. It still serves as the landmark and observation point of the city and as an important orientation point for coastal shipping, a fact which probably had a bearing on the choice of this site as a port. The first major settlement was founded around 230 B.C. by the Carthaginian ruler Hamilcar Barca and named in his honour. It became a major Roman city by the name of Bercino at the time of the Emperor Augustus. Its centre was a low hill (20 m high), Mons Taber, on which a temple was built, and the forum was located nearby at the intersection of the two main roads, a planning feature typical of all Roman towns. In the third century A.D. the city was surrounded by strong walls reaching down to the then irregular seashore. The site of the temple was later occupied by a Christian basilica which was in turn replaced in the 14th century by a Gothic cathedral, while the municipality took its seat at the site of the former forum. This entire area is now known as the “‘barrio gotico”. After the conquest by Teutonic tribes in A.D. 414, Barcelona served for a certain period as the capital of the kingdom of the Visigoths until the Moslem Moors overran Spain in 711. However, while various parts of Spain remained under Moorish rule for 500 to 700 years, the northeastern region of the Iberian Peninsula was recaptured by the Christians as early as 801, at the time of the Frankish empire of Charlemagne. This area, thence known as Catalonia, became

a Frankish frontier province (= march). The fact that for centuries this was the only Christian region in Spain gave it a political and spiritual advantage which was translated into political power. The spirit of individuality and the strive for independence, expressed also by a language of its own, have remained characteristic traits of the Catalonians to the present day. In the 10th century the counts of Catalonia gained independence

from

the Frankish

empire, and the

period of autonomy, which lasted for almost 500 years, was the “golden age” in the history of Barcelona. Most of its splendid historical buildings date from that time. Barcelona also engaged in maritime activities and took part in the Crusades together with Genoa and Naples. Natural conditions prevented a parallel development of the port, which remained an unprotected area of shallow

ie

MEDITERRANEAN

PORTS 5

2

SR RRR SZ

6%